Why have a huge theatre and only use for 3 shows?

Is it because you have already paid the "service charge" and the staff don't feel as though they have to work to get their tips?
Service was not I would have expected and certainly not up to the standards of RCI, P&O, Fred Olsen and Princess.

The employees on these ships get much higher wages and have great benefits, compared to any other cruise lines. They also have strong unions backing them, and seemingly do not get punished for various infractions. There is a high turn-over rate, and a large percentage do not fulfill their contracts or renew them. They know that if they only work 2 months out of a 4-month contract (short in itself) they can be paid for the entire 4 months, for example.

NCL has admitted these problems--even with intense training courses, it is a difficult thing. Living and working on ships has never been for everyone, and it seems that for these young people, the easy way out is to just give up.

Again, there are lots of fine, hard-working employees on these ships, but the ones who don't care ruin the entire product.

I think what happens is that these young people sign up thinking how cool it's going to be to romp around the Hawaiian islands week after week. And then once they get on board and find out that they are expected to actually work, reality sets in and they develope the, 'yeah, right' attitude.

quote:

---

Originally posted by linerguy:
And then once they get on board and find out that they are expected to actually work, reality sets in and they develope the, 'yeah, right' attitude.

-Russ

---

And unfortunately, this is not only on the ships. We see poor customer service more and more in shops and restaurants on land, as well.

quote:

---

Originally posted by ianbat83:
What do you think? Am I alone voice?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Linerrich:

And unfortunately, this is not only on the ships. We see poor customer service more and more in shops and restaurants on land, as well.

Rich

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Linerrich:
They know that if they only work 2 months out of a 4-month contract (short in itself) they can be paid for the entire 4 months, for example.

---

That's incredible?? truly Rich?
Here if someone did that, there would be all sorts of clauses for paying back uniform and training costs and so on! So one would have to work the initial term of the contract or be way out of pocket.

No wonder people so freely jack the job in, if they get away with that

quote:

---

Originally posted by PamM:

That's incredible?? truly Rich?
Here if someone did that, there would be all sorts of clauses for paying back uniform and training costs and so on! So one would have to work the initial term of the contract or be way out of pocket.

No wonder people so freely jack the job in, if they get away with that

Pam

---

All kinds of generous concessions were made by NCL to the unions, and the employees know they can get away with a lot, simply because they won't be sacked. And they also know it's getting hard to quickly replace people.

Just last week on POA, complaints to me from clients about wait-staff gabbing on their cell phones (which work fine within Hawaii) while ignoring passengers. Rude, surly behavior in the dining rooms. Questioning and actually defying guests when a request is made for something simple, like a steak knife to go along with the steak served for dinner, etc.

I know several good management-level people who worked on board and actually left, because of the frustration of trying to train, and constantly replace people. Each week, it's not unusual to have 8 or 10 employees simply walk off the ship and end their employment! This just does not and cannot happen with any other cruise line that I know of.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Linerrich:
Living and working on ships has never been for everyone, and it seems that for these young people, the easy way out is to just give up.

---

Rich, I only speculating here, but maybe American staff are less tolerant of low pay and poor terms and conditions of employment than those staff from third worlds countries?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Malcolm @ cruisepage:

Rich, I only speculating here, but maybe American staff are less tolerant of low pay and poor terms and conditions of employment than those staff from third worlds countries?

---

Yes, that's an absolute given. My earlier post pointed out that NCLA has had to concede many more perks, privileges, and pay to their American employees than shipboard employees usually get.

There's no denying that working on any ship is demanding, and not for everyone. Many people from various countries working cruise contracts may feel trapped in the situation. The young Americans, in contrast, can easily get out of their work commitments; unfortunately too many approach cruise line work as a brief 'summer job', and they can bail out whenever they like.

I didn't mean to paint a bleak picture of the NCLA experience, either. I sell quite a bit of the product and I believe in it. But I also position it to potential guests as a very casual, American-based operation. If they are looking for high levels of formality and services, this is not the product for them.

