Letters
Why does Forte have a free rein at the roadside?
Driving along the Kettering bypass section of the A14 some weeks ago, I saw a notice announcing a proposed new service area, and the inevitable "Here we grow again" logo.
Another Little Chef!
Roadside catering in the UK is so boring, and it is all because of the omnipresent Forte organisation (Little Chef, Happy Eater, et al). One can travel hundreds of miles on British trunk roads and be offered nothing but Forte or lay-by caravans. The independent, family roadside café has all but disappeared.
What will it take for the DTI to acknowledge that there is cause for concern over Forte's stranglehold on UK roadside catering? Surely a knighthood is quite sufficient reward for ensuring the prime minister has his favourite all-day breakfast. He does not have to give (Sir) Rocco Forte a complete market on a plate.
Trade and Industry Secretary Ian Laing has referred Granada's percentage of motorway service area holdings to the Monopolies & Mergers Commission. Mind you, I suppose that is only reasonable: Granada is not yet owned by Forte.
DAVID MITCHEM
Market Harborough,
Leicestershire.
Non-graduates deserve a chance
Why is it that the larger hotel chains seem willing to accept only graduates for their trainee and junior management positions.
When these vacancies are advertised they often give the same old quote: "Qualifications are not as important as previous experience and willingness to learn," but this is simply not so.
When will these employers realize that not having an academic background does not mean we don't want the chance to gain employment-related qualifications?
It seems anyone considering a career in hotel management should concentrate on the smaller, more personal hotel companies that do care about their employees' career progression.
MARC ADAMS
Duty Manager,
The Cairn Hotel, Harrogate.
HCIMA and BHA: just good friends
I enjoyed Table Talk's myopic study of the chicken entrails ("Bets abound for BHA Boss", 17 August) and subsequent marriage broking between the HCIMA and the BHA.
A neat idea, but the wrong bride: we would prefer to remain "just good friends".
Incidentally, Table Talk, did you hear the one about Michael Winner taking over from you…?
DAVID WRIGHT
President, HCIMA
London SW17.
Brave decision to quit rising sun
Catherine Chauvet must be congratulated for recognising that the Rising Sun will never be viable, especially when a manager has to be employed.
The minimum weekly turnover needed to sustain such an operation is at least £5,000 (net of VAT), with a gross profit on turnover of 55-60%, which she has realized can never be obtained.
As always, position, position, position should be the most important consideration when deciding to take on any business. Ms Chauvet has quickly come to the conclusion that the pub's position is not good enough.
I am sure she will continue to do well at the Westbury Inn as she can now be single-minded about it.
JOHN GOMERSALL
Independent Business Consultant,
Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire.
Alma Court closure
In your 17 August issue you ran a story about the closure of the RNIB Alma Court Hotel in Scarborough and the arrangement RNIB has come to with the nearby Cumberland Hotel to accommodate some of our visually impaired guests in the future.
Unfortunately, the quotation from Bas Bastiaan, our hotels service manager, was edited in such a way as to imply that the service provided for sighted guests by the Cumberland Hotel needs improvement. This has caused some distress to the manager of the Cumberland Hotel, Elaine Stuart, and her staff.
We would be grateful if you could make it clear that Mr Bastiaan was referring to services for visually impaired people at the hotel.
JENNY SHEPHERD
Press Officer, RNIB.
London W1N.
A waste of public money
I am writing to express my concern at the waste of public funds that a recent Industrial Tribunal case against us exemplifies.
The applicant had not approached us with regard to any claim for underpayment of wages. Three months after leaving our employment at his own volition, and at no cost or risk to himself other than the price of a postage stamp, he made an application to a tribunal, simply claiming "£105 in unpaid overtime".
Apparently an applicant is not required to support his claim in any way.
Four days after his application, he wrote to us claiming the £105, but still with no supporting information. This was his first and only direct approach to us. We replied, giving him a detailed breakdown of wages paid, and asking him to let us know what hours he disputed. We never had any response.
Some weeks later we received the claim from the tribunals office. Apparently there was no further contact between the tribunals office and the applicant and ACAS was never able to contact the applicant.
At the hearing, the applicant did not appear and his case was dismissed.
The cost to the public of such spurious complaints is appalling. If applications may be made at will, should there not be some assessment as to whether the applicant has made any effort at all to resolve the dispute? Basic organisation should require some acknowledgement by the applicant that he will attend the tribunal.
While one respects the access to justice which tribunals give people who might not be able to afford the costs of the traditional legal process, the balance of common sense must be entirely wrong when such a case can be so recklessly brought at no cost or risk to the applicant.
Indeed, why not let everyone fill in a claim form just for fun? At least the national lottery requires a non-returnable deposit!
Why should public funds subsidise such action? And what are taxpayers actually paying for such an inefficient system?
JOHN APPLEYARD
Proprietor, Haley's Hotel & Restaurant,
Headingley, Leeds.
