smoking and non-smoking sections on ships!

[1 HappyCruiser]

why ban smokeing on balconies I think it makes sence to have one side as non smokeing and well informed cruisers like yourself can book cabins early on the non smokeing side. Id be happy with that, and im used to having to go outside to smoke anyway so I dont really mind not being able to smoke inside the cabin or in the nightclub.

 

And just what non smoker in their right mind would accept a cabin on the smoking side of the ship? Years back NCL use to have smoking & non smoking sides of their ships when there were a higher percentage of smokers & even then it didn't work out so the concept was abandoned.

The very next step is total restrictions in both rooms & balconies which most cruise lines are easing into, like it or not.

[nikimouse]

I guess a non smoker that didnt book early might only be left with a cabin on the smoking side.

At the moment all the balconys are smoking, so non smokers dont have a choice but to book them, I just thought that if there was a choice of smokeing and non smoking balconys then that would please everyone. I wouldnt be too pleased if I had to be on the non smoking side but if I booked last minuit I wouldnt expect to get the cabin I wanted. I didnt know that they had tried to restrict smoking to one side of the ship and people had complained, it just seemed like a good compromise which I obviously favour to them banning smokeing on ALL balconys, and I thought the non smokers would prefer to have some of the balconys as smoke free rather than none of them at all, its a shame people cant compromise.

As long as there is somewhere designated for smoking I will be happy.

Im sure everyone has really enjoyed their previous cruises despite whatever the smoking rules were so thats one thing we all have in common

[swedish weave]

I don't think the non-smokers brought about the changes. I think it was based on the cost of replacing all the damaged linens and fixtures from burns ---PLUS the danger of fire.

[che5904]

I don't think the non-smokers brought about the changes. I think it was based on the cost of replacing all the damaged linens and fixtures from burns ---PLUS the danger of fire.

 

I hope you are right. OK sorry, not about the damaged linens and things ;), and I guarantee I didn't damage anything. I meant that I hoped it wasn't because of the vocals-against-smoking did the loudest yelling. Although I still lean in that direction and that was the reason that the NCL's rep gave and they are the ones that make it so on land.

 

But we'll never know the real reason.

[1 HappyCruiser]

I don't think the non-smokers brought about the changes. I think it was based on the cost of replacing all the damaged linens and fixtures from burns ---PLUS the danger of fire.

 

Also think of all the extra cleaning each week due to nicotine imbedded in the carpets, drapes & stuck on the walls. It must be a never ending job to scrub things clean when people complain about the odor.

I wonder if the crew will be allowed to smoke in their cabins?

[che5904]

Also think of all the extra cleaning each week due to nicotine imbedded in the carpets, drapes & stuck on the walls. It must be a never ending job to scrub things clean when people complain about the odor.

I wonder if the crew will be allowed to smoke in their cabins?

 

The only reason we know for sure is what NCL states.

 

"AnneMarie Mathews, vice president of public relations, said “We’ve been looking at this for a while based on feedback from guests”."

[mtwingcpa]

I wonder if the crew will be allowed to smoke in their cabins?

 

I had an extensive discussion about smoking with the cruise rewards sales guy a couple of years ago. He said they had recently (as of two years ago) changed this, and employees were no longer allowed to smoke in their cabins. Rather, they had to go to designated smoking areas on the crew deck.

[stephenandrew]

You might want to check the facts. According to the Centers for Disease Control, in 2006 20.8% of U.S. adults smoked cigarettes (there may be later data, but the overall trend for many years is a decline in the percentage of adults who smoke, so it's highly unlikely that the 20.8% figure has suddenly ballooned).[/b]

 

I have no evidence to support this other than my own observation, but I suspect the percentage of people on a cruise who smoke is higher than the percentage of people in the the general population who smoke. I know this is true of the people who visit casinos and Las Vegas, and in many regards, I see a cruise being similar in terms of the customer demographics. I do concede, however, I have no evidence of this being the case.

