It's Official: Cunard Re-flags Ships in Bermuda, Launches Weddings at Sea

[bahrain_not_dubai!]

Do Carnival, NCL, or Saga, now or every, through decades-long (or even century-long) marketing, advertising, promotion, and PR schemes identify themselves as being the very definition of any particular culture or country?

 

There is a very distinct difference. The Cunard Line is not NCL, or Saga, or any of the rest for that matter. They have defined a lot of what it is to be British. Compare them to CGT French Line, the Swedish American Line or hell, even the German Atlantic Line- can you imagine any of these ship's flagships being registered outside of France, Sweden and Germany? Or the SS France having been re-flagged to Reunion Island registry? Forget about these lines of old, even Holland America ! Something just doesn't ring right, that is the issue here. It's a shame that the Cunard Line is, for the first time in 171 years registering the British merchant flagship, the Royal Mail Ship Queen Mary 2 outside of the UK. The ship will loose her legendary ''Cunard Queen'' call sign GBQM, used on the first RMS Queen Mary since her construction in the 1930s.

 

The issue here isn't the lovely Bermudans- it's the fact that a company which basically exists on marketing itself as pure British has, to save a few dollars, turned their back on the Union Jack which they drape themselves in for all intents and purposes. When Carnival Corporation took over the Cunard Line they had an obligation to keep it's heritage alive. They charge the world's highest premium for a mass-market passenger line, yet with every passing day the things that differentiates them from others fades, and this is a big deal.

 

Let the Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria be registered outside of GB, but the Queen Mary 2? That would be a great shame. The RMS Queen Mary 2 would become the 'Motor Ship' Queen Mary 2 just like any other cruise liner.

 

Yet more than anything, the Cunard Line's actions are an insult to the intelligence of it's passengers. If they came out stating the new laws would be too much of a dent in their revenue, and they have no choice but to re-flag the ships, while also stating something about just how long Bermuda has been part of the extended UK, the people would have accepted it and understood. But this Weddings At Sea is an insult to many.

[Boytjie]

Let the Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria be registered outside of GB, but the Queen Mary 2? That would be a great shame. The RMS Queen Mary 2 would become the 'Motor Ship' Queen Mary 2 just like any other cruise liner.

 

According to Wikipedia:

In recent years the shift to air transport for mail has left only three ships with the right to the prefix; RMS Segwun, which serves as a passenger vessel in Gravenhurst, Ontario, Canada, RMS St Helena, which serves the island of Saint Helena in the South Atlantic,[10] and RMS Queen Mary 2. QM2 was conferred "RMS" by Royal Mail when she entered service in 2004 on the Southampton to New York route as a gesture to Cunard's history.

RMS Segwun's port of registry is in Canada and RMS St. Helena's is London. Does QM2 even carry mail anymore?

[bahrain_not_dubai!]

According to Wikipedia:

In recent years the shift to air transport for mail has left only three ships with the right to the prefix; RMS Segwun, which serves as a passenger vessel in Gravenhurst, Ontario, Canada, RMS St Helena, which serves the island of Saint Helena in the South Atlantic,[10] and RMS Queen Mary 2. QM2 was conferred "RMS" by Royal Mail when she entered service in 2004 on the Southampton to New York route as a gesture to Cunard's history.

RMS Segwun's port of registry is in Canada and RMS St. Helena's is London. Does QM2 even carry mail anymore?

 

 

Oh, excuse me for my mistake then.

 

I have no idea, but I would guess that the Royal Mail would have her on their transatlantic schedule for sending stuff over to the USA ?

[Leucothea]

<<When Carnival Corporation took over the Cunard Line they had an obligation to keep it's heritage alive. They charge the world's highest premium for a mass-market passenger line, yet with every passing day the things that differentiates them from others fades, and this is a big deal.>> (by bahrain_not_dubai!)

 

There is nothing to be done about it, and I'm not sure if Cunard's survival is that important to those who run it. In other words, they can always create new ships. Our lamenting the demise of Cunard may only be adding fuel to the fire, because the changes don't stop no matter what we say about them. Perhaps the bemoaning can only create a feeling of powerlessness, whereas a positive outlook and creative spirit can uplift. There is so much going on in the world now, who knows what the future holds. At least there is still quite a bit to enjoy about Cunard.

 

"It is a mistake to try to look too far ahead. The chain of destiny can only be grasped one link at a time." Sir Winston Churchill

 

[/url]

[edgeoftheworld]

so;

which countries laws will apply on-board, with regards to passengers & crew?

 

 

 

if the re-flag is to avoid an EU/UK law, presumably the crew will then be covered by Bermudan law?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Bermuda

"discrimination on the grounds of sexuality and gender identity is also legal."

