How does NCL "nickel and dime" you to death?

[maywell]

Come on. Tell me you don't seriously believe the room service charge is about cleanliness rather than a money grab. If you're that gullible, I've got a bridge to sell you.

 

Dunno - I'm not stupid enough to pay $7.95 each time and everyday for room service. Especially when I'm on a certain class of ship that has free food and drinks for solo travelers in studio rooms in the lounge area. Then there's the suites and Haven guests that get $7.95 room service fee waived for being in those rooms. Plus, there's so much seating in so many different places onboard, there's honestly no point in getting room service unless your self-quaranting yourself from illness. *Shrug*

 

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

Edited October 12, 2015 by maywell

[sparks1093]

NCL didn't start the room service fee. RCI did. A few years ago, RCI started charging $3.95 for room service between midnight and 5 am. Recently, Celebrity followed suite with their $4.95 late night charge. But not to be outdone with a nickel and dime charge, NCL jumped in and took it to the extreme in typical NCL fashion with the 24/7 $7.95 charge.

 

Prior to the $7.95 charge NCL also had a charge for late night room service orders. I believe these charges were intended to cut down on the number of people that called an order in and then fell asleep.

[sparks1093]

Dunno - I'm not stupid enough to pay $7.95 each time and everyday for room service. Especially when I'm on a certain class of ship that has free food and drinks for solo travelers in studio rooms in the lounge area. Then there's the suites and Haven guests that get $7.95 room service fee waived for being in those rooms. Plus, there's so much seating in so many different places onboard, there's honestly no point in getting room service unless your self-quaranting yourself from illness. *Shrug*

 

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

 

That's a very good point- the people that are least affected by the nickel and diming (solos in studios and those in suites) seem to be more accepting of the practice. The nickel and diming wouldn't affect me too much because the charges are easily avoided, but the last time that I a priced a cruise NCL was $800 more than CCL and I could not justify to myself spending that much more.

Edited October 12, 2015 by sparks1093

[Aquahound]

Prior to the $7.95 charge NCL also had a charge for late night room service orders. I believe these charges were intended to cut down on the number of people that called an order in and then fell asleep.

 

That reason actually makes a little more sense.

[CPT Trips]

If bashing a company gets them to listen to your complaint and change back or to something more agreeable then bash on! Many companies set pricing to see if they can make the base price attractive and then pile on these added fees and charges as required to subsidize their low wage practices. You think you are giving a tip when you are actually supplying the pay the company don't give to make it a living wage. I like giving a tip for someone doing a good job or better, not to pay a portion of what the company wants to save for profits.

 

The employee compensation practices you mention here are industry wide, except perhaps on the upscale lines that charge far more than the lines that compete with NCL.

[rgruenhaus]

The employee compensation practices you mention here are industry wide, except perhaps on the upscale lines that charge far more than the lines that compete with NCL.

 

And they would do worse if they got no pushback.

[SantaFeFan]

..... You think you are giving a tip when you are actually supplying the pay the company don't give to make it a living wage. I like giving a tip for someone doing a good job or better, not to pay a portion of what the company wants to save for profits.

 

Again someone trots that old chestnut "living wages". What exactly are "living wages"? What they are where you live? What they are in a large city like New York or London? What they are in the city the corporate headquarters are in? What they are where the employee is from?

 

A lot of people use this term but never define what it is. I would argue that this term is much too vague to be of use. Instead, I would argue to use the term "acceptable wage". After all, the employees agree to the wages they earn, and come back again and again to receive them. I have met staff who have been doing this kind of work for a decade or longer. They must find it completely satisfactory in order to leave their families for months at a time.

 

Besides, there are severe tax advantages to the employees for agreeing to lower wages and relying on tips for the balance of their income. In most countries they come from, wages are taxed by their home government, and employment agency fees take a percentage from their wages. Tips are not taxed or agency fees collected on tip income as it is variable income and difficult to track. This system has been described in good detail by other posters on these boards who work in management positions in the cruise industry.

 

The system as it now stands is better for the employee because they are taxed on a much smaller portion of their total income. And after all, it is the employee we are concerned about here, isn't it? Or is it about saving money for ourselves by giving them as little as possible?

 

And call me gullible or overly trusting, but I have zero reason for believing that the company keeps some of the tips for "profit". I guess I am not as suspicious a person as you are.

