Reduced Staffing - a myth?

[cle-guy]

I was reading another thread and came across this quote discussing the current financials put out by RCI in their SEC Stock Filings:

 

On the cost side:

 

Food: $119.2 million vs. 112.5 (5.96% increase)

Shipboard payroll: $209.2 million vs. 209.0 (flat)

 

Shipboard payroll was flat, which would be somewhat expected since manning doesn't change if a few more passengers are aboard. At he same time, there was a 4.5% increase in fleet capacity, so this may suggest some reduction in labor per passenger.

 

A 4.5% increase in capacity would require an additional $9 million in payroll dollars to stay even. OK, so yes there must be some reductions.

 

But how much?

 

Assuming an annualized salary of $30,000, then that is only 312 positions. RCI has 23 ships, Celebrity 11, Azamara 2, total of 35 ships. So 312 staff among the ships equates to about 8 positions per ship could be "missing". Even if we cut the salary in half, we're only talking 16 positions.

 

Solstice for example has about 1,250 crew (figures vary bases on source, this figure is from Crusie Critic Editor Stats: http://www.cruisecritic.com/reviews/review.cfm?ShipID=381).

 

8/1,250 = .64% reduction in staff (just over a half of a percent). Solstice carries 2,850 passengers, so based on 1,250 staff that's 2.28 PAX/staff ratio if no reductions in staff, or 2.29 PAX/staff ratio if there have been cuts to 1,242 staff. Insignificant....

 

Further, people say that dining room staff and cabin stewards make all their money on tips, not salary, so why would a line CUT the positions they don't even have to pay for, (i.e. WE pay for it directly with our gratuities). They haven't saved lodging costs, as they have not converted empty cabins to revenue generating ones, so why sail with empty cabins for staff that costs the line nothing. Cutting positions that cost the line little to nothing doesn't reduce cost at all.

 

I would say perhaps we see fewer folks working the MDR, and I'd say that has a lot to do with growing popularity of Specialty restaurants, select dining as a choice, and BLU. Staff seem to have been repositioned not removed.

 

Curious if anyone has any data sources to support the theory that staffing has been reduced other than anecdotal personal "experience". Because the financials certainly don't support a staff reduction of any significance.

[miched]

It is also more than the salary or wages. Every employee gets medical, food, uniforms, insurance, cabin space and I think transportation to and from their home. There is also the cost of accounting involved to handle thier pay, paperwork, records, and etc.

 

Plus every person on board also uses utilities, and things that require disposal. Everything adds up.

 

Happy sailing 🌊🚢🇺🇸🌅

[mamamzee]

Cle-guy: Your posts always make so much sense to me.

[Orator]

Cle-guy:

Interesting analysis; however, it is very difficult if not impossible to make judgments based on raw numbers since RCL doesn't do a breakdown by component companies. It is possible that there might have been large reductions in one component offset by higher growth in another. We know from reports and personal experience (I understand not what you want) that Activities Staff have been cut in half. We know that Waiters and Asst. Waiters have been assigned more tables and Cabin Attendants and Assistant Cabin Attendants have been assigned more cabins. We do not know the wage structure for Senior Officers and Management. Were there significant increases last year that would have absorbed some cutback savings? We just don't know from how the numbers are reported. Let's assume for the sake of argument that any staff reductions were indeed minimal. Even if we assume that if a minimal cutback impacts what you feel is important to your overall experience, it does have an impact on you.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Orator

[4774Papa]

It is also more than the salary or wages. Every employee gets medical, food, uniforms, insurance, cabin space and I think transportation to and from their home. There is also the cost of accounting involved to handle thier pay, paperwork, records, and etc.

 

Plus every person on board also uses utilities, and things that require disposal. Everything adds up.

 

Happy sailing 🌊🚢🇺🇸🌅

Thanks Cle-guy, another informative post.

We have not noticed a drop in service (we have done four X cruises in the past year and a half).

