Single shamed at Space 220

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I’m so sorry that you had an unpleasant experience. We certainly are not judging any guest for dining alone. Due to the layout of the restaurant, it is more efficient to put solo diners at the bar, but you should not have been made to feel as if you were asking for something inappropriate.”

I'm going to disagree here. If the OP booked the restaurant they needed to be sat in the restaurant. The hostess could have asked "would you have an issue with being sat in the lounge instead" pointing to the area that qualifies as such therefore giving the patron the option by which they are agreeing to a different spot. But if they decline then they should be sat in the restaurant, that may mean they need to wait longer for a table to open up, that totally happens. A night manager should never tell a guest that they are even in a polite way, an inconvenience which you giving an example of saying "it's more efficient" sorry that's an unprofessional answer to give. You think the patron should be told that? Especially at the bar?

Regardless that is basically the OP's point no one should be relegated to XYZ just because. A single person or a pair should absolutely be able to be sat at a booth no ifs ands or buts about that.

Actually, the reason parties of 6 or more usually have an 18% gratuity added to their bill is because they are NOT predisposed to tip more generously. Large parties, especially if they are splitting the bill w/o getting separate checks, are notoriously bad tippers.

I'm going by how we traditionally tip which is based on the price of the food. A restaurant these days would probably lose tip money by employing the automatic tip but it's still done. I couldn't tell you for sure but it seems more or less to be steeped in the way of thinking more work for the server with a larger party and when tipping norms were lower that ensured a bump for the server to compensate for the thought of more work. But a table of 6 especially with an automatic tip of 18% could be less than a table of 2 with the same tip percentage (or what appears to be more common these days 20-25%). As a server if you always interacted with your tables that way you may find a self-fulfilling prophecy of receiving less tips for less attention/care.

 

[LiDa]

I'm going to disagree here. If the OP booked the restaurant they needed to be sat in the restaurant. The hostess could have asked "would you have an issue with being sat in the lounge instead" pointing to the area that qualifies as such therefore giving the patron the option by which they are agreeing to a different spot. But if they decline then they should be sat in the restaurant, that may mean they need to wait longer for a table to open up, that totally happens. A night manager should never tell a guest that they are even in a polite way, an inconvenience which you giving an example of saying "it's more efficient" sorry that's an unprofessional answer to give. You think the patron should be told that? Especially at the bar?

Regardless that is basically the OP's point no one should be relegated to XYZ just because. A single person or a pair should absolutely be able to be sat at a booth no ifs ands or buts about that.

I'm going by how we traditionally tip which is based on the price of the food. A restaurant these days would probably lose tip money by employing the automatic tip but it's still done. I couldn't tell you for sure but it seems more or less to be steeped in the way of thinking more work for the server with a larger party and when tipping norms were lower that ensured a bump for the server to compensate for the thought of more work. But a table of 6 especially with an automatic tip of 18% could be less than a table of 2 with the same tip percentage (or what appears to be more common these days 20-25%). As a server if you always interacted with your tables that way you may find a self-fulfilling prophecy of receiving less tips for less attention/care.

We're going to have to disagree, but largely because we are reading the OP differently. She was NOT put in a space she did not request. She was put in the restaurant, too close for her taste. She had a right to be seated where she requested, which I think we agree.

Giving an explanation is not the same as giving an excuse. So, yes, I think a patron can be told why she was not given seat farther into the restaurant - she was still seated in the restaurant. When my guests want to put a wet umbrella against an emergency exit because they don't want it touching their legs, I have a right to explain why that's idiotic, even though I would never SAY or even IMPLY that it's idiotic. I would explain in the most neutral words possible.

And I can't even begin to respond to your comments on gratuities because ... well, I'm sure you'd find me rude & we wouldn't want that.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

We're going to have to disagree, but largely because we are reading the OP differently. She was NOT put in a space she did not request. She was put in the restaurant, too close for her taste. She had a right to be seated where she requested, which I think we agree.

