4 Bewertungen von Mitarbeiter:innenkununu Prüfprozess
kununu Prüfprozess
4 Mitarbeiter:innen haben diesen Arbeitgeber mit durchschnittlich 1,8 Punkten auf einer Skala von 1 bis 5 bewertet.
Ihr Unternehmen?
kununu Prüfprozess
4 Mitarbeiter:innen haben diesen Arbeitgeber mit durchschnittlich 1,8 Punkten auf einer Skala von 1 bis 5 bewertet.
Nothing that would make me recommend this employer or work there again.
From my first day, I had to make one compromise after another: staff accommodation that did not match what I had understood before arrival, inadequate compensation for the workload and costs, poor staff meals, unclear SERAFE responsibility, opaque tip distribution, unresolved conflicts and dismissive or intimidating HR communication.
Important employment and accommodation conditions were repeatedly left unclear until after arrival or until a problem had already occurred. Employees were then expected to adapt and deal with the consequences themselves.
Whenever one problem appeared to be resolved, another followed. Returning for additional seasons did not bring clearer conditions, greater respect, better communication or professional development.
In my experience, seasonal operational employees were treated as interchangeable staff expected to accept the conditions presented to them and avoid asking uncomfortable questions.
Based on my direct experience over several seasons, I would not work for this employer again. I advise seasonal operational candidates to seriously consider other employers unless every employment and accommodation condition is confirmed clearly and in writing before travelling to Davos.
If the current ownership and management are unwilling or unable to fundamentally change the way seasonal employees are treated, the hotel should be operated by someone who can.The company needs professional and accountable HR management, transparent tip distribution, clear employment and accommodation conditions before arrival, proper conflict resolution and respectful communication with operational staff.Displaying corporate values is not enough. They must also be applied when an employee raises an uncomfortable question or reports a problem.
Over several seasons, I experienced repeated internal conflict, departmental drama and a dismissive attitude toward concerns raised by operational employees.
In the SPA environment, the recurring message was essentially that employees who did not like the conditions could leave. I personally experienced this atmosphere as toxic and demotivating.
Based on my direct experience, I would not apply again and I do not recommend this employer to seasonal cleaners, room attendants, stewards or other operational staff.
The image promoted by the company was very different from my experience as an operational employee.
When documented concerns were raised, responsibility was repeatedly passed between departmental management, local HR and corporate HR. My escalation to corporate Human Resources was not even acknowledged.
In my view, an employer’s real values are demonstrated by how it responds to employee concerns, not by slogans displayed in staff areas.
I experienced the operational workload as high and physically demanding.
During periods of lower occupancy, annual leave was communicated through department managers in a way that appeared mandatory. It was not made sufficiently clear whether the leave was voluntary, formally required or merely proposed because of reduced occupancy.
Employees should receive direct written communication from HR whenever paid-leave balances are affected.
In my experience, there was no realistic career path for seasonal operational employees.
Returning for several seasons, working hard and gaining experience did not lead to meaningful development, greater responsibility, better conditions or professional recognition.Career opportunities appeared to be mainly available to permanent employees and people who were already closely connected to the existing management structure.Seasonal cleaners and other operational staff were treated primarily as temporary labour needed to fill staffing gaps, not as employees worth developing or promoting.For seasonal staff, this is a job, not a career.
In my opinion, the salary did not adequately reflect the workload, working conditions and cost of living connected with seasonal employment in Davos.
The tip distribution system was particularly problematic. After I requested clarification, I received a written response stating that tips were managed by the Head of Department and that management was free to use the distribution model it considered appropriate.
I was not provided with a complete and independently verifiable calculation showing the total tips collected, the applicable individual formula and the final distribution.
The written procedure did not provide a clear individual calculation method, independent oversight or a formal reporting mechanism. The copy made available to me was marked as page 1 of 2, but the second page was not supplied.Because employees could not independently verify the collected totals and final allocation, I consider the system extremely opaque and unacceptable.
In my view, the publicly displayed company values were not consistently reflected in the treatment of seasonal operational employees.
A five-star hotel should apply professional standards not only in guest-facing areas, but also in staff accommodation, internal communication, locker inspections, safety procedures and the handling of employee complaints.
In my experience, genuine team spirit was largely absent. The working environment was affected by gossip, cliques, internal drama, personal conflicts and a lack of trust Instead of problems being addressed openly and professionally, information often circulated indirectly between employees and managers. This encouraged further tension and suspicion Some individual colleagues were supportive, but the overall culture did not create a stable or united team
In my experience, HR communication was sometimes dismissive, disciplinary in tone and intimidating rather than supportive.
In written communication concerning staff accommodation, I was told to stop pursuing the topic or the matter could be handled “in a disciplinary way.”
During a later HR meeting, my locker was opened with a master key, but no written inspection protocol was presented or prepared. I was told that I could face up to three years in prison because of a standard outdoor utility knife. After HR contacted the police, I was informed that the knife did not violate Swiss regulations.
During the same meeting, vulgar language was used when I explained how I had obtained copies of my rental contracts.
I do not consider this professional conflict resolution or acceptable employee treatment.
Staff accommodation and the administration connected with it were major sources of uncertainty.Room arrangements, rental contracts, registration, deregistration and responsibility for SERAFE were not handled with sufficient written clarity. Former employees may become aware of invoices only later because there was no clear process for informing employees after departure.During the WEF period, I personally observed mattresses, furniture, housekeeping equipment and laundry carts obstructing corridors or access routes in staff accommodation. I reported the situation to the Davos fire brigade and municipality. The affected routes were later cleared.
Standards concerning safety, accommodation and employee welfare should not be lower simply because the areas are not visible to hotel guests
Important employment and accommodation conditions were frequently communicated late, indirectly or without sufficient written clarity.
For a proposed later-season contract, I was presented with a different job title, different responsibilities and different salary conditions without prior explanation from HR. The contract was delivered through departmental management instead of being discussed directly with Human Resources.
The same pattern affected paid leave, accommodation, rental contracts, SERAFE responsibility and internal procedures. Questions were often passed between department managers and HR instead of being answered clearly by the department responsible.
After I escalated documented concerns to corporate Human Resources, I did not receive even a basic acknowledgement.
In my experience, permanent employees and people close to the existing management structure were treated as more important, while seasonal operational staff were often regarded as temporary, interchangeable labourI felt that cleaners and other seasonal employees were mainly expected to fill staffing gaps, accept the conditions presented to them and avoid asking too many questions.Their concerns did not receive the same attention as the interests of permanent employees.
Seasonal staff should not be treated as disposable simply because their contracts are temporary
The work consisted mainly of repetitive and physically demanding operational cleaning duties. The tasks themselves offered little variety or professional development The situation in the SPA department made the work considerably worse. In my experience, the SPA was affected by constant internal drama, poor communication, unresolved conflicts and an opaque tip distribution system.Instead of being a professional and well-managed wellness environment, the department often felt disorganised, tense and exhausting to work in. The work itself was manageable; the atmosphere and management of the SPA were the real problem.
Lässig
Sehr gut
Gibts nicht
Cool
Tip top
Ganz gut
Top
Top
Besser gehts niht
Genial
Teilweise sehr knapp
Finds heraus..
Kommt drauf an welcher tag
kein Miteinander
Eher niedriges Gehalt in der Schweiz
HR völlig überfordert