I suspect that the drinks packages may account for some people's perception of a drop in service.

[hcat]

Personally, not into the numbers sheets but they are interesting...

We will judge by our upcoming cruises if our onboard experience reflects that there are sufficient bar servers, pool drink servers, cabin and asst cabin attendants , wine servers and sommeliers, guest rel staff, activity staff, pool butlers, workout area attendants, entertainers, guest lecturers, and so many other hard working staff, etc

 

we know that while live musicians are still onboard it seems not as many as in the past.. one steel drum player replaces an island band, DJs given prime locations instead of bands,, string music groups, jazz groups, piano players and guitarists not a guarantee. I bet they are saving in this area even with the new scratch DJ team...

 

also seems staff composition has changed over the yrs...many long term experienced staff have left b/c of euro to dollar values...can't make enough !

 

We enjoy reading the analytical discussion but ultimately judge by the cruise experience...

[Kennyftlaud]

It may be a bit of leap to extrapolate from SEC filings, exact number of employees lost per ship. Let's say the numbers proposed in this thread are correct. I am concerned about the multiplier effect. Assuming that every employee position has function and fills a need. For each lost position a remaining employee must assume additional duties and hours of work. Example: an employee may work twelve hours per day, cleaning, serving, preparing, carrying, repairing ect. For each employee given a pink slip, twelve remaining employees must now work one additional hour each day to cover the lost work of the one pink slipped employee simply to remain at a constant level of service. Sixteen employees lost has now turned into 192 employees affected. These employees now have additional duties and or additional hours of work to complete each day....just to remain the same. Affected employees begin to approach ten plus percent of the workforce. The work may in fact get done but at what expense? Maybe fewer smiles, perhaps a less helpful staff, possibly an exhausted workforce or even generalized cutting of corners or loss of attention to detail. From what I've observed in the past, these guys and gals work pretty hard already. I'm not sure how much more work can be squeezed out of these folks. I have concerns that relatively small reductions in staff may have general and more far reaching consequences in maintaining a superior passenger experience.

 

 

Ken / Fort Lauderdale

Upcoming Cruises:

Celebrity Silhouette Transatlantic Nov 1, 2014

Allure of the Seas Transatlantic Oct 25, 2015

[Quo Vadis?]

We know from reports and personal experience that Activities Staff have been cut in half. We know that Waiters and Asst. Waiters have been assigned more tables and Cabin Attendants and Assistant Cabin Attendants have been assigned more cabins. We do not know the wage structure for Senior Officers and Management. Even if we assume that if a minimal cutback impacts what you feel is important to your overall experience, it does have an impact on you.

 

We have spoken with enough mid management staff on board to know that these cuts have taken place. I believe that somewhere along the line there was a staff meeting(s) that decided that staff were told that increased income would be the trade off for an increased work load. Less staff to share gratuities means a higher workload, slower service in the MDR, a longer wait for cabin cleaning and more comments from passengers that service just ain't what it used to be.

BBB is an acronym for the fact that one just cannot equate personal experience with someone trying to use numbers to prove the opposite.

As the master of interpreting human nature once said:

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

[Chitown12562]

There was what seemed to be a big reduction in the number of staff around the pool offering drinks on the Equinox this March. Almost no one. I didn't mind, as I appreciated the quite. I went and got our drinks, but there were a few times when I wished someone came by. The same seemed true when we were at the OceanView café.

 

I also noticed that staff seemed to be in more of a hurry in Blu compared to my first cruise with celebrity.

 

Staff reduction or lack of service? Real or imagined that's how it felt.

[Sloop-JohnB]

Cle-guy: Your posts always make so much sense to me.

 

Agree 100%

 

Nothing to add on this topic other than the info is interesting

 

CLE-GUY I enjoy your posts due to your personal perspective of being a long time cruiser (various Celebrity Itineraries & Cabin Categories), RC Stockholder & someone with a background in Hotel Management.

