7 ms·
1M bartenders have to be certified in California by July 1
- mikercampbell 4y agoHoly crap, I'm on mobile and I couldn't read anything because of the banners and ads.
- swayvil 4y agoThat renders the issue nicely, metaphorically speaking.
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y agoThe workforce size in CA is 18M. 1 in 18 workers in CA serve alcohol? How?
- zer0-c00l 4y agoGo to a bar and you’ll find out
- benatkin 4y agoBest comment.
- james-skemp 4y agoFrom the article, it includes people I wouldn't have thought of: According to California’s Assembly Bill 122, alcohol servers are defined as anyone who: - Checks IDs for alcohol consumption or entry into a licensed establishment - Takes alcoholic beverage orders - Pours alcoholic beverages - Serves/delivers alcoholic beverages to patrons All of the above are required to be licensed according to the new law. Furthermore, any managers and supervisors are also required to become licensed. A manager/supervisor is anyone who: - Directly hires or oversees alcohol servers - Trains alcohol servers how to bartend (including how to check IDs and/or when to refuse service to patrons)
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- ars 4y ago"According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 644,100 bartenders working in the US in 2018. That number is forecasted to grow faster than most jobs, rising 8% between 2018 and 2028." So apparently California has all of them, plus extras.
- Rebelgecko 4y agoThe requirement also applies to waiters at restaurants that serve alcohol, baristas that serve alcohol, bouncers, etc
- ars 4y agoThere are 1.8 million waiters in the entire US. 171,630 in California. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353031.htm https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes353031.htm The 1 million number still doesn't add up.
- jimmygrapes 4y agoYou think there's only 118M people in California?
- lazide 4y agoAnyone in the chain from storage to the table is involved, including servers, managers, etc.
- benatkin 4y agoAnd ID checkers. Think security (commonly referred to as bouncers).
- tedivm 4y agoAccording go the bureau of labor statistics there are 1.8m people in the entire country who quality as servers and another 720k who are bartenders. Again, that's the whole country. California as a whole has 60k bartenders and 171k waiters/waitresses- and that includes places that don't serve alcohol.
- benatkin 4y agoDoes waiters/waitresses include places with counter service? A lot of them serve beer.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- bayareabadboy 4y agoBut why?
- cudzich09 4y agoFrom the article Why is California Requiring Training? According to the state of California, studies have shown that mandated alcohol server training has led to a reduction in drunk driving accidents and alcohol involved accidents, and that excessive drinking costs the economy billions of dollars every year. Therefore, the state of California believes that required training is overall beneficial to bartenders, patrons, and the local economy.
- bjterry 4y agoThe study from that link[0] that the CA government used to justify this law is BS. Huge garden of forking paths issue. I mean this doesn't exactly inspire confidence: > After following the iterative identification, estimation, and diagnosis model-building strategy of Box and Jenkins (1976), the following model was obtained: [Followed by a very complex equation with no justification for its structural form]. If I can iteratively generate a model that uses arbitrary combinations of arbitrary variables until I get to statistical significance, I can prove anything. That, plus the 23% decrease of nighttime vehicle deaths they attribute to this law is simply implausibly large. Per NHTSA, alcohol was involved in 40% of fatal accidents in 1990. Meaning it somehow stopped on the order of half of alcohol-related auto deaths in Oregon. That's magical thinking for an intervention like this. 0: https://www.abc.ca.gov/law-and-policy/regulations-rulemaking/approved-regulations/rbs-training-program-act/mandated-server-training-and-alcohol-involved-traffic-crashes/ https://www.abc.ca.gov/law-and-policy/regulations-rulemaking...
- cammikebrown 4y agoMore unnecessary ridiculous bureaucracy. I grew up in California and bartend in Oregon (where a permit has been required as long as I’ve been in the industry). The permit test essentially is, “Do not serve people too much alcohol.” An incredibly pointless waste of resources. You have to re take the test every few years, you know, in case you’ve suddenly forgotten how to do your job.
- lazide 4y agoHey, those bureaucrats need to be able to keep making payments on that second house!
- jakear 4y agoCrazy, I also grew up in CA and work in OR. When I read the title I thought this was a classic example of CA's government overreaching in ways OR's would never. I never would have guessed OR was first!
- jackson1442 4y agoEven Texas requires a TABC certification to serve or deliver alcohol! Servers need to be aware of all of the laws surrounding service, and what to watch out for wrt intoxication. Not all jobs are created equal- and that means there needs to be some baseline for training when it comes to safety that's this basic.
- NoSorryCannot 4y agoOLCC has a sanctioned monopoly on distributing hard liquor in the state and they constrain liquor sales more than CA though less than say UT.
- joewadcan 4y agoI disagree. Controlled substances should have some guidelines and this seems pretty low cost and low overhead on time. I do agree that most jobs are over licensed. From barbers to landscapers, there's generally too much paperwork. But I'm ok with something that'll help the 3rd leading cause of preventable death in the country.
- joewadcan 4y agoSummary: The "certification" is a 2-hour course that can be taken online. It costs $3 and lasts three years. It's a certification to pour drinks responsibly (not some sort of mixology test). It was planned to go into effect last year but CA legislation pushed it out another year to help with transition. Honestly, seems like a reasonable move when 18% of Californians are identified was excessively drinking. (US average 17%). [1] [1]https://www.americashealthrankings.org/explore/annual/measure/ExcessDrink/state/CA https://www.americashealthrankings.org/explore/annual/measur...
- 88913527 4y agoI'm disappointed by the lack of mixology portion, because it would've provided an opportunity for a real value-add of any kind. I've had simple 2-ingredient well drink orders made incorrectly at my local watering hole.
- sokoloff 4y agoThat’s something that I’m comfortable leaving up to the market to handle (in a way that safe service feels like something the market won’t address adequately).
- Bud 4y agoNot realistic. This requirement applies not just to bartenders, but to anyone who takes drink orders or delivers them. Your waiter/waitress needs mixology training? Not really.
- dymk 4y agoAlso one must purchase the training course itself. The article recommends this $10 course: https://servingalcohol.com/california-responsible-alcohol-course-discount/ https://servingalcohol.com/california-responsible-alcohol-co... Why do you think this course would move the needle at all on binge drinking? Overservice is already illegal. Its much more likely excessive alcohol consumption is happening at home. On top of that, oh boy, more nanny state totally-not-prohibition-lite.
- 4y ago
- sureshv 4y agoCalifornia occupational licensing strikes again. Just like the handyman who can’t do jobs > $500 (including materials). There’s a dead spot in that market between $500-$5000 which is the minimum most GCs will do work on.
- aidenn0 4y agoNo dead spot, just unlicensed handymen
- throwaway0a5e 4y agoHandymen who can be forced out of their jobs or at least given a massive financial problem at the discretion of a bureaucrat or enforcement official and are therefore dependent on the good graces of those entities for their income. The purpose of a system is what it does.
- swayvil 4y agoWhere would we be without the government putting their fingers into every little thing.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- parkingrift 4y agoWhat a ludicrous nanny law. This covers not only bartenders but also any servers, bouncers, waiters, food runners, managers, and more. Essentially, if you work in a restaurant with alcohol you’ll need to be certified. Why? Reasons.
- kadoban 4y agoBecause it's effective and relatively cheap and easy.
- google234123 4y agoGood way for the state to collect excessive fines from people and businesses
- spullara 4y agoWhose friend of a politician runs this stuff?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- every 4y agoTexas has long had something like this but its main purpose has been to protect the establishment from any liability. All servers have to be certified. If something goes wrong they are the liable party not the business. CYA...