PTravel

My email to Marriott:

An otherwise pleasant stay at [the Seattle Airport Marriott] hotel was marred by the presence, in the Concierge Lounge, of a family with a noisy toddler. My client and I had planned on an early breakfast meeting. The lounge was occupied, entirely, by business men and women, except for one family with a young child and a baby in a carrier. The toddler was noisy and disruptive, and made it impossible for my client and I to have a discussion. The parents put the carrier, which was one designed to be placed on the floor, on the table -- a surface on which people eat.

The Concierge Lounge was, I thought, intended to be an amenity that was conducive to business travel concerns. Instead, the presence of this one family transformed it into an in-hotel Applebees. Noisey children should not be allowed. Tables should not be used as platforms for anything that sits on the floor.

Except for this incident, I was very satisfied with the hotel and its staff. Indeed, there was a very nice breakfast spread in the Concierge Lounge. I only wish we could have enjoyed it.

AvalancheZ71

Oh boy an entitlement no doubt. Now I don't dismiss your disgust with the carrier on the table, however, what difference would the back end of a carrier pose then the backend of a notebook or laptop that has been handled by a flu-ridden individual?

PTravel

Yep. I think I'm entitled to use the Concierge Lounge for the purpose for which Marriott says it was intended.

I'm not sure I get your point. Notebooks and laptops are not placed on the floor. The carrier clearly had been. I didn't see anyone taking off their shoes and placing them on the table.

AvalancheZ71

Yuck, that is just wrong. I am saying that I think it was improper behavior to place the carrier on the table, however, I believe that most parents to place those on tables. I am just pointing out that a flu-ridden individual would pose as much of a health concern than the carrier. How would you police that model?

The point I am making is that those parents are just as entitled to be in the lounge as you were. Would I want to be interrupted as you were, no I sure would not want to be. Was your client a paying customer to the property? Were you upgraded to the lounge based on status or did you pay for concierge level room? Now since that is a benefit of the Gold or Platinum status, then that is a moot point, however, still one to keep in mind.

PTravel

I wouldn't police that model. I'd think that someone with the flu would have the courtesy to avoid infecting everyone else by spending time in the lounge. I do expect the lounge attendant to tell people who place carriers OR shoes on the tables that they should be removed.

I didn't say they weren't entitled to be in the lounge. I said that they weren't entitled to disrupt the lounge to the point that no one else could use it for its intended purpose.

Yes. Though both our rooms were on my credit card, it is my client that ultimately must pay that bill.

I don't recall, though my TA has standing instructions to book the concierge floor for the extra $10 or so. What difference does it make?

AvalancheZ71

The last point doesn't matter as it is moot. This thread has just turned into a pistol match and non-dissuasive or discussive of pertiant ideas. I hear you, however, I do not. I think the parents were disruptive and not disorderly, it would be the task of the property to remove a disorderly individual. The parents just had bad manners. Would it be in the best interest of the property to limit those over the age of 21 to the lounge? I would say the parent(s) paid for the lounge so they would say not. Your client paid for the lounge as well as you did and you think so. So you can see where this is going, nowhere.

PTravel

I guess I don't understand your point. No one else in the lounge was disruptive. Certainly, all the business people using it didn't interfere with the parents' ability to be there. It's not a question of class membership, i.e. parents vs. business people -- if the kid wasn't noisy and the carrier wasn't on the table, I wouldn't have cared or, for that matter, even have noticed. I don't see why having paid the price admission permits someone to interfere with everyone else's use of a facility.

DJ_Iceman

I think it is the responsibility of the concierge lounge attendant to deal with ANY guests who disrupt the pleasant atmosphere that is supposed to exist there. In that regard, I agree with the OP and only wish he had spoken to the attendant on the spot rather than writing an e-mail after the fact.