 

 

 

 

do cunard/carnival really want to give money to a country like this?;

 

Bermuda's human rights in general do not have a favourable reputation; In mid-2008, Bermuda was the only BOT to refuse to join a four-year human rights initiative organised by the Commonwealth Foundation.

 

 

 

Bermudians have tried to appeal to the Parliament of the United Kingdom regarding LGBT discrimination,[3] prompting the Foreign Affairs Committee to recommend that the British government should take steps to extend human rights in the British overseas territories (BOT), for which the UK is ultimately responsible.[20]

[eroller]

I think the whole issue is of no consequence whatsoever. Cunard were under no obligation to the puiblic to explain the move any more fully than what they did. Nothing was mentioned at all when the Princess and P&O fleets were registered in Bermuda. It is a PR shamble for the no more than half dozen members of Cruise Critisc that are replying to this thread here. No one cares. That is the truth.

 

Just for the record I too am sad that the registry as changed but I'd much rather see Hamilton than Valetta or Vanuatu on the stern.

 

Stephen

 

 

 

I think the issue is of consequence, which may become more apparent as time goes on. Also Cunard is not Princess or P&O. Those are large mainstream lines where often times some passengers may not even know the name of the ship they are cruising on. Cunard is different. People sail on Cunard because they are interested in the history of the line, the tradition, and yes the "Britishness" which Cunard heavily advertises in US brochures. I would think part of that "Britishness" means having the ships registered in the UK, and even christened by the Queen of England. Certainly more significant than the registry of Princess, P&O, or any other line for that matter. There was no outcry when Princess & P&O changed registry because frankly no one cared. Cunard is different.

 

There are far more than a 1/2 dozen CC members that are upset over this. Just take a look at Cunard's Facebook page. Hundreds of posts and the vast majority have no affinity with Cruise Critic.

 

I also think Cunard has a responsibility to it's paying customers (the same ones that keep it in business), to offer a reasonable and truthful explanation of why they are making such a significant change. More upsetting than the registry change is how Cunard thinks they have pulled one over on the very people that pay their salaries. It's insulting.

 

Ernie

[Bramcruiser]

Here here Ernie.

 

As a few of us had said here that there is a large segment that sails on Cunard because of its "identity". I can't think of one cruise line that makes its history and its uniqueness as much of its PR as Cunard does.

 

Yes, they could have good business reasons for re-flagging as ultimately any business out there than can get away with averting the local laws and find a way to keep down the labour rates will simply do it. Most passengers won't care either. However, those who look at Cunard as the last bastion of some ideal will be disappointed. Cunard played the game of hoping that this segment is small enough to make this a non-issue. What I find interesting is that those who constantly say its a business matter is forgetting that the business of its identity has turned into a bit of a joke. Sure the corporate offices may still be in Southampton but as time goes on its going to be British in name only.

 

Cunard could have easily saved face simply by stating they had no choice to do it for business reasons and leave it at that. What the ultimate insult ends up being is that they hid behind this "weddings at sea" garbage. Those loyal enough to the brand were simply treated in disregard. Everytime in the future when the PR people put on a spin about the Cunard experience I can imagine a number of people going "Yeah, right!".

 

I must admit I actually signed OFF the Cunard Facebook page. Better to walk away and not get into the arguments that will ultimately just drag down your spirits.

 

Up until just this week I must admit Cunard was my favourite cruise line. Today, my attitude is just lets wait and see what happens. In some ways my first experience with Celebrity next year may be the change of pace I need to clear out the cobwebs.

[Salacia]

so;

which countries laws will apply on-board, with regards to passengers & crew?

 

 

 

if the re-flag is to avoid an EU/UK law, presumably the crew will then be covered by Bermudan law?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Bermuda

"discrimination on the grounds of sexuality and gender identity is also legal."

 

 

 

 

do cunard/carnival really want to give money to a country like this?;

 

Bermuda's human rights in general do not have a favourable reputation; In mid-2008, Bermuda was the only BOT to refuse to join a four-year human rights initiative organised by the Commonwealth Foundation.

 

 

 

Bermudians have tried to appeal to the Parliament of the United Kingdom regarding LGBT discrimination,[3] prompting the Foreign Affairs Committee to recommend that the British government should take steps to extend human rights in the British overseas territories (BOT), for which the UK is ultimately responsible.[20]

 

Edgeoftheworld, my understanding is that the ship is governed by the laws of the country in which it is registered. This applies to both passengers and crew. I've read several comments that re-flagging Cunard ships to Bermuda has no effect since the Red Ensign will fly. However, there are several differences in the laws that previously governed the ships, and the laws governing ships registered in Bermuda.

 

In addition to what you have pointed out, some passengers might also be interested in Bermuda laws regarding disabled people. Hopefully, this will have minimal effect on Cunard ships. Nevertheless, passengers should be aware there is a fundamental change in several areas. Here's another example:

 

There is no equivalent in Bermuda of the USA's

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or the UK's Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1995 (so weak and ineffective in comparison to the USA's ADA). Bermuda has no other legislation protecting the rights of the disabled or physically challenged.

