The Checkout

Say What You Mean, Please

As I'm still reminiscing about my vacation, I want to share a few thoughts about customer service, especially this one: Why can't hotels say what they really mean? Instead they put sweetly worded messages in the rooms that seem to say one thing but actually mean another.

For instance, in my first B&B in Banff (the Blue Mountain Lodge, a friendly little residence near the main drag), there's this note: "We want to respect your privacy. If you would like fresh towels, the garbage emptied, etc., please let us know." The real meaning of this message became clear the second day: There was NO housekeeping service. Not only were there no fresh towels or empty trash cans--the bed wasn't made either.

But to me, even more maddening are the now ubiquitous notes (left at every other hotel) asking guests to respect the environment by reusing their towels and sheets. At Deer Lodge in Lake Louise, for example, there's a "Recycle Reuse Reduce" card in the bathroom: "Consider the 'mountains' of towels that are unnecessarily wasted every day, along with the monstrous amount of detergent needed and the impact of this added pollution on the lakes and rivers. You can help us to become more environmentally friendly" by not asking for fresh towels every day. Now I heartily agree with the concept of helping the environment and certainly don't need clean towels or sheets every day. But I guarantee you that every hotel asking us to reduce pollution wouldn't do so if it didn't also mean it would reduce their costs. That's what the cards should really be saying: Help us keep room rates down by reusing your towels!

Thanks to these cards, I started reading all labels carefully for the rest of my trip. Perhaps the most ridiculous one was on the bags of "party peanuts" that the flight attendants grudgingly gave out as snack: "Allergen Information: May Contain Tree Nuts." Duh! It's not like you were expecting something other than peanuts! I know this is mandated by the Food and Drug Administration, but give me a break!

My favorite label, by far, goes to the bag of Hardbite Potato Chips (made in Canada): "Our chips are made with unfettered free range potatoes..." At least some one has a sense of humor!

Seen any good labels lately? Post them here.

By  |  June 28, 2006; 7:00 AM ET Customer Service
Previous: No Hails for Airport Cab Service | Next: Perpetual Spam

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Actually, the warning on the peanut bag isn't as silly as it seems. Peanuts aren't tree nuts (they grow underground and are actually more closely related to beans and peas). Tree nuts (including pecans, cashews, almonds, walnuts, etc) are a completely different family and a different set of allergies -- someone might be able to eat peanuts but not tree nuts, and vice versa. So it's useful to warn people that it may not only be peanuts in the bag!

Posted by: Diana | June 28, 2006 7:34 AM

Ok, I'll be nitpicky: peanuts aren't tree nuts. They grow underground. So if I were allergic to, say, walnuts (but not peanuts), I would want to know that there might be tree nuts in there.

Posted by: h3 | June 28, 2006 7:35 AM

This post is very cynical. Would it really be better if language were exclusively informational?

Posted by: Horse | June 28, 2006 8:26 AM

I'd rather see a sign pro-environment then pro-money saving so you can't blame them. They know the majority of their clients feel the way I do. Would you rather see a sign that says "No life guard on duty" or "we're to cheap to pay for a life guard so you're on your own".

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 8:42 AM

>> "Allergen Information: May Contain Tree Nuts."

Having a son who has a deadly allergy to tree nuts, but not peanuts this is actually remarkably useful information.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 9:43 AM

And another thing:

My other son has deadly allergies to both treenuts, and peanuts, as well as non-deadly allergies (some may him vomit violently, others merely give him a rash) to soy, milk, pork and seafood. You have NO idea how usefull it is to have such information printed on packages.

Here's a little something you clearly missed in your lunatic rant that is also helpful: The people who print ingredients actually use a bold face type for all ingredients that people may be merely alergic, and not deathly alergic to.

Perhaps in some future rant you can belittle those stupid, heartless corporations who make the food for their wasting of ink for the sake of saving parents untold hours shopping for kids with such allergies...

