How to Use the Line Cook Interview Template

Why structured line cook interviews matter

A line cook who can't keep up during a 200-cover Saturday night service doesn't just affect their own station - they drag down the entire kitchen. Orders back up, pass times increase, food quality drops, and the chef de partie or sous chef has to step in and bail them out, taking their attention away from the whole section. The cost of a bad line cook hire is felt immediately and viscerally by everyone in the kitchen and every guest waiting for food.

This template ensures you assess every line cook candidate consistently across the competencies that predict kitchen success: genuine cooking ability, station organisation, food safety discipline, composure under service pressure, and the ability to communicate within a kitchen brigade. The 45-minute format reflects the deeper assessment this role demands, while the weighted scoring system helps you compare candidates objectively rather than relying on whether they "seemed like a good cook."

Structured interviews also protect you legally by demonstrating fair, non-discriminatory hiring practices, and they help you make better decisions when you're under pressure to fill a position quickly.

Pre-Interview Preparation

Before the candidate arrives, work through this checklist to ensure you're ready for a thorough assessment.

Review candidate CV and culinary background - Look for specific kitchen experience: which establishments, what stations, what cuisine styles. Note gaps in employment and frequent moves between kitchens - both are common in the industry, but patterns matter.

Prepare interview area near kitchen - Conducting the interview near your actual kitchen helps the candidate understand your operation and gives you the option of a kitchen walk-through.

Have scoring sheets and pen ready - Document responses immediately. When you're interviewing several cooks in one week, it's easy to confuse who said what.

Ensure 45 minutes uninterrupted time - This role warrants a longer interview than entry-level positions. Brief your team that you're unavailable.

Review station requirements and menu complexity - Know exactly what the role involves. Which station are you hiring for? What's the ticket volume during peak service? What level of skill does your menu demand?

Prepare practical cooking test materials if applicable - If you plan to include a cooking trial (strongly recommended for line cooks), ensure ingredients, equipment, and recipes are ready before the candidate arrives.

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining, add "Prepare a plating reference and mise en place list for the trial"
• For high-volume operations, add "Brief the expediter about the candidate trial during service"
• For hotels with multiple outlets, add "Review which kitchen outlet the candidate would primarily work in"

Candidate Details

Record the candidate's full name exactly as they prefer to be called. This becomes your reference for all subsequent documentation.

Document when the interview took place. This is essential when comparing multiple candidates interviewed over several days.

Cooking Experience

Why this question matters:

Line cooks need practical cooking ability that translates to your specific kitchen. A cook who's spent two years on the grill at a high-volume steakhouse has very different skills from someone who's worked the pastry section at a fine dining restaurant. Neither is better or worse - but you need to know whether their experience matches your station requirements. This question also reveals how candidates talk about cooking. Do they describe dishes with genuine knowledge, or are they vague about what they've actually done?

What good answers look like:

• Specific detail about stations worked and cuisines cooked ("I spent 18 months working the saut station at a 120-cover Italian restaurant. I was responsible for all pasta dishes, risottos, and about half the starter menu")
• Clear articulation of what they're comfortable with ("I'm strongest on the grill and plancha. I can handle a full section of 6 burners during a 200-cover service without falling behind")
• Honest acknowledgment of gaps ("I haven't done much pastry work - my experience is mainly hot starters and mains. I'd need to learn your dessert station if that's part of the role")
• Progression narrative showing development ("I started as a commis doing basic prep, then moved onto the garnish section, and within a year I was running the fish station during Saturday service")
• Genuine enthusiasm when describing cooking ("The best part of my last role was learning to break down whole fish. There's something satisfying about taking a raw ingredient and turning it into six perfectly portioned fillets")

Red flags to watch for:

• Vague, unverifiable claims ("I've cooked everything at every station")
• Cannot describe specific dishes, techniques, or equipment from previous kitchens
• Experience listed on CV doesn't match what they describe in conversation
• Only talks about one narrow aspect of cooking with no evidence of broader capability
• Disparaging about previous kitchens without any positive takeaways ("The food there was terrible")
• Claims extensive experience but can't answer basic follow-up questions about cooking methods

