NCL Star Remove DSC

[Pevil]

 

OP back from the 14 day NCL "Antarctica & South America: Argentina & Chile".  The main issue I had with NCL on this cruise was that NCL, 2 weeks before departure, cancelled 1 of 2 days of scenic cruising in the Antarctica and exchanged it for an additional sea day in the Atlantic.

 

When I booked this cruise NCL's own description included: 

 

"Calling all penguin and nature enthusiasts-come aboard Norwegian Star for a once-in-a-lifetime cruise to Antarctica.  Cruise through Paradise Bay in Antarctica and witness a pristine frozen wonderland of glacial mountains and azure icebergs that a colony of adorable Gentoo penguins call home."  

 

NCL cancelled Paradise Bay.  The only reason given by NCL was to "to enhance the guest experience."  This reason was confirmed by Guest Services while I was on board.  No other reason or explanation was provided.  NCL did not offer any goodwill compensation.

 

Not sure if I was more disappointed in NCL in making the last minute itinerary change and not giving me what I paid for or NCL giving me a BS reason for the change.

 

Bottom line, NCL terms and conditions allow NCL to make itinerary changes, and NCL did.  NCL terms and conditions allow me to remove the DSC and I did.

 

When removing the DSC at Guest Services, I was not asked for the reason I was deducting the DSC from my final account.  If NCL wanted to enhance the guest experience I would have thought NCL would want to know the reason I was deducting the DSC, so that NCL could correct the issue on future cruises.  The impression I was left was, NCL could not of cared less if I did or did not remove the DSC.

 

There were other service issues on this cruise.  The quality of this NCL cruise was significantly less than my pre-covid NCL cruises.  The drop was so significant that I will not consider NCL for future cruises.  My impression at the end of this cruise was NCL is prioritizing cost cutting regardless of the affect on the guest experience. 

 

I have completed 3 Princess cruises post-covid, and the quality of those Princess cruises were similar to pre-covid Princess cruises and exceeded by far the quality of this NCL cruise at a similar price point.  Princess gave me what I paid for, so I had no issue paying Princess its DSC. 

 

Just reporting my experience on this NCL cruise and that if you are not happy with your NCL experience instead of just complaining there is (to use Mistertomatoe's description in post #25) the nuclear option of removing the DSC.  For those who think I am punishing the crew by removing the DSC, then we are into the tipping discussions which already has 1,000's of posts on this site so no need to continue to beat that horse.  I am OK with my decision.  If you would have made a different decision, I am OK with that, too.  To each their own.

 

 

 

 

[Menocchio]

20 minutes ago, Pevil said:

 

 The impression I was left was, NCL could not of cared less if I did or did not remove the DSC.

Of course they don't. It's not their money. It's not even money they were counting on to pay a fixed bill. It's their employees' money and they don't have to replace it. They'll just split a slightly smaller pot among the crew. They can't really even use people removing the DSC as a barometer of guest opinion since so many people do it because they just don't like the DSC. 

 

You accomplished nothing. But I guess you saved a few bucks.

[zqvol]

47 minutes ago, Pevil said:

 

OP back from the 14 day NCL "Antarctica & South America: Argentina & Chile".  The main issue I had with NCL on this cruise was that NCL, 2 weeks before departure, cancelled 1 of 2 days of scenic cruising in the Antarctica and exchanged it for an additional sea day in the Atlantic.

 

When I booked this cruise NCL's own description included: 

 

"Calling all penguin and nature enthusiasts-come aboard Norwegian Star for a once-in-a-lifetime cruise to Antarctica.  Cruise through Paradise Bay in Antarctica and witness a pristine frozen wonderland of glacial mountains and azure icebergs that a colony of adorable Gentoo penguins call home."  

 

NCL cancelled Paradise Bay.  The only reason given by NCL was to "to enhance the guest experience."  This reason was confirmed by Guest Services while I was on board.  No other reason or explanation was provided.  NCL did not offer any goodwill compensation.

 

Not sure if I was more disappointed in NCL in making the last minute itinerary change and not giving me what I paid for or NCL giving me a BS reason for the change.

