"This might be YOUR vacation, but it's MY life"

[ckfred]

The very first cruise we took the waiter was explaining to us if we don't like the food and mark the food lower that was a reflection on him the waiter. He said if the food wasn't good it was his job to know and to get us food we liked or was good. He might have been the best waiter we had. If someone didn't like their food he could tell and he would ask if he could bring you this or this to eat. He knew what we ordered and what we liked so he recommended those types of food to us.

 

This goes to the point of including specific comments in the survey. RC needs to understand that passengers, more often than not, blame the kitchen for food that isn't good, rather than the wait staff.

 

If a person is a regular at a restaurant for a number of years, then yes, a waiter ought to know what the customer likes and doesn't like, as well as recommending a dish that is particularly good that night, or avoiding a dish that may be a bit lackluster.

 

On a cruise, even a 14-night cruise, I don't expect a waiter to figure out what what each passenger likes and doesn't like. It's one thing to figure out that a passenger orders an Old Fashion every night before dinner, or that he wants Earl Grey tea with lemon, while everyone else has coffee. But, it takes far longer for a waiter to figure out that a diner is very picky about the freshness of shellfish, or that he doesn't like cilantro in the seasoning for beef, pork, and poulty.

 

By the same token, if a passenger isn't thrilled with the food, the waiter is not in a position to fix things, like at a regular restaurant. If a meal was "off", a manager could decide to comp the meal or throw in dessert for free. If you order a second entree to make up for a bad one, you can take the leftovers home. You can't do that on a cruise ship.

 

It seems to me that RC wants to punish its wait staff for what people on Cruise Critic claim are issues in the kitchens and with the quality of food that is purchased.

 

A waiter can say, "I'm supposed to find food that you like." But, if someone is unhappy with 75% of the entrees and appetizers that he orders, the waiter really isn't in a position to correct the problem. It's not the same as someone who has been happy with the fish and beef entrees on the first five nights of a cruise, then had an issue with a poultry entree that was a bit rubbery and heavy on fiery spices.

[LMaxwell]

This goes to the point of including specific comments in the survey. RC needs to understand that passengers, more often than not, blame the kitchen for food that isn't good, rather than the wait staff.

 

If a person is a regular at a restaurant for a number of years, then yes, a waiter ought to know what the customer likes and doesn't like, as well as recommending a dish that is particularly good that night, or avoiding a dish that may be a bit lackluster.

 

On a cruise, even a 14-night cruise, I don't expect a waiter to figure out what what each passenger likes and doesn't like. It's one thing to figure out that a passenger orders an Old Fashion every night before dinner, or that he wants Earl Grey tea with lemon, while everyone else has coffee. But, it takes far longer for a waiter to figure out that a diner is very picky about the freshness of shellfish, or that he doesn't like cilantro in the seasoning for beef, pork, and poulty.

 

By the same token, if a passenger isn't thrilled with the food, the waiter is not in a position to fix things, like at a regular restaurant. If a meal was "off", a manager could decide to comp the meal or throw in dessert for free. If you order a second entree to make up for a bad one, you can take the leftovers home. You can't do that on a cruise ship.

 

It seems to me that RC wants to punish its wait staff for what people on Cruise Critic claim are issues in the kitchens and with the quality of food that is purchased.

 

A waiter can say, "I'm supposed to find food that you like." But, if someone is unhappy with 75% of the entrees and appetizers that he orders, the waiter really isn't in a position to correct the problem. It's not the same as someone who has been happy with the fish and beef entrees on the first five nights of a cruise, then had an issue with a poultry entree that was a bit rubbery and heavy on fiery spices.

 

If they wanted honest answers about what guests like and do not like they'd ask about service separately from food quality/prep/presentation.

[makiramarlena]

I have a feeling I would have gone straight to guest services. Pressuring guests to give a certain rating is wrong, and this is mega pressure.

 

I also have no idea why the rating on the quality of the food would impact the rating of the server.

 

He'd also not get fives, and a note on the survey as to why the rating was less than five.

 

BTW, Disney has a question on their survey where you can answer yes or no as to whether you "felt pressured to give excellent ratings."

Edited May 4, 2017 by makiramarlena

[makiramarlena]

it's actually kind of a catch 22. Servers realize that passengers don't realize that anything less than the top score is graded as abject failure. Therefore servers feel obligated to constantly remind the passengers that they need to give top scores. Constant urging by servers to give top scores makes passengers uncomfortable and affects their ability to enjoy the cruise, so the badgering makes them resentful; therefore, they don't give top scores anyway.

[Z'Loth]

On a five point scale with 1 being low and 5 being high, what would you rate 1, 3, and 5 for the wait staff? In addition, what would you rate 1, 3, and 5 for the food?

