Why have a dress code and not enforce it?

"Our of courtesy to your fellow passengers the dress code will be enforced" The above paragraph appears on the front page of every day's QM2 paper, but it appears that is not strictly enforced.

On the 2nd occasion of finding my self 'tied' up, as per the dress code of the day, I asked the Maitre D why many other gentleman were being allowed to dine without a tie? His reply was, that it was something that he wouldn't enforce, as it was down to his discretion, and he was happy with a shirt and jacket, sans-tie!

I'm in the camp where I don't really mind what the dress code is, but if there is one, you should adhere to it.

Has anybody else experienced or witnessed this?

imo enforcing a dress code should not be at the discretion of a maitre d'. He is just an empIoyee. It should be the administration who bears responsibility and should order the maitre d's to enforce. Whether there should be a certain dress code is another issue,

"Our of courtesy to your fellow passengers the dress code will be enforced" The above paragraph appears on the front page of every day's QM2 paper, but it appears that is not strictly enforced.

 

On the 2nd occasion of finding my self 'tied' up, as per the dress code of the day, I asked the Maitre D why many other gentleman were being allowed to dine without a tie? His reply was, that it was something that he wouldn't enforce, as it was down to his discretion, and he was happy with a shirt and jacket, sans-tie!

 

I'm in the camp where I don't really mind what the dress code is, but if there is one, you should adhere to it.

 

Has anybody else experienced or witnessed this?

I have never seen more than one or two "dress code deniers" on any of my seven Cunard voyages. I've found that the overwhelming majority of passengers obey the dress code and the few that don't I regard as no more than a passing source of mild amusement. Personally, I obey the dress code because I'm a conforming kind of person but if the Maitre D chooses not to enforce it I'm certainly notgoing to let that diminish my enjoyment of the cruise. I would guess that, on any given evening, there is somewhere around 90-95% compliance. If that was 90-95% non-compliance I might be a little more worried. Rather than coming across with heavy handed enforcement, I think Cunard would probably prefer for the dress code to be self-regulating, and my (admittedly highly unscientific) observations indicate to me that, by and large, it is.

J

J

J

I've seen hooded zip-front sweatshirts - on women - at dinner in the Queens Grill and I was not amused.

Formal attire is a way of putting on one's best face for one's fellow passengers and failing to do so is simply rude.

Is not the convivial, formal yet friendly atmosphere much of what sets Cunard apart?

I think that asking the Maitre d' to enforce dress codes places him in an invidious position, if he denies access to people he will be criticised by them and if he allows access he will be criticised by others. Adherence to a dress code is or should be really a matter of respect for your fellow diners and is or should be self imposed and self enforced.

It would probably be easier for the Maitre d' if the dress code was strictly enforced, then no-one would have any cause for complaint.

Imagine the scenario:- A formal evening and most guests dressed according to dress code, then a gentleman comes in wearing smart trousers, shirt and tie, but no jacket. The Maitre D' lets him in, but he's followed by a man wearing blue chinos and a check shirt....if the MD turns him away for not conforming to the dress code, he could rightly point out that the gent in front of him wasn't conforming either.

I've only once seen anyone not conforming and this gent wore a mustard yellow jacket with a red bowtie on a black and white evening. He was allowed in.

We always take care to adhere to whatever the dress code might be, but others not conforming is more a source of amusement than shock. I'd rather have a nice, pleasant mannerly, interesting person at our table who is dressed in jeans, than someone correctly dressed who has absolutely no manners at all and who upsets everyone else.

One of the Head Waiters told me that in most cases they would like to say something but the person they spoke to then complains about it. Sadly in these times not everybody shows respect to their fellow travellers. And to me not adhering to the dresscode is a sign of disrespect. It is not a case of you arrived at the dining room and disocvered it is formal night. That's what pre-cruise literature is for and also the dress code is stated in the daily programme.