 

Bottom line, NCL terms and conditions allow NCL to make itinerary changes, and NCL did.  NCL terms and conditions allow me to remove the DSC and I did.

 

When removing the DSC at Guest Services, I was not asked for the reason I was deducting the DSC from my final account.  If NCL wanted to enhance the guest experience I would have thought NCL would want to know the reason I was deducting the DSC, so that NCL could correct the issue on future cruises.  The impression I was left was, NCL could not of cared less if I did or did not remove the DSC.

 

There were other service issues on this cruise.  The quality of this NCL cruise was significantly less than my pre-covid NCL cruises.  The drop was so significant that I will not consider NCL for future cruises.  My impression at the end of this cruise was NCL is prioritizing cost cutting regardless of the affect on the guest experience. 

 

I have completed 3 Princess cruises post-covid, and the quality of those Princess cruises were similar to pre-covid Princess cruises and exceeded by far the quality of this NCL cruise at a similar price point.  Princess gave me what I paid for, so I had no issue paying Princess its DSC. 

 

Just reporting my experience on this NCL cruise and that if you are not happy with your NCL experience instead of just complaining there is (to use Mistertomatoe's description in post #25) the nuclear option of removing the DSC.  For those who think I am punishing the crew by removing the DSC, then we are into the tipping discussions which already has 1,000's of posts on this site so no need to continue to beat that horse.  I am OK with my decision.  If you would have made a different decision, I am OK with that, too.  To each their own.

 

 

 

 

Simply a matter of being cheap. 

[RocketMan275]

1 hour ago, Pevil said:

Just reporting my experience on this NCL cruise and that if you are not happy with your NCL experience instead of just complaining there is (to use Mistertomatoe's description in post #25) the nuclear option of removing the DSC.  For those who think I am punishing the crew by removing the DSC, then we are into the tipping discussions which already has 1,000's of posts on this site so no need to continue to beat that horse.  I am OK with my decision.  If you would have made a different decision, I am OK with that, too.  To each their own.

Congratulations, you found  your excuse to remove the DSC.

[mugtech]

On 2/17/2024 at 11:18 AM, BirdTravels said:

Why would you screw the hard working staff on the ship that work endless hours to serve YOU. 
 

You want to show YOUR displeasure, cancel the cruise. 

Cancel the cruise one day before sailing?  Why screw yourself?

[mugtech]

Perhaps if enough people remove DSC the crew members will decide to work for a different cruise line next time.  The front line troops always take the brunt of the assault.

[insidecabin]

On the Star when they had drinkgate 2022 and could/would do nothing on the ship to resolve guest services were recommending adjust DSC.

[luv2kroooz]

11 hours ago, Menocchio said:

Of course they don't. It's not their money. It's not even money they were counting on to pay a fixed bill. It's their employees' money and they don't have to replace it. They'll just split a slightly smaller pot among the crew. They can't really even use people removing the DSC as a barometer of guest opinion since so many people do it because they just don't like the DSC. 

 

You accomplished nothing. But I guess you saved a few bucks.

This simply isn't true. NCL, like other lines, contracts with its crew to pay a fixed minimum salary. This is typically largely funded through tips/DSC/service charge....whatever you want to call it. If the tip pot gets too small, NCL still has to fulfill the contract.

 

Here is the problem with the system. NCL collects all the DSC money on behalf of its crew, pays out the minimum contractual requirement, and then keeps the rest to pay for crew uniforms, pensions, parties, enrichment etc. The guy in the laundry room or your waiter never directly sees any extra money generated in the DSC pool. 

 

We fully support anyone who wants to tip more and we also support the removal of tips when passengers feel economically harmed by something and the company refuses to address valid concerns. To each their own.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, luv2kroooz said:

This simply isn't true. NCL, like other lines, contracts with its crew to pay a fixed minimum salary. This is typically largely funded through tips/DSC/service charge....whatever you want to call it. If the tip pot gets too small, NCL still has to fulfill the contract.

