Chair hogging

[shorne]

There have been endless complaints about the ubiquitous and sempiternal practice of holding a chair all day by plopping a towel or some other object on it first thing in the morning. This doesn't affect me, because cultivating melanoma while sprawling by a swimming pool full of screaming children is not among my principal joys in life. But I honestly don't see why this problem has festered to the point of driving blood pressures up and causing hair to go grey before its time. Is it really that difficult to solve?

 

In much of Europe, free parking on the street is often managed through the use of a little cardboard disc left on the dashboard: one sets it to show the time of arrival, and that information combined with the posted limit shows whether one is legally parked. Liars who set the dial to a later time run the risk of getting caught and being fined on the spot. A similar system could be used for those damn chairs that apparently are both highly coveted and little used: the ship could enforce a maximum absence of, say, 15 minutes (what exactly are people doing that simultaneously creates an urgent need for a chair and an urgent need not to use it?), with little cards made up for the purpose, and anyone finding at 9:01 a card marked «8:45» or «10:00» would be well within her rights to remove it, settle into the seat, and ignore the complaints that might follow five or six hours later.

 

The North American system is to charge for parking everywhere, perhaps because so many North Americans cannot manage numbers well enough to set a clock. That's another possibility, though it would require more equipment: put a parking meter on the chair, and when the time is up, an attendant may issue a ticket and tow any belongings away. The proceeds could go to cover the wages of the staff needlessly hired to manage the passengers' selfishness and lack of consideration.

 

Or passengers could just take the initiative by removing abandoned items and expropriating the chairs. Really, why should a towel or a book be entitled to a chair while a perfectly living pair of human buttocks is left deprived? I do not consider myself the social inferior of dry goods, and I would not defer to the tender sensibilities of a towel if I felt like sitting down.

 

If the problem is really so severe as to lead to fisticuffs, maybe the answer is just to say that any chair left vacant for as little as a second is up for grabs. Or to toss overboard anyone with the gall to hoard a chair. Or maybe people don't deserve to have chairs at all and there should be standing room only.

 

Really, I fail to understand why whatever brain cells may exist in the management of cruise ships cannot find a way to address this dumb problem.

Edited April 7, 2023 by shorne

[Flatbush Flyer]

4 minutes ago, shorne said:

There have been endless complaints about the ubiquitous and sempiternal practice of holding a chair all day by plopping a towel or some other object on it first thing in the morning. This doesn't affect me, because cultivating melanoma while sprawling by a swimming pool full of screaming children is not among my principal joys in life. But I honestly don't see why this problem has festered to the point of driving blood pressures up and causing hair to go grey before its time. Is it really that difficult to solve?

 

In much of Europe, free parking on the street is often managed through the use of a little cardboard disc left on the dashboard: one sets it to show the time of arrival, and that information combined with the posted limit shows whether one is legally parked. Liars who set the dial to a later time run the risk of getting caught and being fined on the spot. A similar system could be used for those damn chairs that apparently are both highly coveted and little used: the ship could enforce a maximum absence of, say, 15 minutes (what exactly are people doing that simultaneously creates an urgent need for a chair and an urgent need not to use it?), with little cards made up for the purpose, and anyone finding at 9:01 a card marked «8:45» or «10:00» would be well within her rights to remove it, settle into the seat, and ignore the complaints that might follow five or six hours later.

 

The North American system is to charge for parking everywhere, perhaps because so many North Americans cannot manage numbers well enough to set a clock. That's another possibility, though it would require more equipment: put a parking meter on the chair, and when the time is up, an attendant may issue a ticket and tow any belongings away. The proceeds could go to cover the wages of the staff needlessly hired to manage the passengers' selfishness and lack of consideration.

 

Or passengers could just take the initiative by removing abandoned items and expropriating the chairs. Really, why should a towel or a book be entitled to a chair while a perfectly living pair of human buttocks is left deprived? I do not consider myself the social inferior of dry goods, and I would not defer to the tender sensibilities of a towel if I felt like sitting down.

 

If the problem is really so severe as to lead to fisticuffs, maybe the answer is just to say that any chair left vacant for as little as a second is up for grabs. Or to toss overboard anyone with the gall to hoard a chair. Or maybe people don't deserve to have chairs at all and there should be standing room only.

 

Really, I fail to understand why whatever brain cells may exist in the management of cruise ships cannot find a way to address this dumb problem.

