Walked by the ol' Berghoff bar Tues nite and looked in the window. As we anticipated, the wall between the bar and restaurant space has been removed. The barstools are on the bar, exactly where Rene G. photographed them on Feb 28. Of course, there will be new tables and chairs even though Rene did not buy any at the auction. One fear, however. It looks as though a platform is being built just on the other side of the front bar window. I hope it's not for friggin' booths! Other than that, it looks like minimal physical changes. Btw, a Berghoff source says "17 West" will open just after Easter. Start lining up now

Thanks for the info, El Panzone. I hope you don't mind but I included it on my Berghoff Memorial Blog also. I can't find anything elsewhere about when the bar (and/or cafe) are supposed to be reopening!

Cheers

April 28th. i'll buy you a beer

I noticed there's a new "17 West" sign in place of the old "Berghoff Bar" sign...

I don't have a photo yet but there's a fairly accurate rendering of it that I made using Power Point posted here...

http://berghoffmemorial.blogspot.com/20 ... -west.html

hopefully this isn't an indication of what's to come inside...?

17/w is the new catering/events business that is either already open or very, very soon to open.

the reopened Berghoff Bar is supposed to be called "17 West at the Berghoff" too, isn't it?

I assumed that's what the sign was for (since it replaced the Berghoff Bar sign).

"17 West at The Berghoff" (corporate events, weddings, receptions, rehearsal dinners, tour groups etc.) is now open for business for parties at 17 West. May 1st the bar, 17 West, will open.

I called Artistic Events/Carlyn Berghoff Catering today to ask when the bar would be reopening.

The person who answered the phone said the "tentative" date was April 18 -- for both the bar AND the cafe at 17 West Adams.

One week from today... we'll see!

http://berghoffmemorial.blogspot.com/

(originally posted by accident as a "new topic" in the forum instead of a reply to this one... sorry!)

Well, turns out the Berghoff cafe reopened today, but the bar did not (supposedly will be on May 2).

As always, you can read all about it at:

http://berghoffmemorial.blogspot.com/

hey, funks, i made a special trip to the hoff tuesday because of your incorrect post that the bar was open. you owe me a beer

sorry... fair enough!

but in my defense, I was only the messenger... Artistic Events gave me the April 18 date for the reopening of the bar AND cafe... turns out it was just the cafe... bummer.

of course. they tell you anything to get you there to give them your money. get ready for more of the same

luckily, their temporary closure has allowed me to steer some of the Berghoff bums to other loop spots.

it was really amazing the virulent responses i got in february whenever
i told someone the bar anad cafe' would reopen in 8 to ten weeks!

that includes the so-called "reporters" from the major print and TV media

on second thought, your "defense" doesn't cut it--you still owe me a beer

Try calling the 17/west cafe and the manager will tell you the tentative date for the bar to open is May 8, if all goes as planned, with a May 5 Berghoff family and friends get together.

cupiditas pecuniæ vincit omnia.

Sun Times Article wrote:'We had to do it the way we did it'

By now, most Chicagoans know the story of the closing of the Berghoff.

The 107-year-old restaurant at 17 W. Adams closed Feb. 28 -- along with the neighboring bar and newer cafe -- because owners Herman and Jan Berghoff retired.

The restaurant's assets, including recipes and executive chef Matthew Reichel, went to their daughter, Carlyn Berghoff, who moved her catering firm into the leased space that will now accommodate private events.

The old Berghoff was one of the few Chicago restaurants to still employ union cooks and servers, leading some observers to wonder whether the closing had more to do with rising employee costs.

"We had to do it the way we did it," Carlyn Berghoff said of the speculation."

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst ... off19.html

I always thought the Berghoff's German food was terrible but I nonetheless enjoyed going there now and again, no less for the friendly and courteous service than the look of the place. Now I doubt I'll ever feel the need to return.

Antonius

Antonius wrote:the friendly and courteous service

LOL. The Berghoff was notorious for its crusty waiters' abruptness -- which often verged on downright rudeness. It was part of the experience.

Somehow, I imagine the nonunion replacements will be blandly polite.

Heres the reason why they closed and reopened:

"The main difference, one not overlooked by customers, seemed to be the absence of the Berghoff's longtime unionized workers."

All companies now wanna pay illegal worker wages if they could!