 

Your observations make sense to me,

 

Cheers!

[shipshape sam]

I was reading another thread and came across this quote discussing the current financials put out by RCI in their SEC Stock Filings:

 

 

 

A 4.5% increase in capacity would require an additional $9 million in payroll dollars to stay even. OK, so yes there must be some reductions.

 

But how much?

 

Assuming an annualized salary of $30,000, then that is only 312 positions. RCI has 23 ships, Celebrity 11, Azamara 2, total of 35 ships. So 312 staff among the ships equates to about 8 positions per ship could be "missing". Even if we cut the salary in half, we're only talking 16 positions.

 

Solstice for example has about 1,250 crew (figures vary bases on source, this figure is from Crusie Critic Editor Stats: http://www.cruisecritic.com/reviews/review.cfm?ShipID=381).

 

8/1,250 = .64% reduction in staff (just over a half of a percent). Solstice carries 2,850 passengers, so based on 1,250 staff that's 2.28 PAX/staff ratio if no reductions in staff, or 2.29 PAX/staff ratio if there have been cuts to 1,242 staff. Insignificant....

 

Further, people say that dining room staff and cabin stewards make all their money on tips, not salary, so why would a line CUT the positions they don't even have to pay for, (i.e. WE pay for it directly with our gratuities). They haven't saved lodging costs, as they have not converted empty cabins to revenue generating ones, so why sail with empty cabins for staff that costs the line nothing. Cutting positions that cost the line little to nothing doesn't reduce cost at all.

 

I would say perhaps we see fewer folks working the MDR, and I'd say that has a lot to do with growing popularity of Specialty restaurants, select dining as a choice, and BLU. Staff seem to have been repositioned not removed.

 

Curious if anyone has any data sources to support the theory that staffing has been reduced other than anecdotal personal "experience". Because the financials certainly don't support a staff reduction of any significance.

 

 

I would suggest that if your analysis and assumptions are correct, then 16 potential positions in more targeted areas around the ship might become significant if you exclude wait and cabin staff under the assumption that they are not paid a salary or one that would NOT warrant eliminating the position.

 

I have heard that the activities staff has been the area effected. This is just what I have heard. My guess is they have 4-5 people per ship so losing one person here would be a 25 to 20 percent reduction of staff in that area using my 4-5 staffing number pre slot elimination.

 

Thanks for your effort!

[Gonzo70]

I was reading another thread and came across this quote discussing the current financials put out by RCI in their SEC Stock Filings:

 

 

 

A 4.5% increase in capacity would require an additional $9 million in payroll dollars to stay even. OK, so yes there must be some reductions.

 

But how much?

 

Assuming an annualized salary of $30,000, then that is only 312 positions. RCI has 23 ships, Celebrity 11, Azamara 2, total of 35 ships. So 312 staff among the ships equates to about 8 positions per ship could be "missing". Even if we cut the salary in half, we're only talking 16 positions.

 

Solstice for example has about 1,250 crew (figures vary bases on source, this figure is from Crusie Critic Editor Stats: http://www.cruisecritic.com/reviews/review.cfm?ShipID=381).

 

8/1,250 = .64% reduction in staff (just over a half of a percent). Solstice carries 2,850 passengers, so based on 1,250 staff that's 2.28 PAX/staff ratio if no reductions in staff, or 2.29 PAX/staff ratio if there have been cuts to 1,242 staff. Insignificant....

 

Further, people say that dining room staff and cabin stewards make all their money on tips, not salary, so why would a line CUT the positions they don't even have to pay for, (i.e. WE pay for it directly with our gratuities). They haven't saved lodging costs, as they have not converted empty cabins to revenue generating ones, so why sail with empty cabins for staff that costs the line nothing. Cutting positions that cost the line little to nothing doesn't reduce cost at all.

