Zuiderdam Customer Service

[mickeyfitz]

"Compensation" is for an actual injury,damage,inconvenience or loss. Here there was an incident which could have resulted in an injury, but thankfully did not. If I almost hit someone by accident, I offer an apology, I don't give them money. If the complaint here was only the claimed lack of a truely sincere apology or if the manager had failed to take any action with respect to the possibly contaminated food, I would feel the complaint was valid.

[Scrumpy]

Am I the only one who can see where a bad attitude by someone in charge would make someone extremely reluctant to re-visit a business? This is amazing. Some believe that the world is full of people who want to take advantage of situations, but I don't think there is any reason to believe that in this situation - other than a comparison with others who'd had apparently (trivial ?) events met with compensation that may have been out of proportion. I don't think the OP is obsessed with financial gain; I think they bristled when their integrity was questioned. I'd do the same. If you tell me something is "impossible", then it sounds like I *must* be lying. It's nice that the food was thrown out IF it was thrown out (any witness to that?), but the whole "impossible" comment was unnecessary and tactless and had an ugly implication. IMHO, of course. Until the past 10 years, I have been in and around and/or employed by restaurants since birth (since my family owned one) and I've also done other customer service work. Sometimes we screw up, accidents DO happen and it's expected that someone will handle it properly and politely - period. Why couldn't the Lido manager graciously apologize without further comment? Is it that hard? What am I missing? I think the whole compensation issue is a convenient distraction from the real problem which is purely one of customer service.

Scrumpy

[dakrewser]

I don't think the OP is obsessed with financial gain; I think they bristled when their integrity was questioned

 

But no one, at any time, questioned their integrity - they assumed their integrity was being questioned and reacted to that.

 

They reacted poorly to being given a bottle of wine by someone in the food & beverage dept., suggesting that a spa treatment would be better - but the F&B dept. has nothing to do with he spa.

 

They refused to return the GRM's phone message, but complain (to us) about how badly they were treated.

 

They claim it's not about the money, but suggest that $100 credit would be fair for finding a staple.

 

And on, and on.

 

BTW, the "impossible" comment (especially coming from someone who's not fluent in English) may simply mean that there are no staples present in that area so that it must have originated in some other area - it says nothing about the OP's credibility. Why are you willing to bend over backwards to see the OP's point of view, but interpret the remarks of the staff AS REPORTED BY THE OP in the worst possible light?

[ekerr19]

Scrumpy - I do not think that you are the only one seeing this, as you put it. But, I think what most people feel is that "bad attitude" is very subjective and it's impossible to gauge what might be "right" or "wrong" for someone else.

 

As I mentioned, I have 103 days on HAL, and have run the whole gamut from excellent to not-so-great, but each cruise has things that make it unique and fall into it's own category. What might be "excellent" for me, may be "horrid" for someone else.

 

I believe the OP when she says her impression was that the Lido Manager treated her poorly - in her mind it occurred that way and I am not discounting her feelings at all.

 

What I do have a hard time with, is that in all my days on HAL, I've never seen ANY of the staff treat ANY of the passengers with less than 100% courtesy. Now, I am not saying it did not happen or occur exactly as she states, but not knowing her (or really anything about her) I can only judge HAL based on my experience, as I said, her opinion of "bad attitude" and mine may be completely different. I want to reiterate that I believe she felt the experience was bad - whether you or I or anyone else may have felt that same way, doesn't really matter.

 

But in the end - she DID have the opportunity to put things right, at least in her own mind, with the GRM and SHE chose not to - I have read also conflicting versions of this incident from her posts, so I'm not sure which is accurate, but she did post on this thread that for her, "it was over".

 

My point has been, why not address it at the time, when you had the chance? Why wait til you are behind a monitor and only have the keyboard to address?

 

I hope she can focus on the more positive aspects of her cruise and chalk this up to a misunderstanding or just an unfortunate event.

[HeatherInFlorida]

But no one, at any time, questioned their integrity - they assumed their integrity was being questioned and reacted to that.

 

They reacted poorly to being given a bottle of wine by someone in the food & beverage dept., suggesting that a spa treatment would be better - but the F&B dept. has nothing to do with he spa.

 

They refused to return the GRM's phone message, but complain (to us) about how badly they were treated.