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining, probe specific techniques: sous vide, sauce work, precision plating
• For high-volume operations, focus on speed, consistency, and batch cooking experience
• For hotels, ask about adaptability across different cuisines and service styles
• For ethnic or specialist cuisines, test knowledge of authentic techniques and ingredients

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Extensive relevant experience across multiple stations with strong, specific examples demonstrating skill progression
• 4 - Good: Solid experience with transferable skills; clear examples of cooking competency even if not all stations are covered
• 3 - Average: Some cooking experience; enough foundation to work your station with training on menu specifics
• 2 - Below Average: Limited cooking experience; would need significant development before handling a section independently
• 1 - Poor: No relevant cooking experience despite applying for a line cook role

Station Management

Why this question matters:

A line cook who can cook well but can't manage their station is a liability during service. Station management is about mise en place, organisation, timing, and the ability to keep track of multiple orders at different stages simultaneously. The cook who has everything prepped, labelled, and within reach before service starts will outperform the more naturally talented cook who's scrambling for ingredients mid-ticket. This question reveals whether candidates approach cooking as a system or wing it.

What good answers look like:

• Describes a systematic approach to mise en place ("I always set up the same way: proteins on the right, veg on the left, sauces and garnishes in the centre. Everything gets labelled with prep date and use-by. I check my par levels against the booking sheet so I know exactly what I'll need")
• Shows awareness of managing multiple tickets ("When orders start stacking, I work backwards from the longest cooking time. If I've got a well-done steak and a rare fillet on the same ticket, the well-done goes on first. I keep a mental map of every dish on my section")
• Mentions communication about timing ("I always call back times when the pass calls. If I'm going to be late on something, I shout it immediately rather than hoping nobody notices")
• Demonstrates clean-as-you-go discipline ("I wipe down between every main course push. A messy station means a slow station, and slow means backed up")
• Shows forward thinking ("During a quiet spell in service, I'm not standing around - I'm restocking, prepping for the next push, and making sure nothing's running low")

Red flags to watch for:

• Cannot describe any system for organising their station
• Reactive approach to cooking ("I just deal with orders as they come in")
• No mention of mise en place or preparation before service
• Dismissive about organisation ("I keep it all in my head")
• Cannot explain how they'd handle multiple orders with different timing requirements
• No awareness that station management directly affects the speed and quality of the whole kitchen

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining, probe detailed mise en place practices and plating station organisation
• For high-volume kitchens, focus on speed of reset between orders and managing high ticket counts
• For kitchens with shared equipment, ask how they coordinate station access with other cooks
• For breakfast service, explore how they manage the unique challenges of simultaneous egg orders at different doneness levels

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Systematic approach with strong organisation; clear evidence of managing complex service through preparation and planning
• 4 - Good: Good organisation and preparation habits; manages their section reliably during service
• 3 - Average: Basic station management; functional during moderate service but may struggle during heavy pushes
• 2 - Below Average: Disorganised approach; limited evidence of systematic preparation or multi-order management
• 1 - Poor: No understanding of station management; reactive and chaotic approach to cooking

Food Safety Knowledge

Why this question matters:

Line cooks handle raw proteins, cooked food, allergens, and everything in between. A cook who doesn't understand core temperatures, cross-contamination risks, or proper storage practices is a genuine danger to your business. One food poisoning incident can result in closure, prosecution, and permanent reputation damage. This isn't about whether they can recite HACCP principles verbatim - it's about whether safe food handling is embedded in their working habits.