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 9:50 AM

Ms. Mayer, you opened a whole, "bag o' nuts" it seems.

Everyone else - cut the lady a break. 1) Peanut allergies are bemusing and weird to most of the population. I realize it's a serious problem, and can cause anaphylactic shock and death... but us non-nut allergy population still finds it humorous that "CONTAINS PEANUT INGREDIENTS" is found on the side of a jar of Jiff.

Also - I wholeheartedly agree with her observations about putting a positive P.R. spin on measures essentially aimed at putting more money in investors pockets. Don't lie to me and put some altruistic side-effect from an action motivated by corporate greed and/or laziness... It demeans the consumer's intelligence.

Posted by: Jay | June 28, 2006 9:53 AM

I will give everybody $100 if we just please DON'T get into the whole peanut allergy thing here today.

That gets SO tiresome.

Posted by: Linda | June 28, 2006 10:19 AM

I'm actually laughing at the last post. Well said.

Posted by: Jay | June 28, 2006 10:23 AM

Peanut allergies are all made up/in your head.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 10:25 AM

I could use $100.

Posted by: me, me | June 28, 2006 10:53 AM

To Jay - I think what you said ("Don't lie to me and put some altruistic side-effect from an action motivated by corporate greed and/or laziness... It demeans the consumer's intelligence.") is an overstated PC version of the great old saying: Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.

I agree with some of Caroline's observations to a point, but I also detect a total sense of entitlement here. I mean c'mon - at least you had the luxury of being on vacation. At least (hopefully) you didn't have your car swept away in the floods this week like some people around here. At least you don't live in a country where you have bombs falling on your head every day. At least you live in a time and place that has aircraft that can zip you around from place to place in a matter of hours (which would be incomprehensible to generations in the not very distant past) despite the peanuts and their blasted warnings...

I mean some people in New Orleans lost their whole lives after Katrina while other people get paid by major publishers to write blogs complaining about their vacation? I think many people could benefit from a lesson of "Keeping Things in Perspective".

Posted by: Judge Judy | June 28, 2006 10:56 AM

To Jay:

I'm so with you. When my niece (my boy's cousin) had the peanut alergy I thought it was a joke. Having watched the boy go into toxic shock because we gave him a cookie with a walnut on it, I can assure it really does stop being a joke. It is an EMENSE pain in my ass to have to go through every piece of candy he gets on halloween and easter to get rid of the nuts as his little brother is only 1 and can't be told not to eat them.

To Linda: I'll stop for a grand... $100 is WAY too cheap.

To anon@June 28, 2006 10:25 AM : Bite me.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 11:00 AM

To suggest that peanut or other nut allergies are "all in your head" proves that the writer of that comment is a complete idiot. It's a medical fact, as demonstrated when my then 2-year old nephew collapsed after eating a cashew. I'm sure the first reaction of his father was to think that his son was feigning injury by failing to breathe. Fortunately his actual reaction was to take the child to the hospital. You're a moron.

Posted by: David | June 28, 2006 11:09 AM

My favorite is the "please conserve water" language you see on the same towel re-use sign, but for your 'convenience' you may open and drink one of the eight dollar bottles of spring water left on your nightstand. Gosh, thanks.

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 11:12 AM

There are lot of beers labeled "imported". Sapporo a "Japanese" beer is imported...from canada. These beers need to read Imported on their label to make more money so they are made in Canada, not the US. Although I'm sure it is owned by Coors, Miller or etc. You would be suprised how many other beers are brewed in Canada and not from Europe or Asia

Posted by: Bryan | June 28, 2006 11:16 AM

Ever notice how many kids these days get these allergies because they're not exposed to things as a child and never gain any sort of resistance?

Coddling kids is bad for them, it turns out.

Posted by: Wibblebaskets | June 28, 2006 11:27 AM

"Organic sea salt"

Last I checked, salt was inorganic. Is this product a scientific breakthrough?

