observer

DELee

Which Hilton property?

David

Doctorslices

A security guard coming to the door for inspection certainly seems unusual. How long was your stay at that point and how long had it been since housekeeping had been in the room?

observer

hugolover

I think the manager is being a bit of a pillock. The policy is if you decline two subsequent housekeeping services, but common sense always prevails.

Call the room. Did he call?
Ask colleagues if they have seen you about.
Suspicious activities reports.
Check CCTV.
Guest has previously stayed and typically does this.

Corporate policy does not say that the manager can just enter the room, can walk around and conduct an inspection. If you answer the door, they're "trained" to check for suspicious behaviour, and of course, if they think there is some, they call the police, they don't take it upon themselves to barge by and conduct an inspection. They can only come inside if there is no one inside, obviously, to make sure you're not dead. And if you refuse to answer and you're inside, well that is a different situation.

I think guests are very understanding of these policies given all the terrorism and shootings in the West, so if conducted properly, no one should feel invaded.

Did they put the "we tried to clean your room" card under the door on the second attempt?

observer

Often1

Good on the property for looking out for its guests.

I can't imagine the villification when somebody posts that they fell and hurt themselves and lay on the floor for 24 hours unable to move before anybody showed up.

As to who charges what to the room, I doubt that this is quite as sophisticated as anyone physically reviewing folios for room charges.

hugolover

For some properties yes, for others no. The penny pinching to place "decline service" cards just makes the policy confusing and convoluted.

If they weren't trying to award 500 points it would all make a bit more sense to use DND cards. DND cards have never meant that properties should not put the "housekeeping service" card under the door, the same card that typically has ticks for "deliver package, laundry" etc. Reducing HK hours is another issue. I often leave a DND until 3PM if I had a late arrival and will call to ask for service, but in some properties they are already clocking off.

So if Hilton had a consistent policy it would all make more sense.

By the second day, the OP would have received two cards, then a courtesy call from the Manager to ask if all is OK and policy is just to make sure he is alright. Policy does not call for the Manager to enter the room and inspect it. If someone feels so wrong when the guest answers the door, then the property should be calling the police. In this climate, I am sure 99.9% of guests are completely understanding. And in smaller properties, who know and see their guests, I sincerely doubt this is even an issue.

Properties prioritising saving a few measly dollars on housekeeping costs remove a big part of the eyes and ears of the hotel. Incentivising guests to the sum of $2.50 for points to decline service increases the incidence of this. Housekeeping would surely spot suspicious articles in a room and something that doesn't look right. But management decided it's better to save a few dollars on HK. And still, corporate policy only calls for the hotel to check if the guest answers the door, not to barge inside if the guest answers.

And for the thread title, it's a second-day wellness check, not daily, the manager should make that clear.

observer

Often1

I'm not sure if you are responding to what I wrote. What I wrote was simply that if what I stated did happen, the property would be equall vilified. I don't really care whether your particular property did it for your well-being, the well-being of others or both.

indufan

A few years ago, I complained about a IHG brand entering my room when the DND sign was on. They explained to me that it was policy to enter the room daily. I called BS. They called my BS and produced the policy.

There is a topic on here someplace. I think it is utter crap but some here don't. I am sure the Vegas thing is part of it but they also don't want to have a meth lab on premises.

writerguyfl

In terms of Hilton Corporate policy, the manager could be right and wrong depending upon the definition. If you define Corporate as the brand owner, he's wrong. There is no corporate policy that hotels are required to pester their guests on a daily basis.

But, if you define Corporate as the company running the hotel, he's correct. The Hilton La Jolla Torrey Pines is operated by Hilton Management Services. Of Hilton's 5,000+ properties, about 300 are managed by Hilton.

Managed Properties List: Hilton Management Services | Portfolio of Properties

As far as the practice is concerned, I view it as security theatre. As noted, if you wanted to stockpile weapons, all you'd need to do is hide them in suitcases.

Hilton Management Services isn't the only company doing this type of thing. At Walt Disney World in Orlando, Disney instituted these same type of daily room checks at all of their 25+ resorts.

Note: Daily room checks are different from welfare checks. Any decently-run hotel will have a policy to check on the welfare of guests. (In some locations, local law may require it.) Typically, it doesn't happen until at least 3 days of no contact. In the various hotels in which I worked, it was 4 or 5 days. I have zero problems with welfare checks of that nature. Daily room checks are a solution in search of a problem.

hugolover

Sorry that's partly wrong.

There is no corporate policy to pester guests on a daily basis, but if a guest refuses service two days on the trot, then it is absolutely corporate policy to check the guest is OK. I can assure you that such a policy exists. It's as clear as guaranteed lounge access for Diamonds.

Hilton have very clear policies on this and there are *no* opt-outs. It is a worldwide policy. Whether some hotels choose to ignore that is up to them because as you correctly point out, if it's franchised, the franchisee is liable if it goes tits up.

writerguyfl

I literally never get housekeeping and almost always stay more than a single night. If what you write is true, that means that every Hilton-branded hotel I've stayed in in the past decade is violating this so-called worldwide policy.

I worked in and followed hospitality for decades. Never once have I seen a franchise agreement that requires hotels to enter a room to check on the guest. Many franchises would absolutely balk at that type of invasive policy simply because it would significantly increase labor costs for almost zero practical benefit. The only thing this would accomplish is irritating guests.

What's your source for this "no opt-out" policy?

hugolover

The policy came about due to the Vegas shooting in October 2017-isn't that obvious, its been referred to over and over in previous posts, so why would it have been happening for "decades" as you said? Nobody said it was. The policy is a little over a year old.

I never said they need to "enter a room" to check on a guest.

What a bizarre hotel policy not to check on a guest who hasn't been seen around the hotel for days and is checked in, never seen going from his/her room, nothing on the camera, no housekeeping, no key lock entry recorded. How many guests generally don't leave their room at all for 48 hours? Who have never been seen by staff, ordering items? It must be a handful occurrence in any property, worldwide.

Could something be wrong with that guest? Would a courtesy call not be sensible? Would it not save a lot of hassle in the long run? It's not all about defeating terrorists, but the well-being of guests.

To me, it makes a lot of sense and I'd imagine many properties never need to intervene, or at a maximum a few times a year.

As I said COMMON SENSE is the prevailing mentality. Not hysterics, as you seem to be suggesting.