What good answers look like:

• Specific knowledge of core temperatures ("Poultry to 75C minimum, burgers to 75C through the centre, reheated food back to 75C. I always probe to check, never guess")
• Practical examples of managing food safety during service ("I use separate boards and knives for raw and cooked proteins. If someone asks me to switch from raw chicken to salad prep, I wash my hands and change my gloves first")
• Shows understanding of allergen management ("I always check allergen tickets. If a dish is marked nut-free, I use clean equipment and a clean section of the station. If I'm not sure about an ingredient, I check with the chef rather than guessing")
• Evidence of temperature monitoring discipline ("I probe and record at least twice per service and log fridge and freezer temps on every shift. If something's out of range, I flag it immediately")
• Demonstrates storage knowledge ("Raw below cooked in the fridge, everything dated and labelled, oldest stock used first. If something doesn't have a date label, it goes in the bin")

Red flags to watch for:

• Cannot state basic cooking temperatures for common proteins
• Dismissive about food safety documentation ("It's just box-ticking")
• No mention of cross-contamination prevention or allergen management
• Claims to "just know" when food is cooked properly without probing
• Previous kitchen experience but cannot describe the food safety systems used
• Shows surprise when asked about food safety, as if it's not their responsibility

Customisation tips:

• For kitchens serving allergen-heavy menus, probe specific allergen management protocols
• For operations with EHO/FSA ratings to maintain, emphasise due diligence expectations
• For kitchens using sous vide or low-temperature cooking, test understanding of time-temperature safety relationships

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Comprehensive food safety knowledge with specific examples of consistent application during service
• 4 - Good: Strong understanding of key food safety principles; demonstrates them as habitual practice
• 3 - Average: Basic food safety awareness; knows the essentials but may need refresher training on your specific systems
• 2 - Below Average: Limited food safety knowledge; would need significant training before working independently
• 1 - Poor: Unaware of basic food safety requirements; potential risk if placed on a section

Working Under Pressure

Why this question matters:

Every line cook says they can handle pressure. The difference between cooks who actually thrive and those who crumble shows up during the weeds - when the printer won't stop, the pass is shouting, and you're three tickets behind on your section. A cook who panics, goes silent, or starts making mistakes under pressure creates a cascade of problems that affects every table in the restaurant. You need someone whose quality actually holds up when the pressure peaks, not just someone who survives it.

What good answers look like:

• Describes a specific high-pressure situation with clear detail ("We had a 180-cover Saturday with two functions and the commis called in sick. I was running the whole grill section alone. I reorganised my mise en place, communicated with the pass about realistic times, and got through it without sending back a single dish")
• Shows tactical thinking under pressure ("When I'm in the weeds, I stop and take three seconds to prioritise. What's the most time-critical dish? What can I batch together? What do I need to communicate to the pass right now?")
• Evidence of maintaining quality, not just speed ("Being fast but sloppy isn't handling pressure - it's just creating problems at the pass. I'd rather call out a realistic time than send something that gets bounced back")
• Demonstrates communication as a pressure-management tool ("The worst thing you can do when you're behind is go quiet. I always call out my times so the expediter can manage the other sections around me")
• Shows recovery and learning ("After a tough service, I always think about what I could have prepped better or organised differently so I'm more prepared next time")

Red flags to watch for:

• Vague answers without specific examples ("I just stay calm and get on with it")
• Describes pressure situations that ended badly with no learning or reflection
• Admits to shouting at colleagues or losing their temper during busy service
• Quality is the first thing sacrificed under pressure ("When it's really busy, you just have to get food out")
• Cannot describe any strategy for managing multiple urgent tickets simultaneously
• Blames others for pressure situations ("The pass was calling too fast" or "The front of house oversold the section")

Customisation tips:

• For fine dining, explore how they maintain plating precision when tickets are stacking
• For high-volume operations, focus on sustained pressure across long services rather than brief rushes
• For kitchens with open passes, ask about maintaining composure when guests can see them

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Thrives under pressure with clear strategies; provides specific examples of maintaining quality during intense service
• 4 - Good: Handles pressure well with evidence of composure and tactical thinking during busy periods
• 3 - Average: Manages pressure adequately; gets through busy service but may need support during peak demand
• 2 - Below Average: Struggles under pressure; quality or communication suffers during busy periods
• 1 - Poor: Cannot handle service pressure; history of breakdowns, errors, or conflict during busy service

Kitchen Teamwork

Why this question matters:

A kitchen brigade only works when every cook communicates, coordinates, and supports each other. A line cook who goes silent during service, who doesn't call back orders, or who refuses to help a struggling colleague creates gaps that affect every table. The grill cook needs to coordinate timing with the sauce station. The starter section needs to communicate with the pass about table readiness. Kitchen teamwork isn't a soft skill - it's an operational requirement that directly affects food quality and service speed.