Once again, you’re assuming that all cruise lines behave/manage the same way. Another nice thing about our preferred line is that there is little tolerance of aberrant behaviors like “chair hogging.” Pool staff monitor vacant chairs and, when stuff is left unattended on a chair for an unreasonable amount of time (e.g., 30+\- minutes), the stuff is removed and stored. 

[shorne]

Well, «ubiquitous» must have been an exaggeration. I don't know: again, if I chose to spend time lounging by a pool, I would just move stuff off any convenient chair and, seeing the chair newly liberated, get comfortable. So the problem isn't mine.

 

And I don't understand why anyone should be allowed to hoard a chair for as long as thirty minutes. Five minutes for passing waste, yes. Ten minutes, maybe. Thirty? Let someone else have the chair, for pity's sake! You're not using it.

[BruceMuzz]

This "chair hogging" behaviour and problem is confined to the low-end mass market cruise lines.

If you want to avoid it, simply move up to a better cruise line.

The company I work for has small ships with more pool loungers than passengers.

We have never experienced the problem you are trying to solve.

[jsn55]

It's useless to try to regulate the behaviour of the ignorant in this situation. Pax are reluctant to move items off chairs because someone might yell at them.  Crew will not 'enforce' any rules, they cultivate 'happiness' for all pax.  They are compensated with gratuities; don't expect them to engage in any unpleasant interactions with pax.  Cruiselines can indeed set up an easy timer system (some of us North Americans might be able to figure it out, or we could ask our much-more sophisticated Euro brethren).  'Security' can be summoned to remove items after 30 minutes.  Security does not exist on tips, they are salaried.  When the affected pax returns and starts yelling, security can come mediate.  

[shorne]

«Happiness» for all means, of course, that some do as they please and others suffer in silence. Dress codes are a classic example: «black tie» is respected by 2½ people; everyone else turns up in rags that I wouldn't wear to clean out the garage. Since dress codes are seldom enforced, we know exactly where that leads.

 

Inertia operating as it does, the buttocks occupying the chair are the ones that will probably prevail. Yelling could turn to violence, I suppose, at which point security would be needed.

 

By the way, I too am from North America. Self-deprecatory jab there.

 

[evandbob]

Let robots remove personal items from unoccupied chairs - see my reply under the current thread about robots on a cruise.

[Elaine5715]

8 hours ago, shorne said:

There have been endless complaints about the ubiquitous and sempiternal practice of holding a chair all day by plopping a towel or some other object on it first thing in the morning. This doesn't affect me, because cultivating melanoma while sprawling by a swimming pool full of screaming children is not among my principal joys in life. But I honestly don't see why this problem has festered to the point of driving blood pressures up and causing hair to go grey before its time. Is it really that difficult to solve?

 

In much of Europe, free parking on the street is often managed through the use of a little cardboard disc left on the dashboard: one sets it to show the time of arrival, and that information combined with the posted limit shows whether one is legally parked. Liars who set the dial to a later time run the risk of getting caught and being fined on the spot. A similar system could be used for those damn chairs that apparently are both highly coveted and little used: the ship could enforce a maximum absence of, say, 15 minutes (what exactly are people doing that simultaneously creates an urgent need for a chair and an urgent need not to use it?), with little cards made up for the purpose, and anyone finding at 9:01 a card marked «8:45» or «10:00» would be well within her rights to remove it, settle into the seat, and ignore the complaints that might follow five or six hours later.

 

The North American system is to charge for parking everywhere, perhaps because so many North Americans cannot manage numbers well enough to set a clock. That's another possibility, though it would require more equipment: put a parking meter on the chair, and when the time is up, an attendant may issue a ticket and tow any belongings away. The proceeds could go to cover the wages of the staff needlessly hired to manage the passengers' selfishness and lack of consideration.

 

Or passengers could just take the initiative by removing abandoned items and expropriating the chairs. Really, why should a towel or a book be entitled to a chair while a perfectly living pair of human buttocks is left deprived? I do not consider myself the social inferior of dry goods, and I would not defer to the tender sensibilities of a towel if I felt like sitting down.

 

If the problem is really so severe as to lead to fisticuffs, maybe the answer is just to say that any chair left vacant for as little as a second is up for grabs. Or to toss overboard anyone with the gall to hoard a chair. Or maybe people don't deserve to have chairs at all and there should be standing room only.

 

Really, I fail to understand why whatever brain cells may exist in the management of cruise ships cannot find a way to address this dumb problem.

