<p>On one of these food related threads someone mentioned the challenges involved in feeding ~4,000 mids daily. Interesting to note that the Navy does manage to feed ~5,700 people (ships company + air wing) each day on the average Nimitz-class aircraft carrier.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Gotta hear an "official excuse" first.
[/quote]
You didn't say "reason" you said "official excuse." Caught off guard is not a reason but it is most certainly an excuse and given by Captain Klein pretty much meets the definition of "official"</p>
<p>Can we say Merlot!</p>
<p>^^^^^^^Totally apples and oranges. Not even close to being similiar. Carriers serve by a food line and steam tables. Almost continuously. At the SAs, they all sit down at once and walk out 20-30 minutes later fully complete.</p>
<p>My point was that each require planning to execute successfully and it does work on an aircraft carrier with larger numbers. I imagine you can't order in a pizza on an aircraft either, so they better do a good job of planning.</p>
<p>Lack of planning will cause problems (for different reasons) at either place.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As soon as we see whether the "reason why" was reasonable, we can decide which way the bottle, or donuts, travels.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Lack of planning will cause a 6 table restarant to grind to a halt but, since neither is it pertinenet to this discussion, no reason to mention it either.</p>
<p>Aircraft carriers are also required to maintain 90 days of rations on board for the crew. USNA has trucks delivering food almost daily, as they don't have adequate storage facilities for that amount of stock.</p>
<p>All you need is a well trained organization, proper planning, a clear understanding of the timetables and simple math. As a former chef I have led a staff who served 6000 people at the Rock& Roll Hall of Fame. We operated out of tents with portable ovens, ranges, folding tables, folding chairs, etc.... The Menu was a choice of bacon wrapped filet of beef, or chicken en phyllo, or a vegetarian plate consisting of grilled seasonal vegetables. All this is served white table cloth service in a massive set of tents and inside the Rock Hall. Everyone from Sting, Bruce Springsteen, to local people who paid big bucks to charity was served inside of 20 minutes.(over the shoulder service) everyone got their choice, all the food was hot, and we donated the excess to local homeless shelters. Can you do a less expensive menu and do it with $6.60 per person per day? a qualified yes.... (my thoughts are that amount reported was the budget for the old system but does not cover the new requirements) The wheels fell off the wagon for a while, but I hope that they can get it done now. You have to realize that the contract went to the lowest bidder. This bidder most likely has union contracts to deal with. (labor one of the highest expenses so there is little $$$ to be available to buy your food) The entire system needs to be given to a properly experienced Master Chief and a motivated crew off any one of our carriers could execute this operation much better than the lowest bidder. And the quality would be 10X better. However that is politics and jobs and that is why we outsource the food service in most shoreside dining halls. Not to get the most bang for the buck. IMHO</p>
<p>from momof1: "My son is more concerned about retaining honors violators than the food situation, though."</p>
<p>I'm hoping, momof1 that "retaining honors violators" went out with the old regime??????</p>
<p>As Profmom2 pointed out: </p>
<p>
[quote]
Capt. Margaret Klein, commandant of midshipmen, acknowledged that the Naval Academy has been caught off guard by the new food policy. Before this year, midshipmen were required to eat in the dining hall only six meals per week. The change means the school went from providing a minimum of 26,400 meals a week to 66,000.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Let me see if I understand this assessment; the Naval Academy was caught off guard by their decision to implement a new meals policy? How exactly does that happen? I assume they have some appreciation for how it sounds when they say things like this about a policy and the consequences of that policy since they choose, decided, elected…to implement it. It was not an act of god or caused by global warming. </p>
<p>I wish they would just stop talking about it and just get on with it. And if they are going to say anything, try and make a positive out of a negative and use it to teach the Mids about responsibility. Stand up in front of a microphone and say “we screwed up”, “this was our decision and our responsibly and this is what we did wrong” or “did not anticipate”, “this is what we have since learned” and “this is what we are going to do to fix it”. Maybe they have done just that. I can only hope so. The last thing you want to try to do with a situation like this is spin it. I will certainly grant Capt. Klein the benefit of the doubt that she may have been misquoted since this is a “news report” and her response may have been more succinct.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The meals I have seen were seated, served, eaten, and departed within 20 or so minutes.</p>
<p>I think when the smoke clears, we might find a disgruntled contractor on the last days of his contract. Perhaps also, a low bid construction contractor who is required to keep all the equipment, both temporary and permanent, up and running during the entire renovation project. A contract whose scope when bid was probably less than 1500 or so breakfasts and approximately the same for dinner.</p>
<p>USNA69, </p>
<p>Any and all of the things you cite as possible reasons for what happened may prove to be true, unfortunately for the Academy, that is not what people see, nor does it effectively excuse the events that unfolded. All it can do is call into question the wisdom of implementing such a change during construction, and/or the failure to anticipate the reaction of the contractor. Those are all possible scenarios, possible reasons to explain what happened, but none of them are acceptable excuses; that is the distinction. If you were the Captain of a ship and the reason you gave for your failure to engage was rough seas would that fly? Does the Navy only go to war when it’s calm? Anyone can succeed when the circumstances are ideal, effective leadership prevails when they are not.</p>
<p>^^^^^Exactly my thoughts.......</p>
<p>So somehow that makes is OK if ......</p>
<p>
[quote]
......we might find a disgruntled contractor on the last days of his contract..........