What good answers look like:

• Describes clear communication habits ("I always call back when the pass calls an order. I announce my times clearly so the expediter and other sections can plan around me. If I'm behind, I say so immediately")
• Shows willingness to support other sections ("If my section's quiet and the sauce cook is getting hammered, I'll step over and help plate or prep garnishes. We sink or swim together")
• Demonstrates respect for kitchen hierarchy ("When the head chef or sous gives a direction, I follow it - even if I'd do it differently. There's a reason for the brigade structure, and second-guessing during service creates chaos")
• Evidence of constructive communication, not just shouting ("During a busy service, I helped a new commis who was falling behind on her section. I talked her through the timing calmly rather than just taking over, because she needs to learn")
• Understanding that feedback goes both ways ("I welcome feedback from senior chefs. My last sous chef pulled me aside after service to show me a better way of timing my garnishes, and it genuinely improved my section management")

Red flags to watch for:

• "I keep my head down and focus on my own station" - isolation during service creates coordination gaps
• History of conflict with other kitchen staff always blamed on the other person
• Disrespectful attitude toward kitchen hierarchy ("The head chef didn't know what he was doing")
• Cannot describe any instance of helping a colleague during service
• Defensive about receiving feedback or instruction
• Shows no awareness that timing coordination between sections is essential for smooth service

Customisation tips:

• For large kitchen brigades, ask about coordinating across multiple sections during complex orders
• For small kitchens with only 2-3 cooks, emphasise the heightened importance of each person communicating clearly
• For kitchens with high turnover, explore how they adapt to working with new team members regularly

How to score:

• 5 - Excellent: Strong team communication and active support for colleagues; clear examples of coordinated service delivery
• 4 - Good: Good team player; communicates reliably and helps others when capacity allows
• 3 - Average: Works adequately in a team; follows instructions but limited proactive support or communication
• 2 - Below Average: Limited team interaction; tends to work in isolation or struggles with kitchen communication
• 1 - Poor: Cannot work within a kitchen brigade; history of conflict or communication breakdown during service

Practical Trial

Why practical trials matter:

You can talk about cooking all day. What matters is what happens when a line cook actually picks up a knife and steps onto a station. A practical trial in your actual kitchen reveals knife skills, cooking instincts, cleanliness habits, speed, and how they interact with your existing team. Some candidates with impressive CVs struggle with basic prep, while quieter candidates who seemed average in the interview produce beautifully executed dishes and keep a spotless station.

What to observe:

Set up station efficiently with proper mise en place - Watch how they organise their workspace. Do they create a logical layout? Do they gather everything they need before starting? Do they work clean from the beginning?

Demonstrated good knife skills and technique - Knife work reveals training and experience more than anything else. Watch for grip, speed, consistency of cuts, and safety awareness.

Followed recipes accurately - Give them a recipe from your menu. Do they read it through first, or dive straight in? Do they measure accurately? Do they taste and adjust?

Maintained cleanliness during cooking - Do they wipe down between tasks? Do they deal with spills immediately? Does their station get progressively messier, or do they maintain order throughout?

Worked at appropriate pace for service - Speed matters, but controlled speed matters more. Watch for efficient movement without rushing, and quality that holds up under time pressure.

Communicated clearly with kitchen team - Do they ask appropriate questions? Do they call out when they need the oven or a shared piece of equipment? Do they interact professionally with your team?

Plated dishes to standard - The final plate tells you everything. Is it clean? Is the presentation consistent? Did they wipe the rim? Would you serve it?

