DVC temporary policy rooms now between 4pm and 6pm?

[DL1WDW2]

I think Hilton Timeshares have a 10 a.m. checkout time .
The problem with altering the checkin/checkout time decreases the value . If I can’t t checkin til 6 and have to be out by 10 …that is a lot of $$$ per hourly rates.
I think it will happen.
Didnt it used to be checkin by 3 and checkout at noon?

 

[DonMacGregor]

So if what you are saying is true, why isn't Disney dropping prices elsewhere? If they are paying out less in salary and services aren't as reliable there should be price drops since it isn't about money, right?

I believe the point being made is that fewer staff are taking longer to turn the rooms over, not that a smaller crew is working the same number of hours (for a net reduction in labor costs). If that were true, then mousekeeping wouldn't be finishing up rooms at 5 or 6 PM, and we all know they are trying to get into rooms as early as 8:30 or 9:00 AM.

If, for example, a block of rooms takes, say, 120 hours (or whatever it might be) total to flip, right now you may have 12 people working 10 hours for a total of 120 hours, versus 15 people working 8 hours for the same total of 120 hours. It's the same 120 hours in labor to flip the rooms, but it's taking longer because the work is distributed between fewer workers. Plus, with the reduced crew and longer hours, you're paying time and a half for 24 of those hours so it's actually costing more in labor, not less.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

I believe the point being made is that fewer staff are taking longer to turn the rooms over, not that a smaller crew is working the same number of hours (for a net reduction in labor costs). If that were true, then mousekeeping wouldn't be finishing up rooms at 5 or 6 PM, and we all know they are trying to get into rooms as early as 8:30 or 9:00 AM.

If, for example, a block of rooms takes, say, 120 hours (or whatever it might be) total to flip, right now you may have 12 people working 10 hours for a total of 120 hours, versus 15 people working 8 hours for the same total of 120 hours. It's the same 120 hours in labor to flip the rooms, but it's taking longer because the work is distributed between fewer workers. Plus, with the reduced crew and longer hours, you're paying time and a half for 24 of those hours so it's actually costing more in labor, not less.

I think part of it as well is the increased COVID cleaning that has to be done (*enhanced cleaning). Obviously, more cleaning takes more time. Wiping down those remotes and bagging them up and wiping down the phones and everything else they added - I am not saying these are bad things - but they do mean that the block of rooms that used to take 120 hours now takes 140 hours. Which means that obviously you either need longer to do the job, or more people the do the job.

I think Disney has opted to take longer, where more people would serve the membership better.

 

[DonMacGregor]

I think Disney has opted to take longer, where more people would serve the membership better.

120 or 140 hours, they still have to pay someone because the rooms still need to be flipped. They only save money if they reduce the time and in turn reduce staff.

As previously discussed, Disney is actively and very publicly holding job fairs, offering substantial signing bonuses, and have increased their base hourly wage. Whether it’s a living wage is another discussion, but they are paying what others in the region are paying. There were a number of recent articles linked upthread speaking to the difficulty the entire Central Florida hospitality industry is continuing to face trying to meet staffing needs.

 

[New Mouse]

120 or 140 hours, they still have to pay someone because the rooms still need to be flipped. They only save money if they reduce the time and in turn reduce staff.

As previously discussed, Disney is actively and very publicly holding job fairs, offering substantial signing bonuses, and have increased their base hourly wage. Whether it’s a living wage is another discussion, but they are paying what others in the region are paying. There were a number of recent articles linked upthread speaking to the difficulty the entire Central Florida hospitality industry is continuing to face trying to meet staffing needs.

So basically they should have had some foresight and not let go of their most valuable team members during the pandemic to avoid this. (And at the end of the day, Disney doesn't actually care regardless of reason because we all already paid.)

 

[TiggerBouncy]

So basically they should have had some foresight and not let go of their most valuable team members during the pandemic to avoid this. (And at the end of the day, Disney doesn't actually care regardless of reason because we all already paid.)

