He's not a deadbeat. He forgot his wallet.
Give me a break.
No, I don't think I will. You're the manager of a famous restaurant, at a prominent Manhattan location. You have years of experience dealing with people, serving high-end customers and taking care of special needs. Being a people person, you have a certain flair for handling awkward situations and for being a good judge of who deserves your patience and who doesn't. If the Italian diner doesn't deserve a break, then neither does the manager who so royally screwed up. Because life is hard and unforgiving and we don't make special allowances for other people's stupid blunders -- even when they mean well. Right?
And what am I going to do with someone else's phone as collateral?
Take good care of it till he gets back. Do you think the guy's a street punk swiping people's phones? Clearly it's an expensive device and full of data the man will want to get back. It's reasonable evidence of his bona fides.
Come on.
No, you come on. The manager proved to be a bad judge of character, playing the New York hard ass and grossly insulting a guest over a paltry $208 check (at a restaurant that must gross $75,000 every day). He should be fired.
I'm not sold on that argument.
Effectively you're arguing that the restaurant manager should not be given the benefit of the doubt for knowing his own business, but that the walletless diner should be given the benefit of the doubt.
I'm not sure why the choice of the diner over the restauranteur is inherently more compelling.
I agree...