Setting up an effective trial:

• Use your actual kitchen and a real station
• Provide a recipe from your menu with clear instructions
• Schedule during prep time for a realistic but manageable environment
• Brief your team to interact naturally but not to coach the candidate
• Observe knife work, cooking technique, and station management from a reasonable distance

How to score the trial:

• 5 - Exceptional: Exceeded expectations in all areas; showed natural cooking ability, clean station management, and professional communication
• 4 - Strong: Met all requirements comfortably; would hold their own on the section from their first service
• 3 - Adequate: Basic requirements met; capable but needs training on your specific menu and systems
• 2 - Below Standard: Struggled with requirements; significant development needed before running a section independently
• 1 - Inadequate: Cannot meet minimum cooking standards; not suitable for a line cook role in your kitchen

Cultural Fit Assessment

Beyond cooking ability, cultural fit determines whether a line cook will stay and thrive in your kitchen. Select all indicators that genuinely apply to this candidate based on your observations throughout the interview and trial.

Shows passion for cooking - Do they talk about food with genuine enthusiasm? Did they engage with your menu and ask questions about dishes? Do they cook outside of work?

Takes direction well from senior chefs - Did they accept feedback during the trial without defensiveness? Do they respect the kitchen hierarchy?

Demonstrates attention to detail - Was their plating precise? Did they taste and adjust seasoning? Did they notice small imperfections and correct them?

Maintains clean and organised workspace - Was their station tidy throughout the trial? Do they clean as they go instinctively?

Shows interest in learning new techniques - Did they ask about unfamiliar ingredients or methods? Do they seem eager to develop their skills?

Works well under pressure - Did they maintain composure during the trial? Can they sustain quality when the pace increases?

Weighted Scoring

The weighted scoring system reflects what matters most for line cook success in most kitchen operations.

Cooking skills carry the highest weight because the core function of a line cook is producing consistently excellent food. Rate 1-5 based on cooking experience responses and trial performance, then multiply by 0.35.

Station management determines whether a cook can handle a section during busy service. Rate 1-5 based on station management responses and observed organisation during the trial, then multiply by 0.25.

Pressure handling is essential because line cooking involves sustained periods of intense, time-critical work. Rate 1-5 based on pressure responses and observed composure during the trial, then multiply by 0.25.

Cultural fit affects retention and kitchen dynamics. Rate 1-5 based on the cultural fit assessment indicators, then multiply by 0.15.

Add all weighted scores together for the final result. Maximum possible is 5.0.

Interpretation:

• 4.0 and above: Strong hire - offer the position with confidence
• 3.5 to 3.9: Hire with development plan - good candidate who'll need support learning your specific menu and systems
• 3.0 to 3.4: Consider second interview or extended trial - potential but significant questions remain
• Below 3.0: Do not proceed - significant concerns that training alone cannot address

Customisation tips:

• Fine dining kitchens might increase Cooking Skills to 0.40 and reduce Pressure Handling to 0.20
• High-volume operations might increase Pressure Handling to 0.30 and reduce Station Management to 0.20
• Small kitchens where teamwork is critical might increase Cultural Fit to 0.20 and reduce Cooking Skills to 0.30

Final Recommendation

Based on all assessments, select your hiring decision:

• Strong Hire - Offer position immediately: Exceptional candidate who demonstrated genuine cooking ability, station discipline, and kitchen communication; secure them before another kitchen does
• Hire - Good candidate, offer position: Solid choice who meets your requirements and will strengthen your kitchen team
• Maybe - Conduct second interview or check references: Potential but need more information; consider an extended trial during actual service
• Probably Not - Significant concerns, unlikely to hire: Issues identified that training probably can't resolve; only reconsider if no other candidates
• Do Not Hire - Not suitable for this role: Clear misfit for your kitchen; don't proceed regardless of how urgently you need a cook

Additional Notes

Record any observations, concerns, or follow-up actions that don't fit elsewhere. This might include:

• Specific reference check questions to ask previous head chefs or sous chefs
• Training needs if hired (specific stations, plating standards, kitchen systems)
• Which station they're best suited for based on trial observations
• Availability constraints or notice period at current role
• Notable strengths to leverage from day one
• Concerns to monitor during probation (speed, consistency, teamwork)

What's next

Once you've selected your line cook, proper onboarding is essential for retention and rapid productivity. See our guide on Line Cook onboarding to ensure your new hire integrates smoothly and starts delivering consistent cooking excellence from day one.