The Bermuda Government does not require hotels, guest houses, cottage colonies, apartments, villas, shops or restaurants or sightseeing attractions or boats to make any of their facilities accessible. Those that do so in Bermuda anyway do so voluntarily. In contrast, the USA, Canada, UK, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, etc. have laws to require this.



Quoted from http://www.bermuda-online.org/BPHA.htm



Passengers are well advised to read their Cunard Passenger Contract, even if they have read it often in the past - as the flag changes, so does the rules. (I sincerely hope those crew members whose contract is about to expire also carefully review their new employment contract for changes in the coming weeks.)



Best wishes,

Salacia

[Salacia]

Copied moments ago from Cunard Voyage Personalizer:

 

 

OTHER IMPORTANT INFORMATION:

 

THE PASSAGE CONTRACT. The terms of the Cunard Passage Contract will represent the entire agreement between Cunard and a guest or prospective guest with respect to any reservation or voyage sold by Cunard. It is important that you carefully read the entire Passage Contract, a copy of which can be obtained from your Travel Professional, Cunard, or click here to view the Passage Contract, and which sets forth the rights and responsibilities of Cunard and the guest. Cunard vessels are registered in the United Kingdom and are operated as specified in the Passage Contract.

 

-----

:confused:.. Cunard vessels are registered in the United Kingdom and are operated as specified in the Passage Contract.????

[Whitemarsh]

Comprehensive explanation of the reflagging move.

 

Thank you for this. It's the best explanation I've come across, and I have to say that I too would have made the same decision, were I running Cunard.

 

A very sad decision, but ultimately the fault of the U.K government.

[Salacia]

For some reason, that reminded me of this quote from the movie Man for All Seasons (1966):

 

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

[guernseyguy]

Thank you for this. It's the best explanation I've come across, and I have to say that I too would have made the same decision, were I running Cunard.

 

A very sad decision, but ultimately the fault of the U.K government.

 

I agree - but Cunard could have handled it much more adroitly than they have - a classic example of 'head-in-sand' crisis management!

[Louise D]

Morally, I am having difficulty accepting this industry is based upon discrimination in payment of wages to crew members. There should be the same wages for all who perform the same type of work. These same type of arguments were used in many countries of the world to deny equal wages to women and force women back into the home after the troops came back from WW2.

 

All of us who have been on Cunard know that some of these non-European crew have the heavy burden of supporting many extended family members back home.

 

If it is indeed true these practices are entrenched in Cunard and other shipping lines then I am personally taking a stand and I am not going to travel with any such shipping lines with these practices anymore. Presumably it means that I have to avoid lines which are flagged in Bermuda, the Bahamas, Panama, Monrovia etc.

 

It may be that there will not be any choices left for cruising, but so be it. There are other holiday options.

[brigittetom]

It's hard to believe that Cunard bought into the Wedding On Board theme. Dispite the extra revenue, the demands of a bride planning her wedding cannot be worth the extra costs and the demands on the staff. Unless Cunard plans to hire extra staff to plan and execute these weddings, they are going to have serious complaints and if they have all of this extra money to innovate this new concept....maybe they have the money to actually keep Cunard as it is now.....the way that passengers really like the ships. With the new changes, closing rooms off for private wedding parties somehow doesn't sit well either. It will be intereting to see how this plays out.

[Whitemarsh]

For some reason, that reminded me of this quote from the movie Man for All Seasons (1966):

 

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!

 

Now I'm reminded of this quote by Simone from Australia's Next Top Model (cycle 7).

 

“I was asked to walk futuristically and I had no idea what to do ’cause we’re not in the future yet. It’s still 2011.” — Simone.

 

[brigittetom]

[quote=Louise D;31096451

 

All of us who have been on Cunard know that some of these non-European crew have the heavy burden of supporting many extended family members back home.

 

Yes, and working on these ships are how they are supporting their familes. For now.

[Ray66]

It's hard to believe that Cunard bought into the Wedding On Board theme. Dispite the extra revenue, the demands of a bride planning her wedding cannot be worth the extra costs and the demands on the staff. Unless Cunard plans to hire extra staff to plan and execute these weddings, they are going to have serious complaints and if they have all of this extra money to innovate this new concept....maybe they have the money to actually keep Cunard as it is now.....the way that passengers really like the ships. With the new changes, closing rooms off for private wedding parties somehow doesn't sit well either. It will be intereting to see how this plays out.

 

I read on another CC forum that for a wedding on IOS an American firm called Royal Romance was used.

[Whitemarsh]

I agree - but Cunard could have handled it much more adroitly than they have - a classic example of 'head-in-sand' crisis management!

