La Scarola, et al: No Table For You!

La Scarola, while not my favorite Italian restaurant, is a place I go to every once in a while, mostly because I can get something to eat there on the way downtown with a minimum of parking hassles.

Last night was the second time I walked in at La Scarola before the dinner rush (6:00) and was told that I could not have a table there at all that night. In fact, the host practically waved me out of the restaurant the moment I walked in. He told me he had too many reservations. The other time I was turned away, literally, at the door, at 6:00 and during the week. One other time, also during the week, I had to convince the host that because we were on the way to a play, we would be very fast, and not take up one of the numerous empty tables for more than an hour.

What gives? Last night, the restaurant was bustling, however, there was more than one available four top. And while those might have been reserved for either parties of four or reservations, I rarely, if not ever, run into a restaurant that will just tell you "no," and not a least give you a projected wait time while trying to accommodate you. (I realize La Scarola does not have a full bar area, they do have some sort of an area, albeit small, where waiting diners can corral, in any case, how do they know that I wouldn't prefer waiting outside or in Richard's bar next door?)

Rarely these days do I find myself making a reservation -- mainly because I eat out mostly on weekdays and because I find that, if I'm willing to wait and have a little patience, be friendly and understanding, most restaurants, even the hottest ones, will accommodate you as a walk in. In fact, in most cases, I end up waiting less than thirty minutes, as fast eaters go in and out, or reservations don't show.

La Scarola is really the one place I've encountered that almost absolutely requires you to reserve (and I'm excepting the high end tasting menu places or tiny places like Schwa). Which, for me, puts La Scarola in a bit of a hard place, as it's not likely to ever be a place where I call to reserve several days in advance. I don't know if they're still suffering the fabled "Check Please! Effect," but I don't think it's generally a good policy to make absolutely no attempt to accommodate walk-in diners.

I'm just wondering -- has anyone ever encountered a restaurant like this -- middle of the road -- that seems to have a tight reservations policy?

If they're filling every table, why should they leave tables empty in hopes of someone else possibly filling them?

"It's so popular no one goes there any more." --Yogi Berra

Mike G wrote:If they're filling every table, why should they leave tables empty in hopes of someone else possibly filling them?

"It's so popular no one goes there any more." --Yogi Berra

I think the idea here is that even if you have reserved every table for a whole evening, there will likely be enough no-shows that it makes good sense to accommodate at least a few walk-ins. As a restaurant manager presumably hoping to maximize your profits, not only will you sell an otherwise "lost" table, the walk-ins will be made insanely happy to get into your super-trendy restaurant (or at least happy enough not to post negative comments about you on LTHForum). That's the theory. On the other hand, a place like La Scarola scarcely needs the business of any individual schlub right now, at least so long as it remains such a fashionable place for the Beautiful People from the Hollywood B-List. Once David Copperfield and the cast of Friends or whoever stops going there, maybe they will re-think the policy on walk-ins.

Well, that is the point.

La Scarola is nearly full from reservations. La Scarola chooses to keep a table or two for some bigshot, in the confidence that at least one bigshot will show up. You are not a bigshot.

Seems to me they are managing things entirely reasonably and fairly so as to maximize the fruits of their success, while giving you the truth straight right at the beginning instead of stringing you along for half the evening. Like when the guy in the suit department at Nieman Marcus tells you their low end starts $300 above your high end, sometimes it's better for everyone to just get the hard facts right up front.

The problem with your notion, Jim, that they should accommodate a few walk-ins is that we're talking 6pm. At 6pm they haven't had any no-shows yet; they have no tables to give away. It's entirely possible that at 9pm a walk-in can get a table (though I'd bet it would be a walk-in who's been drinking at the bar for an hour), but it makes no sense to give away tables in anticipation of no-shows at a time when you could easily create unhappy customers with reservations by doing so and then being unable to fill their reservations.

I admire their realistic management of the situation.

Mike G wrote:The problem with your notion, Jim, that they should accommodate a few walk-ins is that we're talking 6pm. At 6pm they haven't had any no-shows yet; they have no tables to give away. It's entirely possible that at 9pm a walk-in can get a table (though I'd bet it would be a walk-in who's been drinking at the bar for an hour), but it makes no sense to give away tables in anticipation of no-shows at a time when you could easily create unhappy customers with reservations by doing so.

