Fast food trainer - three-day new-hire onboarding SOP: every day has a hard pass bar (N consecutive error-free runs), trainer accountability follows the trainee, and a failed day three means an extension track or a reassignment review - never a same-day firing

You are the training lead for a fast food chain.
Write a three-day new-hire onboarding SOP for store
trainers to execute day by day. It must be
archivable straight into the store's training
system; the readers are trainers and store managers.

Standing rules (all three days):
- Trainer eligibility: [3]+ months in the role, no
  open findings from their own last review; one
  trainee per trainer at a time - more, and the
  start date slides
- Ten minutes before clock-out each day: the
  trainer ticks the day's checklist, both parties
  sign, same day - no backfilled signatures
- Pass bars are behavior counts (N consecutive
  error-free runs, completion within X minutes),
  never trainer impressions - "catching on fast"
  is not a pass basis

Day one: observation only (hands off)
- The trainee shadows one full shift, open to
  close, holding the station's SOP card, noting
  [5] key control points (the trainer checks the
  notes at day's end - did they catch the right
  ones?)
- Hard bar: can state the station's [3] food-
  safety red lines from memory; missing any one
  fails the day
- Forbidden: the trainee touches any food or
  equipment - day-one hands on product is where
  food-safety incidents start

Day two: supervised operation (low-risk stations)
- The trainee works designated stations (varies by
  role, per the station table) with the trainer
  beside them; the trainer intercepts just before
  errors land and never takes over the work
- Hard bar: [10] consecutive error-free runs (or
  transactions) on the day's stations, counting
  correct form; any error resets the count. A
  red-line error stops operation immediately - back
  to observation, retest next day
- Incidents: when a customer rushes or an item
  sells out, the trainee's line is fixed: "one
  moment, I'll get my trainer" - a day-two trainee's
  job is to not worsen an incident, not to solve it

Day three: independent work + scenario drills
- Morning: solo station, trainer watching without
  intervening (red lines excepted); hard bar:
  [20] consecutive error-free runs at no more
  than [1.2]x this store's standard time per run
- Afternoon: [3] scenario drills drawn from the
  scenario bank (equipment fault, front-line
  complaint handling, rush catch-up), each scored
  on two elements: actions taken + who they
  escalated to
- Graduation verdict: both hard bars plus all
  three scenarios passed = graduated; trainer
  signs, manager countersigns, record archived
  (who tested, when, what was missed)

Failing day three (written into the system, never
handled verbally):
- Path A: one extension day, retesting the missed
  bars; the extension is allowed at most [1] time
- Path B: after a second failure, reassignment
  review ([3]-day trial in a non-food-handling
  role) or handling under store employment policy
- Prohibited: terminating for "learning too slow"
  without walking the paths above - onboarding
  cost is already sunk, and rehiring costs more
  than two more days of training
- Trainer accountability: if a graduate commits an
  onboarding-scope error within [30] days, the
  training record is pulled and the trainer's
  eligibility is re-reviewed - accountability is
  what makes trainers actually train

Output format: sections by day, each containing
"content / hard bar / trainer moves / red lines";
append the station selection table (which day-two
stations and day-three solo stations per role -
register / kitchen / expo), with [blanks] for me
to fill from this store's SOP

Constraints:
- Cite no labor-law clauses - anything touching
  termination or pay carries "per local employment
  law and store policy"
- Every number (runs, days, multipliers) is a
  [blank] variable for this store's pace - the
  SOP's structure depends on no specific number
- No "foster a sense of ownership" - a three-day
  onboarding produces one thing, a person who can
  work a station alone, and that is all

Why it is written this way

Every pass bar is a behavior count (N consecutive error-free runs, time within 1.2x standard) because that line is the watershed between this SOP and "just shadow them." The consecutive-count mechanic matters too: an error resets the count, so the trainee must be consistently right rather than occasionally right - twenty clean orders in a rush and twenty in a trough are not the same coin, but this is the best currency that requires no subjective judgment. "Seems ready" is where onboarding quality collapses; the SOP exists to make it impossible to say.

The three-day progression (watch → do it watched → do it alone) maps to decreasing risk: day one keeps hands off product entirely, and a failed red-line recitation parks the trainee in observation - the most common food-safety script is "come give me a hand" on day one. Day two's "intercept, never take over" is written as a trainer move because taking over is onboarding's second-most-common failure: the trainee never learns, and the trainer concludes they cannot. Day three's "watch without intervening" is the diciest discipline of all - the last chances to fail belong in front of the trainer, not in front of next week's customers.

"Failing does not mean firing" is written into the system on arithmetic, not sentiment: recruiting, onboarding, and three days of trainer time are already sunk, and restarting recruitment costs more than another day of training. Paths A and B give the failure somewhere executable to go, instead of "we'll see." And trainer accountability (graduates' errors within 30 days reopen the training record) is the engine of the whole mechanism - when results are traceable, a signature has weight; otherwise it is theater.

Variables