Posted by: Craig | June 28, 2006 11:27 AM

How is salt inorganic? Is someone pouring a bunch of Morton's Iodized into the oceans?

Posted by: Horse | June 28, 2006 11:54 AM

Inorganic -- being or composed of matter other than plant or animal : MINERAL (2) : forming or belonging to the inanimate world b : of, relating to, or dealt with by a branch of chemistry concerned with substances not usually classed as organic.
Salt is NaCl, no Carbon compounds, so it's inorganic.

Posted by: salt is inorganic | June 28, 2006 12:06 PM

Sea salt is "organic" because it's made naturally in accordance with federal guidelines for organicity. Sea salt is "inorganic" because its doesn't contain carbon.

It's no different than arguing "A star is a giant ball of gas; Brad Pitt is a star; therefore Brad Pitt is a giant ball of gas." Also known as equivocation, this so-called reasoning is truly very obnoxious.

Posted by: athea | June 28, 2006 12:07 PM

The "organic/inorganic" argument is an example of how words get hijacked from their original meaning. The chemical meaning of the two words makes salt definitely an inorganic substance, but the FDA's definition of "organic" allows that salt can be considered to be in that category as well.

For an engineer or scientist though, reading "organic salt" makes no sense at all.

Posted by: John | June 28, 2006 12:14 PM

Why the cynical accusations about environmentalism?

For once saving costs and saving the environment actually may be consistent/in harmony. Sure, does the hotel save money? Yes. Does it help the environment? Yes. Will consumers ultimately win either way? Yes and yes--if the hotel saves money, it can keep room rates down. And you won't waste energy.

What's next accusing hybrid car owners of buying the cars only so they can use the HOV lanes and save money on gas? For shame!

Posted by: ah | June 28, 2006 12:20 PM

I carry the organic/inorganic issue one step further, being a chemist and a nerdy one at that. Some years ago someone told me they had some "organic water" and I busted out laughing, same thing, to a chemist organic means having carbon in it and coming from some living thing (i.e., sodium bicarbonate has carbon but is not considered organic). So water, salt, etc. are NOT organic. But I also laugh inside when someone talks about something being "full of CHEMICALS" because to me everything is a chemical, you and me included. It's just a case of the language changing (and getting sloppy IMO). And it just kind of makes me giggle so no harm in it either...

Posted by: Catherine | June 28, 2006 12:33 PM

Don't bring up hybrid owner's. First if you have a hybrid getting 41 mpg and carrying one person, that's one gallon of gas to commute 41 person miles. While if you have three people in a car getting 17 mpg it's actually getting 51 person miles. So maybe those SUVs which only take up twice as much space as hybrids are using space 1 1/2 times more efficiently.

BTW, HOV by definition is HIGH OCCUPANCY not high mileage.

If you have three cars on the road to carry three people, that's causing roughly three times the wear and tear on the roads. While a regular Honda Civic is just roughly above a factor of one.

Any more questions? Hybrids suck up space and obviously the brain in your head.

Why can't they just slug and read a book? Because they are more important than the rest of us? Or just environmentally "conscious" enough to realize a hybrid is "good" for the environment. BUNK!!!! LIES!!!!!

Posted by: ah...... NO | June 28, 2006 12:37 PM

Ok "ah.....NO", if you're really more concerned about getting more "people miles" out of your commute, then why don't you walk the walk - get a hybrid and carpool with the hybrid. Then, with 3 people at 41 mpg you'll be getting 123 people miles! WOW! And don't say they're not big enough - that's bunk. At 6'3" I've been in hybrids that have plenty of space for me and additional passengers.

Or maybe you're really just concerned with having a good rationalization to keep clogging the roads with SUVs. From a non-car owning ex-SUV driver...

Posted by: DOH! | June 28, 2006 1:01 PM

Umm, really? Hybrids are the problem of today? Wow...