And that gets into a very difficult conversation. From a business perspective, they held onto them for a long time, but basically Disney's revenue dropped to almost 0% during the beginning of the pandemic. I mean they still had ABC and the other media channels and they had Disney+. But parks - closed. DCL - closed. Movies - shut down. Theatres - Closed. Production - Shut down. ESPN - reruns. They had almost zilch when it came to income and they had a buck-load of debt that just absorbed with the fox purchase. With no idea how long the pandemic was going to last and how long before they could open up any significant revenue streams, they were basically staring into the abyss. There is just no way to make the right call in that scenario. They could have kept everyone on and the pandemic could still be dragging on with keeping them 100% closed and Disney could have gone bankrupt and we would all be saying that was stupid and they didn't have the foresight to lower their fixed costs.

 

[KAT4DISNEY]

So basically they should have had some foresight and not let go of their most valuable team members during the pandemic to avoid this. (And at the end of the day, Disney doesn't actually care regardless of reason because we all already paid.)

And that is what I posted way, way, way back when it came out they were doing that. Even cutting back on MS? We were all still here and booking - assuming reopening and we already had paid for everything related to operations. Now they did give us rebates (and amounts could be debated considering the staffing they laid off) and they are still struggling 20 months after reopening.

 

[DonMacGregor]

And that gets into a very difficult conversation. From a business perspective, they held onto them for a long time, but basically Disney's revenue dropped to almost 0% during the beginning of the pandemic. I mean they still had ABC and the other media channels and they had Disney+. But parks - closed. DCL - closed. Movies - shut down. Theatres - Closed. Production - Shut down. ESPN - reruns. They had almost zilch when it came to income and they had a buck-load of debt that just absorbed with the fox purchase. With no idea how long the pandemic was going to last and how long before they could open up any significant revenue streams, they were basically staring into the abyss. There is just no way to make the right call in that scenario. They could have kept everyone on and the pandemic could still be dragging on with keeping them 100% closed and Disney could have gone bankrupt and we would all be saying that was stupid and they didn't have the foresight to lower their fixed costs.

Well, we DID just have another global pandemic just 104 years ago, so...

 

[Brian Holtzleiter]

And as CarolMN pointed out, someone will still not get what they want. But I think in the pecking order, getting into a room by 4pm should take precedence over fulfilling room requests.

Hopefully Disney uses some of the quarterly profits to entice some mouse keepers how ever they have to.

I 100% agree with your statement regarding the pecking order. A guest getting into a room by 4pm should absolutely trump someone else’s room request.

 

[New Mouse]

And that gets into a very difficult conversation. From a business perspective, they held onto them for a long time, but basically Disney's revenue dropped to almost 0% during the beginning of the pandemic. I mean they still had ABC and the other media channels and they had Disney+. But parks - closed. DCL - closed. Movies - shut down. Theatres - Closed. Production - Shut down. ESPN - reruns. They had almost zilch when it came to income and they had a buck-load of debt that just absorbed with the fox purchase. With no idea how long the pandemic was going to last and how long before they could open up any significant revenue streams, they were basically staring into the abyss. There is just no way to make the right call in that scenario. They could have kept everyone on and the pandemic could still be dragging on with keeping them 100% closed and Disney could have gone bankrupt and we would all be saying that was stupid and they didn't have the foresight to lower their fixed costs.

The fix is that you explain to your investors you will be in the red for a short time in order to maintain for when things do open back up.

Disney has been absurdly profitable for a long time. To not be willing to spend some of that and hold things together is borderline negligent.

 

[tjkraz]

In late 2020, the layoff number peaked at 32,000 company wide, of which most (exact number unknown) were theme park workers. Pre-Covid, WDW and DL employed more than 100,000 workers combined. So, they retained upward of 70% of all theme park employees in the US.

That came at a time when we were 8 months into the pandemic with no approved vaccine and no clear understanding of what the future may hold. Disneyland was still completely closed and another 6 months away from reopening.

I suspect their "most valuable" were among the 70% retained. Hindsight being 20/20, maybe you do keep everyone--or at least reduce layoffs--if you know it will be business as usual in another ~12 months. Paying 32k workers to do nothing for 18 months probably costs upward of $2 billion in payroll and benefits. Tough call for any CEO.

And it doesn't change the fact that we're in a competitive job market where those people can refuse to return after being recalled.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

Hindsight being 20/20, maybe you do keep everyone--or at least reduce layoffs--if you know it will be business as usual in another ~12 months. Paying 32k workers to do nothing for 18 months probably costs upward of $2 billion in payroll and benefits. Tough call for any CEO.

