Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Reducing tip percentage.

stubbywillow

By stubbywillow,
in Ask a Cruise Question

Recommended Posts

PopeSailin

PopeSailin

Posted
Posted

I totally agree with tipping and every aspect of it, but something I never see anyone ever mentioning is tipping the casino staff.

 

I currently work in a casino and I am one who rely on my tips to survive. I even considered going to work for Carnival in their casinos a few years ago. When I was thinking of doing this and doing my research I learned that casino dealers make $20.00 a DAY! Not a lot of money for sure. From what I learned about their tips, it is comparable to a land based casino ONLY because you dont have to worry about room and board. So the tips are not THAT great either.

 

This is just something I thought I would throw out there cause I never see it get mentioned. Im not saying that EVERY dealer deserves to get tipped either ( god knows I have seen some that I would never tip and even work with some too), but if you have a dealer that is friendly and keeping the game fun for you and others then yeah they deserve it. Oh yeah, dealers cant controll who wins and who loses, so their tip shouldnt be based off winnings. I have seen winners leave broke because they didnt want to stop playing while they were up. Its not the dealers fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
chrisdobb

chrisdobb

Posted
Posted

I have not once complained at having to pay more for my cruise than Americans, I am happy tp pay the price published by the cruise company, the fact I live this side of the Atlantic is my look out (or otherwise!) that point is not relevant. Please let the companies set the price that is accurate and enable then to make their profits, their business, and do not expect me to pay twice just because that is the way it has always been.

To the generous people who advise my to stay at home - thank you for your wellcoming attitude!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
staygulf

staygulf

Posted
Posted
Your taxes and extra insurances don't pay the tips. So you're NOT paying again. You're paying for entirely different things. Blame your government...don't blame the crew.

 

It's got nothing to do with taxes or insurances. I have an annual multi-trip insurance which covers me worldwide which is not part of the cruise cost. It is a simple fact that the price we are quoted for a cruise by a cruiseline is more than the price you are quoted. Taxes do not come into it. The cruiseline is making additional profit and this should be used to supplement their wage costs if that is what they want to do with it. I will carry on tipping for good service as I deem appropriate and not tipping if I feel that I have not received anything outstanding. For example, a stateroom attendant who does no more than his official duties, even though he may be attending to the room four or five times a day, is being paid to do that at whatever salary he has agreed to work for. One who goes the extra mile by appearing out of nowhere to open the door for me each time I return to the room and by leaving a daily basket of fresh fruit merely because my wife happened to once ask for some fruit, as happened on a recent cruise, is worthy of a gratuity. Either way I am not going to pay TWICE for the same service as has been said so many times on this thread. And YES IT IS PAYING TWICE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beachchick

beachchick

Posted
Posted
It is without doubt prices for cruises in America are much cheaper to the Americans, I can see plenty of cruises advertised (we are bombarded with adverts from American cruise companies all the time) on the web yet I cannot take advantage of your prices, the companies are not allowed to do business with me directly, I am therefore forced to use earopean Travel Agent and have to pay their prices, I have no complaint about this but as has been said it is a very relevant fact.

 

Certainly it is relevant, but let's consider that you probably don't have much need to buy the sometimes pricy travel insurance that we in the US do. I know that EU consumer protection laws (probably not using the right wording there) require travel providers to pay for all kinds of things (e.g., refunds, airfares, hotel, food, other travel expenses) when something happens, even when it is clearly not the fault of the travel provider and even when, for example, the cruise went off as planned.

 

smeyer418's example is a good one because it's still fairly fresh in our minds. The volcano in Iceland disrupted all kinds of travel. Cruise lines (as well as other travel companies) were required by EU law to pay for hotels, travel expenses, increased airfare/airfare changes, and so forth--even though this can only be considered under the "Act of God" scenario. This cost the cruise lines and other travel companies a pretty hefty sum. And this is only one example. Where the heck do you think the extra money (a "cushion" of funds to draw from or to pay increased liability insurance) should come from? Higher fares for all of us, even we who would not have had one penny (or one currency of your choice) covered by the cruise line? That would be supremely unfair.