 

I bet that the answers I give will be very subjective.

[TheProfessor74]

Reading another thread, I was reminded by what the assistant waiter said on my last cruise.

 

We did not find the food in the MDR on our last cruise to be all that great, and frequently left over. The crew would ask if they could bring us something else, and I just said no, we would grab a slice of pizza or something from the cafe.

 

One night, the assistant waiter came by and confirmed with us that we would be giving all 5s on the Guest Satisfaction survey - for service, food, etc. I told him of course we would give 5s for service, but we did not find the food to be "5" caliber. He said it didn't matter, we should give 5 for everything, and then write what we did not like in the comments. I told him that would not be my honest opinion, and he stressed that I needed to give 5s for everything, even the food. He then said, "This might be YOUR vacation, but it's MY life". It was really chilling, and I felt quite uncomfortable.

 

What do you make of this, and what would you have done? I am embarrassed to say that I did not complete the survey because of his words. I could not give all 5s for food that I found to be sub-par, but I did not want to affect this guy's livelihood.

 

 

Sheesh I think you guys are harsh people imo... We have been on 7 cruises in the last 3 years with 2 kids, All we have seen in MDR by servers and even everyone in the Buffet area as well is very hard working and nice people. We have never had even one bad waiter on any of the cruises, maybe they are nicer because we have smaller kids?? I understand corporate survey BS and would never hurt an employee by giving bad marks when its the higher ups who screw customers and employees big time with these surveys... So think twice before you leave bad marks unless you really did experience bad service... Me and my wife always say we wish we could bring some of the servers back to the states and put them in our local restaurants where we receive much worse service on a consistent basis "except our local korean place:" lol

[Blizzard54]

I have not read all the way to the beginning of the thread so this may have been mentioned.

I believe it was in November of 2016 that I first noticed a big change in the RCL surveys. They added a question asking if anyone onboard encouraged you to give high scores on the survey. A follow up question asked who, my name or position.

I have been on quite a few sailings in the past year and have not had anyone push for high ratings. The only thing I have heard is to please fill out the survey, no mention of scores. .

[davekathy]

I have not read all the way to the beginning of the thread so this may have been mentioned.

I believe it was in November of 2016 that I first noticed a big change in the RCL surveys. They added a question asking if anyone onboard encouraged you to give high scores on the survey. A follow up question asked who, my name or position.

I have been on quite a few sailings in the past year and have not had anyone push for high ratings. The only thing I have heard is to please fill out the survey, no mention of scores. .

 

Agree. We did a B2B cruise on the Jewel 2 April and 9 April with no PCS spiel like in the past.

[grapau27]

Sheesh I think you guys are harsh people imo... We have been on 7 cruises in the last 3 years with 2 kids, All we have seen in MDR by servers and even everyone in the Buffet area as well is very hard working and nice people. We have never had even one bad waiter on any of the cruises, maybe they are nicer because we have smaller kids?? I understand corporate survey BS and would never hurt an employee by giving bad marks when its the higher ups who screw customers and employees big time with these surveys... So think twice before you leave bad marks unless you really did experience bad service... Me and my wife always say we wish we could bring some of the servers back to the states and put them in our local restaurants where we receive much worse service on a consistent basis "except our local korean place:" lol

I never mind surveys because usually i do them to praise people.

As far as tips go if people pay them they should be distributed as per how the cruise lines tell us who gets what and not used as a carrot to the crew with the threat that our money is witheld if they don't get appropriate scores.

The main point is we should all feel comfortable in reporting accurately what was good or bad without recriminations to the crew but so RC can use them positively to give us all a better cruise.

[pharmdawg]

I work for a large box retail company who has stores in almost every state. We have the surveys too. On most all surveys, a non 5 score is considered a zero. Service was very good but not excellent? Some people will give a 4 and think it is a good score. It is scored a zero. Corporate office bases everything off these scores. What happens is that the employees know what the questions are and only focus on those items of the survey. Most of the time. the score is not a true measure of service.

[rukkian]

These surveys are used for marketing, nothing else. They want to show they only get 5's, which is not possible. I did my survey for our jots cruise earlier this year, and filled it out accurately. I will say we never once heard anything about what score should be done.

 

If anybody was pushing for a good score, i would just say, I want to enjoy my vacation and every time I hear about the survey drops from the experience and will hence drop the score. If somebody is working hard and going above and beyond, I have no problem giving good scores, but pushing for a score just out pitty will get them nowhere.