 

They claim it's not about the money, but suggest that $100 credit would be fair for finding a staple.

 

And on, and on.

 

BTW, the "impossible" comment (especially coming from someone who's not fluent in English) may simply mean that there are no staples present in that area so that it must have originated in some other area - it says nothing about the OP's credibility. Why are you willing to bend over backwards to see the OP's point of view, but interpret the remarks of the staff AS REPORTED BY THE OP in the worst possible light?

 

Bravo, Dave. So well said and exactly the point!

 

Scrumpy, I don't think anyone would debate your points. But the fact is it was the OP who brought up compensation. It all seemed to come down to the fact that they were not happy with the compensation received because even when receiving another call to discuss the issue, she declined to return the call.

 

So I can't help but be just a little suspect that it wasn't about the treatment at all, but rather about the money. And we can't forget we're hearing only one side of the story here.

 

There is always another side of the story, and then ... somewhere in the middle probably ... lies the absolute truth.

[Scrumpy]

I am willing to believe them because I have no reason to question their honesty or their motives; they repeatedly try to explain and clarify, but people don't seem to be hearing them say the same things I'm hearing them say. I think they merely suggested alternative forms of compensation which would have meant a lot as a GESTURE - as proof that management took their concerns seriously. Little things mean a lot. I don't think there'd be a huge profit for them in any of this. Small shipboard credit, perhaps for the cost of the wine - maybe for the spa or to use however else they choose; where's the problem? Frankly, it would never have occurred to ME to take the wine BACK to them and request a credit either. I am not assertive enough to have to keep confronting people about an issue, particularly if I thought they viewed me as out to get something for nothing.

 

I cannot see that they have some kind of vendetta against HAL. (In the first post, they said they "loved" HAL; notice how posters' reponses may have affected the outcome of this, btw). At that point, they'd had ONE previous negative experience with CS and management, which they may have accepted and forgiven without a second incident. In light of that negative experience, I am not so sure that I would return a phone message either. If I already felt like there was a question about my honesty, importance as a guest, or my MOTIVES, then I might feel like I wouldn't get a sincere apology but instead more of the sarcasm already experienced in a previous dealing with management. This goes back to a comment I've made about being "bought off". If someone acts like a jerk, but gives me compensation, why would that make it better for me? When you want a simple apology, having money or credit or booze thrown at you doesn't necessarily help matters. Maybe it makes some people happy, but it wouldn't make me nearly as happy as some polite concern and reassurance that greater care would be taken in the future. Nicely say something straightforward and sympathetic without any unnecessary comment; it isn't difficult and it costs nothing. Lastly, as unfortunate as a language barrier might be, that is hardly the responsibility of the couple in question. If nothing else, having achieved elder status, these folks probably recognize the facial expressions and body language that accompany skepticism. Most of us figure that out when we're young and someone disbelieves us for the first time. I do not think I'm interpreting the staff's actions, or lack thereof, in the worst possible light. It's simply the way that makes the most sense to me, possibly because I have seen similar situations. It's not the customer's job to try to be understanding and make allowances. That is management's job. I think a few brief sentences could have completely changed the outcome.

Scrumpy

 

[Scrumpy]

Laura,

We've had ONE HAL cruise and managed in that cruise to have an incident with staff that I believe was the result of a misunderstanding. MIL got coffee that was too strong. Asked for more water to be added. She believed that she was told that they could not add water to her coffee (at the coffee place). I don't know if it was automated or metered or what because she did end up getting extra water eventually - and every day afterwards. Before that, she was in tears and I ended up at the front desk trying to figure out what happened and if her version could be true. They couldn't care less and were curt to the point of rudeness. We finally resolved the issue directly with the staff member involved, but simply asking for information at the front desk, trying to get some kind of explanation of how things worked, if there was something we should know about the staff member to help us communicate and if it was even possible that the machines were set up that way - well, it was a nightmare. They immediately acted like I was crazy, she was crazy and they plainly wished I'd shut up and go away. Petty? Yeah. Trivial? Certainly. BUT, was it really too hard to be polite and answer a few questions? Things came right in the end when we found common ground with the staff member, but her initial reaction to me also seemed rude - or could easily be construed as rude. It didn't seem like a language barrier so much as a communication problem. Should have been simple to resolve. I think that was the biggest problem we had the whole cruise and it isn't big at all UNLESS you are the one trying to deal with a person who feels mistreated and cannot figure out why on earth the poor woman can't have more hot water to dilute her coffee. One simple, tiny event got blown way out of proportion. I know it can happen. I will not say that my MIL was reasonable because she totally lost it, IMO. However, I did not lose my temper. I just wanted her happy because God knows if she wasn't happy, DH and I wouldn't be happy either.:eek:

