Those pants with the little checkers design
 

I saw them mostly on Scandinavian ships, galley crews wearing grey/white checkered pants, the squares were about 1/4 inch. I saw them on a few other nationalities, including British ships...anyone remember where they came from?

The Muppet Show?

Known as 'Chefs trousers', or pants in US.
Loose fitting and light, the check pattern is there to disguise spills and stains.
They can change a dirty jacket quickly but trousers stay on the whole shift.

Do not know where they came from, but the Norwegian galley crew all had them, and it was called "pepita" (mustered) trousers, which may - or may not - give some indication of where they originated.

Hello Svein, nice to see you back on here.

JJ.

I have done a little research on this.

The Chef's uniform that is now known worldwide started in France in the early 19th century.
The accepted dress is;
Toque (chef's hat) to cover the hair.
White double breasted jacket to reflect heat.
Hounds-tooth check trousers to disguise spills and stains
Apron which is usually tied at the waist as extra protection.

The man who is attributed with its design was a French Chef, Marie-Antoine Carême, who was an early exponent of what later became Haute Cuisine. He cooked for Napoleon and other notables.

The idea of a kitchen uniform was carried on and exported to Britain by Escoffier. At the same time the French term 'Chef de Cuisine' (Chief cook) entered the English language as 'Chef'.

Strangely enough, they were simply known as 'checks'.
Don't know where they originated from but you could purchase them in any crew outfitters.

Thanks for your responses.

A Chef and Haute Cuisine was noticeably absent on most ships I've sailed on but the Cook could always rustle up a bloody good feed.

I recall more than one occasion hearing, in the galley, words to the effect: "Chef? What bloody Chef? All Cooks in here, this is a British ship not French, we have Cooks."

It seems that in Norway at least, the terms "pepita" and "cooks trousers" are nearly interchangeable. The selection available today seems formidable: https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C...MGIL1PMIw&sa=X If the muster should be large, I believe they are called "golf trousers".

No fancy names in engine room, boiler suits, that’s it.

The footwear is the same - oil resistant, non slip, toe protection, no laces.

What's fancy about the term Chef ?!!
It's a term used and recognised around the world.
I can't cook for sh*t but I respect those who have put in years of hard graft to reach the pinnacle of their profession and Blue Flue had plenty had plenty of Chefs in their ships, I can assure you.
Regards Phil

Here we go again, bloody Blue Flue, We had the best of everything!!!!
Oh yes we had, Oh no you hadn't. And on we go.
Ellermans had the best cooks, oh no it was BP, oh no it was P&O, oh no it was Shaw Savill.
Oh no it was Bank Line, "Everybody"; Officers, Crew, Orchestra and Chorus; Oh no it wasn't.

In Texaco, a Tip-Top Company, we had boiler suits, boilersuits, overalls and dungarees. We bought our work wear from Gieves & Hawkes and Moss Bros, no riff-raff.

And the Captain wore a top hat and tails. The Pilot had to leave his shoes at the boarding ladder, no doubt......:big_tongue:

Regarding pilots and uniformed crews, looking far from either strange or snobbish, I read this story in one of Basil Lubbock books There was this skipper who was terribly cross-eyed, and suffered greatly from it. He had heard of this medicine man in a distant port that could cure the affliction, and being a good man, when he was finally ordered to load in this port he decided others deserved to share his god fortune. Consequently he filled the whole crew list with cross-eyed men. The punch line is not really a punch line unless you have a taste for surrealism. Lubbock found it highly humorous and seriously mirth provoking to consider a pilot entering the ship and when standing on the deck finding himself surrounded by a large crew all looking the other way.

Well, at the end of a long trip on a tanker sometimes a tiny bit of eccentricity (the psychological rather than mechanical kind) may emerge.

Wow!! A little bit sensitive aren't we ?
I mention Blue Flue because that was the company I mainly sailed with, and while most of the chefs I came across could be right pr*cks, most of them were bloody good cooks.
No reason for you to feel inferior because you didn't sail with Bluies. Not everyone could make the grade.
Regards Phil :wink:

Phil most people say I'm as sensitive as an air raid on an orphanage, with which I disagree. However I am not unaware of Bluies standards and wish that such was normal across the MN in the 70's ans 80's.

If you have a spare few minutes have a look at "Glenlyon Class to Liverpool Bay Class" #16.

Cheers.

Blue Flue were an excellent company, and I'm glad to have been a company man and trained by them but disillusionment set in when I was logged 'a day and a day' for being 15 minutes late turning to when I missed the launch to the buoys in Yokohama by literally less than 30 seconds.
Being logged two days pay for that offence, when I had never been late for work previously, really stung, and it was all down hill from there.
Bluies were good but I much preferred my time with Federal, who were a lot more laid back and easy going.
Regards Phil

That would certainly be the cause for a disillusionment and the Master must have been a right dick**ed to do that. Cetrtainly would have made me a little miffed!!!!

I was never sure whether it was down to the Ch. Steward, the Mate or the Old Man, as I got on well with all three of them and the Old Man was one of the best I ever sailed with.
No matter!! It was the beginning of the end with Bluies as far as I was concerned.
Catering never got a day off, no matter how long the trip lasted but I took a day off every trip after that, even though it cost me two days pay every time.
Happy days!!
Regards Phil