Ah, but didn' t the OP say s/he was willing to wait, even to hang out at the bar next door, until there was an opening? And neither I nor the OP was proposing that the restaurant immediately give away reserved tables to walk-ins on the assumption that some would be no-shows. The OP wasn't expecting star treatment, just that ONCE a reservation is confirmed as a no-show, THEN it would be reasonable to let a poor schlub, who has been patiently waiting, to be given that table.

Fair or unfair, the policy of holding back tables for big shots is common enough practice that I think we are all familiar with it. I don't think the OP expected to walk into the place and get seated immediately, like he was Jeff Probst or something. The OP isn't asking for a Big-Shot Table, just access to a non-big shot's table once it becomes clear that the non-big shot ain't coming. Being summarily shot down and denied even the opportunity to wait patiently for a table -- and even after offering to wait off the premises -- was the source of the OP's puzzlement (I think).

So they want people standing in their tiny bar area for three hours waiting to pounce on a no-show table? Why, when they can just as easily fill that slot in two minutes at 9 pm?

Again, I think they're doing the customer a favor by not creating unrealistic expectations or allowing them to wait a ridiculous amount of time for a table in a manner that will inconvenience them, the restaurant, and other diners.

Mike G wrote:So they want people standing in their tiny bar area for three hours waiting to pounce on a no-show table? Why, when they can just as easily fill that slot in two minutes at 9 pm?

I agree, but again ... the OP was willing to wait in the bar next door, presumably popping over to La Scarola once every 30 minutes or so to see whether something was opened up. OK, so that may not be the most practical solution (nor how I would choose to spend up to three hours of my life). And maybe the restaurant just decided it was more trouble than it was worth (for all parties) to accommodate such a request. (And re-reading the original post, I guess it isn't clear that the OP actually vocalized such a suggestion to the management; meaning maybe they did assume he planned on standing around inside La Scarola waiting to pounce on a table ... ).

Yeah, I guess I think they have a system allowing people who are not on premises to get a table at a specific time already... it's called making a reservation...

JimInLoganSquare wrote:Being summarily shot down and denied even the opportunity to wait patiently for a table -- and even after offering to wait off the premises -- was the source of the OP's puzzlement (I think).

That's exactly my point. La Scarola is not the hottest place in town. Yet, you could walk into several of the current "hot" places in town, with their bar packed and every table taken (which was not the case at La Scarola last night), and still be offered the opportunity to wait and the host staff will usually make every effort to squeeze you in. I definitely don't wait more than an hour for a table anywhere, but in many cases where I was apologetically told that the wait would be an hour, I'm usually happily seated within a half hour because, as the host has communicated, somebody blew off their reservation. I don't think any business should proceed from that point that "we don't need the extra business," because that may not always be the case.

I have friends who operate a successful neighborhood restaurant in Chicago, a restaurant that gets enough press to garner a flood of reservations from those wanting to check out the place after a writeup. Yet, they will say that they will bend over backwards to accommodate walkins because, in their view, they are usually neighborhood people who will likely become regular customers if treated right, or they are people who, coming back from somewhere like a Cubs game, think of their restaurant, and those people, too, are likely to become repeat customers, if not already.

Besides, this same thing has happened to me during the week at La Scarola, a time when most restaurants are slow(er), and more than half the restaurant's tables were empty. It's a casual Italian restaurant -- turnover is quick -- and it's not the type of place where people are induced to linger (although that's certainly possible as it is at every restaurant).

I think that if a restaurant doesn't want people walking in and asking if they can wait for a table, they need change their policy to require reservations. I went to the La Scarola web site and it does not state reservations are required. On metromix.com, it merely states that they are recommended. By not doing having such a policy, it creates the impression that it is possible to walk in and offer to wait for a table, which can create confusion and, sometimes, disgruntled turned away people.

I admit to admiring the MikeG-endorsed "Here's the facts; suck on 'em" approach as it is least likely to lead to ultimate awkwardness and unhappiness, but I also understand the OP's position that a flat-out "NO" is a little off-putting.

It seems like this situation, like so many of those related to service, depends hugely upon the tone of the person delivering the information. Would it not have been better if a young Italian girl server had gushed, as she brushed away a tear, "I am SO sorry we can't accomodate you tonight. We're full up, and I'd hate to see you wait even a minute knowing that we can't give up our reserved tables tonight. We just feel that wouldn't be fair to the customers who called in. Could you come back, some other time, soon, please?"?

It'd work for me.

