Originally Posted by
rickg523
Both things can be true. Reducing institutional laundering can be both economically sensible for the property and environmentally sensible as well. I'm not sure I really get the objection to such a mildly put, non-verbal request.
My objection isn't a harsh one, its just more in my nature to want to reward brutal honesty in the face of good public relations. In the back of my mind the inner cynic in me can't help but think that the board room conversations leading to the "Save the environment" towel requests went something like this:
"Bob, have you found out a way to reduce our labor costs?"
"Sure have, Bill, turns out we have 3 housekeepers whose sole job is to wash towels and linens - we can cut that down to 1 housekeeper and lay off 2 people if we can get our guests to stop throwing towels on floor"
"How do we do that, Bill?, we can't just tell our guests what to do?"
"It's called greenwashing Bob, if there's a hair of truth in it, we can convince the guests of anything. In this case, we'll remind them it will save water and energy if we don't have to wash their towels every day"
"But Bill, won't they catch on when our hotel rooms all have high-flow toilets and our sprinklers out front are on for 30 minutes every day, even when it's raining?"
"Naah, people wont notice"