The Annandale Booth Restaurant Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

The Annandale Booth Restaurant - Case Study Example It is the duty of a chef or head cook to appoint and train prep persons and dishwashers (Bradach, 1997). Moreover, a chef or head cook is also responsible for the equipments, menu and also for the buying supplies as well. One chef is adequate for Brooks. The kitchen staff the kitchen staff of a restaurant may comprise of the following persons, such as, bread and pastry baker, vegetable, fry or a sauce chef. Moreover, each chef or cook is assigned with a specific task and has a specific job designation as well. Brooks needs at least 3 kitchen staff which can support the head chef. Kitchen workers the kitchen workers are assigned with the following tasks, such as, go after pots and pans, sit and strain soups and sauces and also to weigh and measure the ingredients as well. Moreover, they are also required to clean, peel, and slice vegetables and fruits and also to prepare salads as well. Waiter/waitress – the waiter or the waitresses in a particular restaurant are equired to perform following task, such as, serve food adn beverages, prpeare itemized chekcs and also to take customers orders as well. Moreover, they are aslo required to ensure that the person who comes to purchase alcohol or tobacco products are not under age. Brooks needs at least 4 of them on a shifting basis. Dishwasher – a dishwasher is required to supply pans, pots, utensils and aslo to clean the dishes as well. Moreover, they may also require to clean the kitchen and remove the garbage as well. In this regard, two dishwashers would be optimum for the Brooks. This method for employee selection could be highly helpful for brooks as they can recruit experienced employees for their new office and can havea headstart for their new office. Internal sourcing involves issuing an advertisement which can allow employees to have an idea regarding an available position in the organization, for which they can send their job applications. Internal sourcing has been the most common and

Juvenile Charged as an adult and discuss life leading to criminal Research Paper

Juvenile Charged as an adult and discuss life leading to criminal background - Research Paper Example According to deputy attorney general, the case will also serve as an example to others who have the intension of commiting a similar. However, the manner in which this case was handled and ruled created severe criticism from human right activist, media, family members, and other professionals. According to critics, despite the nature and magnitude of the case, the boy was supposed to be treated like a minor in a juvenile court. There were some background information and experiences that forced the case to be moved into adult court systems. Up to that time, Jordan was the youngest suspects to be charged with homicide in the country. The essay below will address some of the background information that directed Jordan brown case to adult court (Nitespinr, 2010). To start with, in Pennsylvania, the law does not provide the lower age limit for murder charges. Due to this, a minor can be charged as a grown up person in a criminal homicide. The laws that operate in Pennsylvania therefore allowed Jordan to be charged with murder case the same way an adult can be charged in any court. On the other hand, according to University of Texas lecturer Lyndon Johnson, in most states across the country, the law permits children to be prosecuted in adult courts. Most of these laws were passed in 1990s and 1980s when juvenile crimes were at the pick. Additionally, in the initial stage of the case, Jordan failed to acknowledge his guilty. Despite of the available evidence, Jordan and his family declined to accept Jordan wrongdoing. According to Anthony Krastek, the deputy attorney general, it was very complicated for the boy to get the required counseling and counseling in the situation where he declines to acknowledge his guilty. As stated by the deputy attorney general, counseling services are only granted to suspect who acknowledge their guilty. On the other hand, the prosecutor informed the court