Full-service restaurant server probation assessment checklist - tray, course placement, menu knowledge, wine service, table reset, and complaint first-response, each with a fixed pass line, and the examiner marks only pass or fail

You are the trainer of a full-service restaurant. Produce a Server Probation Assessment Checklist for running the assessment. Two groups - hands-on and scenario - with four columns per item: assessment item / how it is tested / pass line / fail line. The examiner records only "pass" or "fail" - no scores.

Hands-on items (live demonstration; all five must pass):
1. Loaded tray run: carry a fully loaded tray along a marked route with corners and steps. Pass: no spills, no wobble, fingers off the inner tray lip. Fail: any spill, or any pause to re-balance
2. Course placement at a table of ten: serve three consecutive courses including a whole fish. Pass: correct serving order, correct fish orientation, complete dish announcements. Fail: any wrong position or orientation
3. Blind menu knowledge: [X] dishes drawn from the menu. Pass: full dish names plus key ingredients and major allergy risks (peanuts, spice level). Fail: two or more dishes with ingredients unknown
4. Bottle opening and pouring: still wine and beer, one round each. Pass: no splash on opening, pour volume per house standard, bottle neck never touches the glass rim. Fail: any splash or rim contact
5. Table reset: clear and reset one full table. Pass: correct action sequence, plates stacked no higher than house limit, reset complete. Fail: out-of-order sequence that stalls the turn

Scenario items (the examiner reads the scenario, the candidate responds):
6. Complaint first response: a guest finds a foreign object in a dish - your first sentence. Pass: apologize, immediately isolate the dish, and call the duty manager - matching the house's approved script. Fail: any opening that explains or denies first
7. "Where is our food": guests pressing while the kitchen is genuinely backed up. Pass: offer a time expectation or a dish-swap option per the house script; do not enter the kitchen to push; promise no specific minute. Fail: promising an exact time or blaming the kitchen
8. Ordering help: the guest says "just pick for us." Pass: ask party size and restrictions before recommending; recommend across three price tiers. Fail: pushing the priciest dishes or a single category

Verdict rules (fixed at the end of the checklist):
- Converted: all 5 hands-on items pass plus [Y] of the scenario items
- Any single fail: one retake of that item within a week
- A second retake failure or 2+ hands-on fails: probation extended [Z] weeks with renewed on-the-job training before reassessment
- Results are logged (item / result / examiner / date); the conversion review reads the log only and reopens nothing

Constraints:
- No "service awareness" or "warmth" items - unobservable criteria always become favor points
- No scores, no letter grades - pass/fail binary only
- Scenario answers are graded against the house script as the source of truth; this checklist fixes structure and verdict, the scripts live in their own booklet

Why it is written this way

"Pass or fail, never a score" is the checklist's first design decision. A scoring system hides favoritism inside numbers: nobody can explain the difference between 85 and 90, so scoring becomes a relationship exercise. Binary judgment forces the examiner to own each line - either point to the fail line the candidate crossed, or pass them. It protects both sides: the candidate knows every line before the exam, and the examiner never carries the cost of "just a few points short."

The eight items cover the three risk classes of a server working solo: the five hands-on items map to "will there be an accident" (spills, burns, wrong positions, wrong dishes), two scenarios map to "will a small thing become a big thing" (complaint first-response, food-timing promises), and one maps to "can they sell." The complaint first-response pass line deliberately matches the escalation flow - the probation assessment is the last gate where the escalation checklist gets enforced, so both documents teach the same sentence.

Writing the fail line as explicitly as the pass line is the part most checklists skip. With only a pass line, an examiner facing a gray performance improvises; spelling out what failure looks like ("any opening that explains or denies first") shrinks the gray zone to a minimum. Item 3's "two or more dishes with ingredients unknown" even rules the partial-failure case - avoiding both the harshness of failing a whole exam over one dish and the mush of letting every dish slide.

Fixing "N scenarios converts" as a variable recognizes that houses differ in error tolerance: a high-check restaurant may demand all scenarios, a neighborhood spot may accept six of eight. Wherever the threshold lands, it must be fixed and posted before the exam starts - an assessment earns trust not from being strict but from rules that were announced in advance and never moved afterward.

Variables