Veendam failed latest cdc inspection

[GeriatricNurse]

Recently off the Volendam on 7 day Inside Passage. Outside Cabin 3026 (on Promenade deck) . No heat for entire week even with thermostat up to highest level. They tried to fix it several times with no success. Other than that, the cruise was great. Just used all the blankets in my cabin! Volendam does show its age in some areas, but I'd sail on her again.

 

But just not in "Outside Cabin 3026 (on Promenade deck)" ;)

[serendipity1499]

I don't mean to be picky, but nowhere does it say that the corrective report must be posted at exactly the same time as the deficiency report. The language says that the corrective report must be appended to the deficiency report for future reference.

 

"Appended" means that it can be added at any time, but once added the two records will be associated. However, there is no statement indicating it has to be at the same time. The other statement merely says that "if requested" the corrective action must be made available publicly. Presumably that means at the request of HAL, but the wording is not very clear.

 

Trust me, I know how to navigate the CDC website and I deal with records such as inspection reports daily. I am in the health field and have done work for CDC (for their website) in the past.

 

 

Did you go to the page where fit clearly states:

The program's Operational Manual specifies that whenever the inspection reports are disseminated to the public, a copy of the corrective action statements submitted by the vessel shall also be included.

Are you telling me that I'm the only person who can read this two paragraph page, when you go through steps A through F of my post!..How can I be the only one which can pull up this page on my old PC..

 

 

 

Once again I Quote: NOTE

 

The USPHS/CDC/Vessel Sanitation Program performed the inspection or re-inspection that is provided as public information on the website. The program's Operational Manual specifies that whenever the inspection reports are disseminated to the public, a copy of the corrective action statements submitted by the vessel shall also be included.

 

VSP requires all ships to submit corrective action statements for deficiencies. This vessel submitted the following corrective action statement; however, VSP does not verify that the deficiencies have been corrected until after conducting the next vessel inspection or re-inspection. Unquote

These two paragraphs are on the same page as the red acknowledge button..

 

 

 

The fact remains that as of August 20, a month after the inspection, no report was published on the website. I can't guarantee exactly when it WAS posted or when it was submitted, although I am going to go look at the site and see if there is some way to figure out the posting date.

 

Aug 20 was not a month after the inspection..The inspection was conducted on Aug 19..The CDC report was filed on Sept 20! Now you are saying the CDC is not following their own Operational Manual & many of you are blaming HAL for that..

Yes I admit I enjoy sailing HAL & I AM NOT excusing the officers on the Veendam for such a horrible score on the inspection..All I'm saying is "Lets get the facts right" If HAL's report was not posted, lets blame the CDC not HAL, since the CDC was not supposed to post the inspection report without the corrective action report..

Betty

[serendipity1499]

Thanks Serendipity. I understand your loyalty to Holland America, and I appreciate your posts.

 

I try not to make statements of fact without citing at least one source (which can be very boring to read). Too often I give my personal opinion, which is clearly stated as such and worth less then spit in wind.:o

 

Nevertheless, I don't believe it is accurate to state that "According to the CDC "operational manual" the Corrective Action Report MUST be posted at exactly the same time the CDC report is issued to the public..This is on the CDC WEB site!"

 

 

 

Best wishes, -S.

 

[/left]

 

I still believe it is accurate to state that it must be posted at the same time..If not, then please tell me what does the two paragraph rule mean? You must do step A through F to get to this page on the CDC WEB site...See my above post!

 

Quote The program's Operational Manual specifies that whenever the inspection reports are disseminated to the public, a copy of the corrective action statements submitted by the vessel shall also be included.

What does the above sentence mean?

How can I be the only person on this thread which iterprets this paragraph differently? IMO if it was not included on Sept 20 then the CDC was not following it's own rule on this page which is clearly spelled out!

Will anyone consider that it was the fault of the CDC & perhaps it's possible that HAL Mgmt called the CDC & asked why the corrective action report was not included?

Betty

 

 

[goodearth]

The comments in the CDC manual are that the corrective action and the inspection report are linked when both are published. Does it say it that simply....No. How else would you write a rule and cover every inspection done by the CDC? For those that have only one infraction........yes, there may be a correction report the same day. For those like the Veendam...........sure as hell not. It's a simple case of reality in the real world. It seems that you are set on believing what you want even though people have offered information for you to consider. Yes, it appears that you are the only one that read the manual and interpreted it that way. Just the way it rolls, I guess :)

[serendipity1499]

The comments in the CDC manual are that the corrective action and the inspection report are linked when both are published. Does it say it that simply....No. How else would you write a rule and cover every inspection done by the CDC? For those that have only one infraction........yes, there may be a correction report the same day. For those like the Veendam...........sure as hell not. It's a simple case of reality in the real world. It seems that you are set on believing what you want even though people have offered information for you to consider. Yes, it appears that you are the only one that read the manual and interpreted it that way. Just the way it rolls, I guess :)

 

 

First of all the CDC did not post the inspection report until Sep 20 one month after the inspection, that's to give the companies time to dispute their findings..