I know you want to rail against hybrids because you're really railing against environmentalists, and their "liberal" agenda, no doubt, but I know SUVs get terrible mileage and I _know_ people who drive them by themselves (let's not digress into HOV use, which is a minor issue beside the point of the hybrid). I'm sorry, 10 miles per gallon (you heard that right - 10 miles, on a new vehicle, and I can find out which one it was if you need it) is not efficient no matter how many people you cram into it (and really, can't we be honest and say that it's mostly wealthier suburbanites who have grocery shopping and nothing else to do that use them?).
And please, don't give the argument that you really care about the "wear and tear" on our roads (or is that -gasp- an environmentally-conscious comment?).
I know this gets off topic of labels and such, but I just think that kind of vitriol over cars (and, more important, not addressing that the whole point of those cars is to try to help the environment somehow while we steadily run out of oil) is a little silly.

Posted by: ah....Yes | June 28, 2006 1:09 PM

About those signs about not replacing the towels in hotel rooms. I'm happy to not have my towels replaced every day that I'm in a hotel -- I just wish they'd provide enough bars to hang the wet towels......

Posted by: Anonymous in Cali | June 28, 2006 1:19 PM

Mayer - are you kidding? I agree with other posters that it seems your post is a rather cynical one. I think most of us are intelligent enough to read between the lines when overnighting at hotels, B&Bs etc. Gosh, wasn't there anything at all that you enjoyed about your trip, or was it so awful and so complaint-inspiring that you had to start tearing into little signs and claims slapped onto foodstuffs too in order to break up the monotony of wishing you'd gone somewhere else?

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 1:33 PM

The signs about reusing towels are fine--if the hotel actually pays attention to the policy. Repeatedly we've followed whatever a particular hotel's instructions are (leave this card on the bed; hang the towels instead of leaving them on the floor; whatever) to indicate that we're happy to reuse the towels, only to find that they've obviously been replaced. Sigh.

Posted by: dc lurker | June 28, 2006 1:49 PM

Wow - keep jumping on the writer to make your day a little better folks.

Allergies are real. So is juvenile diabetes - so I have read everything in the ingredients list on ANYTHING he eats to identify 4-6 different ways they say "sugar". I have to teach him to when he is older. Why do you get special messages?
A few months back I stayed at a luxury hotel (for me at least a 4 star is pretty swanky) that had the SAME sign. When I pay $350 *including taxes* a night I'd prefer the hotel to wash my towel, thanks. Sheesh. Cutting corners indeed!

Posted by: pile on?? | June 28, 2006 1:55 PM

Listen, I'm not against Hybrids, the Honda Civic Hybrids get about 5-10 miles per gallon more than a regular Honda civic, certainly great if you have a commute that is long and isn't afforded the HOV. However, I still opine that HOV would be better served by less cars with better MPP (miles per person) be it a minivan getting 18 mpg and carrying four people or a regular Honda Civic getting 30+ mpg carrying three people, or even an SUV getting 10 MPG and carrying six people.

When the commute that took 2 1/2 hours up and back four years ago is now taking 3 hours and at least 15 minutes of that is due to Hybrids, yeah, they're not efficient spacewise. Or is the hour and a half I've lost due to hybrids of no value? And just to nip any conservation jabs in the bud, if hybrids weren't on the roads those gas guzzling SUVs in the HOV would be getting even better gas mileage. And the HOT lanes, don't even get me started.

Commute time is IMO the #1 political issue, and I slug and drive so what better way to kill three birds with one stone. Better gas usage, better time usage, and it's "green."

Posted by: Ahhh.......NO! | June 28, 2006 2:18 PM

Caroline I'm terribly sorry to hear that the hotel you stayed at was trying to save you money and they didn't tell you up front. Have you called the Better Business Bureau?

Posted by: Caroline's Common Sense | June 28, 2006 2:25 PM

Here's my question about the "slug" thing ... I would *never*, not since it was pounded into my head in preschool, get into a car with a stranger. Verboten.

