Sea Views by Adam

[Ken at the beach]

Here is a part of the most recent blog posted by Adam. I found it refreshing to see someone take a stand against rude and unreasonable customers.

 

http://www.royalcaribbean.com/connect/blog/

 

It’s rare that we encounter rude or boorish sentiments from our guests, but it happens from time to time. When it does happen, I am occasionally unable to restrain myself from commenting, as I know all of the effort that goes into assisting our guests. For example, earlier this week, in an email to one of my top customer relations colleagues, the writer stated “Mark Twain said it best, “You never argue with an idiot. They’ll bring you down to their level and they’ll beat you with years of experience.” All my colleague wanted to do was help with a situation that was complicated on the guest’s side, not because of anything we had done. I advised the guest that I was not enamored with the sentiment expressed towards my colleague and that we would not take further action on the matter. Some readers may view this as a violation of the principle that the customer is always right, but in my view when a guest crosses a certain line either in writing or on the phone I will back up my colleague. I’m curious to hear the readers’ views on this.

[rummenroman]

The customer is not always right. There are several occasions where they are dead wrong. When I worked in a customer service position I would usually help as much as I could until they crossed the polite line. Once they crossed that line, I would go to the customer is not correct. If they are willing to push a person around and be nasty and ugly, they really aren't worth my time or effort to save them as a customer.

[Robinola]

People are becoming more and more Unreasonable.

There is no reason to accommodate an Unreasonable person.

[sullyair]

I've been a business owner for many years. On rare occasions, I've had to fire customers for their conduct -- usually as it applied toward my employees.

[Tyler80]

The customer is not always right. There are several occasions where they are dead wrong. When I worked in a customer service position I would usually help as much as I could until they crossed the polite line. Once they crossed that line, I would go to the customer is not correct. If they are willing to push a person around and be nasty and ugly, they really aren't worth my time or effort to save them as a customer.

 

You are right. The customer is not always right. You treat them with respect and when they cross the line where respect has been thrown out the window, then you go no further and stand your ground on whatever issue that is being discussed. You can't run a successful business and be walked on and disrespected by your clients/customers.

[Blue Line]

I've been a business owner for many years. On rare occasions, I've had to fire customers for their conduct -- usually as it applied toward my employees.

 

I like it-- very well said!!

[dreamer976]

Some people love to argue for the "entertainment" of it! I've come across a few of these idiots myself.

[Paulxyz2004]

“Mark Twain said it best, “You never argue with an idiot. They’ll bring you down to their level and they’ll beat you with years of experience.”

 

 

IMHO the appropriate Response would have been:

 

"Thank you for pointing this out to us. I will take your advice and me and my colleague will stop any further discussion on the matter now." ;)

[marci22]

Anyone who has ever worked with the public knows that some people are just unreasonable. However, pointing it out on his blog with a special post about it, is just plain weird. What is the point?

 

I think he should have just left out the entire last paragraph.

[EVALUATOR]

Anyone who has ever worked with the public knows that some people are just unreasonable. However, pointing it out on his blog with a special post about it, is just plain weird. What is the point?

 

I think he should have just left out the entire last paragraph.

 

I tend to agree. If someone comes here and states they had a problem with rci without details they are grilled.

 

He complains about a passenger but I guess in fairness we now need the third side of the story.

[Mark_K]

Never argue with an idiot, and never get into a pissing contest with a skunk.

 

 

Sent using the Cruise Critic forums app

[geocruiser]

Anyone who has ever worked with the public knows that some people are just unreasonable. However, pointing it out on his blog with a special post about it, is just plain weird. What is the point?

 

I think he should have just left out the entire last paragraph.

 

I agree with you. Some people are unreasonable as well as some workers. Unreasonable people happen on both sides of the fence. If a guess crosses the line (who's line and where is it) I would still check it out. After all ex. if a PAX toilet was overflowing on a cruise and they were nasty about it, Do I as CEO drop the matter because he /she got nasty? Or does the CEO make sure onboard the problem is solved?

Like you I think he should have left out the last paragraph. It can be very hard to deal with people, but after all they are in the cruise industry and should be able to handle rude PAX without dropping the matter.

[pamkev]

I just had to deal with a customer yesterday who was down right nasty. I work a second job at amusement park in there guest services.

Let's just say she laced me out about everything and let me know she was disputed everything on her credit card wasn't paying a dime for her rotten experience. Placed her on hold to talked to my supervisor when I went back on to talk to her I heard her explaining to someone this is what she does to get her vacations for free or next to nothing. Sadly to say this is more the norm now a days

[Robinola]

The last paragraph is the best part. It sums it up!

Great Blog.

He really gets it!

[Wilda]

Anyone who has ever worked with the public knows that some people are just unreasonable. However, pointing it out on his blog with a special post about it, is just plain weird. What is the point?

 

I think he should have just left out the entire last paragraph.

 

I think he is making a point that he is standing behind his employees. Sometimes, based on the complaint, that is appropriate...

[Coralc]

I think he is making a point that he is standing behind his employees. Sometimes, based on the complaint, that is appropriate...