 

I would say perhaps we see fewer folks working the MDR, and I'd say that has a lot to do with growing popularity of Specialty restaurants, select dining as a choice, and BLU. Staff seem to have been repositioned not removed.

 

Curious if anyone has any data sources to support the theory that staffing has been reduced other than anecdotal personal "experience". Because the financials certainly don't support a staff reduction of any significance.

 

Were these numbers quarterly or yearly? If quarterly, you'd also need to use 1/4 year salary, so it would be a loss of 32 or 64 people per ship, not 8 or 16. Also as another poster mentioned, just because waiters and stewards only earn minimal salary ($50 per month is what I have heard) they do cost the cruise line significantly in other areas such as food/insurance/energy consumption/space etc. so there is financial incentive to cut them. As such the numbers likely are even greater than than that.

 

I think it is factual there have been cutbacks and enough to be noticeable and impact the cruising experience. It is factual the activities staff has been cut in half on the Celebrity brand. It is factual there are fewer musicians (i.e. no more a capalla group). And many believe the cabin stewards are assigned more rooms and waitstaff more tables than was the case a couple of years ago. I have found the waitstaff more hurried and less personable on my most recent cruises.

 

CEO Bayley does seem to have taken more aggressive measures than his predecessor in maximizing profits on Celebrity; great for the company's bottom line (at least for the short term), but not so great for the passengers impacted by the cuts.

[cle-guy]

I can stipulate to the activities staff being cut, so that's 2 cut per ship, 11 ships, 22 positions cut.

 

I know this for sure having seen it in action on Summit sailing. I also noticed that I did not see any activities missing, that other staff seemed to pick up the slack. I compared my TA dailies from 2013 and 2014 (both on Eclipse, 13 nights, Florida to Southampton, both with Sue Denning as CD) and they pretty much look didactical, but missing the guest talent show, though they still did the choir and flash mobs....still had trivia, still and Xbox gaming, still hosted crew volleyball in the pool. still had speakers series.

 

I also know Dining room staff no longer have bar order takers, the serving staff does it. I suggest this is more to do with a change in the way service is done, and the reallocation of dining staff to alternate venues, BLU, for example on M class ships had to have staff come from someplace when it was added the last 2 years.....so MDR lost staff, BLU got those staff members. Net effect - ZERO.

 

I also see this as a stepping stone and training time towards no assigned seating, and full any time dining, like normal land-based restaurants do, assign 1 waiter to a table to handle the full service, and have expeditors deliver the food and drinks once entered into the POS system. I honestly think this will be the norm come the 2016 cruise season start. The proliferation of specialty ding means not as many people are in the MDR each night as they sit elsewhere, some tables will be empty others full some half full each night, this affects service. Full tables with assigned waiter will have worse service than the half full table whose missing guests are dining in Murano will for example, this is a problem with assigned seating and assigned wait staff.

 

We also don't know how much of the reduction is related to SHORE side staff...call centers may have had staff reductions, we've read of activities management on shore side being reduced.....so reduction in dollars has come from both ship and shore side....meaning even less of the reduced staff dollars is directly related to the ship-board experience.

 

It's also been noted that Zumba used to be run by Celebrity activities staff, now is run by the Spa staff, who are subcontracted, and therefore not part of the "reduced staff" from the X numbers reported.

 

I honestly don't put much faith in in discussions with staff, they gossip, they say what people want to here, they have their own agenda to spread... and make stuff up (i.e. Bistro on 5 is becoming suite dining room, was one rumor staff spread for months....even after full staff meetings educating them to the contrary). Staff should not be sharing financial information with guests. I've read stories of guests returning telling stories that their cabin stewards tell them them make zero salary, 100% gratuities. this is patently false, a way for the staff to guilt guests into additional tipping...

 

The majority of ship side staff also do not earn benefits (no health coverage, no retirement etc.) so those types of costs are not factoring into the saving of reduced F&B and cabin staff. Typically only shore side staff get benefits, except for very senior positions on board.