How are people comfortable doing that every day? I would rather drive myself slowly than sit there every day worried that I was going to get robbed or raped or murdered.

I'm new to this area and have never seen something like this before ... what am I missing?

Posted by: new to the area | June 28, 2006 2:27 PM

It would be nice to read these blogs without people attacking each other (and the originator). Perhaps Caroline was just trying to get people to think about and initiate an interesting DISCUSSION about things that she finds amusing/bizarre/absurd rather than a route for people to be meanspirited.

Posted by: Silver Spring | June 28, 2006 2:59 PM

The vending machines at my office have little bags of Mr. Nature brand trail mix (of which the main ingredient is peanuts). Here's what it says on the back of the bag:

Since time began everybody used nuts as a source of food. Mr. Nature® continues this tradition by presenting you with flavorful nuts and dried fruits that are energy packed, wholesome and delicious. Mr. Nature®, the best choice... because we care. Enjoy!

Allergy information: Packed on equipment that processes peanuts and tree nuts.

Posted by: Cosmo | June 28, 2006 3:04 PM

Burger King Push Door Label:

"You can have things your way and pull, but this door is extremely stubborn."

Posted by: Whopper Sr. | June 28, 2006 3:28 PM

David said: "It's a medical fact, as demonstrated when my then 2-year old nephew collapsed after eating a cashew."

What would happen if he just stuck it in his ear or nostril?

Posted by: SR | June 28, 2006 3:32 PM

"I would *never*, not since it was pounded into my head in preschool, get into a car with a stranger."

Have you ever taken a bus, train or airplane? Nuff said!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 28, 2006 3:38 PM

I never got in a car with a total stranger, either ... until my then-husband gave me a roundhouse punch to the nose while we were going somewhere in the car. I jumped out of the passenger side before he even finished stopping the car and ran up the road and got into the first car that pulled over. Fortunately, the driver of that car was a young female second lieutenant fresh out of the Air Force Academy, running an errand for her CO. She took me to a friend's house, got me cleaned up, and drove me to the train station so that I could go home to my Mom. Nearly twenty years later, I still think very kindly of that stranger.

Posted by: free at last | June 28, 2006 3:58 PM

I love reading their labels. I don't have one here, but they are very amusing.

Posted by: Vitamin Water | June 28, 2006 4:09 PM

What a dissapointing and still all too typically American reaction to a slight compromise of daily comforts that can result in both economic and environmental benefits for both the consumer and society. An example of a fairly spoiled and pampered journalist. The attempt to write something like Andy Rooney here is pretty obvious.

Posted by: AWG | June 28, 2006 4:58 PM

"Keep Dry"

Posted by: Mr. Bubble | June 28, 2006 5:19 PM

I had a radio recently ... one sticker on the back noted the following: "warrenty void if broken."

Posted by: James | June 28, 2006 5:34 PM

If hotels really want our cooperation in lowering costs they might give us an incentive. First, be honest about the benefit to both the environment AND the bottom line. Second, offer me a discount on my room for the service that I am turning down - perhaps a dollar or two off my bill. Fewer services at the same price amount to a price increase. Wrapping this price increase in "environmentally friendly" language is demeaning and offensive. (I am not opposed to minimizing environmental impact, but am annoyed by misleading and patronizing language.) Also, as previously posted, their overture would be better received if there were a convenient way to store damp towels for reuse. After several years of this practice, I haven't seen the cost savings of reducing their workload returned to consumers in the form of additional towel bars.

Posted by: Traveling consumer | June 28, 2006 5:35 PM

I too don't mind reusing my towels when I stay in hotels. But I know someone who, at home, washed towels after each use.

Posted by: ProfessorB | June 28, 2006 5:51 PM

A business exists to make money. A business has no concern for society, so it is equally valid to employ illegal aliens, dump toxic chemicals in someone's back yard, or lie about motives so long as profit is being generated.

