By Ray Stern
By Ray Stern
By New Times
By Amy Silverman
By Stephen Lemons
By Stephen Lemons
By Monica Alonzo
By Chris Parker
Last Chance is a division of Nordstrom, and its employees are Nordstrom employees and are expected to offer the same level of customer service that we provide in our full-line stores. There are no exceptions. Nordstrom is committed to providing a bias-free, professional work environment in which every employee and customer is treated with respect.
As a result of the statements made by this employee, we have begun a full investigation into the source of these comments. There is absolutely no place on our sales team for people with views so vastly different from the values of our company; they simply are not the kind of people that we want as employees. All employees are provided sensitivity and diversity training on an ongoing basis. We have arranged for all of our current employees to undergo such training again and to review the company's policies against any form of discrimination.
Finally, Silverman's claims that some Last Chance merchandise is not in salable condition are completely without merit. I can assure our customers that Last Chance carefully screens every piece of merchandise before it is sent to the sales floor. All shoes are refurbished, sanitized and deodorized. All apparel and accessories are inspected and only the highest-quality merchandise is presented on the sales floor.
Jackie Schell, store manager
While I respect Howard Seftel's dislike of our atmosphere and employee uniforms at Joe's Crab Shack, there are several things that he reports that are incorrect ("Dungeness & Flagons," February 13).
Seftel states that "televisions are blaring everywhere." While we do have several TVs in the front of the restaurant, it is our strict policy never to turn on the volume. We have even gone so far as to disconnect the volume control on some TVs that are within reach of our guests so that the TVs are not inadvertently turned up.
It is stated that the coconut shrimp "sported a right-out-of-the-freezer-bag flair." Our coconut shrimp are hand-rolled in fresh coconut flake daily. Seftel may not have liked the taste; however, it was not because it was frozen product.
That "desserts come from Landry's" is also incorrect. Our desserts are made for Joe's Crab Shack by a very high-quality company in Texas. "Joe's Crab Shack doesn't bother with bread" is also not true. We serve fresh bread upon request that is baked for us daily by a local bakery.
Finally, Seftel states that our staff "inflicts a Happy Birthday punishment" on guests who come in on their birthday. We get a lot of people who enjoy the birthday festivities, and come here with large groups so they can have lots of fun.
I don't disagree that we are a large company and give tremendous value to our guests; however, I just want to make sure New Times' readers get all the facts correctly.
Tony Tahmosh, general manager
Joe's Crab Shack
Howard Seftel responds: Let's look at the five points Mr. Tahmosh makes:
1. Okay, mea culpa; the televisions aren't blaring. I should have realized they'd have to be louder than a Boeing 747 at takeoff to be heard over the din here. But I have a question: Exactly why does a restaurant need televisions playing with the sound off?
2. Yes, the lackluster coconut shrimp did sport right-out-of-the-freezer flair, even if they were made up fresh.
3. I got the (mis)information that desserts came from Landry's from obliging staff.
4. Mr. Tahmosh says, "We serve bread upon request." I have never heard of an on-request bread policy. All I know is nobody ever brought me bread, or suggested I could have some if I wanted.
5. Mr. Tahmosh doesn't like my assessment that the staff "inflicts a Happy Birthday punishment" on guests who come here to celebrate. He says the folks who come to Joe's Crab Shack enjoy it. I don't doubt it for a minute.
Parental Guidance Suggested
New Times was right to be outraged by the antics of Mel McDonald and his police co-conspirators in the covering up of the sexual molestation of two children ("Mel's Angels," Paul Rubin, January 30). But what I found more disturbing was the reaction of their mother to these events. First of all, who lets the teenager who molested her 3-year-old daughter [have access to] her 10-year-old son two years later? Is this mother guilty of a blatant disregard for her children, or just plain stupidity?
Another thing I found frightening: When her son wanted to go to the police in a failed attempt to gain justice, the mother told police that she didn't believe an investigation was necessary! Let's face it, in the fight to protect our children from harm, we as parents are on the front line. We need to recognize that children have rights. If we don't fight for them, who will?