If members of The NCLA crew get axed or walk off, they don't have to worry about their family back home starving,......

I truely believe that some folks who sign up for the NCLA ships really think that it's going to be a walk in paradise,....they probably shrug their shoulders and think, "who cares if I'm canned, at least I'll have seen Hawaii and got paid for it!".

-Russ

[ 10-27-2006: Message edited by: linerguy ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by linerguy:
That and the fact that they know that they have to work their butts off or be sent home is a great incentive to provide excellent service.

---

I'm sure you are very right, Russ (and Rich).

Maybe I’m being very naive, but I like to believe people in an working environment can do a great job by having good management, being given good training, in turn generating pride in their work and enjoying their jobs. I appreciate that all this is much easier said than done, I know.

The 'carrot and stick' approach (tips for good service and the threat of dismissal for bad) is probably employed by all lines, but is it really the only way to create good service?

[ 10-27-2006: Message edited by: Malcolm @ cruisepage ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by linerguy:
[QB][..] That and the fact that they know that they have to work their butts off or be sent home is a great incentive to provide excellent service. [..]

---

This is sadly how it works on many cruise ships - but there are (luckily) a few exceptions. (there are some ships where the crew is not relying on tips etc.)

I also saw empty tables in the dining room, many already set up for dinner, and many people waiting for a table when we left, yet not being seated. Since NCL abandoned assigned seating for guests, they need to learn how to run a restaurant because this is what they've got now. Seating people efficiently takes training. Restaurants get their guests seated when a table comes available and NCL can train their staff to do this.

Guests have to realize, too, that there seem to be more large parties than there are large tables at certain times. Cruises often have large family groups, or groups of friends who want to dine together. Assigned seating takes care of this, but with Freestyle you get to wait sometimes for a large table to become available, as you do at a restaurant.

Yet I have made this poiint before. The passengers on American Cruise Line's ships which come into St. Michaels have been unanimous in their praise for the service that their american crews and service staff provide on these ships. What is the difference? What is the secret?

I have no doubt that there are some staff members who are good at their job....but that doesn't mean they can't, at times, be indifferent to a passenger's needs. One man I know asked a waiter for steak sauce and the reply was something like, "Sorry, we ran out,...they have it in another part of the ship but, that would mean I'd have to go get it". He was astonished. Another man said that he and his daughter went ashore and when they returned at about 4pm, their room still wasn't made up from the night before. These are only two examples from about a dozen that I have heard from folks.

Anytime I hear of someone like KansasK who has had a positive experience, I have renewed hope that things are turning around; but then I hear one horror story after another and it tells me that, sometimes, perhaps, folks just get lucky.

In all honesty, I think NCL has jumped into this Hawaii thing too fast and too far without first looking at the big picture. Beautiful ships and a wonderful destination are only part of the picture; the people on board are really the soul of a ship. They set the mood and they set the stage. If the mood is bad and the stage is bare, the hardware means nothing.

Cambodge:

That's a very good point: What's the difference?
Perhaps it's experience, size and the fact that lines like American Cruise Line can be more selective in their hiring practices. As you know, the smaller vessels you've mentioned have been operating for years. The number of crew is not nearly as high as it is on the NCLA ships and, most probably, the crew is not salivating at the thought of having a job where they get to romp around Hawaii all the time. These things, I guess, could be the difference.

-Russ

[ 10-28-2006: Message edited by: linerguy ]

[ 10-28-2006: Message edited by: linerguy ]

It would seem that the protectionism which was the catalyst for NCL to create NCL America is not working for the consumers or the cruise line. O.K it is giving some American citizens jobs, but from what I’ve heard here many of them don’t want those jobs.

Although NCL America is not a ‘monopoly’ in the true sense of the word, the high start-up costs of operation in Hawaii ensure that they have little competition.

If NCLA offer a £500 trip from here, I would even pay a 100% single premium and disappear off alone