 

The article you linked to made me think that Cunard was between a rock and a hard place. If they had come out and said the change in registry was to avoid having to pay E.U staff the same as U.K crew, then it's hard to see how that admission could have been P.R'd to the point where no one would have had an issue with it.

 

I strongly feel that this whole mess is another example of why letting Brussels call the shots is not in the U.K's best interest.

 

Morally, I am having difficulty accepting this industry is based upon discrimination in payment of wages to crew members. There should be the same wages for all who perform the same type of work. These same type of arguments were used in many countries of the world to deny equal wages to women and force women back into the home after the troops came back from WW2.

 

All of us who have been on Cunard know that some of these non-European crew have the heavy burden of supporting many extended family members back home.

 

If it is indeed true these practices are entrenched in Cunard and other shipping lines then I am personally taking a stand and I am not going to travel with any such shipping lines with these practices anymore. Presumably it means that I have to avoid lines which are flagged in Bermuda, the Bahamas, Panama, Monrovia etc.

 

It may be that there will not be any choices left for cruising, but so be it. There are other holiday options.

 

You probably would have to give up cruising if you feel that strongly about it. That would be a shame, as you clearly enjoy cruising. Not on Cunard anymore, but other cruise lines.

[brigittetom]

I read on another CC forum that for a wedding on IOS an American firm called Royal Romance was used.

 

I'm absolutely sure that Cunard knows best. I used to work for a Country Club in our area and part of my job was planning the wedding receptions. That was with personal contact from day one. I just cannot imagine that Cunard thinks it's a good idea to take on the Bridezillas. More power to them if they can handle it. :D Personally, I think Cunard should just do what they do best. Keep the existing passengers happy.

[YachtieRick]

Lets be realistic here, this change will really have no effect on the guests except keeping cruising costs low. If these ships were forced to pay the crew proper salaries, most of you couldn't afford to cruise!

[Whitemarsh]

Lets be realistic here, this change will really have no effect on the guests except keeping cruising costs low. If these ships were forced to pay the crew proper salaries, most of you couldn't afford to cruise!

 

If not us then who? The rich don't cruise with other people, they have their own mega-yachts and ships.

[guernseyguy]

The article you linked to made me think that Cunard was between a rock and a hard place. If they had come out and said the change in registry was to avoid having to pay E.U staff the same as U.K crew, then it's hard to see how that admission could have been P.R'd to the point where no one would have had an issue with it.

 

I agree they were between a rock and a hard place - all the more reason to come out fighting - addressing the issue head on - explain that Bermuda has been British much longer than there's been a Cunard (or a USA or UK, for that matter).....don't just wimp out behind 'pent up demand for weddings.

 

Anyroad up, I've now booked my 14th Trans Atlantic - though not on Cunard...

[brigittetom]

Lets be realistic here, this change will really have no effect on the guests except keeping cruising costs low. If these ships were forced to pay the crew proper salaries, most of you couldn't afford to cruise!

 

Maybe, but if most of us couldn't afford to cruise....the crew wouldn't have a job...so how does that work out??

[brigittetom]

Lets be realistic here, this change will really have no effect on the guests except keeping cruising costs low.

 

Actually, let's review this. Make no mistake. For the average citizen.....Sailing on the QM2 is not "Keeping cruising costs low". Sailing on the QM2 means paying more than any other cruise ship in the Caribbean during the winter. We book the QM2 because I absolutely love the expierience. My husband would be more than happy to book RCL and save half the fare. I'm guessing Cunard should actually be cultivating their passengers instead of turning them away..Their choice but there comes a time when passengers will choose Cunard for TA's but not for anything else because there are such better deals out there. It is after all..in the end...the passengers choice. Please don't say that people choose Cunard because "we get a cheap price".. Not even close.

[YachtieRick]

Actually, let's review this. Make no mistake. For the average citizen.....Sailing on the QM2 is not "Keeping cruising costs low". Sailing on the QM2 means paying more than any other cruise ship in the Caribbean during the winter. We book the QM2 because I absolutely love the expierience. My husband would be more than happy to book RCL and save half the fare. I'm guessing Cunard should actually be cultivating their passengers instead of turning them away..Their choice but there comes a time when passengers will choose Cunard for TA's but not for anything else because there are such better deals out there. It is after all..in the end...the passengers choice. Please don't say that people choose Cunard because "we get a cheap price".. Not even close.

 

Cunard isn't projecting itself anymore towards the traditional passengers like yourself, when the introduced cheap vista ships like the QV and QE3, they chose to go massmarket.

It's quite obvious by all the cutbacks onboard that the cost is becoming an issue, and maybe naively so on their part.

 

As for the earlier comment if it was too expensive, no passengers, no jobs for crew. It's like saying its like saying it's ok for sweatshops to employ poorly paid people because it means at least they have a job.

 

Cunard is clearly avoiding paying proper salaries by reflagging the ships.