Damnit, she's only 18 months old, she's gonna touch that hot plate no matter what you say!

[curlcoat]

@Cheesesteak

Then why should I tip the waitress? I should be tipping the fucking chef, if the waitress isn’t providing me with a valued service.

You tip the waitress if she is prompt, brings the right food and checks back to make sure everything is OK and to see if you want anything else. Otherwise, you would have to go back to the kitchen to put in your order, and then again to pick it up, and then again if you want dessert or more to drink.

“Age Appropriate Service” =/= “Babysitting”

You don’t want age appropriate service, you want the server to take over making sure your baby/toddler is kept safe. For some reason, you think that each and every server out there must know how far your kid can reach, that the clear spot on the table is because you’ve moved everything away from the kid, that (as you say below) your kid is stupid and that you aren’t going to pay attention when she comes with your hot food. Believe it or not, despite such parents getting more and more common, they still aren’t the majority of her customers except in places where young children are the focus.

When I have to take a service dog into a restaurant, I do not expect anyone at all to be responsible for him because it isn’t anyone elses responsibility. I know it’s more fun to chat with friends or get drunk or whatever, but that’s all a part of being an adult.

It’s a service mindset. You have this creature in a high chair. It’s small, stupid, easily injured, has a giant cry-hole in the front, and is probably the single most important thing in the world for two people you’re counting on for a significant part of your day’s wages. Treat it that way.

Do you honestly think that your one table is that important to any given server?

@echo6160

I do believe you are subconsciously a troll. I can’t fathom how anybody could be so blatantly ignorant of so much at the same time…I could be wrong, and I’m not going to provide cites, but I think I’ve even seen your ignorance contradict itself on occasion.

And yet, there are others in here who are saying the same things I am. Guess being able to understand the written word isn’t one of your strong suits. Or perhaps it’s just that you don’t get that your way is not the One Right Way - there is a lot of that going around.

@Zeriel

Northeast, so perhaps it’s regional; however, I don’t recall any problems finding restaurants with high chairs on my last trip out to California in the late 1990s, and I was spending a lot of time with my 2yr-old niece who would still have been in a high chair.

Perhaps you were just going to restaurants that the parents knew would have highchairs. Recently, I have been to Maggianos, the Black Bear Diner and a Mexican chain that is not coming to mind right now, as well as our local hole in the wall Mexican place. I don’t recall seeing any highchairs at any of those. OTOH, maybe there just didn’t happen to be any babies/toddlers there when I was .

It is what it is. The benefit of the non-tray chairs is that they will also hold a infant car seat, and presumably those restaurants purchasing that type of chair are okay with that clientele. Those chairs also take up much less room, leaving more room for waiters to walk through and not trip up, and it seems to me that most places that have them have tables with adequate room unless one is ordering an appetizer for every person or something equally ludicrous (said with love, since my favorite Mexican place does tend to cause me to stress-test the table with plates that must also be kept out of the reach of the kid due to temperature.).

Wouldn’t it make more sense to put the infant car seat on the bench?

Table room is another thing that we are not seeing the same. Unless it is just me and my husband, or me and a friend at a table meant for four, there never seems to be enough room on the table for drinks, water glasses, salt/pepper/sugar/etc, salads/soups and dinner plates, especially if we get any appetizers. Maybe we just eat slow or something (kind of doubt it) but it seems that we always have something still on plates when something else comes out. I just cannot even imagine being able to leave a clear space on the table the size of the reach of a toddler. And then to get mad because the server wants to put something there?

[curlcoat]

@Kimstu

Unless you’ve all ordered salads, I think it makes sense to assume that anything a server might bring you at a restaurant could possibly be uncomfortably hot or otherwise inappropriate or dangerous for your toddler to be grabbing.

Therefore, common sense and courtesy to the server both dictate that it’s on the adult patrons to clear some table space outside the “toddler zone” before the food arrives. Don’t expect your server just to stand there holding a bunch of plates while you conduct negotiations about table clearance that you should have taken care of beforehand: it’s inefficient and thoughtless.

And yes, a server should certainly always warn the patrons about extra-hot plates no matter where on the table they’re putting them.

No whining citations issued.

Logic! Are you paying attention here echo6160?
Also brings up the question - why just the focus on hot plates? Are servers also supposed to know to not put a water glass within reach of a toddler, or a salad, or ice cream? If the toddler doesn’t know any better to not grab at a hot plate, would it not be just as likely to grab at anything else interesting that comes within reach?

[Frylock]

@TriPolar

Friend Frylock, I’m a little baffled why my response there was bizarre. The OP agreed with me on that point. I doubt you expect others to have the same degree of concern for your children that you do.

I didn’t want to join in the feces flinging now that this thread is in the monkey cage, but you and I seem to be able to interact even when we have diametrically opposed cosmologies, so I hope you’ll clarify for me as if we were in a reasonably sane forum.