 

So I had assumed 8 positions per ship cut, we've identified 2 being activities staff. So now that leaves only 6 in the rooms/F&B that are missing....which still need offset by the shore based reductions.

 

I appreciate the comments and replies here, I am enjoying understanding other's perceptions and perhaps offering of facts and such related to this.

 

I'm really trying to see how much of the perceived staffing reductions is honestly more closely tied to the "law of diminishing returns". Reading reviews, seems most people who are new to cruising have nothing but praise for the service they get and their overall experience. It tends to be the long time cursers who talk more of the reduced staff, and I wonder how much of that is perception, related to one getting to know "the system" better over time, and who desire additional special care over time as they get comfortable seeking out and asking for increased service levels.

[cle-guy]

Were these numbers quarterly or yearly? If quarterly, you'd also need to use 1/4 year salary, so it would be a loss of 32 or 64 people per ship, not 8 or 16. Also as another poster mentioned, just because waiters and stewards only earn minimal salary ($50 per month is what I have heard) they do cost the cruise line significantly in other areas such as food/insurance/energy consumption/space etc. so there is financial incentive to cut them. As such the numbers likely are even greater than than that.

 

I was using percentages, so they would relate equally to quarterly or annually, the compared figures were the same period, not sure of annual or quarter without going back, but it wouldn't matter if it was 8 positions due to 9 million of savings quarter, it would be then 9 x 4 = 32million savings for the year, and still equated to 9 positions.

 

Significant costs, energy consumption, really...that is so minor related to extra staff, and such a small savings would really only be realized only if their personal cabin went empty and unused so no lights were turned on, which is also part of my theory no cuts have really been made. If they cut so much staff that there are now so many empty crew cabins, why would they not take steps to convert to inside cabins and generate revenue. These 8 positions mean 4 cabins, each can generate lets say $1500 a week (looking at a berm ida sailing insides have been as high as $2500 a week - but I'll go conservative) That's $52,000 increased revenue x 4 cabins = $208,000 in revenue per ship per year, times 11 ships in X fleet = $2,288,000 in extra revenue, plus the extra on board spend for those guests, so lets call it $4 million in extra revenues. If they had those empty cabins, they would convert them for 4 million bucks in revenue stream. It could be as easily done as the adding of BLU was to M class, or as Suite dining room will be added in. That they have not converted staff cabins, tells me they are still full.

 

If they cut a $50 a month employee (who by the way does not get benefits, so forget about those costs, they get tho see the ship doctor who is already there...) Food is also insignificant, as they generally eat off the buffet, and aren't eating the Filet Mignon and Lobster in the MDR. They would also save lets say $400 airfare (they get good deals from airlines due to he "interline" sharing program they have with airlines - lots of my friends work for airlines and take advantage of the ship side deals they get as part of the package). So $400 x 2 trips = $800 x 8 staff = $6400 a year in travel savings. insignificant, and not a blip on the radar.

[Iamcruzin]

I don't speak or become close to the staff as some on this board and the Princess board do and personally I think that whatever they hear from the staff about being over worked and short handed is just a sales pitch to receive a larger tip or to make up for their short comings. I have never had bad, slow or incompetent service on either line and I never got the impression that the staff was stressed or over worked. My room is always clean by the time I get back from breakfast and turned down when I get back from dinner. They always make conversation with us or joke around but I never get so personal that I feel like I have to adopt them or marry them. My guess is that the ships are just getting larger and they are not staffing the ships with the same ratio of staff to passenger as they did when the ships were smaller. I think that's were the cutting of staff is While I may be a jaded New Yorker I'm not high maintenance so maybe I'm not seeing what others see.