It's time to stop believing in the fairy tale propaganda that businesses care about people. They even call you consumers and still no one blinks.

Posted by: Back To Reality | June 28, 2006 7:13 PM

OK. I stand corrected. Your emails and comments have made it clear I was wrong about the tree nuts warning. Thanks to all who have set me straight. I appreciate it.
Caroline

Posted by: caroline mayer | June 28, 2006 10:02 PM

I love the idea of the hybrid, I have always thought it was hideously stupid that the US has all these gas guzzling cars when there are cars that give great gas mileage everywhere else in the world. However, as someone who makes way less than the median in the high cost DC area, I see the HOV by-pass for hybrids as one more way to reward the well-to-do. I, quite frankly, can't afford to pay $26K or so for new car or almost new car and I make a decent salary as an accountant.

Posted by: MEG | June 29, 2006 12:02 PM

Hey as long as we're ranting, check this out - a psycho anorexic jogger screamed at me this morning for not stopping for her so she could cross against the light. I guess she was late to go throw up or something. I'm pretty peeved about that. If I see her tomorrow, I will force-feed her both tree AND ground nuts and then smother her with an unlaundered towel...

Posted by: AsLongAsWe'reRanting | June 29, 2006 1:20 PM

I'm with dc lurker -- I've regularly had towels replaced daily when I didn't want them to be. I actually talked to a member of the housekeeping staff (the one who arrived to clean my room) about the problem. Turns out that either the staff wasn't informed at all about the policy, or the information came in a language they didn't understand. The staff member I spoke with was surprised to hear that I didn't want my towels changed -- she indicated that she had been instructed to change them daily regardless.

Posted by: DMS | June 29, 2006 1:24 PM

"How is salt inorganic? Is someone pouring a bunch of Morton's Iodized into the oceans?"

If that was the only thing being poured into the oceans I would gladly eat sea salt. I think most people who choose organic foods do so to avoid farm chemical residues. Where do you think this residues end up? Some into the ground water, but most into surface water and eventually the ocean along with factory waste water, garbage, and raw sewage. I'm not so worried about what they may ADD extracting sea salt as about what they may neglect to TAKE OUT.

Posted by: joejoe | June 29, 2006 1:59 PM

Wow, and I thought the "On Balance" blog was full of vitriol. The distinction between peanuts and tree nuts is very useful information, but "lunatic rant"? Criticizing Caroline as spoiled and elitist for taking a vacation? (Oh, the horror -- how dare she! And to write about it in public!! Does she know no shame??) Geez.

Frankly, there's a lot in our world that is, well, flat-out funny. I ran around my office in hysterics showing everyone my frozen macaroni and cheese, which said on the box: "Contains wheat and milk products." Umm, gee, I'd sure hope so (although I guess nowadays, you can't be too sure). If you can't see the inherent absurdity in putting a peanut warning on the side of a jar of peanut butter, then boy, you're missing out on a heck of a lot of fun.

Posted by: Laura | June 29, 2006 2:00 PM

To laura:

Macaroni doesn't necessarily have to made with wheat, and 'cheese' doesn't necessarily have to be made with milk. Having to buy varieties of foods that don't contain specific foods alerts one to these facts.

As for peanut butter having a label that says 'contains peanuts'... You've never seen one. IF a product, in it's label says it contains peanuts, they don't need to put it in the ingredients (consult a bag of peanut M&Ms for verification). In the case of trailmix... not all trail mix is created equal, and not all bags are guaranteed to contain nuts... This is purpose for the warning, as people with such alergies look first to label, then the ingredients.

I'm glad you think alerting one to the fact that a processed food item may contain a trace amount of an ingredient that in parts per million will kill people inside of five minutes is funny. I bet you get a kick out watching junkies twitch and die as well... Faces of death? bum-fight!

Posted by: Anonymous | June 29, 2006 3:21 PM

To anonymous 3:21:

Yeah, that's me, I take joy in the pain of others.