Giving an explanation is not the same as giving an excuse. So, yes, I think a patron can be told why she was not given seat farther into the restaurant - she was still seated in the restaurant. When my guests want to put a wet umbrella against an emergency exit because they don't want it touching their legs, I have a right to explain why that's idiotic, even though I would never SAY or even IMPLY that it's idiotic. I would explain in the most neutral words possible.

And I can't even begin to respond to your comments on gratuities because ... well, I'm sure you'd find me rude & we wouldn't want that.

Have you been reading the thread? I think we have figured out the OP was placed in the Lounge but made a reservation for the Restaurant. It's not even a request. You have to make a reservation for the lounge, you have to make a reservation for the restaurant. Are people really just unfamiliar with how Space 220 is? I mean I get it and it's confusing how they labeled things but from what the OP wrote they were not placed in a space they booked for.

Here's maybe some screen shots that might help

 

[DCLCruiseFan09]

Just for the record, you know Disney doesnt Operate Space 220 right? Its the Patina restaurant group.

Talking to Disney will have little effect here.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Whenever someone strikes at me the way you have been doing, I take a peek at their other posts to see if it's just me. It's not. My fellow Disboarder, you tend to disagree with a lot of people & seem unable to do so often being genuinely unpleasant. You are more than welcome to disagree with me, you're absolutely entiteld to do so. But, I get enough of the stabs & rude comments at work & don't wish to get it when I'm doing something that usually makes me smile.

I'm legit asking because there seems to be a lot of confusion. You saying they were sat further into the restaurant and that they were not just not sat where they were requested would lead me to believe you were unfamiliar with the restaurant. You have to book each of the experiences so you can't just simply request and then have to be okay with not getting that request. This is probably because people read restaurant to think about the whole space when there are actually 3 different spaces-restaurant, lounge, bar.

As far as disagreement odd because I remember you enthusiastically agreeing with me on another topic praising me even, interesting the perception.

 

[bsmcneil]

That would be an assumption that people of larger parties would 1) order more in cost of food 2) would be pre-disposed to tipping a larger amount just on the basis of more people.

It would be wise to not assume these two factors if you're in the service industry as you could find yourself mistakenly treating the lower number of party less. And a good server does not distinguish between large or small parties.

You're surprised I made an assumption that 3 people would order more food than 1 person? That's odd to me. I'm not in the service industry, though I have waited tables (for years). I didn't say anything about treating people differently - it's a really weird take. However, most tips are a percentage of the bill - 20% of 3 people's meals is very likely more than 20% of 1 person's.

It seems similar to the "ADR for a cupcake" problem from BOG - if you're taking up time and resources (by using a table for one dessert item), it is thoughtful to recognize your server is very likely earning less money. Sure, if you're one person ordering 5 full entrees and sides - it could be less than 3 people - but that's seemingly unlikely.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It seems similar to the "ADR for a cupcake" problem from BOG - if you're taking up time and resources (by using a table for one dessert item),

In what way is that complimentary to the OP specifically booking the restaurant where they will have to pay the fixed price? By putting them in the lounge they should have been given the option to do a la carte and by doing that that would be a self-fulfilling prophecy that just by the act of them being 1 person would end up netting less money to the server.

I mean I totally get how that ruffled people's feathers to book a PPO BOG ADR (and whew that was a lot of acronyms lol) but I don't think that's comparable here. In fact I would think that's the opposite strictly because of how it was done. Larger parties would have a harder time stomaching the costs here, and indeed on enough threads people try to book the lounge to get the experience but not come out paying as much money especially as the menu is not as appealing to many and that is usually aimed at those with multiple people in their party (especially children)

You're surprised I made an assumption that 3 people would order more food than 1 person?

