Brooklyn, NY – The River Café, located on the Brooklyn waterfront in DUMBO, has a covert policy of discrimination against Orthodox Jews, according to one past and one current employee. The New York Post reveals (http://bit.ly/RTB4r1) that the popular Orthodox Jewish dating spot assesses a $25-per-person minimum for Jews dressed in “religious garb.”
Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email
Using coded terms, reservationists alert the maître d’ if someone in a yarmulke, “religious hat” or “strings” requests a seat at the bar. “There are several notes in a book that the reservationists use,” said a present employee. “The book says that if two religious Jews come in, we call ahead to the maître d’ and say, “is there space for two at the water bar?’ – in which case, a minimum of $25 will be enforced that is just for Jews wearing yarmulkes or any sort of religious hat. The terminology in the book is ‘special hat’ or ‘religious hat.’ At the bar, the $25 minimum is only enforced for Jews.”
The restaurant manager denied the allegations, claiming that, “The $25 minimum applies to everyone.”
But snapshots of the reservation book obtained by the Post support the employees’ assertions. “If they look as if they will only order water (not that we stereotype or anything) mention the minimum right away,” one note from management reads. “If they ask for the bar and there is room, tell them there is a minimum at the bar as well.”
Another missive from management says they “have decided that when people come in for the bar and are A. wearing sweat pants and B. religious top hats and strings, you must say for A. gym bar and for B. water bar. Thanks.”
To further verify the employees’ claims, the Post sent a Jewish couple to the bar. The husband was wearing a yarmulke and his wife, a long skirt. They were told the bar was full, but they could sit on the empty terrace if they paid a $25-per-person minimum. A few minutes later, two Post reporters who were not dressed in religious attire, were seated on the terrace and were not subjected to the minimum. Their bill for a coffee and a gin-and-tonic came to $18.51.
The workers say management imposed the minimum because Orthodox Jews only come for the view, do not order alcohol, and take up space without spending enough money.
If the reason is truly as the last paragraph says (because Orthodox Jews only come for the view, do not order alcohol, and take up space without spending enough money) …. Then it is not discriminatory , but simply good business practice!
I totaly understand them, they are losing money on the orthodox jews, they just have to have a better and more open and honest system how to do it, not sneaky!!
Obviously, if customers just keep coming in and only order water and will not order anything else (as it is not a kosher place), any business will eventually go out of business. I think that it is not right for us to take up such valuable space in a cafe/bar just to have a “cheap date” with aq nice view without concern for the business that needs it’s income. So if the Cafe needs to impose a fee so that those in their view are free loaders and who actually cost them effort and money, they definitely should impose one. As to the daters, well, they should go to a kosher restaurant where they can actually enjoy a meal and where another yid would have a little more parnassah to boot.
Exactly. I’ve been there quite a few times in my dating years and was wondering why they always said that there was no space inside. Now it all makes sense. Just to show we are still in Golus, folks.
I do not feel that this is Discriminating against Jews.
They pay big time property tax and need to cover it somehow. They are there to sell,, not to provide beautiful water view for free. From that they cannot make a living.
To me it looks like that Orthodox Jewish people do not buy alcohol on a date, but yet enjoy the view. Well, there’s a price for it. No freebies in life.
Don’t be a cheapo and buy a drink,, if u are too orthodox for buying a drink, then meet your date in the dining room like its typically traditioned in Williamsburg.
It doesn’t necessarily mean anti semitism.
It seems that the river cafe finally figured out how to deal with a “clientele” that proved exceedingly unprofitable.
The fact that an establishment should find it necessary to automatically assess a $25 minimum, should give all of us cause for introspection.
I personally think this is a terrible article against the cafe and very much unjust.
The cafe is a Non-Kosher establishment and is located against a beautiful view. Naturally there are a couple of jewish dates every night there, but of course they cannoy buy anything because its not kosher.
So these dates come in 8 pm and sit there (of course in the best seat) for 3 hours, don’t buy anything, use the bathroom and facilities, and takes away the seats from potential customers.