After two lousy experiences at La Scarola, I would consider not getting a table to be a good thing.

I have frequently seen La Scarola deserted at 6:00, then every chair at every table filled by 7:00. Weeknight or weekend.

My wife and I are not bigshots. But the fellows at La Scarola have never failed to seat us if there was an open table, regardless of our lack of a reservation.

The fact that La Scarola is my favorite restaurant in Chicago, and that I always personally order enough food and drink for three grown men on every visit, perhaps assists the maître d' in remembering to embrace my custom.

I am sorry that you were not seated. There is no seat in any restaurant in Chicago I enjoy as much.

I wouldn't necessarily use La Scarola and accommodating in the same sentence. Evil Ronnie and I walked in and not seeing carbonara (for which he was a hankerin') on the menu asked the waiter if they could whip it up. After a kitchen consultation, the waiter came back and proclaimed they didn't have the ingredients (!) and no, they wouldn't prepare it. Ron put down $10 for the water we drank and the bread we nibbled. We exited, went to another restaurant without carbonara being on the menu and they were happlily accommodating. End of story.

I wouldn't necessarily use La Scarola and accommodating in the same sentence.

True enough, and my own impressions of La Scarola are mixed, but it does seem kind of odd to criticize a restaurant this strongly for not serving a walk-in when they're (presumably) all booked-up and not serving a dish that isn't on the menu.

Lots more on the Carbonara Conundrum here.

Harry V. wrote:I have frequently seen La Scarola deserted at 6:00, then every chair at every table filled by 7:00. Weeknight or weekend.

My wife and I are not bigshots. But the fellows at La Scarola have never failed to seat us if there was an open table, regardless of our lack of a reservation.

The fact that La Scarola is my favorite restaurant in Chicago, and that I always personally order enough food and drink for three grown men on every visit, perhaps assists the maître d' in remembering to embrace my custom.

I am sorry that you were not seated. There is no seat in any restaurant in Chicago I enjoy as much.

So Harry is a big shot, and if one wants to get in one should arrange to go with him. Of course, the price might be high, since one would likely be required to actually dine with Harry, and possibly buy him something to eat in return for the sharing of his big shot sunshine with you . But it is always a pleasure to dine with fellow LTH'ers.

Harry, hope you do not mind me suggesting this.

La Scarola is not my favorite place, though it is not bad either. Seems to me there are a few places on Taylor Street and Oakley that are not quite as popular but pretty accessible and a bit more welcoming. Not that they do not fill up, too.

And I pretty much agree with Mike about being turned away. It is fine, and realistic, plus there are so many other very good options around there.

Anyone denied a table on a busy night at La Scarola should consider themselves lucky. Being jammed in anywhere near the small bar area is a disaster even if only one or two people are at the bar. In all of Chicagoland there are few tables worse.

The restaurant's "NO" behavior is a conceit I find a bit perplexing on a couple of levels.

Not long ago, I was at Keefer's and Chef John Hogan happened by my table. I asked him if it was possible to get one of his signature salads chopped. He looked at me quizzically at first and then said, "Of course you can. The days of saying 'no' to a customer are over."

That has stuck with me ever since.

Second, while I understand there's a certain neighborhood charm to the place, the La Scarola food has never risen above mediocre in half a dozen visits.

Acting like a jerk is never excusable, but is somewhat understandable when the person, place or thing is the very best at what it does.

These guys aren't even close.

What a difference two years can make.

Perhaps La Scarola has matured or they simply need the business more than before. Tonight, we had a reservation for four at 5:00 and the evening was delightful. A lovely and helpful waitress. A bustling and accommodating busman. And the food was terrific. Reasonably priced wines by the glass and a martini that could have served three.

They claim to serve the best pasta fazool in Chicago and I wouldn't argue. Thick and tasty -- it was a nice match to their asparagus salad, which comes with roasted peppers and goat cheese in a VOO-and-lemon dressing that hit the mark on the tart & tasty index. Very fresh mussels in a red sauce that cried out for another basket of bread to sop up the juices. The side of escarole & beans (how could you not order something with escarole at this place?) was also enjoyable and the entrees were all good: Vitello di Franco with asparagus and arugula, Tilapia, Broccoli with goat cheese and a special of Meatballs and Shells with mushrooms and jalapenos.

The first impression is that we all enjoyed each of the items we had. The second impression is that the portions are quite generous. Nicely served by nice people.

We will return.