My entire point worth discussing is that a parent has to take responsibility for the well being of their child whether the rest of the world behaves rationally or not. They have to assume the best waitperson will accidentally put a hot plate within reach of their child, so there is no additional effort required by the parent even if the world was filled with considerate and intelligent people performing menial tasks for sub-minimum wage.

It was bizarre for you (and others) to attribute to the OP a desire that anyone else have an “equal level of concern” for the OP’s children as the OP himself has.

What is asked for in the OP is a minimal level of concern appropriate to children in general, not the same level of concern that would be shown by a child’s parent.

If I put a red hot poker in front of a kid playing on the playground, I haven’t failed just to show a parent’s concern, I’ve failed to show a minimal normal amount of concern.

I disagree that one “must assume” that others will not show this minimal amount of concern.

[Kimstu]

@Frylock

If I put a red hot poker in front of a kid playing on the playground, I haven’t failed just to show a parent’s concern, I’ve failed to show a minimal normal amount of concern.

Kind of shifting the goalposts here, though. A kid playing on the playground presumably is not being closely supervised and controlled by an adult in immediate proximity to them. A toddler sitting next to a parent at a restaurant table, however, presumably is.

[Frylock]

@Kimstu

Kind of shifting the goalposts here, though. A kid playing on the playground presumably is not being closely supervised and controlled by an adult in immediate proximity to them. A toddler sitting next to a parent at a restaurant table, however, presumably is.

I was illustrating the more general principle, not shifting goalposts.

[OldnCrinkly]

The hot plates are often the kid’s own plates that have been sitting under the heater until the parents’ dishes were ready. It doesn’t take a genius to put it on a fresh (not cooked) plate. Or bring it out when it is ready, one extra trip is hardly an outrageous imposition.

This, to me, is similar to grocery baggers. Yes, the cantaloupe belongs in a bag. However, you are an idiot if you put it on top of the bread. Similarly, yes, the dishes belong on the table. However, if you put the one that is too hot for you to touch in front of a baby, you are being an idiot. It doesn’t mean you’re a bad person. It just means you did something dumb.

I don’t like my brad smashed, and I don’t like my kids singed. Both are easy to avoid with a minimal amount of forethought.

[Kimstu]

@Frylock

I was illustrating the more general principle, not shifting goalposts.

I think the “more general principle” is kind of meaningless without acknowledging that its implementation depends on circumstances.

For instance, the minimum normal amount of caution you need to exercise in keeping dangerous objects away from an unsupervised and unrestrained child is different from the minimum normal amount of caution needed in the case of a supervised and restrained child.

Using an example of the former case to “illustrate” a point in a dispute about the latter case is where the goalpost-shifting comes in, IMHO.

[CrazyCatLady]

Back in the day when I started waiting tables, I had NO IDEA just how grabby little kids could be. I knew they liked to touch things that looked interesting, but grabbing every. single. thing. within arm’s reach? Never would have expected that. And, tbh, I rather expected by the time a kid was old enough to walk, they were familiar with the words “no” and “hot.” Because I assumed most people would have had to keep said kids from sticking things in light sockets and touching the stove and grabbing food off other people’s plates and all that kind thing–how do you keep a kid from doing that kind of stuff unless you teach him about “no” and “hot”? So yeah, when I set something in the border of the clear zone around a 2 year old and said “This is hot” I assumed the little bugger knew that meant not to touch it.

I learned through experience that many people had in point of actual fact NOT taught their kids not to touch hot things at home and that some kids would manage to grab anything that wasn’t tethered to the ceiling six feet above the floor, but I had absolutely no way of knowing that going in.

[Uber_the_Goober]

@curlcoat

Logic! Are you paying attention here echo6160?
Also brings up the question - why just the focus on hot plates? Are servers also supposed to know to not put a water glass within reach of a toddler, or a salad, or ice cream? If the toddler doesn’t know any better to not grab at a hot plate, would it not be just as likely to grab at anything else interesting that comes within reach?

Actually, yes, I am paying attention. Didn’t you notice that particular point being covered earlier - by me even? Yes servers should be aware of ANYTHING they put in front of a toddler. It’s their responsibility. Stop trying to shift it away from them. It’s a shared responsibility between the parent and the server. It’s about being a decent member of society. You know how we have negligent homicide laws? The same basic principle applies to just about everything that could potentially do harm to another person. Hot plate, covering the stairs with soapy water and not warning people, or driving recklessly and killing pedestrians.

The fact here is that we simply disagree. You a bit more vehemently so - comically even. Stop spraying your bullshit all over. It’s beginning to stink up the place.
Oh, and you’re a jizz covered harlot. And your mother smells of elderberries! And…oh I’ll save it.

[Frylock]

@Kimstu

I think the “more general principle” is kind of meaningless without acknowledging that its implementation depends on circumstances.

For instance, the minimum normal amount of caution you need to exercise in keeping dangerous objects away from an unsupervised and unrestrained child is different from the minimum normal amount of caution needed in the case of a supervised and restrained child.