[NLH Arizona]

I think sometimes it is a matter of one person's perception and then others just run with it, thinking that it is the truth or wanting to only see the negative. I've seen posters on here say that there was a huge percentage of cutbacks in the serving and housekeeping departments, while others say that they had tremendous service and their server or cabin steward was always around and never missed a beat. Others have issues with the activity staff cuts, but when you look at recent reviews there are raves about the activities and it doesn't seem like anything has been dropped. Even Zumba, it is still there, it is just that Canyon Ranch has taken over and decided to charge for it, but it is still there.

 

Curt, thanks for the information and insight, hopefully it will settle the minds of those that are new to Celebrity or those that are looking to cruise with Celebrity.

[Gracie115]

Were these numbers quarterly or yearly? If quarterly, you'd also need to use 1/4 year salary, so it would be a loss of 32 or 64 people per ship, not 8 or 16. Also as another poster mentioned, just because waiters and stewards only earn minimal salary ($50 per month is what I have heard) they do cost the cruise line significantly in other areas such as food/insurance/energy consumption/space etc. so there is financial incentive to cut them. As such the numbers likely are even greater than than that.

 

I think it is factual there have been cutbacks and enough to be noticeable and impact the cruising experience. It is factual the activities staff has been cut in half on the Celebrity brand. It is factual there are fewer musicians (i.e. no more a capalla group). And many believe the cabin stewards are assigned more rooms and waitstaff more tables than was the case a couple of years ago. I have found the waitstaff more hurried and less personable on my most recent cruises.

 

CEO Bayley does seem to have taken more aggressive measures than his predecessor in maximizing profits on Celebrity; great for the company's bottom line (at least for the short term), but not so great for the passengers impacted by the cuts.

 

Hey Gonzo-

 

I've been wondering where you've been!! Nice to see you posting again!

 

Agree with you and with Orator too.....looking at a "bulk" number does not tell the tale at all. Who knows what kind of increases upper management have taken to help the payroll figure stay "flat" while the cuts are made to the lower staff.....as we all know the top 1% of income earners are increasing their earnings much faster than the rest of the working world....... so in order to do a proper analysis you have to see the structure of the ships staff, say a year ago and then again today...suspect you would see quite a different picture than just a person cut here and there....

[cle-guy]

So a brief and simple question, if so many staff are no longer on the ship, why are those cabins sailing empty not yet converted to revenue generating cabins....? The revenue those would generate is a hundred fold more than the cost savings.

 

Discuss....

[dkjretired]

I also know Dining room staff no longer have bar order takers, the serving staff does it. I suggest this is more to do with a change in the way service is done, and the reallocation of dining staff to alternate venues, BLU, for example on M class ships had to have staff come from someplace when it was added the last 2 years.....so MDR lost staff, BLU got those staff members. Net effect - ZERO.

 

 

QUOTE]

 

Your comments are well thought out however those on the dining room staff do not explain what happened on S class ships if you accept the bar staff went to Blu or other locations on the M class ships. I think eliminating the bar server predates the M class upgrades to S class venues, not sure about that though. (can't spell that damn word, don't want to search for it) Think they lose money on this, I ordered a drink and it took forever, didn't get it until middle of dinner. Didn't bother ordering at dinner the rest of the cruise.

 

I can also say that I spend a lot of time in the Solarium, don't like the Sun since I'm a melanoma patient and I did notice that bar staff were very infrequent in there on my last cruise. I used to see them all the time but not last cruise. Also, most of the cruise I only saw one person at the bar by the pool, always remember two or three. Point is there are reductions that we just don't know about.

Edited July 30, 2014 by dkjretired

[Sloop-JohnB]

So a brief and simple question, if so many staff are no longer on the ship, why are those cabins sailing empty not yet converted to revenue generating cabins....? The revenue those would generate is a hundred fold more than the cost savings.

 

Discuss....

 

Because the majority of vacant cabins we would assume would be in less desirable locations (lower decks for example, or "embedded" in the walls of some Passenger Decks... This I know to be true for Deck 3 on S-Ships)

 

Conversions could be possible... But it would be a lot of work reconfiguring... More so we assume if only a handful of cabins involved.