I have seen once there close to 7-8 dates at the same time and i can understand management making an end to this.
they didn’t say you cannot come here anymore or you are banned, they merely said, you want to sit here for 3 hours, no problem, either buy something or pay me a minimum.
What’s wrong with that? they are not open for people to sit there for free.
There is nothing wrong with a minimum, but it has to be applied to all.
Oh please!!! They only do that ,not to make people feel bad. I agree with them totally.
They are free to charge for East River Water or for soda and we could buy that. I am sure people do, I know I would & I know I’ve seen others buy water, soda, etc., when in a non-kosher place.
If these allegations are true, I hope they are sued to the max (a nice “Jewish” name!)!
I think many are missing the point. just have the same rules for everybody. have a minimum whether one drinks water or just orders coffee. The issue was that they only enforced it on frum Jews not that there was a minimum
I actually do think that they are right, I have been to other places before where ( jewish ) people come in to watch sports on TV and all they said is either pay $5 to sit and watch or you can buy a drink or play games and $5 goes towards the drink or game, if they would do the same its a much nicer way and everyone will understand… But they do have a point… Just do it in a nice way
Nothing wrong in telling all customers they can only come in for a minimum of $50 or so.
VERY MUCH wrong in charging JEWS only, as they enter, knowing that they won’t buy food.
Don’t discriminate between customers. Although their intentions were right,they did it in a terribly wrong way.
I totally understand them,but a minimum should apply to every customer and not only to religious Jews.
Simple solution. A business that is getting so many of this type of clientele should cater to their needs by offering pre-packaged kosher snacks, sandwiches and even a selection of specifically kosher drinks. THAT would be good business!
It is well known among hotels in Manhattan that orthodox men and women come and sit for drinks. They don’t mind it as they are customers, and also are always dressed well. The river cafe on the the other hand, is a restaurant on the water. It is truly a beautiful place. Filling it with orthodox men and women who will only by drinks for 6 dollars doesn’t work for their business . The 25 dollar minimum is fine. They also may want a different crowd. If they really want to avoid the frum they just have to raise that to 50 dollars minimum. That would do the trick. It is mostly financial.
Would a frum restaurant permit two people to take up a table for two hours if they just order two cokes?
And, yes, it is discrimination. The arguments the other posters have made here are valid arguments for imposing a minimum across the board. They do not justify imposing a minimum only on Orthodox Jews (or those who dress like them). As the article itself stated, the two reporters who did NOT dress like religious Jews only paid $18.51 for their drinks, yet the bar seemed to have no problem serving them.
If the bar wants to impose a $25 minimum (or any other number) on everyone, then that’s perfectly legal. But if what the article describes is true, it is illegal discrimination. The fact that the owners have an economically valid reason for doing so does not make it legal or right.
(We are so used to thinking of discrimination as coming from some severe form of anti-semitism that we dismiss the milder forms. The owners have a valid economic point about their Orthodox customers. They just dealt with it in the wrong way.)
its a private bar restaurant….they can do whatever they want or feel….perhaps others order food and frum yidden dont oe whatever…i dont see the big deal…or perhaps they dont like the way charadim dress…which os also fine as its a priviate bar…what the big deal!!
It is 100% discrimanatory, even if it is a “Good Business Practice”.
Everyone needs to realize that it’s $25 PER PERSON, which means that a date will cost $50 +tax +tips. For WATER.
Sounds like a way of making Jews not want to come at all.
Its pure geniva to go there. Also a shaila about mares eiyin
It’s literally disgusting to me how many Jews will defend this outladish restaurant.
It doesn’t matter that they have legitimate business practices of why they are doing this. They have no right to treat Jews differently than anyone else. All Antisemtisim starts with money reasons. The Jews here are the same ones who defend companies who refuse to hire Shabbos observers. These Jews have no Ahavas Yisroel. I’d like to check the background of the posters here because having Rachmonos is one of the three Jewish traits and these Jews who always defend the Antisemities whether they refuse to hire Frum Jews or charge them more than others, are showing their Achzorius (Mean) trait!
Nu, so if they are so frum they should be in a glatt kosher restaurant to begin with.
If we were even HALF as concerned with kavod Shomayim and chillul Hashem as we are with supposed “anti-Semitism”, REAL anti-Semitism would disappear.