There isn't paid parking within 100 miles of me and I live in North America so it isn't everywhere.  Beside a car parking in a parking spot is using the spot as intended.  Someone's flipflop left on a chair while the owner engages in activities elsewhere is not the use of a chair.  If they need someplace to place the flipflop, put in on the deck.    

[9tee2Sea]

7 hours ago, shorne said:

Well, «ubiquitous» must have been an exaggeration. I don't know: again, if I chose to spend time lounging by a pool, I would just move stuff off any convenient chair and, seeing the chair newly liberated, get comfortable. So the problem isn't mine.

 

And I don't understand why anyone should be allowed to hoard a chair for as long as thirty minutes. Five minutes for passing waste, yes. Ten minutes, maybe. Thirty? Let someone else have the chair, for pity's sake! You're not using it.

what if someone is lounging on the chair and has to use the bathroom?  They were gone for 10 min, but you decided that was too long and took their chair. What if they went to the bar to get a drink? What if they decided to go into the pool?  I have to say this, but from reading your other posts, YOU ARE A JERK ( in my opinion).  I think you are right, cruising may not be for you.  Sorry to be so rude, Im really not like that. If you have a complaint about anything, don't take matters into your own hands. Notify the crew, and they will hopefully take care of the situation.  One never knows the mentality of the passenger they have offended.  Things can go wrong very quickly over the slightest provocation ( anywhere, not just a cruise ship).

[ldubs]

8 hours ago, shorne said:

Well, «ubiquitous» must have been an exaggeration. I don't know: again, if I chose to spend time lounging by a pool, I would just move stuff off any convenient chair and, seeing the chair newly liberated, get comfortable. So the problem isn't mine.

 

And I don't understand why anyone should be allowed to hoard a chair for as long as thirty minutes. Five minutes for passing waste, yes. Ten minutes, maybe. Thirty? Let someone else have the chair, for pity's sake! You're not using it.

 

I suggested a much similar concept in a recent thread.  I think there were a lot of very upset chair hogs.  Get ready to circle the wagons.   

Edited April 7, 2023 by ldubs

[ldubs]

57 minutes ago, 9tee2Sea said:

what if someone is lounging on the chair and has to use the bathroom?  They were gone for 10 min, but you decided that was too long and took their chair. What if they went to the bar to get a drink? What if they decided to go into the pool?  I have to say this, but from reading your other posts, YOU ARE A JERK ( in my opinion).  I think you are right, cruising may not be for you.  Sorry to be so rude, Im really not like that. If you have a complaint about anything, don't take matters into your own hands. Notify the crew, and they will hopefully take care of the situation.  One never knows the mentality of the passenger they have offended.  Things can go wrong very quickly over the slightest provocation ( anywhere, not just a cruise ship).

 

I don't think anyone thinks bathrooms, pool use, and bar orders would not be valid reasons to temporarily save a chair.  

 

BTW, If you are "not really like that" then don't be like that.   

[BklynBoy8]

 

WOW...Didn't think this practice still exists.... Long time since heard last time someone mentioning this.

 

I there was a lot of trouble on the Rotterdam in the early 80's. People would leave their items on the chairs and MIA. But the Deck Staff after a certain amount of time would roll the personal items up in a towel and take it back to there deck. Passengers would question the staff where is their items are and they were presented with them back. Making the space available. I would see items on chairs as early as 7-730 during my early walk.

 

The best system we enjoyed was on the QE2. You would go to the Sun Deck, select a chair to your liking and it would be tagged with you name for the entire time sailing. You even had the Deck Staff watch you to see that you would not get too burnt maybe falling asleep. Also they would offer a beverage like water to hydrate. Yes, there was a minor on board charge but it did work and very well accepted.

 

The over all thought to this subject is the consideration to one and another being on vacation and sharing the ship with due politeness. 

 

I know we see the domaining of passengers on Shore Excursions, Tour Buses, Clubs/Bar/Discos/Showrooms. Holding seats for others to come with those entering and looking for space presently. Even the staff makes announcements before a show to not hold seats for those not there yet out of consideration. 

 

[d9704011]

Glad I looked through this thread.... I learned a new word:  sempiternal.

[Toofarfromthesea]

51 minutes ago, d9704011 said:

Glad I looked through this thread.... I learned a new word:  sempiternal.

Same here.  It was the best part of this beating a dead horse thread.