This is true to a very limited extent.  The crew are contracted for a total compensation per month, made up of wages and DSC.  It is acknowledged in the contract that the DSC is variable, based on passenger participation/satisfaction, so the wage can be less than what is contracted for at any time.  There is a statutory minimum wage, that is less than half of the contracted wage (about $685 out of $1400/month contracted), and the DSC makes up about 70-80% of the contracted wage.  The cruise line is required to make up salary lost due to DSC reduction, only if the total compensation falls below the minimum.  So, passengers removing the DSC can reduce crew compensation by 50% without affecting NCL's bottom line in the slightest.

 

1 hour ago, luv2kroooz said:

Here is the problem with the system. NCL collects all the DSC money on behalf of its crew, pays out the minimum contractual requirement, and then keeps the rest to pay for crew uniforms, pensions, parties, enrichment etc. The guy in the laundry room or your waiter never directly sees any extra money generated in the DSC pool. 

Incorrect, again.  The amount of DSC charged to passengers, and the contracted amount of DSC in each crew members' paycheck is based on double occupancy participation in the DSC.  The crew's contract acknowledges that the crew's compensation may be more than what is contracted, if the ship has a higher occupancy than double occupancy.  So, yes, the crew, of whatever rating in the DSC pool, will see any "extra" DSC that is generated.  Further, the crew know, based on terms in the contract, that about 10% of DSC will be used for crew welfare (parties, upgrades to crew facilities voted on by crew), and is not used for "crew uniforms" nor "pensions".

 

I don't get into whether or not people should remove/adjust the DSC, for whatever reason, I just make sure the facts about the DSC and how crew are paid, is presented.  That's why this will be my only contribution to this thread.

[luv2kroooz]

Something doesn't add up for me. NCL charges the highest DSC in the industry on a per passenger basis. Why?

 

Do more NCL passengers remove the DSC requiring them to have a higher daily rate just to "make ends meet"?  Probably not.

 

Is NCL crew compensated better than industry standards? If true, why would anyone work on Carnival or Princess at a $16 per person per day rate?

 

Is a higher percentage of DSC retained by the company to offset non crew operating costs? Put another way, does NCL require it's passengers to pay a higher percentage of crew base salary, by shifting that cost to the customer?

 

What I know is the NCL DSC has reached a level that requires some more explanation. They, in theory, collect the most amount of DSC money in the industry. A family of four is now asked to pay $560 for a seven day cruise on NCL vs $448 on Princess or Carnival, for a similar service model. Princess offers twice daily stateroom service.

 

 

 

[d9704011]

7 minutes ago, luv2kroooz said:

Is a higher percentage of DSC retained by the company to offset non crew operating costs? Put another way, does NCL require it's passengers to pay a higher percentage of crew base salary, by shifting that cost to the customer?

This would be my guess.  Of course, we'll never know but need grist for the service charge mill!

[chengkp75]

23 minutes ago, luv2kroooz said:

Something doesn't add up for me. NCL charges the highest DSC in the industry on a per passenger basis. Why?

 

14 minutes ago, d9704011 said:

This would be my guess.  Of course, we'll never know but need grist for the service charge mill!

Okay, I'll take back my vow to not post here anymore.  Could it be that NCL has a lower percentage of the crew's compensation being wages, and a higher percentage being DSC, while keeping the total compensation similar to other lines to remain competitive?  Remember, the only thing guaranteed to the crew is the statutory minimum wage, and it doesn't matter whether their total compensation is made up of 70% DSC or 90% DSC.

 

The whole DSC thing is so that advertised fares can be kept as low as possible.

[Capitan Obvious]

15 hours ago, Pevil said:

When removing the DSC at Guest Services, I was not asked for the reason I was deducting the DSC from my final account.  If NCL wanted to enhance the guest experience I would have thought NCL would want to know the reason I was deducting the DSC, so that NCL could correct the issue on future cruises.  The impression I was left was, NCL could not of cared less if I did or did not remove the DSC.

 

You originally claimed that the whole point of removing the DSC was as a "protest". If they don't ask you the reason why, and if they "could not have cared less" about the removal, then, IMHO, your protest completely failed...you made a sound without anyone available to hear it.

