NO MORE free valet parking for DVC members.

[RDP]

Is the Valet $12 per day or length of stay?

 

[Dean]

When I complained to BWV managers about the parking situation for guests staying at the resort, I was told DVC members received free valet so it wasn't an issue.

If self parking is not available in the resort lot for guests of the resort, I will be complaining. Those actually staying at the BWI or BWV should not have to park in the lot across the street so that others can go to the parks.

IMO, the resort lot should be reserved for BWI/BWV guests and those with a handicapped sticker. Everyone else should be directed across the street, even if they have a WDW parking pass from another on-site resort.

In all fairness, they do seem to be much more proactive in policing the BW parking during Food & Wine Festival, at least on the weekends.

Truth be told, the Boardwalk needs more parking, period. My guess is that this change will mean the size of the valet lot can be significantly reduced.

P.S. I am having a very hard time believing that the BWI is paying the entire amount of the valet contract. It's a common expense. Until someone with the authority to speak for DVC says otherwise, I will continue to believe members are paying a prorated share, just as we pay a prorated share of housekeeping and front desk operations.

As I noted above, I have never seen the free parking location behind the valet totally full even when a significant portion is just blocked off and not being used. It's a little further than the lot on the right and in some portions, likely further than the lot across the street except you're not having to cross the street. However, if it's not blocked off, it does snake all the way to the tennis courts and the canal and can be a great place to park if you're in a villa on that end.

As for paying, I doubt either the BWI or BWV have been paying anything for the valet parking, it's even possible they are getting paid to allow it. However, the BWI guests were likely paying a higher percentage due to members getting free parking. As I speculated earlier, it's likely that either a contract clause kicked in that is requiring money from the resort OR they are renegotiating the contract the the company is demanding a subsidy of some type or at least a guarantee. Regardless, the end result is the same. If you see an ambulance at one of the resorts this week it's likely because one or more valet attendant was attacked due to this change. I wouldn't want to be them right now dealing with this with no pre-warning of the guests arriving and knowing the entitlement mentality many have, esp DVC members as a group.

Is the Valet $12 per day or length of stay?

per day.

 

[Alexander]

Is the Valet $12 per day or length of stay?

Per Day

We only use valet when the weather or kids require it--for example, we had dinner at the Contemporary twice last visit and it was monsooning both nights. Valet was a no-brainer for those visits. Another night we were eating at the Poly and DS (3) had fallen asleep in the car. It was worth paying for it (non DVC resort) than carrying him across the parking lot.

If it goes away, it goes away. We don't use it that often and if we need it, we'll pay for it. Otherwise, we'll just walk.

 

[Tara]

Is the Valet $12 per day or length of stay?

Per day. Once you pay for a day, you can valet at any resort that offers valet as many times a day as you like.

Even if I do have to pay for it again, it's still a great deal IMO.

 

[TiggerAllie]

I just got off the phone with MS, and I asked about the valet parking change. His response was, "Oh, you heard?" and proceeded to inform me that yes, that was correct, and the change goes into effect today. Supposedly they will be correcting/updating the website "right away".

I then asked if our dues would be lower or pro-rated because of the change in service. His response to this was that the reason that they decided to end the complimentary valet parking was so that they wouldn't have to raise the dues [as much--as I'm sure they will go up some]. I asked why the rate change went into effect today and not January 1 when the dues period ends, and he didn't really have an answer for that.

I then asked where I could file a formal complaint with my dissatisfaction and this change, and he told me to use the "contact us" form on DVCmember.com.

I think the more people that call in and the more people that write, the better chance there is that they might reconsider this or actually attempt to renegotiate something in the next contract period. It also gives us a chance to express our displeasure that we weren't notified ahead of time. What happens to the people pulling up to the valet today, expecting to get complimentary parking? As a member who has a vacation that starts on Friday, at a resort where this change goes into effect (VWL), I feel like I should have been notified by phone or email at least.

I seem to remember that the valet parking area at WL/VWL is actually the rows that are on the villas-side of the parking lot. Too bad it's probably too much effort to move them towards the middle.

I will be calling TiW tomorrow to ask as well. Again, the more concern they get from guests, the more they will see that it is a service that people actually use.