 

One story I remember from the volcano was a European couple (sorry, I can't think of which country, perhaps France) who had their flights to Spain canceled. So they thought they might take the train, but couldn't find a schedule they could agree on. Then they figured they'd drive from home, but her car was in the shop and he opted to lend his car to a friend. And they said it was too much trouble to see about renting a car because so many people were doing that. Ultimately, they decided it was too much trouble and that they couldn't be bothered to get to the port, nevermind that there were plenty of options for them and the cruise itself was completely unaffected by the volcano. The ship departed on time and cruised the complete itinerary. But even though this couple refused to make any effort and could have gotten to the port, the travel providers were required to refund them all costs because of their original flights being canceled due to the volcanic ash. As I recall, the response of those in the EU was "Well, of course they should get their money back; We have laws about that" and the attitude of we across the pond was "Wow, they decided they didn't want to make any effort to even get there and they could have, but they get their money back anyway?"

 

I am certainly happy that EU citizens (and others) have that kind of consumer protection. I suppose it would be nice if we did too, but that would mean higher fares. I rather prefer that our fares are lower and that we have the choice to purchase insurance to cover such events. We always do and we have had to file claims. It's been money well spent for us, but others don't think it's a good investment.

 

First aside: I also recall that several of the cruise lines and some airlines, etc. tried to weasel out of their EU obligations. That was flat wrong. The companies knew the deal going in, they agreed to abide by EU laws, and they charged higher fares to EU residents to cover that. They should have paid all verified claims and not whined about it even a tiny bit.

 

Second aside: It really, really irks me when someone in the US (or any country with similar regulations) doesn't bother to buy travel insurance and then assumes the cruise line or other provider should refund them or pay for additional expenses that are unrelated to anything that the company has done or had control over. It's the "We didn't buy insurance and need to cancel the day before our cruise because my sister-in-law is in the hospital. Why won't the cruise line give us our money back? How can we get them to break their cancellation policies?" That's like when someone who hasn't bothered to buy home insurance has their home destroyed in a fire and expects "the government"--i.e., the rest of us taxpayers--to pay up so they can rebuild and buy new stuff. IMO, if they don't buy insurance, they have no right to complain. Okay, off soapbox about that.

 

In any case, the higher fares you pay in the EU and other countries with comprehensive consumer protection laws are partly there to cover the additional costs in the event of things like the Iceland volcano. You're not paying higher fares to pay the crew a higher wage. If you are angry about paying more because of your own laws, then you should take it up with your lawmakers. What it sounds like is that some of you want all your country's consumer protections, which mean that you needn't worry if anything happens--you'll be covered, and you want to pay the lower fares we enjoy because of our less comprehensive travel regulations. IMO, you shouldn't expect to have it both ways. OTOH, it's kind of the nature of being human to want that.

 

As far as how the crew gets paid, I would actually prefer that the cruise lines include the current DSC/tip amounts in the fare and pay the crew accordingly. Then we could pay extra if we feel we've had exceptional service. I disagree with those who say that paying the crew more outright would be a disincentive for them to work hard. We've taken two cruises on US-based cruise lines, which are required to pay according to US labor laws, and did not find that service suffered. It differed primarily in the way the crew related to passengers. US workers generally feel themselves the equals of the passengers, so they don't tend to have the "subservient" attitude and behaviors that you find on many/most international crews. The US crews were hardworking, pleasant, and generally efficient, but they were more "casual" (not rude or anything like that) in their interactions with passengers.

 

Bottom line, if the business/compensation structure and the service charge/gratuities are not acceptable to you, then don't book the cruise.

 

beachchick

Link to comment
Share on other sites
staygulf

staygulf

Posted
Posted
Certainly it is relevant, but let's consider that you probably don't have much need to buy the sometimes pricy travel insurance that we in the US do. I know that EU consumer protection laws (probably not using the right wording there) require travel providers to pay for all kinds of things (e.g., refunds, airfares, hotel, food, other travel expenses) when something happens, even when it is clearly not the fault of the travel provider and even when, for example, the cruise went off as planned.

 

smeyer418's example is a good one because it's still fairly fresh in our minds. The volcano in Iceland disrupted all kinds of travel. Cruise lines (as well as other travel companies) were required by EU law to pay for hotels, travel expenses, increased airfare/airfare changes, and so forth--even though this can only be considered under the "Act of God" scenario. This cost the cruise lines and other travel companies a pretty hefty sum. And this is only one example. Where the heck do you think the extra money (a "cushion" of funds to draw from or to pay increased liability insurance) should come from? Higher fares for all of us, even we who would not have had one penny (or one currency of your choice) covered by the cruise line? That would be supremely unfair.