A few years ago I saw a Head Waiter standing at the entrance to the dining room and he suggested to the gentleman entering that he might want to put on a jacket (it was elegant casual night) before dining. It was done very pleasantly and the man did return with a jacket. I wanted to run over to that Head Waiter and kiss him. On my way out of the dining room I did thank him.

imo enforcing a dress code should not be at the discretion of a maitre d'. He is just an empIoyee. It should be the administration who bears responsibility and should order the maitre d's to enforce. Whether there should be a certain dress code is another issue,

Surely that is his job. He should ensure that the rules of the house are adhered to.. If he cannot, then he is not a maitre d.

The problem with being too tolerant with the dress-code is simply that, human nature being what it is, people start to take advantage of it and this then often forms the thin end of the wedge.

For this reason I feel that dress codes should be very well publicised (both in the pre-booking literature and on board the ship) and then enforced accordingly. If certain passengers refuse to comply then they should be refused admission to the relevant venues. It's as simple as that. Why should a handful of awkward people be free to break the rules and detract from the very ambiance that other passengers have paid for? They would have been informed of the requirements before booking the cruise and again when they were on board. Hence, ignorance of the dress code would not be an excuse.

If they then wish to complain about their 'Human Rights' they could perhaps be accommodated in an ante-room or screened off in some obscure corner out of sight! The recalcitrants would soon get the message and it would put an end to this on-going controversy.

The problem with being too tolerant with the dress-code is simply that, human nature being what it is, people start to take advantage of it and this then often forms the thin end of the wedge.

For this reason I feel that dress codes should be very well publicised (both in the pre-booking literature and on board the ship) and then enforced accordingly. If certain passengers refuse to comply then they should be refused admission to the relevant venues. It's as simple as that. Why should a handful of awkward people be free to break the rules and detract from the very ambiance that other passengers have paid for? They would have been informed of the requirements before booking the cruise and again when they were on board. Hence, ignorance of the dress code would not be an excuse.

If they then wish to complain about their 'Human Rights' they could perhaps be accommodated in an ante-room or screened off in some obscure corner out of sight! The recalcitrants would soon get the message and it would put an end to this on-going controversy.

Totally agree!!

On the second night of World Cruise out of Sydney (to Hong Kong) (I think it was a semi-formal night) there were many men arriving in the dining room jacketless. From what I could see the Maitre d' turned them away at the door.

I did see men wearing zippered jackets like you would wear on a golf course on semi and casual nights as a substitute jacket. I did not see them turned away. The dress code doesn't define a "jacket". They looked foolish in a room full of well dressed people.

Dressing on the QM2 is very impressive. There aren't many places where people dress up any longer in our part of the US. It was great fun and an integral part of the cruise.

I think that asking the Maitre d' to enforce dress codes places him in an invidious position, if he denies access to people he will be criticised by them and if he allows access he will be criticised by others. Adherence to a dress code is or should be really a matter of respect for your fellow diners and is or should be self imposed and self enforced.

I agree with you 100% Cap'n. Draconian enforcement of rules may be fine in an English public school along with corporal punishment and all the rest of it, but if adults on a Cunard vessel are stupid enough to wish to flaunt their ignorance and stupidity by ignoring the dress code then they should be permitted to parade that ignorance around the dining room and become objects of scorn and derision. Only they look foolish - not the other 95% who have obeyed the dress code. So let's celebrate the "Dress Code Deniers" - for me they have brightened up many an otherwise rather staid evening. Bateman could have made a wonderful cartoon out of "The Man who Infringed the Dress Code".

J

I've seen hooded zip-front sweatshirts - on women - at dinner in the Queens Grill and I was not amused.

 

Formal attire is a way of putting on one's best face for one's fellow passengers and failing to do so is simply rude.

 

Is not the convivial, formal yet friendly atmosphere much of what sets Cunard apart?

We took a cruise, where at breakfast time a mature gentleman and his rather younger wife used to turn up straight from the spa, dripping in perspiration and in her case rather scantily dressed.

One of the ladies thought this was distracting and no good for her husband's blood pressure so she complained to the Maitre d'. His reply was along the lines of , "but that is Lord such-and-such". She responded that she didn't care if it was Lord Haw Haw, get it sorted or I'l be speaking to the Hotel Director, the Captain and anyone else who will fix it.