Edited April 7, 2023 by Toofarfromthesea

[auntmeg]

12 hours ago, shorne said:

.... perhaps because so many North Americans cannot manage numbers well enough to set a clock. ....

Was this part really necessary?

 

Certainly untrue. And definitely mean-spirited.

[shorne]

3 hours ago, ldubs said:

 

I suggested a much similar concept in a recent thread.  I think there were a lot of very upset chair hogs.  Get ready to circle the wagons.   

 

Yes, and the personal attacks, as you have correctly observed, have already started. I'm sorry that you too attracted people's ire, but I'm not a bit surprised.

 

What someone said earlier makes a lot of sense: if you want to take a cruise, shell out for one that the cheap and the selfish cannot afford.

[d9704011]

8 minutes ago, shorne said:

What someone said earlier makes a lot of sense: if you want to take a cruise, shell out for one that the cheap and the selfish cannot afford.

Being cheap and/or selfish has/have nothing to do with what a person can afford.

Edited April 7, 2023 by d9704011

[ldubs]

22 minutes ago, d9704011 said:

Being cheap and/or selfish has/have nothing to do with what a person can afford.

 

It is true that when there is a need, among the most unselfish are those who can least afford it.  

 

I think part of the chair hog problem is people justify selfish behavior because the rules allow it.   

[d9704011]

4 minutes ago, ldubs said:

It is true that when there is a need, among the most unselfish are those who can least afford it.  

Too philosophical for me to understand.  I was just commenting on shorne's inference that cheap and selfish people can't afford cruises that attract passengers who would not be chair hogs; whether the well-heeled are immune to the scourge of chair-hoggery is not entirely clear to me.

[ldubs]

21 minutes ago, d9704011 said:

Too philosophical for me to understand.  I was just commenting on shorne's inference that cheap and selfish people can't afford cruises that attract passengers who would not be chair hogs; whether the well-heeled are immune to the scourge of chair-hoggery is not entirely clear to me.

 

I was agreeing, but let me translate -- being selfish has nothing to do with what a person can afford.  😀

Edited April 7, 2023 by ldubs

[2wheelin]

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, BklynBoy8 said:

 

The best system we enjoyed was on the QE2. You would go to the Sun Deck, select a chair to your liking and it would be tagged with you name for the entire time sailing. You even had the Deck Staff watch you to see that you would not get too burnt maybe falling asleep. Also they would offer a beverage like water to hydrate. Yes, there was a minor on board charge but it did work and very well accepted.

 

The over all thought to this subject is the consideration to one and another being on vacation and sharing the ship with due politeness. 

 

 

With that system, who gets first choice? If you get there last and are stuck with undesirable spot or not enough chairs together for your family, you are screwed for the whole cruise.

 

[shorne]

14 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

It is true that when there is a need, among the most unselfish are those who can least afford it.  

 

 

Yes, it certainly is. That's a different matter, however, from the selfishness that we have been discussing.

[mom says]

22 minutes ago, shorne said:

 

What someone said earlier makes a lot of sense: if you want to take a cruise, shell out for one that the cheap and the selfish cannot afford.

Given the intolerance your posts display towards what you assume to be typical of most cruisers, perhaps you should consider that you are not going to be pleased with any cruise,  no matter how exclusive it purports to be. The selfish, rude, poorly informed, and self important are not confined to any level of cruise line, just as they aren't confined to any one segment of society. 

 

In your first post on this thread you stated that you don't avail yourself of loungers by the pool. If this is so, why are you harping on a subject that doesn't affect you? I also note the use of hyperbole, sweeping broad assumptions, deliberately insulting characterizations and provocative suggestions.   Could it be that you simply derive some kind of enjoyment by pot stirring? (Rhetorical question).

[shorne]

4 minutes ago, ldubs said:

 

I was agreeing, but let me translate -- being selfish has nothing to do with what a person can afford.  

 

Let me back up a bit. I can believe, as has been reported, that the pricier venues are less tolerant of such abuses than the cut-rate venues that foster «happiness».

 

I've never said or thought that money and virtue go together. That's not what I meant at all.

[ldubs]

15 minutes ago, 2wheelin said:

 

With that system, who gets first choice? If you get there last and are stuck with undesirable spot or not enough chairs together for your family, you are screwed for the whole cruise.

 

 

That is always going to be an issue anywhere & anytime there are chairs and people who need or want to sit in them.  One mitigating thing might be the sun deck, which if above the pool deck, might have less demand for chairs.