 

One story I remember from the volcano was a European couple (sorry, I can't think of which country, perhaps France) who had their flights to Spain canceled. So they thought they might take the train, but couldn't find a schedule they could agree on. Then they figured they'd drive from home, but her car was in the shop and he opted to lend his car to a friend. And they said it was too much trouble to see about renting a car because so many people were doing that. Ultimately, they decided it was too much trouble and that they couldn't be bothered to get to the port, nevermind that there were plenty of options for them and the cruise itself was completely unaffected by the volcano. The ship departed on time and cruised the complete itinerary. But even though this couple refused to make any effort and could have gotten to the port, the travel providers were required to refund them all costs because of their original flights being canceled due to the volcanic ash. As I recall, the response of those in the EU was "Well, of course they should get their money back; We have laws about that" and the attitude of we across the pond was "Wow, they decided they didn't want to make any effort to even get there and they could have, but they get their money back anyway?"

 

I am certainly happy that EU citizens (and others) have that kind of consumer protection. I suppose it would be nice if we did too, but that would mean higher fares. I rather prefer that our fares are lower and that we have the choice to purchase insurance to cover such events. We always do and we have had to file claims. It's been money well spent for us, but others don't think it's a good investment.

 

First aside: I also recall that several of the cruise lines and some airlines, etc. tried to weasel out of their EU obligations. That was flat wrong. The companies knew the deal going in, they agreed to abide by EU laws, and they charged higher fares to EU residents to cover that. They should have paid all verified claims and not whined about it even a tiny bit.

 

Second aside: It really, really irks me when someone in the US (or any country with similar regulations) doesn't bother to buy travel insurance and then assumes the cruise line or other provider should refund them or pay for additional expenses that are unrelated to anything that the company has done or had control over. It's the "We didn't buy insurance and need to cancel the day before our cruise because my sister-in-law is in the hospital. Why won't the cruise line give us our money back? How can we get them to break their cancellation policies?" That's like when someone who hasn't bothered to buy home insurance has their home destroyed in a fire and expects "the government"--i.e., the rest of us taxpayers--to pay up so they can rebuild and buy new stuff. IMO, if they don't buy insurance, they have no right to complain. Okay, off soapbox about that.

 

In any case, the higher fares you pay in the EU and other countries with comprehensive consumer protection laws are partly there to cover the additional costs in the event of things like the Iceland volcano. You're not paying higher fares to pay the crew a higher wage. If you are angry about paying more because of your own laws, then you should take it up with your lawmakers. What it sounds like is that some of you want all your country's consumer protections, which mean that you needn't worry if anything happens--you'll be covered, and you want to pay the lower fares we enjoy because of our less comprehensive travel regulations. IMO, you shouldn't expect to have it both ways. OTOH, it's kind of the nature of being human to want that.

 

As far as how the crew gets paid, I would actually prefer that the cruise lines include the current DSC/tip amounts in the fare and pay the crew accordingly. Then we could pay extra if we feel we've had exceptional service. I disagree with those who say that paying the crew more outright would be a disincentive for them to work hard. We've taken two cruises on US-based cruise lines, which are required to pay according to US labor laws, and did not find that service suffered. It differed primarily in the way the crew related to passengers. US workers generally feel themselves the equals of the passengers, so they don't tend to have the "subservient" attitude and behaviors that you find on many/most international crews. The US crews were hardworking, pleasant, and generally efficient, but they were more "casual" (not rude or anything like that) in their interactions with passengers.

 

Bottom line, if the business/compensation structure and the service charge/gratuities are not acceptable to you, then don't book the cruise.

 

beachchick

 

You are so wrong. The additional price we pay to the cruise line has nothing to do with our sonsumer protection laws. That comes out of our insurance which is an additional cost on top of the already additional price. The higher price reflects the non-tipping culture, so we are already paying for the tips in the cruise price.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Texas Tillie

Texas Tillie

Posted
Posted
staygulf,

Up until your last post, IMO, you have just been argumentative but you are now treading on shaky ground.