 

Heather - I am not cynical enough to think that all people are so completely motivated by money. I think there was an unfortunate series of events and that they could easily have been handled better - with or without any compensation at all. A caring attitude and a few good emotional strokes make all the difference, but those need to come from the people performing service. If there's a problem, first you deal with the emotional aspect of it by being nice. If something further is warranted, even if it is not asked for, then you take that step. Really, I think a small gesture is more appreciated than a blatant buy-out. I think immediate compensation offers without compassion are insulting. Maybe I'm wrong. Wouldn't be the first time ;)

 

Scrumpy

[HeatherInFlorida]

Heather - I am not cynical enough to think that all people are so completely motivated by money...................;)

 

Scrumpy

 

Scrumpy, I honestly couldn't agree with you more with everything else you said. But on the issue quoted above, I wasn't the one talking about money. If you read back to my post, I said how disappointed I am that everyone measures things being made right by how much money they receive.

 

I said this only in response to the OP who brought up the issue. It was the OP who said she thought they deserved renumeration ... I believe she said in the neighborhood of $100 would be fair given what she's heard other's receive for what she called "more minor" complaints.

 

It would be my hope that people would be happy with a humble apology and leave it at that. But obviously, in this situation at least, that was not enough.

[Scrumpy]

I think we mostly agree. I can see mentioning a credit of some kind primarily because the meal is already paid for, and also if something of value has been offered. I think it's more a goodwill gesture than anything else unless it's a large amount of money and perhaps saying $100 knocked that out of the ballpark for some. I can understand that many are suspicious of anyone who mentions money at all. I figured a shipboard credit for the amount of the wine would probably have sufficed if they felt like they'd gotten a sincere apology. That is in the eye of beholder, of course, and the crux of the matter, IMO. They still don't think they got that. People aren't really going to agree on this because of the financial aspect. Once money is mentioned, people often focus on that and I can see why it would happen that way. I've been in situations where someone made out financially without "deserving" it, IMO. The bottle of wine, or for instance, a bouquet of flowers, might represent a certain dollar amount, but it's not construed as being as crass as seeking money per se. Is that a better way of putting things? I don't imagine anyone would break down the cost of a cruise minute-by-minute & meal-by-meal and try to determine exactly how much had been spoiled and how much they thought should be refunded. Then again...never say never!

Scrumpy

[Heaven2]

Dear Scrumpy you are so kind to try and explain my husband and my side of this problem. But I fear you are fighting a losing battle. For some unknown reason a majority of the people have decided not to read our words as they are intended and put their own spin on the situation.

 

Here is my quote from the first post =

 

"Now I don't know what you all think of this situation but we are not happy with the response. We still feel that the manager does not believe us. A bottle of wine ( which we do not drink ) doesn't seem enough for the " small incident " of almost swallowing a staple. We would have appreciated a letter from the management and possibly they could have seen them way to give us some type of ship board credit ? We are not looking for a huge reimbursement but I have heard of others getting a $100 credit for a lot less."

 

 

If read correctly you will see that the basic problem was the Lido manager telling my husband that it was not possible for the staple to come from the food in the Wok. You all can decide what you think that was supposed to mean. His English was fine as he is a Canadian. The bottle of wine was not enough without a letter from the management. I was pointing out that on these very boards I have seen people receive credits of $100.00 for smaller incidents. Did we expect a credit of $100.00 ? Hardly, we are not in such dire financial straits that a 100.00 would be needed. First week of the cruise cost us $3000.00 so you can see that we do not lack money. If the management felt that more than a letter was due, than a small shipboard credit is better. It would certainly not be more than $25.00 or less depending on the quality of the wine. Not all people want to receive spirits. I never mentioned a spa credit. I already had been to the spa, why would I expect an expensive spa credit ? As far as our integrity being questioned. Do you believe if someone says to you that what you told them is impossible that it is not saying that you are telling a made up story ? I doubt that you would react with sunshine and blushes ....( smile humor )

As for posting after we left the ship:

Sail7seas said:

 

"Please do post a 'write up' this weekend. I would like to read it.

