Would room stewards appreciate privacy cards?

We try to make our cabin steward's job easy by letting him or her know what we don't need. For instance, on our cruise last month we let her know that we did not need ice in the ice bucket.

Oh, that's the American way [emoji6]. Every job I've ever worked required me to be there certain hours, regardless of whether or not any work needed done. At my job we are considered hourly even though we are paid like we are salaried. My standard base pay is considered on a 40 hour work week. I have to be there a minimum of 40 hours. If I work more I get paid more on an hourly basis. But to work less I have to use vacation days. Every hour has to be accounted for. So yes, if I get to a point when there is no work left to be done and no reason to anticipate anything new popping up; I can sit around doing nothing until my shift ends or I have to use vacation time to leave early. Usually people just choose to sit around and do nothing and save their vacation time.

Being salaried over here is based on hours as well, I think the basics are more or less the same. Except for getting paid for being there, working or not. That system is only used for civil servants :evilsmile:

Putting out the privacy card does not give them more time off, it may give them less.

They may have a certain time (I talked with our steward last week) that they have to wait around to see if the privacy card is still out. I am not sure if they have to notify someone to let them know the room was not done due to the privacy card.

Better to not be so messy, and have them be able to do their job quickly and get DONE.

Being salaried over here is based on hours as well, I think the basics are more or less the same. Except for getting paid for being there, working or not. That system is only used for civil servants :evilsmile:

So, just out of curiosity then. Say you have 2 employees with the same job. One is better with computers and can get some tasks performed more quickly than the other. They get the same workload. One can finish it in 7 hours and one can finish it in 8. What happens to the last hour for the first one? Are they given additional duties, so essentially penalized for being efficient; or allowed to leave early?

That's the situation I have at work often. A majority of my peers lack typing skills and their computer skills are basic. On average I can finish a task twice as fast just due to having computer skills. But we both have to be there the same number of hours. So I tend to get a combination of more tasks and more time with nothing to do.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

So, just out of curiosity then. Say you have 2 employees with the same job. One is better with computers and can get some tasks performed more quickly than the other. They get the same workload. One can finish it in 7 hours and one can finish it in 8. What happens to the last hour for the first one? Are they given additional duties, so essentially penalized for being efficient; or allowed to leave early?

 

That's the situation I have at work often. A majority of my peers lack typing skills and their computer skills are basic. On average I can finish a task twice as fast just due to having computer skills. But we both have to be there the same number of hours. So I tend to get a combination of more tasks and more time with nothing to do.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

The more efficient worker will either get additional tasks, or just sits and does nothing. But, typically, the "better" worker will also be the one in line for more promotions/bonuses.

You're being paid to be there. If you leave early, you don't get paid for the time you're not there.

The more efficient worker will either get additional tasks, or just sits and does nothing. But, typically, the "better" worker will also be the one in line for more promotions/bonuses.

 

You're being paid to be there. If you leave early, you don't get paid for the time you're not there.

Right, that's my point. Though, I'm union so while we gain in overall pay in benefits, we lose merit based incentives. So the better worker gets nothing except more time to do nothing.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

So, just out of curiosity then. Say you have 2 employees with the same job. One is better with computers and can get some tasks performed more quickly than the other. They get the same workload. One can finish it in 7 hours and one can finish it in 8. What happens to the last hour for the first one? Are they given additional duties, so essentially penalized for being efficient; or allowed to leave early?

 

That's the situation I have at work often. A majority of my peers lack typing skills and their computer skills are basic. On average I can finish a task twice as fast just due to having computer skills. But we both have to be there the same number of hours. So I tend to get a combination of more tasks and more time with nothing to do.

The good ones (most of them are programmers btw) are indeed penalized for being efficient, as we have an endless list of more things to do. In programming though, finishing a task fast may mean much more work a year later, so it's not really comparable to for instance cleaning cabins. The reward comes as higher salaries.

I'm not speaking for all employers, but I'm definitely more interested in production than having people work for me, even when they bide their time checking Facebook.

The good ones (most of them are programmers btw) are indeed penalized for being efficient, as we have an endless list of more things to do. In programming though, finishing a task fast may mean much more work a year later, so it's not really comparable to for instance cleaning cabins. The reward comes as higher salaries.

 

 

 

I'm not speaking for all employers, but I'm definitely more interested in production than having people work for me, even when they bide their time checking Facebook.

Well, it's still the same idea though - finishing tasks faster doesn't lead to more time off or a 'break', just being assigned additional duties. So the idea that if your steward doesn't clean your room just translates to him re-stocking towels or vacuuming the common areas rather than time off isn't strange. I don't know that that's what happens but if they r due to work an 8 hour shift I doubt not cleaning 1 room changes that.

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

The other unique aspect of work on a ship is that the workplace is also the employee's home, so there would be more opportunity for abuse of the system if crew were allowed to wander away from their work stations whenever their assigned duties were done.

If we want to talk about work inequities, or getting paid for doing nothing, can I please be compensated for the 40,000 cigarette breaks I didn't take during my working years?

Seems to me that stewards and other similar type professions are "on duty" during their assigned working hours, whether they are actually doing anything, efficient or not.

Sent from my B3-A30 using Forums mobile app

Though, I'm union

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

You can stop there, as that is the root of your problem.

You can stop there, as that is the root of your problem.

