NEWS FLASH: HAL to favor Triples and Quads

[Mary229]

6 minutes ago, TRLD said:

I expect it is more a matter of feedback they receive from a number of sources which probably include some of the same things as discussed here, more than they are reacting to CC posts.

The AARP example was CC.  But yes and I advocate all forms of communication when you complain.  My response was to someone who was being dismissive of complaining here 

[Wehwalt]

8 minutes ago, TRLD said:

Not really. One still has to into account the context.

 

Other language in the contract might cover them that paragraph does not.

That could be, but if it's a question of arguing whether "any other reason" means that or something else, I know which side of the question I'd care to be arguing. No offense.

 

[Mary229]

1 minute ago, Mary229 said:

The AARP example was CC.  But yes and I advocate all forms of communication when you complain.  My response was to someone who was being dismissive of complaining here 

Actually this is not even a situation about complaining, it is commentary on how to properly execute a change of policy especially when it is a very longstanding policy 

[Real NHDOC]

1 hour ago, Wehwalt said:

That could be, but if it's a question of arguing whether "any other reason" means that or something else, I know which side of the question I'd care to be arguing. No offense.

 

It's blatantly obvious that section 4 of the contract wouldn't grant HAL the latitude to change your cabin at will or else they wouldn't have changed section 8 to explicitly give them that.  Even they, in good conscience couldn't interpret it that way.   Unfortunately, now that they have granted themselves such unilateral power over cabin assignments it's something they could easily exploit to maximize their profits any way they see fit.  As I said before, they CAN do a lot of things, but SHOULD they?  No, they shouldn't.  If they choose to offer triple and quad rooms to singles or couples that's their choice, but they want it both ways.  They want to be able to under-fill them with whomever wants to buy them but then reserve the right to put you anywhere on the ship to accommodate a larger party who happens to book after you do.  It should be "first come first served" not "we don't care what YOU want it's all about stuffing as many people on the ship as we can legally stuff onto it". At some point they should be taking into account how it makes the guest feel about booking a cruise with them.  I know it certainly makes me less likely to book a triple or quad room if it is being offered to me with the understanding that it's only "at will".  

Edited April 22 by Real NHDOC

[TRLD]

Just now, Real NHDOC said:

It's blatantly obvious that section 4 of the contract wouldn't grant HAL the latitude to change your cabin at will or else they wouldn't have changed section 8 to explicitly give them that.  Even they, in good conscience couldn't interpret it that way.   Unfortunately, now that they have granted themselves such unilateral power over cabin assignments it's something they could easily exploit to maximize their profits any way they see fit.  As I said before, they CAN do a lot of things, but SHOULD they?  No, they shouldn't.  If they choose to offer triple and quad rooms to singles or couples that's their choice, but they want it both ways.  They want to be able to under-fill them with whomever wants to buy them but then reserve the right to put you anywhere on the ship to accommodate a larger party who happens to book after you do.  It should be "first come first served" not "we don't care what YOU want it's all about stuffing as many people in the ship as we can legally stuff onto it".    

Basically your options are

 

1. book a 2 person cabin and not worry about it

2. book a specific 3/4 cabin paying to choose a specific cabin knowing that at some point there is a chance that you could get moved

3. pay less and book a guarantee

4. Not book at all or with a different line which may or may not follow the same practice

 

Considering that their competition (NA adult focused lines Celebrity and Princess) are already doing this or similar steps increasing their ability to maximize their use of room inventory I would not expect them to reverse this direction. If anything lines are moving more in the directions of guarantees instead of preselected rooms.

[Real NHDOC]

Unfortunately, now, with the contract being the way it is even if you book a 2 person cabin for 2 they can move you for any reason so basically every booking is a guarantee cabin booking as you have no control over where they want to put you and no recourse if you are unhappy with it. 

 

Instead of calling a particular cabin your "chosen cabin" it should just be called your preferred choice of cabin.

Edited April 22 by Real NHDOC

[TRLD]

4 minutes ago, Real NHDOC said:

Unfortunately, now, with the contract being the way it is even if you book a 2 person cabin for 2 they can move you for any reason so basically every booking is a guarantee cabin booking as you have no control over where they want to put you and no recourse if you are unhappy with it. 

That is too funny. Technically they could sell you a cruise go out and sail in a circle, touch one foreign port if out of the US, not let anyone off ship, and feed you a steady diet of pork and beans according to the cruise contract. Surprised someone doesn't raise that concern.

 

They could and have always done some room changes  with sufficient reason. Sometimes as an unasked for upgrade, sometimes for the rather ambiguous operational reasons.

 

In this they are making a pretty well defined policy change concerning high capacity rooms. Pretty clear in what they are saying if you are a party of 2 and book a 3/4 room you have some potential risk of getting bumped to an equivalent or better 2 person room based upon their room grading system.

