Hotpot restaurant cashier - voucher dispute scripts: state the rule once, offer two alternatives, and leave exception-making to the manager

You are the cashier team lead at a hotpot restaurant. Write
a script set for "voucher and set-meal disputes" covering
six high-frequency scenes, for cashiers to keep inside the
register station. Each scene has three fixed blocks: Script
(speakable verbatim) / Paired action / Never say.

Opening ground rules (apply to all six scenes; memorize
this part first):
- State the rule once: read the voucher terms calmly,
  one pass, no debating, no re-explaining - repetition
  converts a "rule" into a "negotiation"
- Always carry two alternatives: the guest may refuse
  one option, but a walkable exit stays in their hand
- Exceptions belong to the manager: a cashier bending a
  rule once has rewritten it for the entire store - this
  is a fairness question, not an authority question,
  because the next table overheard and will want the
  same treatment

Scene 1: base upcharge (voucher excludes split / premium
pots)
- Script: "This voucher covers the standard base; a
  split pot adds [upcharge amount], it's the second line
  on the voucher. If you'd rather skip that, the
  [eligible options] in the standard bases are house
  favorites too. Pay the difference or switch bases -
  which works for you?"
- Paired action: point to the terms on the voucher
  (phone screen or printout)
- Never: "That's the platform's wording, not ours" -
  blaming the platform is admitting the store doesn't
  stand behind its own rules

Scene 2: party mismatch (4-person voucher, 3 guests)
- Script: "The set is portioned for four, so for three
  it runs generous. Two choices: use it as-is and box
  the extra, or drop the voucher and order a la carte
  for exactly three. How would you like to play it?"
- Paired action: lay out both options, then wait -
  no rushing
- Never: "You need a full four to use it" (most terms
  don't say that, and an invented rule is worse than a
  strict one)

Scene 3: blackout window (weekend / holiday exclusion)
- Script: "This voucher runs on weekdays only - it's
  printed on the face. Tonight you're welcome to order
  normally and save the voucher for a weekday visit, so
  it doesn't go to waste. Can I show you today's
  [in-store special]?"
- Paired action: volunteer the store's own same-day
  offer; hand over a step down
- Never: any version of "you should have read it
  earlier"

Scene 4: set item sold out
- Script: "The [sold-out item] in the set is done for
  tonight - I'm sorry. We can swap it for [equal-value
  option], or refund the voucher and go a la carte with
  the difference on us. Which would you prefer?"
- Paired action: fetch the manager for refund authority
  immediately (a sellout is the store's fault, and the
  remedy arrives on the spot, not after a huddle)
- Never: "Come earlier next time" - a sellout is the
  store's failure, not the guest's

Scene 5: stacking with member pricing
- Script: "The system takes either the voucher or the
  member price, not both - each is a real saving, they
  just don't stack. Let me run both numbers and we'll go
  with the cheaper one for you."
- Paired action: compute both totals where the guest
  can see
- Never: rounding into "fine, I'll give you both" - a
  stacking exception is a rule change

Scene 6: code won't redeem at the store (system / code
issue)
- Script: "The code isn't clearing today - likely
  [common cause: expired / platform settlement lag].
  Two ways forward: settle normally now, I take your
  number, and I refund the difference the moment the
  code clears; or you reach the platform's support and
  sort it there. Your call."
- Paired action: log the guest's contact and code, and
  write the commitment down where the guest watches you
  write it
- Never: "Not our department" - the guest is inside the
  store, so the problem is the store's until it's handed
  off

Output format: one ground-rules section plus six scene
sections, each with three blocks (scripts as quote
blocks); a closing "escalation line" section: when to
fetch the manager immediately (guest asks for the person
in charge / amounts over [limit] / voices rising), with
the cashier's stopping point spelled out.

Overall discipline:
- Scripts conversational and speakable; [ ] items filled
  by the house
- No invented voucher terms or permissions; when unsure,
  "let me confirm" beats a guess
- No script longer than four sentences

Why it is written this way

The structural problem behind voucher disputes is when the guest learns the rule: the terms they skimmed at purchase and the terms explained at settlement sit a whole meal apart - so disputes detonate at the register, where the guest has already eaten and has earned the right to be angry. The scripts therefore lean on showing, not explaining: pointing to line two on the voucher beats any verbal re-explanation, and one calm pass beats three - because to a guest's ear, repetition is the sound of a rule that negotiates.

"Always carry two alternatives" is the spine of the set. A guest in a dispute is never trapped by the rule itself but by the feeling of being trapped by it - two exits (pay the difference or switch bases; use it and box the extra, or drop it and order fresh) put the choice back in their hands and give the emotion somewhere to go. Every scene ends on "which works for you", and that phrasing is deliberate: it shifts the conversation from a verdict fight to an option pick.

The cashier never bends a rule - exceptions belong to the manager - by design, not bureaucracy. A cashier's exception costs not the difference on one check but the rule itself: the table that overheard will want the same, and by tomorrow the rule is folklore. A manager's exception runs on different logic: the manager is empowered to weigh individual cases, and guests read a manager's exception as hospitality; they read a cashier's as proof the rule was negotiable all along. The escalation line is written as concretely as the scripts because the most dangerous moment at a register is not the dispute - it's the cashier holding on one sentence past where they should have stopped.

Variables