 

I agree with what you have posted Wilda. Customer service should be provided until the customer becomes abusive, unreasonable or foul mouthed.

 

I am a government employee. There is no profit motive, but we truly do try to assist people. Abusive communication is not the way to get your point across to someone.

 

It's great that Mr. Goldstein supports his employees. :)

[melbur]

It is his last paragraph that is the most meaningful. His way of telling all that resorting to bully tactics and rude behaviour will not get you anywhere. BRAVO

[Seaworthy01]

The customer is NOT always rite, they only use it as a tactic in order to get what they want in a retail setting. I like the Mark Twain quote, but It's a shame that an idiot had to use the quote in attempt to make themself look like the superiour one in the argument. It's a shame when good quotes are miss used and abused.

[Paulxyz2004]

It is his last paragraph that is the most meaningful. His way of telling all that resorting to bully tactics and rude behaviour will not get you anywhere. BRAVO

 

I like when a corporation takes this stand. I know it´s not easy for a Business, but it´s the way to go and not something that should be labeled bad customer Service.

[CaribeDiver]

I agree with you. Some people are unreasonable as well as some workers. Unreasonable people happen on both sides of the fence. If a guess crosses the line (who's line and where is it) I would still check it out. After all ex. if a PAX toilet was overflowing on a cruise and they were nasty about it, Do I as CEO drop the matter because he /she got nasty? Or does the CEO make sure onboard the problem is solved?

Like you I think he should have left out the last paragraph. It can be very hard to deal with people, but after all they are in the cruise industry and should be able to handle rude PAX without dropping the matter.

 

I disagree with your last statement. When dealing with an unruly customer who is being abusive no matter what you try to do you have to just draw the line and realize that that person is probably no longer going to be a customer anyway and cut them off. I have dealt with many angry people in the past as I was a manager for a rental car company. I typically had people angry when they walked through my door because someone hit their car and they now had to get a rental. However, sometimes there is no pleasing an angry customer and once they become abusive I no longer want their business and may even take efforts to refuse future business.

[geocruiser]

I disagree with your last statement. When dealing with an unruly customer who is being abusive no matter what you try to do you have to just draw the line and realize that that person is probably no longer going to be a customer anyway and cut them off. I have dealt with many angry people in the past as I was a manager for a rental car company. I typically had people angry when they walked through my door because someone hit their car and they now had to get a rental. However, sometimes there is no pleasing an angry customer and once they become abusive I no longer want their business and may even take efforts to refuse future business.

 

like you I al so worked my whole life with the public. RCCl should be able to handle the matter with out dropping it. They can draw the line and realize that that person is probably no longer going to be a customer anyway and cut them off (like you said). But if there is a true problem it should be solved for the good of the company no matter how nasty the PAX is. What I am saying is to drop the PAX (not deal with them), but solve the problem, if indeed it is a real problem.

I feel that RCCL should rise above the nasty PAX level and at the same time letting the PAX know that being nasty does not help. Because if a real problem is not fix, then the compliant will happen again. Maybe next time the PAX may be nice about it or heaven forbid worse . Make sure that real problems are solved not pushed aside because a PAX is nasty.

 

P.S. I think you might be a diver? In my younger day I was. I have a PADI, c-card. Most of my diving was done out side the V. bridge in NYC. Dark cold water.

[Paulxyz2004]

like you I al so worked my whole life with the public. RCCl should be able to handle the matter with out dropping it. They can draw the line and realize that that person is probably no longer going to be a customer anyway and cut them off (like you said). But if there is a true problem it should be solved for the good of the company no matter how nasty the PAX is. What I am saying is to drop the PAX (not deal with them), but solve the problem, if indeed it is a real problem.

I feel that RCCL should rise above the nasty PAX level and at the same time letting the PAX know that being nasty does not help. Because if a real problem is not fix, then the compliant will happen again. Maybe next time the PAX may be nice about it or heaven forbid worse . Make sure that real problems are solved not pushed aside because a PAX is nasty.

 

P.S. I think you might be a diver? In my younger day I was. I have a PADI, c-card. Most of my diving was done out side the V. bridge in NYC. Dark cold water.

 

 

If you re-read the Statement from AG you will realize that this is not about a problem RCI needs to rectify or others will complain about in the future.

 

All my colleague wanted to do was help with a situation that was complicated on the guest’s side, not because of anything we had done.

 

In addition nowhere it was said that if RCI had a Problem and the Pax got nasty they wouldn´t resolve the issue while still dropping off the passenger for being nasty.

[Aquahound]

Was this release in response to the recent actions by an idiot Pinnacle member? :confused:

[geocruiser]

If you re-read the Statement from AG you will realize that this is not about a problem RCI needs to rectify or others will complain about in the future.

 

 

 

In addition nowhere it was said that if RCI had a Problem and the Pax got nasty they wouldn´t resolve the issue while still dropping off the passenger for being nasty.

 

" we would not take further action on the matter"

 

Can you please tell me what this means? Does it mean to solve the matter or let it go because the PAX was nasty?

[bigeagle12]

Was this release in response to the recent actions by an idiot Pinnacle member? :confused:

 

You need to share more ???