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst ... off19.html

hmmmmm.......I am not sure I like the smell of Carolyn Berghoff's quote in the Sun Times. It seems to me that it was an easy way to get rid of expensive union employees. I will never walk through those doors again.

I do have to commend the family on their marketing smarts. All that free publicity......

LAZ wrote:LOL. The Berghoff was notorious for its crusty waiters' abruptness -- which often verged on downright rudeness. It was part of the experience.

Well, that wasn't our experience. In fact I remember going there, reluctantly, when our son was about a year old, with an out of town guest who insisted that we all eat there at the height of the lunch rush. I was amazed at the great service -- especially their ability to keep a toddler happy in the midst of a crowded, noisy room. They also knew without being told that we'd want to order something for him right away and have it brought out as soon as possible (a point which somehow is not obvious to many waiters). It was the best baby-friendly service we experienced during that stage of eating out.

polster wrote:Heres the reason why they closed and reopened:

"The main difference, one not overlooked by customers, seemed to be the absence of the Berghoff's longtime unionized workers."

All companies now wanna pay illegal worker wages if they could!

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst ... off19.html

Well, now. It's not like union wages and "illegal worker wages" are the only possibilities. There is a large middleground, namely non-union, "legal" worker wages. That said, I had no idea there was a waiterpersons' union. How much do union waiters get paid, I'd be curious to know? And should that influence our decisions regarding the tips we leave these union workers? I know the fact that a waitperson (at least typically, and allegedly) is paid minimum wage or sub-minimum wage rates, and depends on tips to pay the rent, motivates me to tip generously. But if the waiter is being paid "union wages" anything like UAW or other union wages, then they ought to be tipping me.

mk wrote:hmmmmm.......I am not sure I like the smell of Carolyn Berghoff's quote in the Sun Times. It seems to me that it was an easy way to get rid of expensive union employees. I will never walk through those doors again.

I do have to commend the family on their marketing smarts. All that free publicity......

... And huge crowds during the two months that are always slowest...

El Panzone had caught wind of this some time back and posted on it somewhere above.

As far as the comportment of the staff there, I know that a number of LTHers knew and were fond of the staff and from my own perspective, they always treated us and our guests with the utmost courtesy. No exception over 15 years. But then, I get along with just about everybody.

JimInLoganSquare wrote:

polster wrote:Heres the reason why they closed and reopened:

"The main difference, one not overlooked by customers, seemed to be the absence of the Berghoff's longtime unionized workers."

All companies now wanna pay illegal worker wages if they could!

http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst ... off19.html

Well, now. It's not like union wages and "illegal worker wages" are the only possibilities. There is a large middleground, namely non-union, "legal" worker wages. That said, I had no idea there was a waiterpersons' union. How much do union waiters get paid, I'd be curious to know? And should that influence our decisions regarding the tips we leave these union workers? I know the fact that a waitperson (at least typically, and allegedly) is paid minimum wage or sub-minimum wage rates, and depends on tips to pay the rent, motivates me to tip generously. But if the waiter is being paid "union wages" anything like UAW or other union wages, then they ought to be tipping me.

I don't care if the orginal waitstaff made UAW wages or not, to dupe the public into a panic of nostalgia (and profits) to cut payroll is EVIL.

-ramon

Ramon wrote:I don't care if the orginal waitstaff made UAW wages or not, to dupe the public into a panic of nostalgia (and profits) to cut payroll is EVIL.

-ramon

As a general assertion, Ramon, I have to agree with you; duping the public and closing your business in order to cut payroll would be very bad -- even "EVIL" -- acts. Your implication is that this is true of Berghoff and its past and present owners/operators, and that's where the problems begin. That is, "Maybe so, maybe no." That's a big assumption you've got going there. And, if it were not true, then those who had asserted it as true, with no factual basis, and only speculation and rumor ... if proved wrong ... would be struck comical, to say the least. I'm skeptical and think it best to reserve judgment on this matter. The possibility that Berghoff is innocent of all charges means those alleging otherwise could be defaming this business and its owners; and with the limited knowledge we have, that is not worth the risk, is it?

Jim, I am sorry, but I must disagree. There are two old sayings.

Where there is smoke, there is fire.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it probably is a duck.

Please pardon me for going a bit off topic.