 

Mind you, converting some of the "embedded" cabins to small singles like on NCL Breakaway (see their deck plans... They are the closest thing afloat on a mainstream cruise line to a crew cabin) might prove to be a successful / profitable thing to attract a single "modern luxury" cruiser

 

Cheers!

[NLH Arizona]

 

I can also say that I spend a lot of time in the Solarium, don't like the Sun since I'm a melanoma patient and I did notice that bar staff were very infrequent in there on my last cruise. I used to see them all the time but not last cruise. Also, most of the cruise I only saw one person at the bar by the pool, always remember two or three. Point is there are reductions that we just don't know about.

I will say that on all cruise lines I've been on there were many more servers by the pools in years past, but I also noticed that they went around asking if anyone wanted anything and hardly ever saw them getting drinks. Possibly the cruise lines felt that they could be of more benefit somewhere else and moved them to another location on the ship, instead of having them just walking up and down the pool all day. Just a thought! Edited July 30, 2014 by NLH Arizona

[coldweathergirl]

So a brief and simple question, if so many staff are no longer on the ship, why are those cabins sailing empty not yet converted to revenue generating cabins....? The revenue those would generate is a hundred fold more than the cost savings.

 

Discuss....

 

We've sailed several times in the last year and the wait staff in Blu appeared to be stretched a bit thin. Could be because Noro precautions were in place.

 

I wonder if some of the staff cabin slack is being taken up by the onboard future cruise sales staff. There seemed to be a minimum of 4 on our last sailing and a couple of years ago it was an office of one. They also have the specialty excursion desk that was not in place a year or so.

[phoenix_dream]

I will take facts over perceptions and anecdotal comments when I have them. Some interesting figures were quoted, and from there certain conclusions were drawn. Unfortunately, we do not have enough facts to say with certainty how many staff were cut, or from where were the staff cut. There are so many unknowns, matched with many more variables relating to reassignment rather than cutting, RCI vs Celebrity cuts, etc.. What we can know from the statistics is that the amount of cuts overall was not drastic.

 

Those of us who have cruised Celebrity for many, many years risk intense flaming when we dare to mention cuts that have taken place over the years either in staffing, quality of service or food, or whatever. We are accused of never being satisfied, being complainers, finding fault with everything, the list goes on and on. As an X cruiser since 1992 I am going on record again as saying that 1) I love Celebrity, 2) Celebrity is my line of choice, and 3) I have experienced definite declines in certain areas that while they do not prevent me from having a great cruise are in fact noticeable. I am here to say definitively that all three of these comments can be true because they are for me. I would appreciate anyone commenting on these statements to consider all three of them, and not just #3. How much of this decline can be attributed to staffing cuts versus other money saving efforts I cannot always determine.

 

I believe it is worth taking a grain of salt with comments from staff about reductions, but I think there has been enough hearsay evidence from multiple fronts to not completely dismiss it out of hand. Is it exaggerated? Perhaps. But it is mentioned often enough I don't think it should completely be disregarded. Having been a manager for many, many years, I can say with certainty that only a fool will not pay any attention to what the staff is saying. This analogy is not exact, but I think the basic truth still holds - no one knows what is really going on better than the people doing the day to day work.

[dkjretired]

I will take facts over perceptions and anecdotal comments when I have them. Some interesting figures were quoted, and from there certain conclusions were drawn. Unfortunately, we do not have enough facts to say with certainty how many staff were cut, or from where were the staff cut. There are so many unknowns, matched with many more variables relating to reassignment rather than cutting, RCI vs Celebrity cuts, etc.. What we can know from the statistics is that the amount of cuts overall was not drastic.