[luv2kroooz]

34 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Could it be that NCL has a lower percentage of the crew's compensation being wages, and a higher percentage being DSC,

Yes, add that to list of hypotheticals. I think what you are saying, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, is that their wage expense is less and they can use the savings to do whatever they want with it.

[chengkp75]

3 minutes ago, luv2kroooz said:

Yes, add that to list of hypotheticals. I think what you are saying, and I don't want to put words in your mouth, is that their wage expense is less and they can use the savings to do whatever they want with it.

Nope, not what I'm saying at all.  The only difference is that more or less (depending on which cruise line) of that wage expense comes from DSC and more or less what comes from wages.  To do a true comparison, you would need to add in the cruise fare to see if one costs less but has more DSC, or not.  If you think that cruise fares would be the same, and not increase by the amount of DSC, if they eliminated DSC across all lines, then I think you are naive.  They cannot "do what they want" with the DSC, as it is contractually bound to crew compensation.

[SomewhereGirl]

It all comes out in the wash.  Are solos paying a single DSC also cheap?  Should they offer to pay twice the DSC so the total DSC pool isn't reduced?  Give me a break.

[d9704011]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Okay, I'll take back my vow to not post here anymore. 

Post #35 can officially be declared a total success; let's let the service charge dogs run!

[G-DawgMN]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

This is true to a very limited extent.  The crew are contracted for a total compensation per month, made up of wages and DSC.  It is acknowledged in the contract that the DSC is variable, based on passenger participation/satisfaction, so the wage can be less than what is contracted for at any time.  There is a statutory minimum wage, that is less than half of the contracted wage (about $685 out of $1400/month contracted), and the DSC makes up about 70-80% of the contracted wage.  The cruise line is required to make up salary lost due to DSC reduction, only if the total compensation falls below the minimum.  So, passengers removing the DSC can reduce crew compensation by 50% without affecting NCL's bottom line in the slightest.

 

Incorrect, again.  The amount of DSC charged to passengers, and the contracted amount of DSC in each crew members' paycheck is based on double occupancy participation in the DSC.  The crew's contract acknowledges that the crew's compensation may be more than what is contracted, if the ship has a higher occupancy than double occupancy.  So, yes, the crew, of whatever rating in the DSC pool, will see any "extra" DSC that is generated.  Further, the crew know, based on terms in the contract, that about 10% of DSC will be used for crew welfare (parties, upgrades to crew facilities voted on by crew), and is not used for "crew uniforms" nor "pensions".

 

I don't get into whether or not people should remove/adjust the DSC, for whatever reason, I just make sure the facts about the DSC and how crew are paid, is presented.  That's why this will be my only contribution to this thread.

 

 I wish we could pin this post anywhere and refer to it when anyone starts claiming they know how the DSC is distributed.

 

  @chengkp75 I've always appreciated your knowledgeable posts over the years. Thank you.

 

 

[insidecabin]

40 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Nope, not what I'm saying at all.  The only difference is that more or less (depending on which cruise line) of that wage expense comes from DSC and more or less what comes from wages.  To do a true comparison, you would need to add in the cruise fare to see if one costs less but has more DSC, or not.  If you think that cruise fares would be the same, and not increase by the amount of DSC, if they eliminated DSC across all lines, then I think you are naive.  They cannot "do what they want" with the DSC, as it is contractually bound to crew compensation.

 

When P&O went to included service charges there was no difference to the lowest base fares they stayed around the same level.

 

They have gone down on some trips since then.

 

Often lower than NCL base fares.

 

[chengkp75]

32 minutes ago, insidecabin said:

 

When P&O went to included service charges there was no difference to the lowest base fares they stayed around the same level.

 

They have gone down on some trips since then.

 

Often lower than NCL base fares.

 

And, I believe that the Shipping Acts of both the UK and Bermuda provide different requirements for crew compensation than flags of convenience, so the DSC may have been less of an effect on minimum compensation.

[luv2kroooz]

I don't know man,  too complicated for me to wrap my simple mind around. Still trying to understand why NCL needs $20 per day to make their model work. First world problems. Everyone have a good day.