I actually have a decent amount of couples who spent so much money on one meal I mean it's amazing. So if a server by matter of practice opts to give them less attention that would be a shame. My husband's grandmother spends more than my husband and I on one meal at the Pasta House than we do on our anniversary (which is the one meal we really go all out on) simply because she loves getting a few apps, then a salad, then pasta and she cannot pass up a dessert, always gets wine, etc. All of those waiters (and she knows them by name) know good and well not to assume her solo status means less of a tip. In truth they earn more of a tip from her than my husband and I.

 

[Figment Mom]

Since this thread has taken a different turn, my addition may be ill-timed, but I'll go ahead anyway.

My two sons and I had reservations for Space 220 Lounge. We booked 60 days out and specifically wanted the lounge.

The hostess upstairs asked both us and another family of 3 if one of us would be willing to sit at the bar. Both of us declined. The hostess was clearly annoyed and basically implied she wouldn't be able to seat one of the families.

I have a 7-year-old and bar seating is not only not comfortable for him, but I didn't want to sit in a row, nor did I want us to face the bar instead of the windows.

Ultimately, we were seated in the lounge, although the waiter seemed confused and at first gave us the restaurant menu. We were on the top level along the railing. I just went back and looked at pictures and the tablecloth was white.

At any rate, we enjoyed our meal and didn't feel singled out the way the OP felt, but the hostess did make me feel uncomfortable just for wanting to be given the location (not a specific table, just lounge vs bar) that I reserved.

I did not complain to management. It would have to be an exceedingly grievous issue for me to complain.

 

[pirate33]

Since this thread has taken a different turn, my addition may be ill-timed, but I'll go ahead anyway.

My two sons and I had reservations for Space 220 Lounge. We booked 60 days out and specifically wanted the lounge.

The hostess upstairs asked both us and another family of 3 if one of us would be willing to sit at the bar. Both of us declined. The hostess was clearly annoyed and basically implied she wouldn't be able to seat one of the families.

I have a 7-year-old and bar seating is not only not comfortable for him, but I didn't want to sit in a row, nor did I want us to face the bar instead of the windows.

Ultimately, we were seated in the lounge, although the waiter seemed confused and at first gave us the restaurant menu. We were on the top level along the railing. I just went back and looked at pictures and the tablecloth was white.

At any rate, we enjoyed our meal and didn't feel singled out the way the OP felt, but the hostess did make me feel uncomfortable just for wanting to be given the location (not a specific table, just lounge vs bar) that I reserved.

I did not complain to management. It would have to be an exceedingly grievous issue for me to complain.

This does suggest a bit of a pattern. One of the posts above suggested complaining to Disney would be useless because this space is run by a third party-company. I suspect that Disney wants its service standards respected by lessees, and friendliness is a core Disney value, so I think a complaint could have an effect.

On the general topic of single shaming, I just want to say that my impression is that this issue is not like the old days, where solo diners were sometimes treated as weird or misfits, but purely a revenue generation issue. From a pure $ standpoint, a restaurant would rather have a solo diner occupy a single seat at the bar rather than a table that could accommodate 1 or 3 others. That would especially be so at a place like Space 220 where they can undoubtedly fill any vacant tables with larger parties. This is not an excuse for poor hospitality but just an observation. A classy establishment would not blatantly discriminate against solo diners to turn a table for a little additional $.

I have had a similar profit-driven, unpleasant experience just once in many years of solo dining on solo business and personal trips. This was at a restaurant in Chicago with a nice view of the river. I was first refused a table as a solo diner and then ejected from a common table in the lounge area with about 12 seats. I was so annoyed by that point that I left. I didn’t feel “single shamed“ but rather treated as a not-profitable customer and thought that was really quite rude. I was definitely annoyed.

 

[LiDa]

I know OP wanted that.

I was just presenting that if they sat someone in the Lounge even though they booked the Restaurant, the Lounge menu should be an option. All the folks trying to get Lounge for the menu but being stuck in the Restaurant might be happy with the result OP had.

I agree -- if they're going to insist you sit somewhere you don't want to be, Visitor Services 101 says offer the same menu.

