Busy queue in a cafe. About 20 minutes to get to the front. Student comes in, grabs a seat and gives his order to his friend in the queue

[cakeorwine]

Should the cafe staff have said anything?

It's really rude to do that - DS could easily have done the same thing whilst we were in the queue but it was busy and it would have been pushing in.

Is it just entitlement? Selfishness?

Or smart thinking and sod everyone else?

@cakeorwine obviously they all lacked the common sense to get a table first

If other people are to daft to get a seat that’s not the fault of those with common sense!

standing in a queue for 20 minutes with children when you don’t need to sounds pretty daft to me.

It's well known as a very busy and a very popular cafe.

I would have thought that table service would be the best option.

People can queue until they are told a table is free.
Then be shown a table and can order food.

A much better way of doing it - you are not going to get annoyed customers who don't / can't take a table that is unoccupied for whatever reason - which can put customers off going there again and people coming can get a better idea of seeing how busy it is.

Queuing for your spot is fair.

Seems to be a big overlap on this thread between the selfish and the stupid - with the table hoggers apparently not grasping that if everyone sits at a table for 10 mins before they get their food, then for 10 mins whilst they eat their food, the number of tables ovcupied by eaters is halved.

It's also not queuing to get food straight away. It's queuing to place an order. The food comes to the table - and that took longer as it was busy.

So people who are saying that they are concerned their food would be cold - the only way that would happen would be if ypu had queued for 20 minutes, then placed your order and then couldn't find a table for a while. And that is because people at the back of the 20 minute queue had already got someone to wait at a table for them for 20 minutes.

The layout of the cafe - with the barrier - looks like it was designed for people to queue first before ordering and then you find a table after you have ordered.

Why would anyone queue for 20 mins without knowing there are tables available? Doesn't make any sense.

I sit, the person with me orders. Otherwise we go elsewhere.

So what happens if there are no tables?

Exactly?

Where do these people who spend 20 minutes queuing to order then sit once paid if the tables are still taken up by people waiting another 20+ minutes for the food to actually arrive at their table?

@cakeorwine

So why were the overwheming majority of people happy to wait, with families and children, next to the barrier, whilst he decided to leave this queue and grab a seat?

I have never seen that happen - ever. Entire families waiting in a queue for 15-20 minutes, paying loads of £££ for their food and drinks and then hoping they can get a table. People always get a table first! You're just butthurt because you didn't think to do it. Sucks for you.

Also, virtually everyone on this thread disagrees with you. Time to admit you are wrong, and move on hmmmm?

but if nobody in the queue is allowed to reserve a seat, then who is going to be using the seats?
i.e. there are only 20 seats in the cafe.
20 people want to sit down and eat.
YOU THINK all 20 people should be standing in the queue, and all the seats should be empty.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF OTHER (normal)PEOPLE think that 5-10 people should be in the queue and everyone else should be reserving their tables.
Either way, person 21 comes in, there aren't any seats left for them, so what difference will it make?

If anything your way is worse, because if people 21 and 22 comes in, they will reasonably think 'Wow, there are loads of seats available, let's join the queue.' Only to get to the front, get served, and there's nowhere to sit.

Whereas at least if they come in, and it's obvious all the seats are taken, because people 5-20 are sitting in them in their various groups, while people 1-5 are in the queue, they can make their choice 'there doesn't look like there are any seats, let's try somewhere else,' or 'let's risk it that by the time we've paid someone will have finished and left.

They’re kind of screwed if they didn’t use their common sense to ensure they have a table before ordering.

Well yes I agree as do most others that is why the OPs way is so illogical and hence I'm asking her what happens if people follow her illogical way of doing it, queue for 20 minutes but still can't sit down because those who also queued for 20 minutes still haven't even got their food?

In that situation everyone followed the OPs rules but the tables are still being hogged and there's no room for the next lot of people who've queued and paid because the first lot still don't even have their food yet?

Hopefully that makes sense.

And table hoggers - what about people on their own in this situ? Are they supposed to bagsy a table with a bag or a book - or just stand there for 10 mins as all the tables are full of selfish fucks who would rather sit there with no food than queue?

Doesn't bother me. If I'm out with DH and we go to a cafe and there's a queue one of us will sit down and the other will queue to order. I have no problem with others doing the same. The only time it would grate is if I were on my own of course, but then it's horses for courses.

Yes you use a book or coat or shopping bags like ever solo diner for all eternity it's not difficult I've done it plenty of times.

Much better than risking having no table at all which seems entirely likely in the OPs example even if every man, women, child, granny, toddler and his dog queues first to pay and then sits down.

Not martyring yourself and being a push over does not make you a selfish fuck.

There would be 2 possibilities there would be no tables depending on behaviour:

1. Assume all people are in the queue and no one has pre taken a table and left others in the queue to wait. Then there would be no tables because people were either waiting for their food to arrive, were eating or had finished and were probably leaving

2. Assume that people when they arrived decided that someone should join the queue whilst others would sit at an unoccupied table - or wait until a table became empty and then take it - whilst someone else from their group waited in the queue. Obviously there would be groups who could not do this. In this scenario, the reasons there would be no tables would have increased - people would be waiting for their friend to get to the front of the queue to place their order, people would be waiting for their food to arrive, were eating or had finished and were probably leaving

Which scenario is going to lead to fewer tables being available once someone had placed their order at the counter?

Ingenuity. Makes me think of Will Smith’s character in Men in Black doing the assessment tests! Think outside the box to get ahead.

And what happens if when you arrive, there are no tables available to do that, so you join the queue.

Then a table becomes available and you are just about to be served. Then someone joins the BACK of the queue and one of them takes the table that becomes free whilst the others join it.

This is what happened to us: We were nearly about to be served.

It was a very busy cafe.
We saw a table was just about to be free.
Then these people came in, someone took it and the other person went to the back of the 20 minute queue.

So what would you have done if this table had not become free or had been taken by the person just in front of you?

Imagine this scenario.

No tables available when you arrive so you join the queue.
You have just placed your order and were about to look for a table.
Someone comes in, their friend joins the back of a 20 minute queue and the other person takes a table that has just become free.

Explain to me how that's fair?

Waited until a table had become free.

We had queued.
Placed our order.
Had our number on a stick.
So effectively, we were next in turn for a table.

Which is why table service is better.

If here were no tables go elsewhere queue or not.
Both the cafés I go to the most ask you were you are sitting and bring your food and drinks to you so you have to grab a table first.

And if no table became free? Or the people behind you took the next table because they were closer to it? Or maybe the person behind them should get the table instead because they've got a drink and you're table hogging waiting for your food to arrive

Where does the madness end? Just sit at a table first and avoid all this nonsense.

The thought was that by the time we had got to the front of the queue, people would have eaten so spare tables would have been available as people who HAD eaten would leave.

Which would work - if only people who had ordered or were eating were sat at the tables.

This is a very very busy and popular cafe with a queue to get into out and a barrier separating the tables from the queue.

I am curious what was so magical about this cafe that people were prepared to queue for 20 minutes 😂