 

[SCFIREMAN]

I just spoke w/ DVC M/S, he advised me to write to wdw.guest.communications@disneyworld.com and let them know my thoughts about the removal of the valet. I told him I was disappointed that Disney is quick to advertise additional services but seems to forget to mention deletion of them. When I asked why it was removed he read me the script he was given about the rising cost of doing business and not wanting to raise our dues. Although he did say Disney is very big into guest feedback and that writing with your concerns could effect change in the policy.

 

[snappy]

Will this change prompt more members to skip the rental car and just use DME and busses/boat transportation?

It sounds to me like another way to influence more members to spend all their $$ onsite.

I believe I will just stay fewer days in larger or higher point requirement DVC units, combined with more offsite days.

We'll get to try some of the new offsite resorts, and just save our $$ rather than buy more DVC points.

Thanks, DVC!

 

[Chuck S]

The resorts that are truly a freestanding DVC resort (SSR and OKW) do not offer valet services at all.

no need to, you park outside your room block

Have you ever tried to park in the OKW HH area during a semi-busy DVC season? There are many times no parking spots are available at all.

 

[Deb & Bill]

Have you ever tried to park in the OKW HH area during a semi-busy DVC season? There are many times no parking spots are available at all.

That's why the HH location is a poor choice.

 

[CarolMN]

As I noted above, I have never seen the free parking location behind the valet totally full even when a significant portion is just blocked off and not being used. It's a little further than the lot on the right and in some portions, likely further than the lot across the street except you're not having to cross the street. However, if it's not blocked off, it does snake all the way to the tennis courts and the canal and can be a great place to park if you're in a villa on that end.

I have seen that area full. I have also been told I could NOT self park there. Both situations on a F&W weekend and both times a registered guest of the BWV. Guard knew we were staying there. Polite, but not sympathetic. And FWIW, both times there were plenty of spaces available after IllumiNations. We were in SV and could easily see the cars leaving around 9:30pm.

As for paying, I doubt either the BWI or BWV have been paying anything for the valet parking, it's even possible they are getting paid to allow it. However, the BWI guests were likely paying a higher percentage due to members getting free parking. As I speculated earlier, it's likely that either a contract clause kicked in that is requiring money from the resort OR they are renegotiating the contract the the company is demanding a subsidy of some type or at least a guarantee. Regardless, the end result is the same.

Perhaps. I do agree something to do with the valet contract precipitated the change, but do not agree that BWV/BWI were getting paid to allow the valet company to provide the service.

If you see an ambulance at one of the resorts this week it's likely because one or more valet attendant was attacked due to this change. I wouldn't want to be them right now dealing with this with no pre-warning of the guests arriving and knowing the entitlement mentality many have, esp DVC members as a group.

I certainly hope that the change doesn't result in violence! I agree that many DVC members have a bad case of entitlement, but unless someone is mentally unbalanced, I can't see members resorting to violence over this. I think you are exaggerating.

That said, I would not want to be a valet right now, either. There will be arguments and unhappy members as a result. I am very willing to believe some members will take out their frustration on the valet employees by not tipping. DVC should be ashamed of themselves for not doing a proper job of communicating the change and the reasons behind it.

 

[Chuck S]

That's why the HH location is a poor choice.

Agreed, I prefer the outlying areas. But it is also a problem when parking to check-in or visiting the store and Olivia's. Especially if you travel with someone in a manual wheelchair. You either have to walk up pushing the chair from your outlying room, or load/unload the chair from a bus. Often we've driven through the HH area looking to park, and have wound up dining off-site because of no parking.

 

[DebbieB]

I just spoke w/ DVC M/S, he advised me to write to wdw.guest.communications@disneyworld.com and let them know my thoughts about the removal of the valet. I told him I was disappointed that Disney is quick to advertise additional services but seems to forget to mention deletion of them. When I asked why it was removed he read me the script he was given about the rising cost of doing business and not wanting to raise our dues. Although he did say Disney is very big into guest feedback and that writing with your concerns could effect change in the policy.