As a visitor services manager, though, I know that the attitude of the lower-level staff comes down from above. If the manager is a jerk, the hosts will feel they can be jerks & the wait staff will feel they can be jerks. This is not a given because some people are self-motivated, but it can be so. This manager was a jerk.

 

[musicguy856]

This does suggest a bit of a pattern. One of the posts above suggested complaining to Disney would be useless because this space is run by a third party-company. I suspect that Disney wants its service standards respected by lessees, and friendliness is a core Disney value, so I think a complaint could have an effect.

On the general topic of single shaming, I just want to say that my impression is that this issue is not like the old days, where solo diners were sometimes treated as weird or misfits, but purely a revenue generation issue. From a pure $ standpoint, a restaurant would rather have a solo diner occupy a single seat at the bar rather than a table that could accommodate 1 or 3 others. That would especially be so at a place like Space 220 where they can undoubtedly fill any vacant tables with larger parties. This is not an excuse for poor hospitality but just an observation. A classy establishment would not blatantly discriminate against solo diners to turn a table for a little additional $.

I have had a similar profit-driven, unpleasant experience just once in many years of solo dining on solo business and personal trips. This was at a restaurant in Chicago with a nice view of the river. I was first refused a table as a solo diner and then ejected from a common table in the lounge area with about 12 seats. I was so annoyed by that point that I left. I didn’t feel “single shamed“ but rather treated as a not-profitable customer and thought that was really quite rude. I was definitely annoyed.

If you dine at a resort you need a reservation if planning to drive (or even use rideshare, which is ridiculous) so I have no problem making a reservation as a single, even if I have to make it for 4 people. I have no problem sitting at the bar but have to take up a table due to their policies.

 

[Shawn d]

I work in guest services as a theatre manager, so I am not offended that they put you in the restaurant, but close to the bar. Nor am I offended that they tried to put you at the bar. Nor am I of the opinion that they were shaming you for dining alone. What DOES offend me -- and quite a lot -- is the idea that they would object to your objection, that they would tell you “This worked for my friends, so you should keep your yap shut". That's like saying "put on a sweater cuz I'm cold."

I am absolutely NOT of the opinion that “the customer is always right” because more than half the time they’re not [because they’re asking for things that are either against fire codes or dangerous/rude to others or above the ticket price they paid.] But, when a guest says, “I feel as if I were treated poorly simply because I’m dining alone and I have a right to experience the restaurant as much as any other party of guests,” the PROPER answer is, “I’m so sorry that you had an unpleasant experience. We certainly are not judging any guest for dining alone. Due to the layout of the restaurant, it is more efficient to put solo diners at the bar, but you should not have been made to feel as if you were asking for something inappropriate.” And then he should have gotten your bill & given you a 10% discount or taken your dessert or wine or whatever off the bill.

I hope you told Disney and not just us here on the boards. We can provide support and reinforcement but only Disney can correct the behavior of its staff.

I did contact Disney at the same time I posted this. The reply I received is that they will look at the situation and speak with the people in the management team

 

[Pickles516]

I will finish my take with this:

It may be always completely booked when you went but it was not for when I went. It was around 440 pm. It was 85 % capacity. There was NOT a line out the door for bar seats

I did not want to “pick my table” but when you make a reservation, which I did, you make it clear to the reservation agent ( I did NOT book the reservation online or on my phone. I dealt with a human being. I did not do a walk up which would have been a different story. I made it perfectly clear that I wanted to sit in the restaurant, not the lounge when I made the reservation.

My trip was a special occasion. So, ya, I am going to be upset when things don't go great. I know there are complications but the manger made me embarrassed for raising the complaint. If you go on a dinner with your partner and order a glass of wine, do you not say something when they bring you a beer instead. Like I said, for the night manager and his attitude and his making me feel like i was in the wrong saying, well, they are both alcohol. but you wanted something else or would you just say nothing and drink that instead. Like I said, I am sure most people would point that out

Kinda sounds like you embarrassed yourself if I’m being honest.