[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by l2ridehd

At one time in the past, I think by a real estate agent, I was told employees had some benefits. It was Villages school for their children, free checking at Citizens or some other discount there as I think all checking is free, discount on golf as a non resident, discount on home mortgage by one half percent, discounts at Villages owned retail places (Southern Lifestyles, Villages Golf Carts, etc.) and a couple other things which I forget now. If they live in The Villages, they pay the same fees and get the same perks as everyone. Most employers provide employees some type of discount on the products they sell. I still get discounts on IBM products as a retired employee. Just bought this new laptop from Lenovo which IBM sold 10 years ago, but they retained the employee discount accessibility.

So I guess getting a free pass on the Amenities fee might be a stretch, as that is supposed to be resident based and controlled by the over 55 retirement community rules, but giving employees perks is a well established business practice. Free amenities would probably create other issues like how do you handle employee children and tee time priority to mention a couple. So my guess is they do get perks, but I bet it is not free amenities.

Thats a sure bet................see post #23..

[Dirigo]

So it appears that this employee was pulling my leg. I have to wonder why he would lie about something like that?

I won't reveal his name or position because I like the guy and I wouldn't want him to get into trouble.

[Posh 08]

Don't they get to go to Katie Belle's? I won't tell the source but I know for a fact they go and not a resident.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by Posh 08

Don't they get to go to Katie Belle's? I won't tell the source but I know for a fact they go and not a resident.

There are many times ID's are not checked at Katie Belle's, for example Saturday morning at the breakfast buffet.

[Posh 08]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

There are many times ID's are not checked at Katie Belle's, for example Saturday morning at the breakfast buffet.

That the official answer?

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by Posh 08

That the official answer?

Nope.

[downeaster]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

I sent an email earlier this evening to Janet Tutt, District Manager.

Rather than going off half cocked with these wild accusations, maybe it would be better to get your facts straight first.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Is it true all or some Villages employees enjoy the
same access to the amenities as residents?
Thanks in advance.


Her response.

Thanks for contacting me. The answer is no. Of course the vast majority of employees are residents. However, the rest, including myself, do not have access. Appreciate your helping to get the facts. Have a great night. Janet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does no one read all of the posts? See my posts #15 and #20.

[Posh 08]

Originally Posted by downeaster

Does no one read all of the posts? See my posts #15 and #20.

I read them all including your #15 and #20. My question was quite specific. Katie Belle's. Are there any type of TV, or Developer employee with privileges to that establishment?

[zcaveman]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

There are many times ID's are not checked at Katie Belle's, for example Saturday morning at the breakfast buffet.

My understanding is that the breakfast buffet is open to all.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by downeaster

I received a very quick answer when I questioned the validity of the claim.

No District employee or employee of the Developer is allowed to use amenities unless they are residents (a vast majority of the employees are residents). Other employees, including the District Manager, are not. The individual who claims they have privileges may have found a way to beat the system. However if the District were to find that to be the case there would be appropriate actions taken.

That is the answer I received. However, I might add, it appears if the name of the subject non resident/employee amenity user were known his job would be in jeopardy.

I do, I read posts #15 and #20. And Bogie's too from Janet Tutt. This thread will continue, but the issue is resolved. I don't know why I know it will, but it will.

[Posh 08]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I do, I read posts #15 and #20. And Bogie's too from Janet Tutt. This thread will continue, but the issue is resolved. I don't know why I know it will, but it will.

Not so fast GC, I'm still expecting a different answer on the KB question.

[2BNTV]

I read all previous post of a thread before replying. It makes sense in that at least I know what has been discussed before I put in my two cents and in my case, I would get change back.

[golf2140]

Originally Posted by Trish Crocker

I find it sad that someone would resent another person getting a break. It appears that the whole thing is untrue but the idea that someone would be offended by an employee being able to use the facilities as part of their employment package is offensive to me. The amenity fee is what? $135, 140 per month...Heaven forbid that someone swimming next to me in the pool got away without paying this. Frankly, i'm planning on spending the rest of my life enjoying the lifestyle without looking to make sure that no one is getting away without paying 'their share'. In the immortal words of Rhett Butler...'frankly..I don't give a damn'..

[BogeyBoy]

Originally Posted by downeaster

"Villages employee" is a very broad definition. Is he an employee of the developer, CDD, VCDD, property management, local restaurant, etc.? Are we talking large numbers of eligible people?

This is a great point, I think a lot of people that appear to be employees are receiving paychecks from a sub-contractor/private company, etc.

[Bogie Shooter]

Originally Posted by downeaster

Does no one read all of the posts? See my posts #15 and #20.

If you think I should not have posted the information I received from J. Tutt, sorry. It was posted approximately 1 hour after your post #20, if you can believe the times.
Yes, I did read all the posts. I was not questioning your posting of the information you received and if anything it was supportive of your conclusion.