I don't see the point in e-mailing the wdw address rather than the DVC. Valet has not been removed from WDW resorts, the service is still there, they are just charging more for it (from $10 to $12?). It's DVC where it's gone from free to $12. I think the member satisfaction-email address is the way to go.

dvcmembersatisfactionteam@disneyvacationclub.com

 

[Tara]

Will this change prompt more members to skip the rental car and just use DME and busses/boat transportation?

It sounds to me like another way to influence more members to spend all their $$ onsite.

I don't think so - most people rent a car for the convenience, so I don't see many giving that up over $12 per day.

 

[jade1]

Don't you usually make the decision to "outsource" something because they can do it cheaper? And if more people are using ME, how can there be more valet parking going on than in previous years? Wouldn't it have to be getting a smaller and smaller cost every year?

What else can still be outsourced and the savings...I mean, added expense be passed on to the user?

 

[DanenRox]

The concept of "Welcome Home" lends itself to a few assumptions. I understand it's just a marketing ploy, but if DVC continues to promote themselves as our "home", they should acknowledge that most of us don't pay to park in our driveway.

 

[Chuck S]

Don't you usually make the decision to "outsource" something because they can do it cheaper? And if more people are using ME, how can there be more valet parking going on than in previous years? Wouldn't it have to be getting a smaller and smaller cost every year?

What else can still be outsourced and the savings...I mean, added expense be passed on to the user?

While the outsourcing may save Disney $$ by removing those employees from their payroll, the valet contractor may be demanding these changes to insure profitability. So while the cost to Disney is cheaper, the DVC perk may disappear as part of the contract agreement with the valet company. While the short notification of the change is truly bad form (and unfortunately on par) for DVC, it may truly not be in DVC's power to insist that the perk continue without giving increased monetary support to the contractor.

Remember under labor laws, the contractor still has to pay the valet a wage, even though they are tipped positions. If the hourly income to the contractor from operations is less than that mandated hourly employee expense, what would you have them do?

 

[jade1]

While the outsourcing may save Disney $$ by removing those employees from their payroll, the valet contractor may be demanding these changes to insure profitability. So while the cost to Disney is cheaper, the DVC perk may disappear as part of the contract agreement with the valet company. While the short notification of the change is truly bad form (and unfortunately on par) for DVC, it may truly not be in DVC's power to insist that the perk continue without giving increased monetary support to the contractor.

Remember under labor laws, the contractor still has to pay the valet a wage, even though they are tipped positions. If the hourly income to the contractor from operations is less than that mandated hourly employee expense, what would you have them do?

If it still is saving Disney money, than I would let the resorts know that any DVC member that checks in and wants valet-they are still covered.

Again, what else can be outsourced and the savings, I mean added expense be passed on to the user? That's more my point than the situation Disney created with this "money saving" decision.

 

[harra]

Don't you usually make the decision to "outsource" something because they can do it cheaper? And if more people are using ME, how can there be more valet parking going on than in previous years? Wouldn't it have to be getting a smaller and smaller cost every year?

What else can still be outsourced and the savings...I mean, added expense be passed on to the user?

Outsourcing doesn't always result in cheaper expense. In fact, from my experience in the corporate world, it's often the opposite. The difference is that the expense of using Disney CMs as opposed to outsourced contractors is where the expense falls on the profit & loss statement. Often times the powers that be will bring down an edict that they must reduce payroll. So what do they do, fire people and hire contractors because contractor expense falls in a different expense line item. Payroll is reduced but the cost of contractors is higher than the employees ever were. But the powers that be are happy because payroll expense is down

 

[Chuck S]

If it still is saving Disney money, than I would let the resorts know that any DVC member that checks in and wants valet-they are still covered.

Again, what else can be outsourced and the savings, I mean added expense be passed on to the user? That's more my point than the situation Disney created with this "money saving" decision.

Why should Disney, because they have outsourced the service, pay a subsidy to the contractor to give DVCers the service for free? That subsidy would be passed on to DVCers as dues increases.

 

[jade1]

Chuck, if your saying "Disney" is deciding to make decisions that will cost "DVC members" more money (or less perks) and too bad for them-then yes, we have no argument and should expect more bad situations to come.