 

Especially since his reading comprehension is zilch! Smeyer418 didn't cheat anyone - but rather insisted that they reimburse the travel agent for the mistake. :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
staygulf

staygulf

Posted
Posted
Especially since his reading comprehension is zilch! Smeyer418 didn't cheat anyone - but rather insisted that they reimburse the travel agent for the mistake. :eek:

 

I read it exactly right, I wasn't referring to the honesty which I applaud, but to the fact that the TA had effectively paid the gratuity, so why chastise those that feel they are paying it twice ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
staygulf

staygulf

Posted
Posted
staygulf,

Up until your last post, IMO, you have just been argumentative but you are now treading on shaky ground.

 

Er, hang on a sec. How is putting my point of view accross in a thread of equally emotive posts in any way argumentative ? And why shaky ground ? Is it alright for smeyer418 to refer to themselves as charter members of CHEAPO and refer to us (those whose tips are included in the cruise price) as "cheap and niggardly" ? :confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
micro yaya

micro yaya

Posted
Posted

i recently saw a program on fox about travel. and the report went on to say that the crew members were paid $250.00 per week. now if this is true then they are well compensated for the job they do. people in the u.s. are out of work, they are loosing their homes. do you think they would like to make 250 a week. seems to me that tips are for jobs well done. have you ever eaten breakfast on the final day of a cruise, and seen how you are treated. tips paid ,off you go, and on to the next bunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mbisson

mbisson

Posted
Posted
i recently saw a program on fox about travel. and the report went on to say that the crew members were paid $250.00 per week. now if this is true then they are well compensated for the job they do. people in the u.s. are out of work, they are loosing their homes. do you think they would like to make 250 a week. seems to me that tips are for jobs well done. have you ever eaten breakfast on the final day of a cruise, and seen how you are treated. tips paid ,off you go, and on to the next bunch.

 

I couldn't agree more! 16 hr days, 7 days a week, yep $250 should about cover it

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bplazo

bplazo

Posted
Posted
You are so wrong. The additional price we pay to the cruise line has nothing to do with our sonsumer protection laws. That comes out of our insurance which is an additional cost on top of the already additional price. The higher price reflects the non-tipping culture, so we are already paying for the tips in the cruise price.

 

I have been reading Beachchicks posts for alot of years and I have never known her to be wrong :).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
smeyer418

smeyer418

Posted
Posted
i recently saw a program on fox about travel. and the report went on to say that the crew members were paid $250.00 per week. now if this is true then they are well compensated for the job they do. people in the u.s. are out of work, they are loosing their homes. do you think they would like to make 250 a week. seems to me that tips are for jobs well done. have you ever eaten breakfast on the final day of a cruise, and seen how you are treated. tips paid ,off you go, and on to the next bunch.

 

Fox news is to news as military music is to music(from Rocky and Bullwinkle)...you believe what you hear on the news(any news)? I worked for UPI many years ago.

 

even if that is what they say, it didn't say whether that included tips or not. Its just not true BUT it MAY be true on some cruise lines especially those with a mandatory service charge and where its included in the fare.

 

and BTW for those who stated I cheated the TA. This TA like many offers OBC instead of lowering the price on Celebrity(which doesn't allow discounting but allows amenities(which OBC up to a certian percentage is allowed), so the agreement when I purchase the cruise through them was an OBC of a certain dollar amount. When I was required to prepay the gratuities, I ask if they would just pay it for me now instead of the OBC. they agreed. When I got on board as I said I noticed that both the gratuities and full original OBC had been credited. I did get something I wasn't entitled to- that is both the full OBC and the gratuities. I called and told the TA that when I got back and returned the overage. I don't see how that makes ME cheap. and there are a lot of Cheapos out there, rarely can they really not afford to tip. In fact most people who refuse to do so, it has nothing to do with their ability to pay but their attitude. Given what those who complained about my post said, I submit that the term does apply....to some of you....but niggardly is a much better word worth at least 70 points and I leave my signature on this time as most people under stand that Cheapos is a standing joke...(like Jack Benny being a cheapo)-except those for whom the joke lands too close to home.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: Set Sail Beyond the Ordinary with Oceania Cruises
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: The Widest View in the Whole Wide World
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Cruise Critic News & Features
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...