And as you say - that's hindsight. The difficulty is that no one could tell them if they would be open in 12 months or 36 months or even longer. As it is, this has dragged on longer than many of the experts thought - but back at that time for all we knew a vaccine would take a lot longer. Remember that as recently as 20 years ago vaccines took decades to develop.

The fix is that you explain to your investors you will be in the red for a short time in order to maintain for when things do open back up.

Disney has been absurdly profitable for a long time. To not be willing to spend some of that and hold things together is borderline negligent.

Because of Fox, Disney's D/E was up to .6 already. Disney had already been downgraded. Fitch had moved them to Negative (not a good sign; basically saying they considered Disney at risk for a default). S&P Downgraded them to BBB making potential new debt more expensive and kept them at 'negative' credit watch (meaning a high chance they would be downgraded again). . Their investors were twitchy.

There was no vaccine, and no potential end in sight. No one could give any guidance if they would have any revenue in 2021 or heck even in 2023.

Saying something like that would have been colossally stupid and probably tanked them further if not made them prime meat for a buyout.

 

[BruinEd03]

And as you say - that's hindsight. The difficulty is that no one could tell them if they would be open in 12 months or 36 months or even longer. As it is, this has dragged on longer than many of the experts thought - but back at that time for all we knew a vaccine would take a lot longer. Remember that as recently as 20 years ago vaccines took decades to develop.



Because of Fox, Disney's D/E was up to .6 already. Disney had already been downgraded. Fitch had moved them to Negative (not a good sign; basically saying they considered Disney at risk for a default). S&P Downgraded them to BBB making potential new debt more expensive and kept them at 'negative' credit watch (meaning a high chance they would be downgraded again). . Their investors were twitchy.

There was no vaccine, and no potential end in sight. No one could give any guidance if they would have any revenue in 2021 or heck even in 2023.

Saying something like that would have been colossally stupid and probably tanked them further if not made them prime meat for a buyout.

I thought DVC members paid for the housekeeping staff as part of the dues. If that’s the case, then it doesn’t matter if Disney retains the housekeeping staff for DVC. They can pass the cost onto the members. So from Disney’s perspective, there should be very little risk to keeping housekeeping for DVC. On the other hand, as that staff is shared with the rest of the resorts, if DVC carried the housekeeping staff through the shutdown, then they shouldn’t be shortchanged now.

 

[Sandisw]

I thought DVC members paid for the housekeeping staff as part of the dues. If that’s the case, then it doesn’t matter if Disney retains the housekeeping staff for DVC. They can pass the cost onto the members. So from Disney’s perspective, there should be very little risk to keeping housekeeping for DVC. On the other hand, as that staff is shared with the rest of the resorts, if DVC carried the housekeeping staff through the shutdown, then they shouldn’t be shortchanged now.

There are no separate staff. We pay Disney as the property manager a fee based on expenses to manage the resort which includes housekeeping.

The employees are Disney employees and so Disney decides how it runs. The contract with DVCMC is to provide the services.

The amount we are charged each year from Disney is part of the dues. We got a credit during the shut down.

Hosever, no matter what, it’s still Disney who gets to make the decisions on where to staff and how to get DVC villas clean.

The only recourse we have, if the service they are providing is subpar, is to contract with someone else to manage the property. But that will never happen because, as pointed out, both DVCMC and Disney, are part of well, Disney.

As owners, we have to complain to DVC who would then have to complain to Disney to up their game.

However, we don’t get a say in who they hire, how many they hire, whether they furlough, etc.

 

[BruinEd03]

There are no separate staff. We pay Disney as the property manager a fee based on expenses to manage the resort which includes housekeeping.

The employees are Disney employees and so Disney decides how it runs. The contract with DVCMC is to provide the services.

The amount we are charged each year from Disney is part of the dues. We got a credit during the shut down.

Hosever, no matter what, it’s still Disney who gets to make the decisions on where to staff and how to get DVC villas clean.

The only recourse we have, if the service they are providing is subpar, is to contract with someone else to manage the property. But that will never happen because, as pointed out, both DVCMC and Disney, are part of well, Disney.

As owners, we have to complain to DVC who would then have to complain to Disney to up their game.

However, we don’t get a say in who they hire, how many they hire, whether they furlough, etc.

Yes, but Disney took the cash from DVC to keep a lot of staff members, and DVC should be rewarded for contributing to the retention of staff. Without DVC’s money, I’m sure Disney would’ve had to let go of a lot more staff. In addition, while they gave a refund, it wasnt a lot. Also, they could’ve just said that they needed the money to retain staff.