Soon after, a more modest mode of dress was adopted. Lord So-and-so didn't think much of it, so on the last night he turned up in jeans and a tatty shirt with rolled up sleeves. Rest assured - the dress code isn't enforced on the night when gratuities might be in the air.

.

.

Whilst I do expect the maitre d to enforce the dress code, I do appreciate that this is easier said than done. Once you consider the mentality of those persons that deliberately flout the dress code, it does raise the alarming thought that these people could be capable of anything. They've already demonstrated that good manners, and the feelings of others, mean nothing to them. What else are they capable of?

I would hope that no Cunard maitre d has ever faced repercussions for trying to enforce the dress code. That would be very disappointing.

In any case, thankfully, the vast majority do the right thing and adhere to the dress code. For many, it's one of the reasons they booked in the first place.

One or two of the posters whose views I respect refer to "self-regulation", or "self imposed and self enforced", or similar.

Should it be like the self-regulation practiced by the Bankers of the world?

I agree with Whitemarsh and those who feel that the formality is what sets Cunard apart from its competitors - and that the Maitre D's should be supported in enforcing the dress codes (all of which are well published pre-cruise and daily during the cruise.

D

I really don't get it at all. Why go on such a fine ship and then not make an effort with your own appearance? Of course "formal" is quite subjective, and thats why there is so much guidance as to what it means. For example, my idea of formal dress is a full length gown and my informal would be a pretty day dress with a flower print that ended somewhere just below the knee. That same dress might be someone else's idea of dressing upto the nines.

If people really do not want to stick to codes, would they not be better served going on a ship that is catered with freestyle in mind? There is plenty of them. I am just back from one. There was not ONE tuxedo on "formal/or not" night, but thats okay - that's what I expected.

The expectation on Cunard is that you do dress up, and I for one am really looking forward to it.

I really don't get it at all. Why go on such a fine ship and then not make an effort with your own appearance? Of course "formal" is quite subjective, and thats why there is so much guidance as to what it means. For example, my idea of formal dress is a full length gown and my informal would be a pretty day dress with a flower print that ended somewhere just below the knee. That same dress might be someone else's idea of dressing upto the nines.

 

If people really do not want to stick to codes, would they not be better served going on a ship that is catered with freestyle in mind? There is plenty of them. I am just back from one. There was not ONE tuxedo on "formal/or not" night, but thats okay - that's what I expected.

 

The expectation on Cunard is that you do dress up, and I for one am really looking forward to it.

Most here will entirely agree with your point. I don't get it either. Mind you I didn't get "Formal or not" on NCL. :)

.... Draconian enforcement of rules may be fine in an English public school along with corporal punishment and all the rest of it, but if adults on a Cunard vessel are stupid enough to wish to flaunt their ignorance and stupidity by ignoring the dress code then they should be permitted to parade that ignorance around the dining room and become objects of scorn and derision.......

 

J

Why should the simple enforcement of a dress code be described as 'Draconian'? And what have 'English public schools and corporal punishment' got to do with it? Most of Cunard's captains probably went to Public School and enforcement of rules is a major part of their job.

The original poster asks the question 'Why have a dress code and then not enforce it'? Of course it's a nonsense - if you advertise and boast a dress code then it should be enforced. The whole point is that Cunard's reputation has been built on elegant formality. That's why passengers choose it. If timid head-waiters are hesitant to enforce it then they should be replaced by people who will enforce it, providing of course that they are fully supported by Cunard's management.

No-one denies that formality is in decline and, truth be told, if the dress code for formal nights was optional then perhaps the number of non- conformists would rise exponentially over the years. But whilst there is a dress-code it makes sense to enforce it. If the awkward-brigade don't like it then they can lump it! It's not rocket science. No jacket - no admittance! It's as simple as that.

Having seen a male on the QV in Feb/Mch in the Chart room just minutes before dinner, dressed only in a thong, Cunard robe wide open, and not one staff member reacting, I wonder just how far the "wear whatever you like it is your vacation" types will go . I also saw an over weight man in the elevator wearing only a thong and nothing else.