Edited April 22 by TRLD

[Mary229]

6 minutes ago, TRLD said:

That is too funny. Technically they could sell you a cruise go out and sail in a circle, touch one foreign port if out of the US, not let anyone off ship, and feed you a steady diet of pork and beans according to the cruise contract. Surprised someone doesn't raise that concern.

 

They could and have always done some room changes  with sufficient reason. Sometimes as an unasked for upgrade, sometimes for the rather ambiguous operational reasons.

 

In this they are making a pretty well defined policy change concerning high capacity rooms. Pretty clear in what they are saying if you are a party of 2 and book a 3/4 room you have some potential risk of getting bumped to an equivalent or better 2 person room based upon their room grading system.

That is a well known clause and the only thing that keeps them in check is the power of the purse.  For a most recent example go to the Oceania boards when they tried just such a cruise when the Middle East conflict began.  There are many examples. For the people on the initial cruise it is a terrible event but going forward the line starts losing business as people do become very vocal. I just warned someone away from NCL because of news articles published about this same topic.  Turns out publicly shaming does work 

[TRLD]

21 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

That is a well known clause and the only thing that keeps them in check is the power of the purse.  For a most recent example go to the Oceania boards when they tried just such a cruise when the Middle East conflict began.  There are many examples. For the people on the initial cruise it is a terrible event but going forward the line starts losing business as people do become very vocal. I just warned someone away from NCL because of news articles published about this same topic.  Turns out publicly shaming does work 

What keeps them in check is more that they are actually trying to deliver a reasonable value in return for the fees charged. 

 

Can be lots of disagreement around exactly what that means.

 

The point is that the contract does and has always given them the power to do lots of things, that in reality represent clauses to protect them from unanticipated events and from technicalities in our very litigious society. Not because they are going to the extremes of the document. The main thing the document does is to enable them to determine compensation in case of unexpected events and make it clear that in most cases such compensation is goodwill.

 

With the warnings they are starting to put into the system it is unlikely that there will be any compensation when they actually implement bumping small parties from large capacity rooms.

[Gsel]

I now cruise single and have two cruises booked. DH and I preferred Neptune Suites which , I think will hold actually three or four persons. Now that he is gone I still book Neptunes, fortunately he left me able to afford that. If HAL decides to "move" me they are going to face one very upset "old" lady!  

[TRLD]

Just now, Gsel said:

I now cruise single and have two cruises booked. DH and I preferred Neptune Suites which , I think will hold actually three or four persons. Now that he is gone I still book Neptunes, fortunately he left me able to afford that. If HAL decides to "move" me they are going to face one very upset "old" lady!  

Are there any Neptune suites that only hold 2? If not then it should not be an issue. The problem arises when a class has both 2 cabins and 3/4 cabins and books a 3/4 with 2 people.

[YourWorldWithBill]

I think we have to see how this plays out. As others have said, it's not in HAL's interest to offend its customers. My suspicion is that it won't happen too often.

 

My PCC, probably stating the company line, said that any move would be to an "equal" or better cabin. All of us who chose our cabins know that we are particular about what cabin we want, so the idea of "equal" may not work; but let's see how HAL actually deals with it.

 

After all, I'd be fine with an upgrade in most cases, but not all. And as far as your point, @Gsel, I seriously doubt that they would move someone from a Neptune suite.

[3rdGenCunarder]

5 minutes ago, YourWorldWithBill said:

After all, I'd be fine with an upgrade in most cases, but not all. And as far as your point, @Gsel, I seriously doubt that they would move someone from a Neptune suite.

 

Well, there is the Pinnacle Suite...

[YourWorldWithBill]

46 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

 

Well, there is the Pinnacle Suite...

Maybe that's out new plan! That's the path.....

[TiogaCruiser]

5 hours ago, Mary229 said:

There have been examples of HAL responding quickly because of Cruise Critic threads.  The one that I recall most recently was the introduction of the AARP OBC.  The language changed two or three times in one day in response to comments on these boards 

 

 

6 hours ago, Mary229 said:

I think HAL does read this forum. I also think we need to speak up. Many businesses go happily along because no one speaks up. it is not because we work for HAL which saying so is just plain snarky.  It is because I meet so many people who have been manhandled by agencies, tour companies or cruise lines and sit quietly stewing.  If you speak up effectively you might be surprised.  Sitting back and saying nothing gets you absolutely nothing 

Maybe, maybe not. HAL has its own private forum that several CC posters haunt (some even using the same screen name) also. Topics and discussions are identical to similar CC, but HAL knows who is who.  

On the other hand, some 10 years ago a poster came on CC HAL board and asked a question concerning a family member set to cruise with them who had limited capacities, and within a few hours they had received an email from HAL addressing their concerns and what would/could happen if that person had an issue on a ship.