[che5904]

I have no evidence to support this other than my own observation, but I suspect the percentage of people on a cruise who smoke is higher than the percentage of people in the the general population who smoke. I know this is true of the people who visit casinos and Las Vegas, and in many regards, I see a cruise being similar in terms of the customer demographics. I do concede, however, I have no evidence of this being the case.

 

I agree, but if one were to believe these figures, wouldn't it stand to reason that the fair thing to do would be to give us approx. 20% of public space instead of less than 4%. Just sayin' :rolleyes:

[1 HappyCruiser]

I had an extensive discussion about smoking with the cruise rewards sales guy a couple of years ago. He said they had recently (as of two years ago) changed this, and employees were no longer allowed to smoke in their cabins. Rather, they had to go to designated smoking areas on the crew deck.

 

They seem to be ahead of Princess in some respects and lagging in others.

I agree, but if one were to believe these figures, wouldn't it stand to reason that the fair thing to do would be to give us approx. 20% of public space instead of less than 4%. Just sayin' :rolleyes:

 

Maybe they're just calculated that your smoke spreads out to 20% of the ships area.

[chrispb]

And just what non smoker in their right mind would accept a cabin on the smoking side of the ship? Years back NCL use to have smoking & non smoking sides of their ships when there were a higher percentage of smokers & even then it didn't work out so the concept was abandoned.

The very next step is total restrictions in both rooms & balconies which most cruise lines are easing into, like it or not.

There are non-smokers who are not bothered by others smoking, so I guess they wouldn't mind.

Speaking as a smoker, the cigarette I enjoy most if the first one in the morning along with a coffee BEFORE being dressed and decent so that is the time I would mainly use a balcony. Same thing at the end of the day - a drink with a ciggie. The rest of the day I'd be out and about so maybe something could be worked out, ie timeshare?:D

[che5904]

Maybe they're just calculated that your smoke spreads out to 20% of the ships area.

 

I'm so happy you and I could finally agree on something on this thread. So the next time you get the impression you have smoke smell waifing in your direction from our less than 4% you can just put it down to the area you are in just happens to be in that other 16.8% that has been "calculated the smoke spreads on the ship" :D :D

[stephenandrew]

I agree, but if one were to believe these figures, wouldn't it stand to reason that the fair thing to do would be to give us approx. 20% of public space instead of less than 4%. Just sayin' :rolleyes:

 

Two thoughts--one, NCL makes up it rules regarding smoking. So long as those who smoke follow those rules, everything is cool. Non-smokers (like me) have no legitimate right to complain if a smoker chooses to light up on the balcony next to me. If I choose to go on NCL, then I have to make adjustments consistent with those rules. Second, if it were solely up to me, I would ban smoking in all public places--restaurants, pubs, ball parks, etc. Smoke is like money in that is fungible---smoke is not typcially contained to designated smoking areas. Second hand smoke is carcinogeinc. A smoker's active behavior (or anyone's for the matter) should not impact my health. If someone wants to drink themselves to death, that's ok--becasue their drinking does not impact me. If someone wants to smoke, their smoking does impact me. So no, I would not give smokers proportionate space.

 

Having said all of this, my personal views are just that. I have never sailed on NCL before, and if it turns out that their smoking policy negatively impacts my cruise, then I will find another cruise line--maybe go back to Princess for example. I actually think that the free market is the best way to "decide" smoking policy---if some cruiselines find it economically advantageous to allow smoking, then so be it. Non-smokers can either deal with it, or find other vacation options.

[1 HappyCruiser]

I'm so happy you and I could finally agree on something on this thread. So the next time you get the impression you have smoke smell waifing in your direction from our less than 4% you can just put it down to the area you are in just happens to be in that other 16.8% that has been "calculated the smoke spreads on the ship" :D :D

 

I didn't say I agreed with the 20 % because even if it were 20% the smoke moves around & cannot be controlled no matter how hard they try.

My main peeve is the situation created on balconies & not the rest of the ship. I can avoid the smoke sections pretty easily but when I'm on my balcony & smoke continues to blow past my space is what I get upset. If I'm paying extra for my balcony why shouldn't I be entitled to breath fresh air all the time and not have to go inside because 4 or 5 people upwind decide to smoke at different times?