I hope you enjoy the remainder of your cruise. Happily, your DH wasn't injured and you're on a 'dam' ship while we (sadly) are not!! Enjoy it. "

 

I was under the impression that the boards were for this purpose and that the first amendment was still alive and well ( smile for those that do not understand humor )

 

Being over looked are all the positive things we have said about the cruise. Nothing can be done to convince those that are taking a hard line on the supposed topic of outrageous compensation. I can take the heat but it does seem that they are reinforcing each other's opinions without trying to understand what I am saying.

 

Again, I am posting this for myself and my husband. So this OP is not just expressing her opinions."She could have made it right "...My husband was of the same opinion. My husband would type it up but I type better ( well, at least I can use more than two fingers ...smile...humor ) At the point of the second phone call, we were just too tired of explaining our problem ( somewhat like we are experiencing on this board ) so we dropped the whole issue. I posted on the board because I have been told before that you want to know it warts and all. But that doesn't seem to be the case, why not ?

And on one last note, I was not a customer service representative. That is a good job but I was an Operations Manager. This entails being responsible for an office of 100 people and reporting to a national company. I loved my job and some of the people who reported to me were customer service representatives.

 

Again, Thanks Scrumpy but don't wear out your fingers on this thread. I suspect that my stance on quality customer service has put a burr under their saddle ( humor, humor ).

[Seadoc]

The number is the (rough) estimate of the number of words, thus far, in this "thread".

Suffering from pre-terminal anal-retentiveness, I admit to having read each of them (sigh).

 

A few, hopefully objective, observations:

 

1. Rusty staples, do not belong in food.

2. Cruise marketing (e.g., smiles, superlatives and flawlessness) and cruise reality can coexist (e.g., Seabourn) but do not always (e.g., CCL, NCL and, in this case, HAL). It's the responsibility of "management" to ensure they do and do so "always". Management's "tools" are staff education/indoctrination, adequate staffing, ship and staff maintenence, money and committment/reinforcement and, perhaps most importantly, action on any and all negative customer feedback. It's not a science, but an art. HAL failed this customer...the customer did not fasil HAL.

3. Cruiseline fidelity (e.g., posters on these boards or allusions to the "number of days" cruised on a given line) easily and often clouds objectivity. To paraphrase the generic post written in response to real or imagined "complaints": "This is my favorite cruiseline you're bashing and, because I've sailed ___days with this line or taken ___successful cruises with this line, your "alleged complaint" must be viewed at higher power under my micrscope than other, and positive (reinforcing?) posts. Either my favorite line was having a most unusual "bad day" or you yourself must have somehow directly contributed to your complaint".

4. First-time cruisers should and must be accorded the same "customer service" as veterans. It's not the responsibility of the cruiser to "learn the ropes" but the responsibility of the line to provide, without specific request, the flawless customer service touted in the marketing hype...and to do so each and every time for all customers. That's why there's almost always a comma in the price of a cruise: a bunch of money is handed over in return for the cruiseline delivering on all of their marketing promises, regardless of the "status" of the customer.

5. What's (GOOD) Customer Service? Simply stated, perhaps, it's the "Golden Rule". It must be applied to every customer all the time - no exceptions and no excuses. Humans goof. Good customer service allows for goofs, but deals with them in such a way as to ensure the clear and unambiguous message received is the real verity: "The Customer ALWAYS comes first".

 

Thanks for your ear.

[TYMAN]

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..........................................

[HeatherInFlorida]

Some board hints: Just to the right of where you're typing you will see "smilies". When you want to express humor, click on the one that fits. You'll find that much easier than typing out "smile":) ... "being funny":D , mad:mad: , etc.

 

There's also no reason to continue to post that you're also speaking for your husband. Everyone is clear on that. When people say "she" it only means that you are the actual poster. It is not suggesting you singularly have the opinion.