I was on Crystal, when two travel agents were put off the ship at the next port, when they "pushed the envelope too far". One of them came to the dining room wearing a see through baby doll nightdress and matching robe.

So how unsuitable does an outfit have to be before Cunard will do the same as Crystal.?

Why should the simple enforcement of a dress code be described as 'Draconian'? And what have 'English public schools and corporal punishment' got to do with it? Most of Cunard's captains probably went to Public School and enforcement of rules is a major part of their job.

 

The original poster asks the question 'Why have a dress code and then not enforce it'? Of course it's a nonsense - if you advertise and boast a dress code then it should be enforced. The whole point is that Cunard's reputation has been built on elegant formality. That's why passengers choose it. If timid head-waiters are hesitant to enforce it then they should be replaced by people who will enforce it, providing of course that they are fully supported by Cunard's management.

 

No-one denies that formality is in decline and, truth be told, if the dress code for formal nights was optional then perhaps the number of non- conformists would rise exponentially over the years. But whilst there is a dress-code it makes sense to enforce it. If the awkward-brigade don't like it then they can lump it! It's not rocket science. No jacket - no admittance! It's as simple as that.

Personally, I feel the Captain should make the dresscode enforcement as part of the predinner announcement one always hears. I think pax will listen to the Captain in this instance.

Having seen a male on the QV in Feb/Mch in the Chart room just minutes before dinner, dressed only in a thong, Cunard robe wide open, and not one staff member reacting, I wonder just how far the "wear whatever you like it is your vacation" types will go . I also saw an over weight man in the elevator wearing only a thong and nothing else.

 

I was on Crystal, when two travel agents were put off the ship at the next port, when they "pushed the envelope too far". One of them came to the dining room wearing a see through baby doll nightdress and matching robe.

 

So how unsuitable does an outfit have to be before Cunard will do the same as Crystal.?

You know me! Luckily, I was not in the Chartroom when that boorish slob showed up. He would have been ejected, even if I had to do it myself. I'm fairly tolerant of slackers, but sorry, that guy would not have gone ignored by me. Sorry if it offends some but a stand does have to be made in instances such as this.

Originally Posted by Suzieanna

I really don't get it at all. Why go on such a fine ship and then not make an effort with your own appearance? Of course "formal" is quite subjective, and thats why there is so much guidance as to what it means. For example, my idea of formal dress is a full length gown and my informal would be a pretty day dress with a flower print that ended somewhere just below the knee. That same dress might be someone else's idea of dressing upto the nines.

If people really do not want to stick to codes, would they not be better served going on a ship that is catered with freestyle in mind? There is plenty of them. I am just back from one. There was not ONE tuxedo on "formal/or not" night, but thats okay - that's what I expected.

The expectation on Cunard is that you do dress up, and I for one am really looking forward to it.

The above quote presupposes that you have choice in which line you sail on. I am tied to fixed weeks I can go on the cruise, and during that time the only ship sailing to where I want to be is Cunard. I am no fan of formal dress but will willingly abide by it, but it is never going to be a reason my choice of cruiseline. The ports and the dates are the crucial two parts for me, the cruiseline is whichever gives me the best choice of locations.

Ive only been on two Cunard cruises, one on the QM2 and one on the QE and from my observations everyone seemed to comply with the dress code. ( well they did in the QG )

I consider the dress code to be very important, its part of the Cunard dining experience, why book Cunard if you don't like getting smartly dressed? So yes the Maitre D should enforce the code!

I consider the dress code to be very important, its part of the Cunard dining experience, why book Cunard if you don't like getting smartly dressed? So yes the Maitre D should enforce the code!

Thank you! I completely agree with this position. Those passengers that want the casual cruise should book passage on a casual cruise line.

Thank you! I completely agree with this position. Those passengers that want the casual cruise should book passage on a casual cruise line.

What I don't understand is why people don't self-regulate. I also don't get it when people aren't either smart enough or care enough to see when they fail to comply with the norm of those around them. IF you want casual, go casual on the correct ship. BUT...IF you want elegant and a more formal, traditional experience, pick the correct ship.

I have expectations that Cunard WILL be a step above the casual. I will not be disappointed ? Will I ?