The e-mail itself, however, was poorly written in that it comes across as whiny child-bashing. I don't think the sole purpose of the concierge lounge is to conduct business, nor am I disgusted by someone placing a child carrier on a table. If the OP was so disrupted by the family's behavior and the attendant refused to do anything about it, then I would suggest there are plenty of other places (the OP's guest room, the lobby, a lounge area, the business center, or even a conference room) they could have adjourned to.

sziv50

[QUOTE=PTravel]My email to Marriott:


The Concierge Lounge was, I thought, intended to be an amenity that was conducive to business travel concerns. QUOTE]

I think your assumption here is a big part of the problem. I did a quick search and can't find anything about the concierge lounge being intended SOLELY for this use.

The only thing I could find was "Access to the Concierge Lounge provides an additional retreat, including beverages and an assortment of food selections, during and after a long day.

So yes, it is a retreat, but I also don't think that you should take it for granted that it will be a quiet place, conducive to conducting a meeting with a client. At least the lounges that I've been in have had not only people, but also tv's roaring among other things
.
I agree that the noisy toddler should have been dealt with and the parents should have left instead of bothering everyone. I hate when parents ignore this and pretend like nothing wrong is happening. But I disagree with your sense of entitlement to the concierge lounge.

AvalancheZ71

Well I would revise my statement to include saying that if someone is being diruptive that should be brought to the attention of the attendant. I agree disruptive behaviour should be unacceptable. On the another note, I am sure that the property would be more than happy to sell you space in a meeting room that would have be more than sufficent to meet your business meetings needs.

PhillyPhlyer40

Dear Marriott:

Due to the fact that I need child care for my 8 year old (and that the lounge is NOT indended solely for business travelers), can you kindly kick all paid guests staying for the purpose of business OUT of the lounge so I could drop my child off and allow him to run around the lounge playing "cowboys and indians" with the attendant during breakfast? I will pick him up sometime around 5pm nightly.

Thank you,

A parent who no longer needs our nanny!


Seriously...do you think that all children should be out of the lounge? I stayed about 3 weeks this year with my 8 yr old who was 10times quieter then the j@ck@ss on the cell phone trying to impress everyone with how "impotent" or was that important he was. Geeez...what next...no fat ladies in the pool? (Although i MIGHT vote for that!)

ohmark

[QUOTE=sziv50]In my experience, in concierge lounges, restaurants, etc., it's not just that some parents ignore the disruptive behavior, many actually think it's cute and they want everybody else to enjoy the shenanigans. "Isn't it cute the way he bangs his fork on the table?" "Look how fast he can run (crawl) from one end of the concierge lounge to the other."

Speaking of ignoring the behavior, my wife and I were in a restaurant a few months ago and there was a large party of adults and children also in the room. The adults were all seated at a number of tables pulled together in the center of the room. The children (ages 6 to 12), were seated in three booths on one side of the room. My wife and I in a booth at the end of the room. The parents paid no attention to the children who became increasingly disruptive. The children began folding their paper placemats into airplanes and were throwing them at each other between booths. Some of them sailed onto our table, onto our food. The parents never paid attention to any of it.

Obviously, the problem with ill-behaved children in the concierge lounge or wherever is not the children, but the parents. I'm a parent and I enjoy children. It's not their fault.

ALARISstl

I've encountered many disruptive people conducting business, yacking on their cell phones while I tried to quietly read the paper and enjoy a glass of wine.

I think the C-lounge is geared more towards someone who wants to kick back and have a cocktail as opposed to two or three people trying to bust out next fiscal years sales objectives.

After all, it's a lounge, not a conference room.

clarkef

While I sympathize with the OP, his basic assumption is faulty. He assumes that a C-lounge is intended for business meetings. However, there is nothing in the literature that supports that assumption. In fact, I was recently at a Concierge Lounge that specifically forbade business meetings.

Each property sets the tone for its C-Lounge which can often be influenced by the local. In Southern California, lounges tend to be more informal, in part because of the beach cultures. By contrast, I was at a hotel in Belgium where most of the guests wore suits to the lounge. During my stay at the hotel, not once did I see one child or even teenager.

PTravel

That's odd. I thought it was "rude and inconsiderate parent" bashing.