[OrcaPotter]

On DCL's survey there is actually a question where you indicate whether or not you were pressured to give all "excellents" on the survey. I'm sure because the "pitch" had become a serious problem. Frankly, that problem is caused by the company so you would think that instead of just putting that question on the survey, they would change the conditions/requirements that make their crew feel compelled to hard sell themselves.

 

I have been on only 1 RCI cruise prior to my Oasis trip next month so I don't remember how bad "the pitch" was on my 2007 cruise. On Disney, where I'm gold, I've had a wide range of pitches: from a polite request at the end of the trip to a nightly lecture and sob stories. I'm hoping that the former is all we deal with on Oasis.

[ccotting]

I never mind surveys because usually i do them to praise people.

As far as tips go if people pay them they should be distributed as per how the cruise lines tell us who gets what and not used as a carrot to the crew with the threat that our money is witheld if they don't get appropriate scores.

The main point is we should all feel comfortable in reporting accurately what was good or bad without recriminations to the crew but so RC can use them positively to give us all a better cruise.

 

Speaking as an HR type I would guess that the system is set up as what is called 'variable compensation' which is to say a bonus system based on ratings. Staff members are not "docked" if they don't get the highest rating, rather they don't get the highest bonus. Staff are not highly paid and understandably focus on the largest opportunity; they are no doubt deeply frustrated when ratings don't reflect their best efforts.

 

Previous posters are correct in pointing out that it is very hard when things out of the individual control are used by those measuring. Building a compensation system that awards the best is always challenging. I always try to evaluate on the generous side in the staff assessments. The majority of staff work very hard and try their very best.

[Rala]

It's not a card/paper it's an emailed survey. If you don't won't to be bothered with it just hit delete.

 

When the surveys were on paper the scale was 1-5. Now with the electronic (or is it telepathic;p) surveys the scale is 1-10. At least , I think this is the case. Anyone remember? :)

[Blizzard54]

When the surveys were on paper the scale was 1-5. Now with the electronic (or is it telepathic;p) surveys the scale is 1-10. At least , I think this is the case. Anyone remember? :)

Yes, Royal is 1 to 10.

[Cascade1911]

We received the "please give all fives for service and food" spiel on our March sailing of Allure. Thing is, I never saw a survey.....

[sblair]

I'm ONLY going to give honest opinions to surveys. If food/service is a 5, then I'll give it a 5. If it is a 3, then it is going to get a 3. If you hound me to give you a particular score then you're likely going to get a lower score for pressuring me and diminishing the experience.

 

I've seen enough complaints over the years about food quality issues, lying on the surveys does NOTHING to improve things. Only giving an honest answer is going to improve quality. And improving quality is in the RCI staffs interest too, it increases tips, increases repeat cruisers with the line, etc....which all increases the money in their pocket.

[grapau27]

Speaking as an HR type I would guess that the system is set up as what is called 'variable compensation' which is to say a bonus system based on ratings. Staff members are not "docked" if they don't get the highest rating, rather they don't get the highest bonus. Staff are not highly paid and understandably focus on the largest opportunity; they are no doubt deeply frustrated when ratings don't reflect their best efforts.

 

Previous posters are correct in pointing out that it is very hard when things out of the individual control are used by those measuring. Building a compensation system that awards the best is always challenging. I always try to evaluate on the generous side in the staff assessments. The majority of staff work very hard and try their very best.

If cruise lines want to operate a bonus scheme why don't they do what other employers do and use their own money.They tell us x amount is for cabin steward etc from our tips so why not just give them our money like what they tell us the split is ?

[chengkp75]

I try to avoid "tip threads" and "quasi" tip threads, which this seems to be, but just let me weigh in with my experience from the other side of the equation, as a supervisor who sat in many a revenue meeting discussing DSC reductions and service reviews, when they did not apply to my personnel at all.

 

As I've always stated, the DSC is a "carrot and stick" method of team building via peer pressure, where one poor performer (who causes DSC to be reduced) affects the entire team, and at the same time allowing the cruise line to disavow the reduction in wage ("the passengers did it, not us").

 

While reductions in DSC will result in loss of money to the service crew, I have never heard of low ratings on surveys resulting in loss of DSC earnings. It will affect the crew's performance evaluation and hence their retention, advancement, or preference for placement on a given ship. Some ships and lines also give rewards for the most maximum ratings in a month, like a day off in port, or a dinner at a specialty restaurant to the winning crewmember.

 

If you are expecting a completely honest answer from a tipped employee to the person tipping them, I've got a bridge in NYC to sell you.

[grapau27]

I try to avoid "tip threads" and "quasi" tip threads, which this seems to be, but just let me weigh in with my experience from the other side of the equation, as a supervisor who sat in many a revenue meeting discussing DSC reductions and service reviews, when they did not apply to my personnel at all.