 

Those of us who have cruised Celebrity for many, many years risk intense flaming when we dare to mention cuts that have taken place over the years either in staffing, quality of service or food, or whatever. We are accused of never being satisfied, being complainers, finding fault with everything, the list goes on and on. As an X cruiser since 1992 I am going on record again as saying that 1) I love Celebrity, 2) Celebrity is my line of choice, and 3) I have experienced definite declines in certain areas that while they do not prevent me from having a great cruise are in fact noticeable. I am here to say definitively that all three of these comments can be true because they are for me. I would appreciate anyone commenting on these statements to consider all three of them, and not just #3. How much of this decline can be attributed to staffing cuts versus other money saving efforts I cannot always determine.

 

Cle-guy makes the point of transfers etc. and he is right. Common sense dictates that we don't know all the changes, pretty much anything we say is guess work. I'm just going on my cruise and enjoying myself.

 

I believe it is worth taking a grain of salt with comments from staff about reductions, but I think there has been enough hearsay evidence from multiple fronts to not completely dismiss it out of hand. Is it exaggerated? Perhaps. But it is mentioned often enough I don't think it should completely be disregarded. Having been a manager for many, many years, I can say with certainty that only a fool will not pay any attention to what the staff is saying. This analogy is not exact, but I think the basic truth still holds - no one knows what is really going on better than the people doing the day to day work.

 

You are absolutely right in your comments, agree with all three of your comments and I have been sailing with them since 92 also. . One of the things I will say is that the quality of service and food in the Specialty restaurants is what we got 20 years ago every night in the MDR. I am not complaining, I accept that things change, some are good, some not so good. They are my favorite line and am looking forward to Alaska this in August

Edited July 30, 2014 by dkjretired

[Gracie115]

I will take facts over perceptions and anecdotal comments when I have them. Some interesting figures were quoted, and from there certain conclusions were drawn. Unfortunately, we do not have enough facts to say with certainty how many staff were cut, or from where were the staff cut. There are so many unknowns, matched with many more variables relating to reassignment rather than cutting, RCI vs Celebrity cuts, etc.. What we can know from the statistics is that the amount of cuts overall was not drastic.

 

Those of us who have cruised Celebrity for many, many years risk intense flaming when we dare to mention cuts that have taken place over the years either in staffing, quality of service or food, or whatever. We are accused of never being satisfied, being complainers, finding fault with everything, the list goes on and on. As an X cruiser since 1992 I am going on record again as saying that 1) I love Celebrity, 2) Celebrity is my line of choice, and 3) I have experienced definite declines in certain areas that while they do not prevent me from having a great cruise are in fact noticeable. I am here to say definitively that all three of these comments can be true because they are for me. I would appreciate anyone commenting on these statements to consider all three of them, and not just #3. How much of this decline can be attributed to staffing cuts versus other money saving efforts I cannot always determine.

 

I believe it is worth taking a grain of salt with comments from staff about reductions, but I think there has been enough hearsay evidence from multiple fronts to not completely dismiss it out of hand. Is it exaggerated? Perhaps. But it is mentioned often enough I don't think it should completely be disregarded. Having been a manager for many, many years, I can say with certainty that only a fool will not pay any attention to what the staff is saying. This analogy is not exact, but I think the basic truth still holds - no one knows what is really going on better than the people doing the day to day work.

 

I agree wholeheartedly! Have been cruising with X for almost 20 years and still am and will continue to do so. Having said that there is no question that staffing is reduced since I first cruised. I don't need statistical analysis to prove that. There are either no sommeliers in the MDR anymore or very few. The wait staff handle far more tables now than they did then, cocktail servers were everywhere, now much more sparse. Housekeeping staff handle more staterooms, I know this for a FACT. Again, this is not meant to complain, just acknowledgement that it is a fact. I think it is harder, MUCH harder for someone who just began cruising with Celebrity in the last few years to see those changes, those of us who have been with them for a decade or more see it very easily. Still love the product they are putting out and can't wait for the next cruise!!:)