[UKstages]

 

2 hours ago, luv2kroooz said:

Still trying to understand why NCL needs $20 per day to make their model work.

 

most likely because it isn't really twenty dollars.

 

there is another OSC anomaly that is never discussed.

 

("OSC" = onboard service charge, f.k.a. "DSC")

 

and that is that certain high-volume travel partners, and NCL itself in limited instances, waive the OSC. i can go to the american airlines cruise site right now and book a cruise on NCL and get what they describe as "gratuities for the first two guests" included for free. and NCL itself doesn't charge the OSC to its own casinos at sea "elite" members. (that's a perk of that level of the program.) they may have other arrangements under which they offer "free" OSC.

 

i assume that when a travel partner offers onboard credit (OBC), that comes out of their commission. i assume that when a travel partner offers to "pay" the onboard service charge (OSC) or offers "free gratuities" that it doesn't come out of their commission, but that it's a negotiated volume benefit from NCL.

 

so, it seems to me that NCL has built a certain shortfall into the program with regard to collection of the OSC. they know how many guests typically sail on a cruise, they know how many guests typically remove the OSC and they know how many travel partners are exempt from collecting OSC at any given time and how much volume they deliver. my best guess is that NCL therefore must have a "blended rate" for OSC. non-haven guests are charged $20 a day, but NCL most likely looks at that as something like $14.37 (or whatever dollar figure accurately reflects all the OSC removals and waivers).

 

and that is perhaps one reason why the OSC keeps climbing.

 

[BamaCruiser39]

17 minutes ago, UKstages said:

NCL itself doesn't charge the OSC to its own casinos at sea "elite" members. (that's a perk of that level of the program.) they may have other arrangements under which they offer "free" OSC.

 

No, but CAS does charge an additional $20 per person per day "admin fee" for CAS bookings that no one else charges. That's in addition to DSC if you do not have the DSC waived via CAS status

[UKstages]

that's absolutely true and that's a valid complaint of the casinos at sea program, but it's tangential to the removal of OSC discussion in this thread. there are not making enough in CAS admin fees to offset a shortfall in OSC, i'm pretty sure. the fee is just completely bogus and pure profit,. ostensibly, they can argue that it helps defray the costs of running the CAS operation, but that's just nonsense. it's a money grab, plain and simple. 

 

(btw, changes are being made to the CAS program on april 1. we can certainly hope those changes include the removal of that admin fee to make them more competitive with other cruise lines' casino programs, but that would just be conjecture on my part at this point.)

[The Traveling Man]

7 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

This is true to a very limited extent.  The crew are contracted for a total compensation per month, made up of wages and DSC.  It is acknowledged in the contract that the DSC is variable, based on passenger participation/satisfaction, so the wage can be less than what is contracted for at any time.  There is a statutory minimum wage, that is less than half of the contracted wage (about $685 out of $1400/month contracted), and the DSC makes up about 70-80% of the contracted wage.  The cruise line is required to make up salary lost due to DSC reduction, only if the total compensation falls below the minimum.  So, passengers removing the DSC can reduce crew compensation by 50% without affecting NCL's bottom line in the slightest.

 

Incorrect, again.  The amount of DSC charged to passengers, and the contracted amount of DSC in each crew members' paycheck is based on double occupancy participation in the DSC.  The crew's contract acknowledges that the crew's compensation may be more than what is contracted, if the ship has a higher occupancy than double occupancy.  So, yes, the crew, of whatever rating in the DSC pool, will see any "extra" DSC that is generated.  Further, the crew know, based on terms in the contract, that about 10% of DSC will be used for crew welfare (parties, upgrades to crew facilities voted on by crew), and is not used for "crew uniforms" nor "pensions".

 

I don't get into whether or not people should remove/adjust the DSC, for whatever reason, I just make sure the facts about the DSC and how crew are paid, is presented.  That's why this will be my only contribution to this thread.

Thank you for bringing clarity to this matter.  Your posts are always insightful.

Edited March 15 by The Traveling Man