Edited October 12, 2015 by SantaFeFan

[sparks1093]

Again someone trots that old chestnut "living wages". What exactly are "living wages"? What they are where you live? What they are in a large city like New York or London? What they are in the city the corporate headquarters are in? What they are where the employee is from?

 

A lot of people use this term but never define what it is. I would argue that this term is much too vague to be of use. Instead, I would argue to use the term "acceptable wage". After all, the employees agree to the wages they earn, and come back again and again to receive them. I have met staff who have been doing this kind of work for a decade or longer. They must find it completely satisfactory in order to leave their families for months at a time.

 

Besides, there are severe tax advantages to the employees for agreeing to lower wages and relying on tips for the balance of their income. In most countries they come from, wages are taxed by their home government, and employment agency fees take a percentage from their wages. Tips are not taxed or agency fees collected on tip income as it is variable income and difficult to track. This system has been described in good detail by other posters on these boards who work in management positions in the cruise industry.

 

The system as it now stands is better for the employee because they are taxed on a much smaller portion of their total income. And after all, it is the employee we are concerned about here, isn't it? Or is it about saving money for ourselves by giving them as little as possible?

 

And call me gullible or overly trusting, but I have zero reason for believing that the company keeps some of the tips for "profit". I guess I am not as suspicious a person as you are.

 

As another poster pointed out on another thread if any of it were kept for the company's profit then the passengers would not have the ability to adjust it or remove it.

[NLH Arizona]

Especially if a meal comes from a complimentary onboard food source. Let us have that freestyle and choose to tip when the comp meal arrives. NCL thinks freestyle means free to pay for what you choose to. You have a choice to not enjoy the cruise with what others can afford to pay for.

Actually, the meaning, when NCL came up with the term "Freestyle", was that you were free to eat where you want, you were free to eat when you want and were free to eat with who you want and started when they got rid of the fixed dining on their ships. Over the years it extended to activities, etc., but it has never had anything to do with something being "free" or anything to do with what you pay for.

[Karysa]

If the change had been made in an information vacuum maybe that would explain it, but this was instituted very shortly after Del Rio asked if he could get $4 or $5 more per day per passenger so it is more reasonable to conclude that this was designed to increase revenue (not that there is anything inherently wrong with that, but let's call it what it is).

 

I personally will draw the line here. They won't be getting $8 for bringing me a snack. I will walk up to what's open and get it for myself.i just don't see this as a money maker except for being able to cut staff in the room service kitchen/delivery services areas.

[NLH Arizona]

You think you are giving a tip when you are actually supplying the pay the company don't give to make it a living wage. I like giving a tip for someone doing a good job or better, not to pay a portion of what the company wants to save for profits.

You do realize that just about ever mass market cruise line has this very same system. The crew, reportedly, makes anywhere between $50 and $100 a month and the rest of their income comes from DSC or automatic gratuities.

[NLH Arizona]

I personally will draw the line here. They won't be getting $8 for bringing me a snack. I will walk up to what's open and get it for myself.i just don't see this as a money maker except for being able to cut staff in the room service kitchen/delivery services areas.

I'm with you, I would never pay $8 for room service (haven't used room service in any of my 35+ cruises) nor do I use room service when I stay in hotels when there is a service charge attached to it.

[Aquahound]

I personally will draw the line here. They won't be getting $8 for bringing me a snack. I will walk up to what's open and get it for myself.i just don't see this as a money maker except for being able to cut staff in the room service kitchen/delivery services areas.

 

One of my favorite activities on a cruise, especially on sea days, is rolling out of bed, eating a hot breakfast and drinking a pot of coffee in the privacy of my balcony. It's peaceful, relaxing and frankly, sometimes I'm just not ready to join the cattle herd yet.

 

Oh well, I guess if I were to look at it glass-half-full, hot breakfast wasn't even available on their room service menu before this charge. :rolleyes:

Edited October 12, 2015 by Aquahound

[sparks1093]

I personally will draw the line here. They won't be getting $8 for bringing me a snack. I will walk up to what's open and get it for myself.i just don't see this as a money maker except for being able to cut staff in the room service kitchen/delivery services areas.

 

I don't think that any of the changes by themselves would be a big revenue producer, but if they are all added up then you are probably looking at a significant revenue source. I am sure Del Rio et all is counting on the "captive audience", overall, to continue to order room service at near the same level as before the addition of the fee. I doubt that room service was so popular that they needed to add additional staff to deal with the orders.