 

Another problem your experiencing here is that you continually say you're not going to explain yourself further but you keep doing it. You've lost your audience. People have formed their opinions on this and they're done with it.

 

If you had kept the issue to feelings, to the fact that you felt you had bad treatment, you would have had a lot more of us. It was the mention of money that got everybody going.

 

Leave money out of it. It doesn't solve your issue and it makes it look like money was all you wanted. It doesn't matter what else you say or how much you try to explain yourself.

 

It's done. It's really, really done.:o

[Lokalona]

OK I've decided I want all my money back and I want the wine too...shouldn't have left it behind! LOL reallity no way...dream land yup! I would have liked to have a couple days worth of my scrilla (teenage term for cash) credited on my card for my situation. Since at least 2 days were basically ruined by clear fault of the cruise line and poor service, rude help and the over all "I don't give a DAM" attitude...using their favorite phrase back at them.

 

The rest of the 5 days were OK, not great but heck no one can control the weather.

 

 

My most recent cruise was on RCI just a few weeks back...we had a wonderful cabin, good weather except the last day, mediocre to good food but hey it is RCI after all. Service was outstanding! The service really made you tollerate what was not quite up to snuff.

 

I just wish I had another cruise to look forward too...

[Host Walt]

The number is the (rough) estimate of the number of words, thus far, in this "thread".

Suffering from pre-terminal anal-retentiveness, I admit to having read each of them (sigh).

 

A few, hopefully objective, observations:

 

1. Rusty staples, do not belong in food.

2. Cruise marketing (e.g., smiles, superlatives and flawlessness) and cruise reality can coexist (e.g., Seabourn) but do not always (e.g., CCL, NCL and, in this case, HAL). It's the responsibility of "management" to ensure they do and do so "always". Management's "tools" are staff education/indoctrination, adequate staffing, ship and staff maintenence, money and committment/reinforcement and, perhaps most importantly, action on any and all negative customer feedback. It's not a science, but an art. HAL failed this customer...the customer did not fasil HAL.

3. Cruiseline fidelity (e.g., posters on these boards or allusions to the "number of days" cruised on a given line) easily and often clouds objectivity. To paraphrase the generic post written in response to real or imagined "complaints": "This is my favorite cruiseline you're bashing and, because I've sailed ___days with this line or taken ___successful cruises with this line, your "alleged complaint" must be viewed at higher power under my micrscope than other, and positive (reinforcing?) posts. Either my favorite line was having a most unusual "bad day" or you yourself must have somehow directly contributed to your complaint".

4. First-time cruisers should and must be accorded the same "customer service" as veterans. It's not the responsibility of the cruiser to "learn the ropes" but the responsibility of the line to provide, without specific request, the flawless customer service touted in the marketing hype...and to do so each and every time for all customers. That's why there's almost always a comma in the price of a cruise: a bunch of money is handed over in return for the cruiseline delivering on all of their marketing promises, regardless of the "status" of the customer.

5. What's (GOOD) Customer Service? Simply stated, perhaps, it's the "Golden Rule". It must be applied to every customer all the time - no exceptions and no excuses. Humans goof. Good customer service allows for goofs, but deals with them in such a way as to ensure the clear and unambiguous message received is the real verity: "The Customer ALWAYS comes first".

 

Thanks for your ear.

Seadoc, you have cited what those of us in "real life" are constantly emphasizing; the consumer ultimately decides who succeeds and who fails and the service/product provider who forgets that fact, even for a few minutes, is doomed.

 

Your post contains a lot of basic, fundamental wisdom. Thanks.

[ekerr19]

The OP indicated she was considering Crystal for her next cruise - and I applaud her, she obviously had a bad enough experience on HAL to merit going elsewhere.

 

I still think "good" and "bad" customer service is highly suggestive - what bothered her, may not have bothered me or my DH at all - and I certainly don't want to discount the feeling that she believed it was bad. In the end, that's all that really matters anyway - what she and her husband believed.

 

The fact remains that each of us have the power to decide where we will spend our future travel dollars - I believe this IS a message that should be getting through to Seattle, loud and clear - but perhaps it's not.

 

I have not yet reached the point where I say "no more HAL", but I can't say that day won't come either.