(Manfred Klimek / animated image: Runwayml)
Updated: 12 March 2026
Many are now saying: “We could have known”. As is so often the case. But should we have known? That behind the hype surrounding the Copenhagen restaurant Noma – and the larger-than-life chef René Redzepi of ten years ago – lay raw violence? For years, the restaurant was regarded as the beating heart of global avant-garde cuisine. Anyone wanting to know where cuisine was heading looked north. ‘New Nordic’ wasn’t just a trend, but the trendy boho-chic attitude. And René Redzepi was more than just a chef – he was a dazzling, sought-after media personality. Since 2023, following Noma’s ‘not-quite-closure’, it has become known that incidents of staff being humiliated took place in the kitchen in Redzepi’s presence, such as: “tying them naked to a chair and mocking them”. This behaviour led to consequences on 12 March. Redzepi stepped down as Noma’s head chef; a board is to decide on his shares in Noma. It is likely that Redzepi will leave Noma entirely.
The allegations are now almost three years old. In mid-February, however, the case has reignited: the whistleblower and former Noma employee Jason Ignacio White is gradually releasing evidence against Redzepi’s conduct, which is also likely to bring the Danish public prosecutor’s office into the picture. It is extremely disturbing what is now set to come to light: suspicions of money being channelled into Swiss accounts, suspicions of favouritism towards his family – and, of course, renewed suspicions of coercion and massive breaches of Danish health and safety legislation. This was followed by an in-depth investigation by the New York Times into conditions at the Copenhagen restaurant – at a particularly inopportune time for Redzepi, who has just opened a Noma branch in Los Angeles. Redzepi and his family are, of course, still presumed innocent regarding certain allegations – such as the transfer of funds to Switzerland – which Redzepi has not admitted to.
What was once hailed as a culinary empire is suddenly under immense moral pressure. Jason White reports on exploitation, on extremely harsh working conditions, on unpaid internships, and on a system that supposedly spoke of passion but was structurally based on self-exploitation. And not just in the kitchen. Service staff, security guards and gardeners are also speaking out. The allegations concern the entire organisation.
I remember well just how much Noma changed the way we think about food. Fermentation as an art form. Foraging as a philosophy. Mosses, ants, wild herbs – everything became a form of culinary expression. For years, the restaurant topped the rankings, won awards and redefined aesthetic codes. Only Michelin remained a little sceptical amidst all the hype; the “Nestlé Restaurant Guide”, “50 Best Restaurants”, however, catapulted Noma like a rocket into the culinary heavens and must now face the question: did nobody ever speak to the staff?
Alongside this fame, another debate was already rumbling on 10 years ago: it became public knowledge that many so-called “stagiaires” – trainees who had come from all over the world to become part of this legend – were working full-time, often without adequate pay. For many, this meant long days, physically demanding work, a high cost of living in Copenhagen – and financial pressure. Access to haute cuisine was thus effectively restricted to those who could afford to work without an income.
This was not a problem exclusive to Noma. The entire world of haute cuisine had long operated according to this model. But Noma was the most visible symbol – and thus also the most visible litmus test.
Added to this was another question: must excellence necessarily be achieved through harsh conditions? For decades, Michelin-starred cuisine was characterised by hierarchies, pressure and a loud atmosphere. Redzepi himself has admitted in interviews that in earlier years he led with anger and harshness and had to work on himself. At the time, this was seen as a sign of a cultural shift. Yet that shift apparently never took place.
The latest allegations suggest that structural problems run deeper. If the complaints relate not only to chefs but to the entire restaurant environment, then it is no longer a matter of culinary style. It is about the way people are treated. About the very foundations of a system.
Noma reacted in 2023; it had to react. Trainees were paid. Processes were changed. And finally came the announcement: the traditional restaurant model would be phased out after 2024. Instead, there would be seasonal projects, research and product development – Noma 3.0. That is not how things turned out.
Officially, this was a planned evolution. A creative step. But it can also be interpreted differently: as an admission that the economic model of haute cuisine no longer works. If even one of the world’s most celebrated restaurants can barely manage to combine high standards with fair working conditions in the long term, what does that say about the industry as a whole? Is that the truth, the reality of the matter? Is there no other way? Or is it perhaps simply the case that Redzepi, as allegations are now coming to light, has in fact raked in massive amounts of money and moved it to Switzerland?
Perhaps we are witnessing the end of an era. An era in which genius and pushing boundaries were seen as justification. In which passion served as compensation for overwork. In which ‘being allowed to be part of it’ was sold as payment.
What concerns me less is the collapse of a myth. Myths come and go. What concerns me is the question of how much we, as guests, have helped to sustain this system. We wanted perfection. We wanted uniqueness. We wanted the feeling of being part of something significant. And a great many very good, new independent winemakers wanted – indeed, had to – be on Noma’s wine list. Were conditions dictated to them too, and did they accept them? For the Noma bonus?
Excellence comes at a price. And perhaps we are now, for the first time, seriously asking who pays it.
Redzepi has recently spoken a great deal about his brilliant new Noma 3.0. That is now a thing of the past. His business pulled the plug following the withdrawal of sponsors in the US. For the name Noma is now tainted. Whether that will change so quickly following Redzepi’s departure remains to be seen this year. But one can surmise that Noma is history. And it ended with a fart.