Posted Tuesday, July 20, 2004 10:31 AM | Contributed by Jeff
Paramount's Carowinds has shocked some of its seasonal teen workers by banning them from the grounds after their shifts end. Carowinds notified employees that the company was unsuccessful in preventing off-duty employees from socializing with those on duty, noting that "the guest experience is compromised" when off-duty employees hang around.
My first reaction to this was negative, but when I stopped and thought about it, I've seen what they describe at a lot of parks, and it's annoying. When it's about your safety, it's more than annoying.
We have the same policy at the restaurant I work in. If you want to grab a bite to eat, so be it. But if it causes a disturbance in the guests experience the manager will tell you to box up your food and hit the bricks.
I see your point Jeff, but what about those seasonals who AREN'T in the park *distracting* those who are on-duty, simply enjoying one of the SUPPOSED benefits of working at a park...
Many MANY times I've seen off-duty employees yakking with, and distracting those who are ON duty....but I don't like the idea of punishing everyone for the actions of a few....then again, it sounds like they DID try to work out a solution with the employees, and it failed.....so.....
It sure puts a damper on one of the employee perks but I understand the rationalization. I didn't register to read the article, but I wonder if they couldn't start with some discipline before going to this extreme.
Have the rule be you can be in the park but not in the "zone" you work in. If a manager finds you in that zone you are subject to the disciplinary system which might ultimately end up in termination.
Bad idea. They should have dealt with this in a different way (like not allowing them to hang out in their area). It is annoying, but they pay the employees so little, this was a major perk for attracting workers.
Why not revoke the priveleges from those who broke the rules? Should be easy to "deactivate" their passes for free-entry.
What usually happens when a policy such as this goes into effect is the ones who were the rulebreakers in the first place will still be the ones that violate the rule and may end up getting fired anyway. Meanwhile, the peeps that just want to hang out in the park and not cause trouble and ride a few rides will no longer be able to do so. Lame.
I don't think keeping employees from their area is fair either. What if a lot of the rides you want to go on in your spare time is located in you work area? Or, do you mean by work area, around the booth and such?
Sound like this is a chronic problem that management lost control of. So instead of disciplining the offenders and nipping this in the bud, all the seasonals become defacto offenders. Bad, bad management. Verbal, written, and then you're outa here. How much you want to bet that there won't be too many returnees next year?
The edict implemented last week removes a coveted perk that helps lure some 2,000 mostly young workers during the park's operating season in spring, summer and early fall months.
"Some" does not mean a portion of the employees, "Some" means (from dictionary.com) "An indefinite additional quantity: did the assigned work and then some. " In this case - you could remove the word some and replace it with "approximately" or "more than"...
*** This post was edited by redman822 7/20/2004 3:08:20 PM ***