[goldmom]

I have a feeling that there is no perfect solution to this problem. As the areas where smoking is allowed become smaller, the areas where smoking is allowed will become even more smokey.

 

My son was living in Manhattan when they changed the smoking rules there. He said that the bars and restaurants were smoke free, but you couldn't walk down his street as all the smokers were outside and you had to walk through clouds of smoke. He said he would have rather they had left a part of the bar as smoking with maybe a venting system.

 

The same thing on the ships. They took away all the inside areas where you could smoke, except the Casino. When that went into effect the Casino became smokier because all the smokers would go there as it was the only place they could smoke. I think this new change in policy will make the balcony areas smokier than before as people can no longer smoke in their cabins.

 

Hopefully it wouldn't be an issue as the breeze when the ship is moving should blow away any smoke. I understand people's concerns, but unless you have a bunch of people chain smoking next to you, you should be able to use your balcony with maybe a possible whiff of cigarette smell occasionally. Guess we'll find out soon if this new policy makes thing better or worse. I remember that very few people ever had a problem with a cabin smelling of smoke, NCL always seemed to do a good job with that.

[che5904]

I have a feeling that there is no perfect solution to this problem. As the areas where smoking is allowed become smaller, the areas where smoking is allowed will become even more smokey.

 

My son was living in Manhattan when they changed the smoking rules there. He said that the bars and restaurants were smoke free, but you couldn't walk down his street as all the smokers were outside and you had to walk through clouds of smoke. He said he would have rather they had left a part of the bar as smoking with maybe a venting system.

 

The same thing on the ships. They took away all the inside areas where you could smoke, except the Casino. When that went into effect the Casino became smokier because all the smokers would go there as it was the only place they could smoke. I think this new change in policy will make the balcony areas smokier than before as people can no longer smoke in their cabins.

 

You have very valid points. If you have a couple smokers sitting at a table on the port side near the pool for a while they get up and leave ther area with the breeze will clear out, then another couple come and so on. Or you make that one of the few places smokers can go, it only stands to reason there will be continually a cloud of smoke from that area.

 

Which I believe was mpk's point earlier on in this thread.

[Why Knot Me]

Well mpk I'd like to thank you, DMH15, rvsullivan and other non-smokers like you. When I get my back up and just want to throw up my hands and say well to heck with all of you, because I can't seem to please anyone no matter how hard I try to consider we are all living on this planet together. So I'll just smoke whereever and not give a hoot about anyone else. It is posts like these on this thread that brings me back to grounding and believing there is still a reason I should try to be aware of my surroundings and try to consider those that don't smoke. Some days it's pretty tough to remember that and yes since our little naughty spot is getting smaller, gives less space for us to move to.

 

And your sentiment above is so right in many areas of our now regulated lives. I wonder how many people remember how well people got along when they regulated themselves and took time to consider their fellow human beings. When your actions were based strictly on your heart and common decency instead of some bureaucrat's decision.

 

Here's the deal for me. I don't smoke, nor do I care for the smell. That said, when I am on my balcony and someone is smoking and that smoke is bothering me, I have two choices... stay on my balcony until it passes, or go into the cabin and wait until the smoke passes. I don't get to dictate where or when a smoker gets to smoke. It's just the way it is and I have a choice to stay or move.

[che5904]

Here's the deal for me. I don't smoke, nor do I care for the smell. That said, when I am on my balcony and someone is smoking and that smoke is bothering me, I have two choices... stay on my balcony until it passes, or go into the cabin and wait until the smoke passes. I don't get to dictate where or when a smoker gets to smoke. It's just the way it is and I have a choice to stay or move.

 

True or you could do what the one poster before suggested the do they bring " a battery-operated fan and a can of airfreshner". Everyone lives in harmony.