 

As I've always stated, the DSC is a "carrot and stick" method of team building via peer pressure, where one poor performer (who causes DSC to be reduced) affects the entire team, and at the same time allowing the cruise line to disavow the reduction in wage ("the passengers did it, not us").

 

While reductions in DSC will result in loss of money to the service crew, I have never heard of low ratings on surveys resulting in loss of DSC earnings. It will affect the crew's performance evaluation and hence their retention, advancement, or preference for placement on a given ship. Some ships and lines also give rewards for the most maximum ratings in a month, like a day off in port, or a dinner at a specialty restaurant to the winning crewmember.

 

If you are expecting a completely honest answer from a tipped employee to the person tipping them, I've got a bridge in NYC to sell you.

Its always good to hear from people who know the truth about these issues.

[Biker19]

if you are expecting a completely honest answer from a tipped employee to the person tipping them, i've got a bridge in nyc to sell you.

:):cool:

[bUU]

If cruise lines want to operate a bonus scheme why don't they do what other employers do and use their own

I've never worked for a company that's granted a bonus from anything other than profit in excess of profitability​ goals, or cost savings in excess of cost reduction goals. So calling this a bonus is wrong.

 

And I never had any trouble remembering that no money is mine until I earn it according to the terms and conditions of my employment, including variable compensation.

 

 

 

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

[grapau27]

I've never worked for a company that's granted a bonus from anything other than profit in excess of profitability​ goals, or cost savings in excess of cost reduction goals. So calling this a bonus is wrong.

 

And I never had any trouble remembering that no money is mine until I earn it according to the terms and conditions of my employment, including variable compensation.

 

 

 

This message may have been entered using voice recognition. Please excuse any typos.

Every company wants to make a profit, but a company shouldn't ask their suppliers or customers (passengers in RC case) to fund a staff bonus scheme on top of paying for the product already.

[bUU]

Every company wants to make a profit, but a company shouldn't ask their suppliers or customers (passengers in RC case) to fund a staff bonus scheme on top of paying for the product already.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but not your own facts, and the fact, objective and documented, is that the cruise fare that passengers pay does not fully cover the compensation for the service they receive from crew members. [Link] If those terms and conditions are not something that a passenger can accept and abide, then as a matter of integrity that passenger would have no other choice than not purchasing the cruise.

 

Beyond that, there are many - many - passengers who prefer a system within which the amount of compensation for service is at least partially within their control. In addition, as has been repeatedly explained here on CC, the current system's reliance on passenger-controlled compensation provides tax advantages. If the full cost of compensation was built into the cruise fare, the cruise fare would be substantially higher than just that additional amount, since it would be necessary to gross up the increment to account for the heavier tax burden that crew members would be saddled with, the way your comments imply you'd have it.

 

Of course, that is the direction things are going. The refusal of too many passengers to behave with integrity with regard to this matter has prompted some cruise lines to make it increasingly more and more difficult to avoid. Some cruise lines automatically add the gratuities to the bill and you have to wait on what is often a very long line to try to get the charge removed. There is talk of requiring specific details of the grievance to justify removal of the automatic gratuities... that'll surely be the next step. It apparently wouldn't violate the tax provisions to require a provable cause.

 

The only beneficiaries of the system as your comments imply you'd have it is higher fares to benefit tax authorities in crew member home countries. And perhaps that's fair, but do you realize that that is the only beneficiary of the end-game your approach to this matter benefits?

[chengkp75]

I cannot speak for all nationalities where cruise ship crews come from, but a large percentage of them are from the Phillippines, and their law clearly states that any compensation received from an employer, whether titled as wages, salary, or gratuity, is taxable as income. Payments received directly from a customer are not considered to be income.

 

There is, in fact, very little tax consideration for the crew between wages and DSC compensation. As I've stated, it is a device by the cruise lines for incentivizing good service performance.

 

There is somewhat of a financial benefit to the crew, though this applies to those crew who do not receive any DSC compensation, like the deck and engine departments. The portion of the crew's wages that are considered "base wage" (the small fixed wage of service staff, and the base 40 hour/week wage of non-service staff) is required to be sent home to the crewmembers' country, where the crewing agency that provided the employment for the crewmember takes a cut before distributing it to the crew's family. The DSC portion of the wage, for service staff, and the overtime wage for non-service crew, are paid to the crew onboard, and the crew use this for their onboard and in port expenses, and then cash it out when their contract is over. So, while there is a benefit to having the majority of the compensation be in the form of DSC, if the DSC did not exist, then the service staff would be paid wages and overtime like the remainder of the crew, and the overtime portion would be exempt from the crewing agency's garnishment.