They are 100% correct in what they are doing.
What would Prome Grill do if they knew the client would only order the french fries and nothing else?
To all those with comments that it is not discriminatory is missing the point. As soon as the minimum is not enforced equally it is discriminatory period.
The hgeadline should read “Famous River Café In DUMBO Covertly Discriminates Against “customers” who are untilizing their premises on false pretenses.
as an owner of a food establishment, i have a right to reserve my table for diners only. if you like to drink please sit at the bar. however even though that is my policy I can still sit a well dressed couple at a table — against my own policy or rules — in order to get them to like the place and perhaps they will come back to eat or change their mind and order food (something that happens very often. if a couple that does not seem as if they have the purchasing power to buy dinner at my restaurant I will not let them have a table even if the place is empty — why…? I want to show upscale diners, and these will never buy dinner anyway. same with the religious couple. they will never buy food, and for the few that spend some money, it is not worth taking a chance and locking up prime seating for water drinkers.
its a shame we have to through all these formalities to begin with, they both know if the next date is even shayich within 5 minutes from her house. if the $25 minimum is too much then they can just hit a tea lounge in park slope, they let you sit for hours with one soda
Anytime a group is singled out for “special treatment” especially using religious garb criteria, it is considered discriminatory. Regardless of the economic loss, a cover charge should be applied equally and not only to “beards” or other religious people.
If they would discriminate against [some other ethnic group, let’s say Scots, for example] because of a preconceived stereotype that [some other ethnic group] is “cheap and doesn’t like to spend money” it would be against the law. They are discriminating on the basis of preconceived stereotypes against frum Jews.
yes it may not be polite to sit for 3-4 hours and only ordering a water. that being said there has to be a minimum applied for all race and religious people alike
Discriminatory, period. Customers are sized up by the way they dress. If it adds up to “Jewish,” sock it to ’em. Guaranteed they wouldn’t put this policy in place for free-loading goyim out on a cheap date. The motive may have merit but the modus operandi reeks of prejudice.
“The workers say management imposed the minimum because Orthodox Jews only come for the view, do not order alcohol, and take up space without spending enough money.”
“The restaurant manager denied the allegations, claiming that, “The $25 minimum applies to everyone.”
Please explain the contradiction….
Agree with the policy of $25 minimum. It’s pricey real estate after all. They have to pay their lease etc.
The problem as may preceding comments have pointed out; is how they selectively apply it to Jewish free loaders but the non-jewish free loaders are exempt. That is discrimination in definition. That ought to be penalized (I’m actually quite libertarian so I’m conflicted in this, but if anti discrimination laws exist, this should be the perfect example).
Perhaps it will be more profitable if they curb the amount of black patrons. Then more racists would be appealed to eating there and their profits could soar. So what if they post a sign “$75 surcharge for blacks” to disincentivize black patronage? Would that just be smart business or discrimination?
enjoy The Landing at Long Wharf in Boston MA, My husband and I sat down at the bar, ordered 2 diet sodas, and they threw in a water for free.
It’s clearly discrimination. A minimum must be enforced for all, period. Patrons should be told of minimums at the same time. And taking up restaurant seats without ordering enough might be considered stealing from the owners.
The newspapers experiment was not fair. Jewish patrons on a date tend to sit for many hours in their seats, while other patrons who order $18 worth of coffee tend to finish up in a matter of minutes. I believe that most of the jewish daters who go there gladly pay the $25 fee to enjoy a good place to date. It is a shame that this had to be made into a scandal. Now they will be forced to change their policy and we will lose a good dating spot. They will probably impose a 1 hour time limit before you are asked to leave, unless you order something else.
Isn’t sitting at a restaurant bar a lot more poblematic halachically than sitting in a hotel lounge. Is sitting in a McDonalds having a coke any different tan doing the same in this River Cafe?
1. Maybe they should charge $50 for water unless you order $50 worth of real drinks.
2. Who would marry a guy that was so cheap that all he would order on a date is water?
Its not because they are jews but rather they dont spend money there, what if a bunch of Spanish people decided to go on dates and sit for hours in say anons pizza? You would start not liking spanish people coming in, not because they are spanish but rather they taking up tables without giving you a penny.
