bitching about numbers..

i attended this meeting today which i was told was supposed to be a 'focus group' in which we had the opportunity to voice our opinions about various issues concerning the restaurant. how the meeting panned out however was not what i had anticipated. unfortunately.. the ceo's/cofounders conducted the meeting and instead of being seated 'round-table' we sat in front of the two as an audience would be, watching a presentation. and presentation is pretty much what we got. in my humble opinion. the focus of the 'discussion' was about the calorie counts on the menus. we were presented with how upset they [the big wigs] were about the requirement/law and how unfair it is and why are chains singled out [vs. fancy fois gras serving restaurants]? bitchmoanbitchmoan. and how extensive efforts were made [and may still be] to curtail the regulations so on and so forth. they're upset about the numbers on the menu devaluing their products and in the end the heft of their wallets. though in not quite so few words. it's just not fair-- over and over they exclaimed. ..and the thing is, part of me can sympathize. i mean, i know that when people at work get in my way of doing a good job, that can ultimately screw over my income. and it's like: get out of my way. don't fuck with my money, man. BUT. and as you can see, that's a big but.. but what about social responsibility?. an issue that i seem to have to grapple with time and time again at this job.. the meeting more than anything else was a taste/reminder of.. the corruption?.. i know it sounds harsh but it's to make a point.. but of the corruption of business/money on the well-being [or lack thereof] of fellow man/men. most of the 'discussion', it felt like, was focused on salad 'dressing on the side' and how the goddam dressing was the.. ahem, THE ONLY culprit of the gastronomical, i mean, astronomical caloric numbers.. and trying to figure a way to tweak the presentation of the numbers to make them seem not so bad/guilt-inducing.. urrrg.. midway through, i wanted to pull my hair out.. and if you haven't seen me recently, i have pretty long hair. i'd look pretty weird without it.. so anyway there was some discussion about serving salads with dressings on the side and listing the caloric info with the salad dressing separate and by tablespoon, which for sure would create the illusion of fewer calories, because who would eat their salads of such ginormity using all but a mere tablespoon? then there was also mention of testing low fat/fat free dressings. the low fat suggestion i was ok with though the fat free one made me shudder. dressing is fat... not 'fattening' per se but a fat. decrease the amount but don't eradicate it dummies.. it similarly goes into the realm of fat free margarine and fat free half and half all of which might be a lil less artery clogging but pumped with a boatload of unpronounceable chemicals which i'd be afraid to touch let alone put in my mouth and swallow.. in any case.. i could go on and on about salad dressing but think i will bite my tongue [or fingers] for the time being and save it and dedicate a whole other piece about them for another time. ..what they failed to mention/recognize were the other ingredients in the dishes including handfuls of rice sticks and wontons, which are essentially deep fried bits of refined starch.. and.. portion control. half size salads are enough to serve as entrees and full size salads are, well, forget about them. they can feed a whole village and then some. but seemingly reluctantly and likely ignorantly they didn't seem to consider the idea/suggestion for more than a moment before disregarding it and moving on. ..they were upset about the 2000 calorie daily value being listed as a requirement-- which by the way is listed on practically every item in the aisles and aisles of the supermarket. they weren't really looking to educate their staff about nutrition.. grrr.. they weren't really interested in offering a whole wheat pasta-- not that that would really affect calories but it would fiber-- nor were they at all interested in becoming a health food restaurant, the latter which i can respect because those places i think sometimes/oftentimes end up serving even more heavily processed foods-- faux chik'n anyone?. but why can't they be healthy[-er] and still taste good and as one of them put it still use 'food as entertainment'?. bitchmoan. they present themselves as taking the high road and 'dealing' with the situation now vs. later and hoping they are a step ahead expecting ALL restaurants-- whether a chain or not-- to eventually be subject to the requirement. ..in any case, this piece itself is admittedly a bitchmoan on my part. i just found it so irritating how irrational they were being, losing sight of the bigger picture as to why these laws are being enacted etc. it's not because the government has it in against them/chains but the chains especially, since they reach a larger audience/population, SHOULD be the first ones to take action. i mean, these guys/the company is always harping on the four principles they supposedly operate by, acronymed ROCK, which stands for respect opportunity communication kindness. i understand this as a means to keep things running smoothly [as best as possible] within house, but what about in regards to the clients/guests themselves?-- the bigger house? ..the joint already uses a lot of fresh ingredients which makes it such that they actually have a decent base/foundation to work from.. now if they can just first EDUCATE themSELVES and then take action in which both buyer and seller win then maybe it might give me hope in man/business once again, or for the very first time really.. that would be the day, huh?.