 

[Sandisw]

Yes, but Disney took the cash from DVC to keep a lot of staff members, and DVC should be rewarded for contributing to the retention of staff. Without DVC’s money, I’m sure Disney would’ve had to let go of a lot more staff. In addition, while they gave a refund, it wasnt a lot. Also, they could’ve just said that they needed the money to retain staff.

The point is that Disney gets to decide how to use the money we pay them to clean the villas. If they let people go because resorts were closed, and credited us back, then we didn’t pay as much as we would have had it stayed open

They set the budget and we pay it. If they say…making this up..we will charge you $1 million dollars to clean the DVC villas, and we agree, then that is what we pay. We don’t pay the entire cost of the housekeepers unless it’s a stand alone DVC resort.

They then provide the service as they see fit. If it’s subpar..not meeting the terms..then DVCMC needs to be on them or hire a different property manager…which will never happen.

So, if they can’t get the staff to get rooms done by 4 pm, we are stuck unless we find a way to stay on DVCMC to get on Disney to figure it out.

 

[TiggerBouncy]

The point is that Disney gets to decide how to use the money we pay them to clean the villas. If they let people go because resorts were closed, and credited us back, then we didn’t pay as much as we would have had it stayed open

They set the budget and we pay it. If they say…making this up..we will charge you $1 million dollars to clean the DVC villas, and we agree, then that is what we pay. We don’t pay the entire cost of the housekeepers unless it’s a stand alone DVC resort.

They then provide the service as they see fit. If it’s subpar..not meeting the terms..then DVCMC needs to be on them or hire a different property manager…which will never happen.

So, if they can’t get the staff to get rooms done by 4 pm, we are stuck unless we find a way to stay on DVCMC to get on Disney to figure it out.

Pretty much this. We do not own our staff - we only pay for a service. Which is why I maintain that if you feel your service is not up to par, say something. We (DVC) cant' kick the current management company to the curb, that's true. But they generally DO listen to feedback from what I have observed, and if enough membership complain, they DO go to Disney and say "WTH? We are getting a ton of complaints. Please get on this".

 

[Grumpy by Birth]

There are more than a few folks who have always maintained that the verbiage "check-in begins at 4pm" meant that you could check-in no earlier than 4pm, but didn't mean your room would be ready by 4pm.

The other camp maintained that check-in beginning at 4pm meant (or at least should mean) that you can't check in before 4pm, but rooms should be ready once check-in begins (a reasonable expectation in the hotel industry, I think). That's why check-in doesn't begin until then, because they need until then to get rooms ready. So if they need longer than that to get rooms ready, then check-in doesn't REALLY begin then. You can check-in to the lobby. You just can't check-in to your room!

Kind of reminds me of this...


The statement "Rooms will be ready between 4pm and 6pm" does eliminate the ambiguity of what is meant by check-in beginning at 4pm. It establishes that your room will should be ready no later than 6pm. This essentially tells us that rooms may not be ready until up to two hours after check-in time. If rooms aren't ready for two more hours, why is check-in at 4pm?

If it's acceptable for rooms not to be ready until 6pm, how long before we're told that they won't be ready until 8pm? Or 11:59pm? That example might be hyperbole, but in principle the room being ready 8 hours after check-in is not different than it being ready 2 hours after check-in. If check-in time isn't defined as the time you can check in to your room, then it's just an arbitrary time. They might as well say that check-in begins at 6am, but rooms won't be ready until 6pm.

In most people's view, "checking in" to a hotel is synonymous with getting into the room, not merely letting the hotel know that you've arrived. Rooms being ready for guests to occupy is the only really relevant time.

I get it... COVID, short-staffed, etc. But this issue pre-dates COVID.

 

[CLAYINCT]

After reading through this thread, I'm now starting to worry about the grocery delivery process. I'll be checking into a Grand Villa at OKW for my bachelorette on July 13. My flight arrives at 9am, so I was planning to lounge around the pool until the room became available and set a grocery order for 4pm. However, if my room is not available, what do I do with my groceries? The order will include some perishables and alcohol. Does bell hop hold alcohol?

 

[DVC-Don]

We stayed at SSR two weeks ago. Were notified via text at 1PM that our room was ready.