Last year when someone suggested opening a nice place in the city where people can go and pay a mere 10 bucks and stay as long as possible, it was suppose to be for dates, then they figured out that the people on dates rather not be around jews!!! So what do you call that racists?
What if this establishment refused to seat people who were dressed in Muslim garb? Would they get away with it? Would they be able to use the excuse that they were “scared” because “Muslims might bomb them” even though suicide bombers usually dress secular in order to “blend in.” Also, Muslims do not drink alcohol so they would also order only water or soft drinks and therefore not be “profitable” for the establishment.
I would like to see the consequences of this cafe turning away Muslim customers.
BTW I think it is WRONG to discriminate against Muslims just as it is to discriminate against Jews for whatever lame excuse “Muslims are terrorists” or “Jews are cheapskates.”
I think there is a minimum for all they just tell the frum Jews that right away, since they may balk later to pay so much for water. 99% of people will not just drink water
Why is everyone focusing on whether the restaurant is right or wrong? How about asking whether the frum “customers” are right or wrong?!
#72 hit the nail on the head. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 dealt with discrimination in public accomodations, including restaurants. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the latter law in 1965. The restaurants down south and elsewhere, prior to 1964, used to use the same rationale, in denying a portion of the population, to their service. This scenario reminds me of Hertz car rental, when one of its locations was found to be also be discriminating against orthodox Jews. Their code words were “no yeshivahs”. Incidentally, in response to #35 , in that scenario, the restaurant would only charge one cover charge, to the orthodox person. His date with a tank top, would not be accessed a minimum charge.
This is old news about the River Cafe. In 1993, the Jewish holiday of Purim was on Monday, March 8th. As the then President of the Rotary Club of Brooklyn, I attended to Rotary’s Annual Gift of Life Dinner, after the traditional reading of the Megillah of Esther. Following the Dinner, my wife and I went to the River Cafe to continuing celebrating Purim. I had rented a limo for the night (to avoid DUI). We were both in formal attire, with my wife wearing $50K of diamonds, which she had borrowed from work. We went to the bar and ordered our usual – a single malt for my wife, and a double shot of vodka for me. Before we could partake of our drinks, the manager came over, and told the bar tender to clear our drinks. I asked why? The manager said that I would have to take my hat off. I told him that I am an Orthodox Jew, and will not take my hat off. There was an Asian lady sitting and drinking at the bar, who had a hat on her head. We then left. A local Brooklyn Heights newspaper carried the story with this quote from the manager at the River Cafe: “We don’t want them and their big black hats in here”. I contacted an attorney, who spoke with the River Cafe’s owner. The owner said that
What a HUGE חילול השם!!! I cant believe that someone would actually put the media up to sending in an “undercover” person to expose this non-issue.
If you’re frugal and want a cheap date, go to the airport like we used to do back in the day.
This is sadly a major strike against our own selves (and you who started this whole stupidity knows that). The goyim now have another reason to hate us.
Bravo!!
Their reasoning is 100% sound. From a business perspective why have chronic non paying freeloading customers who use their facilities and provide no monetary compensation. However the method used to ensure they do capture that income is disgusting in that it singles out individuals based on religious garb. This policy must be enforced on both Jews and Gentiles alike regardless of any other argument justifying otherwise.
While on this topic we should also address the same issue which takes place when purchasing esrogim. Many shops charge according to how wealthy and how makpid you are. That is not acceptable. Should be equal pricing regardless. No?
This is not anti-semitism. It’s plain old business sense.
I think that even it’s considerate discrimination by law don’t make a fuss if it’s nothing meager we are in gulis and we don’t look that they should hate us more
Can a lawyer please explain if this is a discriminatory policy and if so, what should be done next? My sons took their dates to nice places like this and never had a problem. I wonder if anyone has experience with the “I’m sorry sir, we’re full” only to see goyim go in & get served (without reservations)? By the way, I have seen Kosher venues with reserved signs on tables that are there just to avoid serving “undesirables.” But this seems different.