As a former server, I feel obligated to weigh in here. There are several levels of minimum wage. Federal non-tipped, Federal tipped, and the state equalivents. Tipped employees are required to report tips received and are taxed on the same. We all know this is a cash business and not everyone is scrupously honest. That said the government requires that tipped employees report a minimum of 8% of sales as tips. Taxes come out of very meager paychecks. Highly tipped people sometimes don't make enough salary to cover the taxes taken from paychecks.

Ah, you say, but I always leave 20%...what about the other 12?

Most servers are required to divy their tips up. Usually the bartender gets a % of liquor (and sometimes soda) sales, bussers get a %, the kitchen expediter gets a flat rate, and in upscale restaurants, the front and back waiters have a hand in the tip pool.

Then there are the smart servers, they claim all their credit card tips. They're traceable should one get audited, and often equal a lot more than 8% of sales. Really smart servers keep a log of what they earned, what they tipped out, and what the difference is.

See if this makes sense, it's taken directly from the Department of Labor web site.

Jurisdiction:FEDERAL: Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
Basic Combined Cash & Tip Minimum Wage Rate $5.15
Maximum Tip Credit Against Minimum Wage$3.02
Minimum Cash Wage $2.13
Definition of Tipped Employee by Minimum Tips received (monthly unless otherwise specified): More than $30

In Illinois, if a worker averages more than .75/hr in tips, the employer can take credit against their salary. (That means pay them less)

Illinois

Basic Combined Cash & Tip Minimum Wage Rate $6.50
Maximum Tip Credit Against Minimum Wage $2.60
Minimum Cash Wage $3.90
Definition of Tipped Employee by Minimum Tips received (monthly unless otherwise specified): $20

Either way, wages are pretty low and most employees get neither medical benefits nor paid vacations. Union workers don't get a huge salary bump but they DO get benefits.

Diannie

As of today, they're saying simply "I don't know" when you ask Artistic Events for the Berghoff Bar reopening date.

El Panzone -- ok, I do owe you a beer... when -- who knows!

http://berghoffmemorial.blogspot.com/20 ... -dont.html

Ramon wrote:I don't care if the orginal waitstaff made UAW wages or not, to dupe the public into a panic of nostalgia (and profits) to cut payroll is EVIL.

-ramon

sabersix wrote:Jim, I am sorry, but I must disagree. There are two old sayings.

Where there is smoke, there is fire.

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, it probably is a duck.

I have to agree with Jim on this one. While the quote given by Carlyn Berghoff ("We had to do it the way we did it") directly follows a sentence regarding speculation about getting rid of the unionized workforce, there is no context around that quote from her to let us know if she is in any way referring to handling the situation in a certain manner to ultimately get a non-unionized workforce. An alternative explanation that is quite plausible is that "do[ing] it the way [they] did it" was for tax reasons (e.g., to save money on transfer taxes, to allow someone to take a tax loss). I am not saying this (or another) explanation is more plausible than the employment angle (and there may be other evidence out there that this was done to deal with the unionized workforce), but rather that reaching that conclusion with anything approaching certainty based solely on the linked article (and the author's decision to follow a line about speculation regarding the employment angle with an ambiguous Carlyn Berghoff quote) is problematic.

sabersix wrote:Where there is smoke, there is fire.

Yes, but what fire?

Another saying (one with which I hold more truck): Post hoc, ergo propter hoc

And, cum hoc, ergo propter hoc

As Matt''s post suggests, this story provides a very thin wisp of smoke. And there are many types of fires that may have emitted that wisp. Union-busting is just one of many possibilities. The elimination of union jobs may only be a coincidental, unintended result of a business management decision that was necessary, in the minds of the Berghoff family and its legal and business advisers, to keep the business alive in some form or another, in light of any number of changing circumstances. I don't think we are in a position to speculate based on this, not at least without a lot more explanation from the Berghoff's (and because The Berghoff is a privately-held family business, they have no obligation to provide one, by the way).

Hmmm...

Pension fund sues the Berghoff over payment
(Crain’s) — A pension fund representing Berghoff Restaurant workers has filed a lawsuit against the landmark eatery claiming it owes more than $450,000 to the retirement plan.

Read the full article at The Berghoff Memorial Blog...

http://berghoffmemorial.blogspot.com/

wow, is it hot.
sure am thirsty
i'll buy you one bac
ep