A. What problem?

B. So far everyone has agreed that they can't leave their workplace early simply because their work is complete - union or not

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

A. What problem?

 

B. So far everyone has agreed that they can't leave their workplace early simply because their work is complete - union or not

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Sorry, to be different but I could and did leave early. If the stuff at the office was done I left as long as the markets were closed. If not I stayed until it got done or I took it home with me and did it there. But it would be tough on a cruise ship.

After far too long in the hotel industry, I can assure you that, for every guest who chooses to have no or very limited housekeeping service, there are two guests who either trash their rooms or are very high-maintenance. This is an everyday ocurance and housekeeping supervisors count on at least one or two "DNDs".

I mean....I guess they would appreciate it. At my job if if people don't want my services I....guess that's "better"? Obviously I don't mind it if they do want something I'm expected to provide, but the less work I have to do the better?

Sounds like I.T.

-source: I am in I.T.

I don't care about the towel animals and once a day cleaning is all I need. I will communicate this to the steward on future cruises.

BTW< some hotels are now offering bonus frequent stayer points for NOT having your room cleaned every day.

One chain I stay at offers 250 points per day for opting to not be cleaned, with a 3 day maximum stretch at a time.

BTW< some hotels are now offering bonus frequent stayer points for NOT having your room cleaned every day.

 

One chain I stay at offers 250 points per day for opting to not be cleaned, with a 3 day maximum stretch at a time.

Yes, and we've happily accepted those points. But I'm guessing their housekeeping staff aren't getting paid time off for the rooms they don't have to clean that day. (Which seems to be what the OP was suggesting for the cabin stewards) More than likely, the hotels will simply reduce the number of housekeepers on staff.

If I find out (I ask) that my steward is free to go off ship after the cabins are finished, I definitely tell him/her not to do my room, then I put the privacy card on the door.

I hope that passengers who do this aren't using it as a chance to reduce the gratuity.

Yes, and we've happily accepted those points. But I'm guessing their housekeeping staff aren't getting paid time off for the rooms they don't have to clean that day. (Which seems to be what the OP was suggesting for the cabin stewards) More than likely, the hotels will simply reduce the number of housekeepers on staff.

:eek: Really? Companies would reduce staff and not just let them have extra time off?

So all those ATM's didn't give all those bank tellers extra time off?

And those automated check outs didn't give all those grocery check out workers extra time off? :eek::eek:

Cruisers, if you really love the ship staff, let them do their jobs.

:eek: Really? Companies would reduce staff and not just let them have extra time off?

 

So all those ATM's didn't give all those bank tellers extra time off?

And those automated check outs didn't give all those grocery check out workers extra time off? :eek::eek:

 

Cruisers, if you really love the ship staff, let them do their jobs.

This. And the corollary is, don't screw them by playing games with grats. Leave the auto-grats on and use your own discretion for extras.

Last cruise we had two cabins side by side. The grandkids were a disaster (6, 8, 9 and 11) with their crafts all over the room. So, one morning we went to breakfast and put out the "make room up now" on our cabin but left "do not disturb" on the kids. He asked me why and I said I hadn't had time to pick up the room before he comes in. He said he would rather do the rooms together and get them done and he didn't consider the kids to be as bad as some adults. So he cleaned both at once.

I've heard that if they go too many days without cleaning that the cleaning becomes even more work. Think about it. If you clean your bathroom every day, even if it is just a wipe down, then when it is time to do the heavy duty stuff it goes much faster. They have a procedure. Let them do it.

How would you like it if they came to your job and said, naw, just do half of it and we'll call it a day. Don't worry about a receipt or writing up the information, go take a break instead. How do you think that will fly at your job?

Well, it's still the same idea though - finishing tasks faster doesn't lead to more time off or a 'break', just being assigned additional duties. So the idea that if your steward doesn't clean your room just translates to him re-stocking towels or vacuuming the common areas rather than time off isn't strange. I don't know that that's what happens but if they r due to work an 8 hour shift I doubt not cleaning 1 room changes that.

A very late response, sorry for that. No it doesn't work like that. My best programmers can say "I need to move my dad, so I'm not here the next week". We have a very precise system for holiday hours, extra hours, whatever, but it wouldn't even be registered.

In the end, it's my wallet that would pay for people pretending to work, or not even pretending but openly wait till the bell rings. That would be something you might read about in history books about the USSR but I'm amazed it does seem to work that way in the US. IMHO, you need a new Henry Ford, to explain that people who just wait while producing nothing are more productive the next day when they're allowed to go home and go fishing with their kids. Or, on a ship, to unwind and get some sleep or have a drink with friends.

IMHO, what the Chief is saying, "so they will just tend to hang out in the crew stairwells by the linen lockers and chat" is the very worst way to treat your employees.

Yes, and we've happily accepted those points. But I'm guessing their housekeeping staff aren't getting paid time off for the rooms they don't have to clean that day. (Which seems to be what the OP was suggesting for the cabin stewards) More than likely, the hotels will simply reduce the number of housekeepers on staff.

Housekeeping tips also are reduced if guests cut the amount of attention they request, If tips drop sharply, hourly rate of pay will have to increase?

Look at it this way. Suppose everyone on the ship decided to be kind to the stewards and have a one day per week no cleaning day. This means that the stewards would have 14% less work to do. You can be certain that the cruise lines would look at these numbers and decide that they could get rid of 14% of the stewards. Do you want to have it on your conscience that 14% of the stewards lost their jobs because of you?

DON