And please, tell me where exactly I said they shouldn't label for food allergies? I think it's great that people today, especially kids, have a much better chance of avoiding accidental ingestion. Good Lord, I had serious food sensitivies myself as a kid (to milk and wheat, as a matter of fact), but was lucky enough to grow out of them. But that didn't deprive me of the ability to laugh.

Posted by: Laura | June 29, 2006 4:20 PM

Re: THE TOPIC (that is escaping so many here)

I agree with the poster who said a discount should be offered to those hotel guests who are willing to decline certain services. All they have to do is jack up the price two bucks a day and offer to take that same two bucks off the room rate if you are okay with skipping new towels and sheets.

I don't mean to be cynical about it - the bottom line is that there are very real environmental benefits. It would really be a very good thing if they could make it happen.

Posted by: pat | June 30, 2006 5:56 PM

Regarding the holiday lodges:
I would have left.People should not patronize any hotel that leaves notes like that. If staying, they should ask for extra towels.

First of all, you were not staying at a retreat run by kind clergy allowing you the free use of their facilities. You were paying for lodging that included the price of fresh towels, linen, hot water, etc., whether you took advantage of it or not.It is probably not enough that they are exploiting the underpaid staff that has to clean up the filthier mess, but they also want to cheat the guests.

Then there is the issue of the pestilence and deaths that the world experiences when nonhygienic methods are unleashed in the name of cost containment. Those wet towels are harboring a nice brew of germs while they hang on the rack-and I bet they use cold water,no disinfectants and line drying too...Just look at the poor people who have had their lives ruined or shut down by infected/damaged medical devices that were meant to be used once and discarded, but instead were "cleaned" or "reconditioned" and reused by the mandate of the arrogant, greedy hospital directors who want to pocket more money-8 hospitals in the Washington area, according to this newspaper.

Hygiene saves lives,and may save you from bed-biting bugs that feed on guests in unhygienic bedding at night...maybe some people like anointing themselves with a mixture of dead skin cells,sweat (yes, you do sweat while toweling down),body fluids and colonies of germs everytime they reuse these filthy towels in the name of conservation, but it is not an enlightened act.

Posted by: CC | July 5, 2006 10:57 AM

Regarding the holiday lodges:
I would have left.People should not patronize any hotel that leaves notes like that. If staying, they should ask for extra towels.

First of all, you were not staying at a retreat run by kind clergy allowing you the free use of their facilities. You were paying for lodging that included the price of fresh towels, linen, hot water, etc., whether you took advantage of it or not.It is probably not enough that they are exploiting the underpaid staff that has to clean up the filthier mess, but they also want to cheat the guests.

Then there is the issue of the pestilence and deaths that the world experiences when nonhygienic methods are unleashed in the name of cost containment. Those wet towels are harboring a nice brew of germs while they hang on the rack-and I bet they use cold water,no disinfectants and line drying too...Just look at the poor people who have had their lives ruined or shut down by infected/damaged medical devices that were meant to be used once and discarded, but instead were "cleaned" or "reconditioned" and reused by the mandate of the arrogant, greedy hospital directors who want to pocket more money-8 hospitals in the Washington area, according to this newspaper.

Hygiene saves lives,and may save you from bed-biting bugs that feed on guests in unhygienic bedding at night...maybe some people like anointing themselves with a mixture of dead skin cells,sweat (yes, you do sweat while toweling down),body fluids and colonies of germs everytime they reuse these filthy towels in the name of conservation, but it is not an enlightened act.

Posted by: CC | July 5, 2006 10:58 AM

As I'm still reminiscing about my vacation, I want to share a few thoughts about customer service, especially this one: Why can't hotels say what they really mean? Instead they put sweetly worded messages in the rooms that seem to say one thing but actually mean another.
I do not agree.For more info go to System.String[]

Posted by: apartments krakow | September 27, 2006 7:46 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2010 The Washington Post Company