[swedish weave]

As much as I would like to agree with you (and I am a a non-smoker who disdains second hand smoke), I cannot. NCL tells you in advance before you buy a ticket where people can and cannot smoke. The balcony is one of those places where people can smoke. You can't blame the smokers who use thier balconies to smoke. I would rather, as I said before, prohibit all smoking on ships, but until I have a controling interest in the ownership of a cruiseline, I am going to have to either (a) accommodate those who are smoking, or (b) find other vacation options.

 

Or wait patiently. I think the changes are coming, but it will depend on how strong and how quickly the message gets to the cruise companies about the dangers of second-hand smoke to passengers and crew.

[stephenandrew]

Or wait patiently. I think the changes are coming, but it will depend on how strong and how quickly the message gets to the cruise companies about the dangers of second-hand smoke to passengers and crew.

 

I don't think this is an issue of how quickly the "message" gets to the cruise companies. I think is more a matter of economics, and for right now, it makes more finanical sense for NCL to permit smoking in selected places on board. I do agree, however, that over time, the demographics of the population will change, and fewer people will smoke; and that, I think is what will ultimately result in changes to smoking policy on board.

[madelinerose]

I don't think this is an issue of how quickly the "message" gets to the cruise companies.

 

It already has for some: ;)

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=225

[stephenandrew]

It already has for some: ;)

 

http://www.cruisecritic.com/articles.cfm?ID=225

 

My point was intended to mean that the cruiselines already know that dangers of second hand smoke---they akready have that "message", as does anyone who has not been living in a cave for the past 20 years. The cruiselines are not making decisions to be altrusitic, or becasue they are concerned about our health (heck--look at the food and beverages they make available on board). They are concerned, legitimately so, with making money. Once/if on-board smoking is determined to reduce their revenue/profit, they will change their policy.

[DMH15]

My point was intended to mean that the cruiselines already know that dangers of second hand smoke---they akready have that "message", as does anyone who has not been living in a cave for the past 20 years. The cruiselines are not making decisions to be altrusitic, or becasue they are concerned about our health (heck--look at the food and beverages they make available on board). They are concerned, legitimately so, with making money. Once/if on-board smoking is determined to reduce their revenue/profit, they will change their policy.

 

And, in the meantime, can't we all just get along?

 

(Note: if any stranger's smoking bothers me,if even for an instant, I picture my sweet sister in law's face. I wouldn't hurt her for the world. My brother has never smoked, and he wishes his wife would quit, and she has tried every method known to man! I love my SIL so any nameless, faceless smoker I imagine as her.)

[JerseyJaguar]

I chose NCL specifically because of a change in smoking policy on another cruiseline. I was booked on HAL's Baltic cruise in an oceanview when I got an email saying they were stopping cabin smoking and only allowing it on balconies. Well, their balcony would have cost me $2,000 more so I looked for another line and found a balcony on NCL's Baltic cruise that was the same price as my oceanview on HAL (yes, it's less days, but 2 of those 3 are sea days and I'm only losing one country).

 

I expect there will be more people like me, who chose NCL for their affordable balcony smoking option over ships that either don't have that option or charge too much for a balcony. If they take the balcony smoking away, I will find another cruiseline or another vacation option.

[swedish weave]

I chose NCL specifically because of a change in smoking policy on another cruiseline. I was booked on HAL's Baltic cruise in an oceanview when I got an email saying they were stopping cabin smoking and only allowing it on balconies. Well, their balcony would have cost me $2,000 more so I looked for another line and found a balcony on NCL's Baltic cruise that was the same price as my oceanview on HAL (yes, it's less days, but 2 of those 3 are sea days and I'm only losing one country).

 

I expect there will be more people like me, who chose NCL for their affordable balcony smoking option over ships that either don't have that option or charge too much for a balcony. If they take the balcony smoking away, I will find another cruiseline or another vacation option.

 

As Stephenandrew posted, economics will dictate what your options are for the future. If enough non-smokers step in to replace the revenue lost by smokers moving to another line, the trend to limit smoking will continue in the direction it is going now.

 

Of course, it could develop like the baggage charges the airlines implemented. Some lines may see it as a business opportunity and buck the trend. It could work to the advantage of some of the cruise lines to do that with smoking.