[rgruenhaus]

Again someone trots that old chestnut "living wages". What exactly are "living wages"? What they are where you live? What they are in a large city like New York or London? What they are in the city the corporate headquarters are in? What they are where the employee is from?

 

A lot of people use this term but never define what it is. I would argue that this term is much too vague to be of use. Instead, I would argue to use the term "acceptable wage". After all, the employees agree to the wages they earn, and come back again and again to receive them. I have met staff who have been doing this kind of work for a decade or longer. They must find it completely satisfactory in order to leave their families for months at a time.

 

Besides, there are severe tax advantages to the employees for agreeing to lower wages and relying on tips for the balance of their income. In most countries they come from, wages are taxed by their home government, and employment agency fees take a percentage from their wages. Tips are not taxed or agency fees collected on tip income as it is variable income and difficult to track. This system has been described in good detail by other posters on these boards who work in management positions in the cruise industry.

 

The system as it now stands is better for the employee because they are taxed on a much smaller portion of their total income. And after all, it is the employee we are concerned about here, isn't it? Or is it about saving money for ourselves by giving them as little as possible?

 

And call me gullible or overly trusting, but I have zero reason for believing that the company keeps some of the tips for "profit". I guess I am not as suspicious a person as you are.

 

Here's an example of why pushback can work.

 

 

VAUXHALL — Attention shoppers: If you are unhappy with how you are treated at a local supermarket, take your story to Facebook.

 

That's the lesson from 70-year-old Maplewood woman Marge Dooley, whose story apparently generated so much social media chatter that it solicited an apology from her local Whole Foods.

 

Then I read your reply/comment and I see that some choose not to live in the real world. They don't have any sense of what a "Living wage" is. Must be nice!

Most of us have to compare our income to what we need and if we don't have a living wage there isn't always enough to get these needs. That's not a living wage!

Yeah we just throw that term around despite our millions.

I hope those in the Haven that feel like you stay up there.

[rgruenhaus]

I don't think that any of the changes by themselves would be a big revenue producer, but if they are all added up then you are probably looking at a significant revenue source. I am sure Del Rio et all is counting on the "captive audience", overall, to continue to order room service at near the same level as before the addition of the fee. I doubt that room service was so popular that they needed to add additional staff to deal with the orders.

 

You are exactly right! They, like so many industries, are trying to choke off the services they provide and thus need less staff to pay.

Ford went to an all robotic manufacturing in Brazil to keep from paying wages and benefits.

[NLH Arizona]

Here's an example of why pushback can work.

 

 

VAUXHALL — Attention shoppers: If you are unhappy with how you are treated at a local supermarket, take your story to Facebook.

 

That's the lesson from 70-year-old Maplewood woman Marge Dooley, whose story apparently generated so much social media chatter that it solicited an apology from her local Whole Foods.

 

 

I think there is a big difference in a company offering an apology versus them changing their policies or reducing their fees. There has been enough negative chatter on here about the room service charge, the increases in the DSC, etc. and NCL has stood strong and not reversed their policies. The only policy they reversed is the "no food back to the cabin" and I believe that was because (1) they new darn well there was no way for them to enforce this stupid rule and (2) they got a lot of bad publicity in the news media.

[rgruenhaus]

More like the abuse of ordering to much and not eating it from room service. Really didn't see it on NCL because that how good the complimentary places on the Breakaway are at the time room service was free, but I got to see the aftermath of abuse of in the hallways of the Carnival Splendor - mounds of uneaten food out in the open. And the room stewards not cleaning it up fast enough - Guess, the new CEO of NCL Holding saw it on one of the NCL's ship and was throughly disgust by it all (remember , he was the previous president of Oceania & Regent - 2 upscale lines).

 

Sure, they reverse the new policies somewhat - the no takeout from anywhere was rescinded and a extremely limited complimentary continental breakfast room service in the AM is now offered along with all-day $7.95 service. But now, if someone orders 'big' and don't eat it all then leaving it all out by the door any other time - it's basically on their dollar, not the cruise line per se for the clean up.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

 

The only time I don't finish food is when it isn't prepared the way I asked or it's just bad.

 

I was at a buffet once in a casino and the roast beef was leather and the cherry tomatoes when I sliced into them were rotten inside. In that case I told the manager, but on a ship how long would you wait for a correction or replacement food item. Maybe the food in the hall was delivered cold! During meal hours I can see a little charge as the ship staff would multitask, but after hours it should not be a problem or charged for.