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Gee, great logic there.</p>
<p>These are 'discussion forums' and people with varying points of view will continue to discuss topics of interest whether or not everyone happens to agree with them.</p>
<p>For a mid who doesn't have enough to eat, I doubt they could really care less about intelligent 'excuses'.</p>
<p>"Can you do a less expensive menu and do it with $6.60 per person per day? a qualified yes.... (my thoughts are that amount reported was the budget for the old system but does not cover the new requirements)" -xchefmike</p>
<p>That's the problem, it's still $6.60 per day. When the mids travel during the summer they are reimbursed $6.60 a day for food. So, if each meal in King Hall averages $2.20, minus labor, how much is actually being spent on the food? If the overall food budget remains the same, but the quantity increases, what will suffer? Quality. Tell me this isn't going to happen!</p>
<p>I don't know USNA69----
me thinks you owe me a bottle! ;)</p>
<p>(yellowtail will do nicely--- I'll even share!!! :) )</p>
<p>rjr
Interesting concept: a person in authority taking responsibility for their decision.
Given the current envrionment of obfuscation that seems to envelop our government, that doesn't seem likely to happen.</p>
<p>bill- are you trying to tell me i am never going to see that yellowtail??? :(</p>
<p>I don't remember the exact words upon which you rest your claim--others who are more adept at quoting posts may care to research this--but it does seem that your claims are being obfuscated by the fog of lame and irrelevant arguments.</p>
<p>The meals I have seen were seated, served, eaten, and departed within 20 or so minutes. USNA69</p>
<p>I could serve "Family Style" for 4000 Mids in 2 minutes with the right staff. (been there done that got the t-shirt) we are not talking the moon shot here. I concur with Bill take accountability for it, solve it and move on. Stop trying to make excuses.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I too wish we could all stop talking about it and just move on. Unfortunately, we are simply moving on to stage 2, which is criticizing the new menu; no red meat, what about the Arabs and pork, etc.</p>
<p>One of the tenets of good leadership is to praise in public and to reprimand in private. Therefore, we will probably never know the details of what went wrong, simply that there was an error and it was corrected. I would expect no more from a good leader. However, I am sure that some would consider accepting responsibility without providing details just another spin.</p>
<p>I have no idea why there was a food screw up, and apparently there was one, of which the extent we can only speculate. I cannot believe that it happened in a vacuum out of pure incompetence and neglect. There was a reason, a valid reason. And at the cost of a bottle of merlot, I intend to find it. My speculation, and it is that, is that it is a construction contract issue. I was a facilities commander and, as such, was intimately familiar with contracts. After retirement, I was Senior Vice President for Estimating and Procurement of a large construction company which performed approximately 80 million dollars annually of military contracts. My owners desired me to bid the Bancroft Hall renovation which originally included King Hall as an additive bid item. Based on the scope of work and the specification requirements, I passed. It was a huge headache and had way too many possible avenues to disaster. Having lived there, I knew too much. Time2 may consider it irrelevant and trivial, but the King Hall contract is administered and controlled by the Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Washington. This command is totally independent of ADM Fowlers Chain of Command and he has very little input into construction issues.</p>