Changes in doorman duties
Started by ms0
over 18 years ago
Posts: 107
Member since: Nov 2005
Discussion about
New York magazine has an article about changes in doorman responsibilities: http://nymag.com/realestate/realestatecolumn/29998/ ... It's all part of a steady "de-skilling" of doormen, an attempt to "formalize" their duties that ends up depersonalizing the service they offer, says Peter Bearman, a Columbia University social-sciences professor and author of the recently published book Doormen. I can believe that certain responsibilities such as watching the double-parked car, or watching someone's kid could be eliminated. But buildings are also constantly trying to increase service levels, amenities, etc. Are others seeing changes in their doorman responsibilities? If so, what are the changes?
#2,3,4 useless. He didn't complain about doormen. He asked a question.
In my building, which is a 1980s condo downtown, we've not changed responsibilities, but we have tried to increase "professionalism". That means getting rid of the television which they watched way too much, limiting their "friends" hanging around the front desk, etc.
Some people who have lived in the building for many years, resist any change that is perceived as one that negatively impacts the doormen. Others who bought recently at current market rates are far more interested in a level of service that is much more like the UES buildings they came from...more formal.
IMHO, doormen are useless. I lived in a doorman building for 8 years and dreaded having to interact with these people. The only utility was getting packages and frankly, I can get those at work, at Mailboxes, etc, or at the Post Office. Then there's the constant and holiday tipping thats expected. Who needs it. Plus these guys are unionized to boot. A racket if ever there was one. A concept I could get my brain around would be hot young women concierges. That I'd pay to see.
The reason those comments were removed is that they were juvenile and a waste of space.
Why can't there be intelligent dicsussions on these boards? Aren't there enough "open" boards for teenage boys that these posters can use?
Defending that kind of behavior just dosesnt make sense. It adds nothing to the conversation, is generally very nasty, and would never be said without the cloak anonymity that the web provides.
Sad place we have gotten to . . .