Using an example of the former case to “illustrate” a point in a dispute about the latter case is where the goalpost-shifting comes in, IMHO.

This is foolishness. One generally does not place burning hot objects in front of children. It does not require a particularly close or intense kind of caring feeling toward the child for this to be applicable.

[Sleeps_With_Butterflies]

Woohoo! We’ve got it ratcheted back up to BURNING HOT (we would have accepted RED HOT as well) again. I think we just need someone on the other side of the argument to fling some “STOP TAKING YOUR KIDS TO RESTAURANTS!” nonsense and we can get this thing another 200 replies!

[Zeriel]

@curlcoat

Perhaps you were just going to restaurants that the parents knew would have highchairs. Recently, I have been to Maggianos, the Black Bear Diner and a Mexican chain that is not coming to mind right now, as well as our local hole in the wall Mexican place. I don’t recall seeing any highchairs at any of those. OTOH, maybe there just didn’t happen to be any babies/toddlers there when I was .

I find it’s often the case there are no obvious high chairs sitting out and I have to ask if there is one. I have not yet left a restaurant because there are no provided high chairs, but I also don’t tend to even attempt to dine above $30/plate with a toddler in tow, and even that is generally family sushi places and the like.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to put the infant car seat on the bench?

Trust me when I say that infant car seats are not very stable when sitting on a flat surface smaller than a floor–their bottoms are not generally designed to sit stably on a surface, they’re designed to latch to two parallel bars. Every shopping cart kid seat and the upended bottom supports of every high chair I’ve ever personally seen has been compatible with every infant car seat I’ve owned.

Table room is another thing that we are not seeing the same. Unless it is just me and my husband, or me and a friend at a table meant for four, there never seems to be enough room on the table for drinks, water glasses, salt/pepper/sugar/etc, salads/soups and dinner plates, especially if we get any appetizers. Maybe we just eat slow or something (kind of doubt it) but it seems that we always have something still on plates when something else comes out. I just cannot even imagine being able to leave a clear space on the table the size of the reach of a toddler. And then to get mad because the server wants to put something there?

It’s possible I tend to eat quickly. Nonetheless, I’ve not had problems eating a multiple-appetizer dinner with my wife and parents at places like Red Lobster (which always strikes me as having relatively smaller tables) with the kid in tow, so I might also just be better at table tetris. =P

But then again, I’m the one who just picks stuff up and moves it when it’s accidentally put where the kid can get it, rather than getting annoyed.

[mister_nyx]

I used to wait tables and the whole point of my evening is the point where I put the fucking bonfire on a plate in front of your child so that I can relish their cries of pain.

P.S.: If you tip less than 20% you are a monster.

[Rand_Rover]

Zeriel, do you also sit down with your dog and explain very calmly and patiently why it’s not OK to shit on the floor? Just curious.

[Cat_Whisperer]

@mister_nyx

I used to wait tables and the whole point of my evening is the point where I put the fucking bonfire on a plate in front of your child so that I can relish their cries of pain.<snip>

Now, THAT’S what I’m talking about!

[scratch_llll]

Hey! It’s the parents responsibility to burn their children! A waiters only respnsibility is to bring water and shoot people in the head who can’t get out of the way of a bullet because fuck em he has no responsibility to babysit people who haven’t got the sense to dodge.

[Frylock]

@Sleeps_With_Butterflies

Woohoo! We’ve got it ratcheted back up to BURNING HOT (we would have accepted RED HOT as well) again. I think we just need someone on the other side of the argument to fling some “STOP TAKING YOUR KIDS TO RESTAURANTS!” nonsense and we can get this thing another 200 replies!

I don’t understand this post. Restaurant plates are literally burning hot. As in, touching one can conceivably send you to the hospital.

[Zeriel]

@Rand_Rover

Zeriel, do you also sit down with your dog and explain very calmly and patiently why it’s not OK to shit on the floor? Just curious.

Coming from you of all people, that’s pretty fucking funny.

[Cat_Whisperer]

@Frylock

I don’t understand this post. Restaurant plates are literally burning hot. As in, touching one can conceivably send you to the hospital.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof - do you have any proof that people are regularly hospitalized by touching hot plates in restaurants?

[Sleeps_With_Butterflies]

@Frylock

I don’t understand this post. Restaurant plates are literally burning hot. As in, touching one can conceivably send you to the hospital.

I’ve been an emergency room nurse for a bit now and I’ve never seen this happen. Not one time. Could it happen? Well, I guess it could. I could see the sizzling iron fajitas ones POSSIBLY causing a burn enough for a hospital visit if you grabbed it and refused to let go, but regular plates? Where are you eating that you’ve seen this?

You could have your hand superglued to one of them and not have more than a first degree burn.

Listen, wait staff SHOULD NOT SIT HOT THINGS OR SHARP THINGS in front of kids but getting all pearl clutching insane with RED HOT PLATES only makes you look silly. For serious, you’re hysterical. Calm down.