[rgruenhaus]

So you have never delivered food in your life. Pizza delivery drivers have to report all tips as income! It is taxed! Another indication that a person is not living in the workers world.

[SantaFeFan]

Then I read your reply/comment and I see that some choose not to live in the real world. They don't have any sense of what a "Living wage" is. Must be nice!

Most of us have to compare our income to what we need and if we don't have a living wage there isn't always enough to get these needs. That's not a living wage!

Yeah we just throw that term around despite our millions.

I hope those in the Haven that feel like you stay up there.

 

Oh, but I DO live in the real world. I live in the SF Bay Area, where the cost of living is higher than just about anywhere in the US. Should we use that as the "living wage" (http://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/06075) demands you are making, or the "living wage" in Escambia County, FL (http://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/12033) where you live, which is 33% lower? Is this magical "living wage" for a single adult, or for a family of four? Or is it for the most expensive city in the world - Monaco, France? Or for the least expensive city - Karachi, Pakistan?

 

Or, do we consider where the people who are working on the ships are actually from, and use that as the basis for a "living wage"?

 

People like you are quick to demand "living wages" for the crew. But, when asked to explain exactly how much that is, you are deadly quiet. If you can't support your demands with facts, you are only making noise to hear yourself. You aren't doing anything positive, or contributing anything of value in any way. A "living wage" varies around the world. Unless you are ready to tell us what you consider fair, you aren't telling us anything at all.

 

I would argue that it is you who isn't living in the real world. If yo did, you would know that different areas of the world have different "living wage" requirements and you would be able to provide rational arguments instead of just noise. Unlike you, I base my argument on facts, not on emotion as you seem to be doing.

Edited October 12, 2015 by SantaFeFan

[sparks1093]

You are exactly right! They, like so many industries, are trying to choke off the services they provide and thus need less staff to pay.

Ford went to an all robotic manufacturing in Brazil to keep from paying wages and benefits.

 

I don't believe that was the point that I was trying to make in the post you quoted. The room service charge is designed to increase revenue, not eliminate staff by decreasing demand (even if room service were eliminated I don't believe that it would result in any staff savings, although individual staff members would notice a slight shift in job assignments).

[sloopsailor]

You are exactly right! They, like so many industries, are trying to choke off the services they provide and thus need less staff to pay.

Ford went to an all robotic manufacturing in Brazil to keep from paying wages and benefits.

 

If you lived in the "real world" with the rest of us, you would understand that the use of robots is more about consistent manufacturing and quality control than in effort "to keep from paying wages and benefits".

 

You clearly have been drinking from the "corporations are evil" Koolaide pitcher. :rolleyes:

Edited October 12, 2015 by sloopsailor

[Karysa]

You are exactly right! They, like so many industries, are trying to choke off the services they provide and thus need less staff to pay.

Ford went to an all robotic manufacturing in Brazil to keep from paying wages and benefits.

 

This is what I am thinking.

[maywell]

I don't believe that was the point that I was trying to make in the post you quoted. The room service charge is designed to increase revenue, not eliminate staff by decreasing demand (even if room service were eliminated I don't believe that it would result in any staff savings, although individual staff members would notice a slight shift in job assignments).

You say new room service fee is to increase profits and I say it's a great detriment to make people twice about using room service that even cost money. They either order big to make up for the cost and clean is on their dime not cruise line ~or~ the people can take themselves to any eatery on the ship and maybe even sitdown, there and eat food there. Either way, win-win for the cruise line when it comes to saving food money and time.

 

Sent from my SM-N910T3 using Tapatalk

[cantwaitt]

I would never pay extra for room service.

 

I would never pay extra to eat in a dining room when a dining room meal is already included in the cruise price.

 

I would never pay to bring a bottle of wine on the ship when every single other cruise line permits one bottle per passenger for no extra charge.

 

I would not pay extra for the gouge restaurants to get lobster when all the other cruise lines include it in the dining room that is included in the cruise fare.

 

I would never pay $45 per say for the spa so i can use an indoor hottub on a sailing out of the northeast when every other cruise line does not charge for this.

 

In other words, I would never ever ever let myself be ripped off by NCL when there are many other cruise lines that treat their guests with a lot more respect.

 

You can have your FEE STYLE CRUISING. I am out and enjoying more 40-something cruises giving my money to someone else.