 

Since I seem to be the only one that has interpreted this incorrectly, & you know so much about the CDC, will you kindly tell me what the following paragraph means that is clearly stated on the CDC WEB site & I pointed out in my above post:

Quote Quote The program's Operational Manual specifies that whenever the inspection reports are disseminated to the public, a copy of the corrective action statements submitted by the vessel shall also be included. Unquote

If you can give me a clear explanation of the above sentence, then I will bow to your expertise..

Betty

 

[cruisin'girl]

I must be missing something, but exactly what difference does it make? Is it worth this amount of time, or any time actually, researching,reading the CDC Operational Manual, interpreting, and arguing about the CDC reporting rules and regs? Are we grasping at straws to find some way HAL has been mistreated in this whole debacle?

[cruisemom42]

 

First of all the CDC did not post the inspection report until Sep 20 one month after the inspection, that's to give the companies time to dispute their findings..

 

Since I seem to be the only one that has interpreted this incorrectly, & you know so much about the CDC, will you kindly tell me what the following paragraph means that is clearly stated on the CDC WEB site & I pointed out in my above post:

Quote Quote The program's Operational Manual specifies that whenever the inspection reports are disseminated to the public, a copy of the corrective action statements submitted by the vessel shall also be included. Unquote

If you can give me a clear explanation of the above sentence, then I will bow to your expertise..

Betty

 

 

I agree with the previous poster that it's more or less splitting hairs, but since you ask....

 

My interpretation, FWIW, is that the "whenever" doesn't refer to time but to instance. In other words, IF the CDC is going to disseminate the original report, and IF the corrective report is available, then CDC cannot publish one but not the other, as that would be misleading. However, I believe that up until the corrective report is available, they certainly would've been free to publish the original report on its own.

 

It's rather like a correction to an article in a medical journal. Once the correction is published, it is the duty of anyone citing the original article to also cite the correction as well.

[serendipity1499]

I must be missing something' date=' but exactly what difference does it make? Is it worth this amount of time, or any time actually, researching,reading the CDC Operational Manual, interpreting, and arguing about the CDC reporting rules and regs? Are we grasping at straws to find some way HAL has been mistreated in this whole debacle?[/quote']

 

I completely agree with you, HAL has in no way been mistreated..They failed the inspection & as far as I'm concerned,we'll never cruise on the Veendam again unless we see an improvement..

However, I'm arguing the fact that the CDC /SIZE]

apparently did not follow their own rules & many implied that HAL was to blame for the Corrective Action repot Mysteriously appearing..

If you are going to argue in court folks, get the facts straight!

Betty

[tangerinebunny]

Betty, if the CDC has erred, it seems that HAL's legal and PR departments would be on it. So perhaps we should just leave them to it.

[serendipity1499]

Betty, if the CDC has erred, it seems that HAL's legal and PR departments would be on it. So perhaps we should just leave them to it.

 

I completely agree, since we can't even agree to what the word "whenever" in the sentence means..;)LOL.:).

 

And I am inclined to believe that HAL's legal Dept has already been on it!

Betty

[peaches from georgia]

If the inspection report cannot be posted without the cruiseline's corrective action report attached then there must be a time limit for the corrective action report to be filed by the cruiseline or the inspection report will be made public without it until it is eventually submitted. Then the corrective report must be also published. Otherwise the cruiseline could decide to never submit their report and the CDC would never be able to make the inspection report public. That of course makes absolutely no sense! The CDC cannot be held hostage by the cruiseline.

 

HAL's Legal Dept?? Going after the CDC? C'mon. They probably have their hands full with booked and paid pax wanting to cancel their cruises on the Veendam and get full refunds.

[Salacia]

"Are ships required to correct violations from the inspection?

 

Yes. Some of the violations are corrected during the inspection while others may take longer to correct. Although ships are responsible for correcting all violations, some critical violations must be corrected immediately. Each ship must submit a Corrective Action Statement that states how the violations were corrected."

 

Copied from http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/vsp/desc/about_inspections.htm

 

Please note that it does not give a deadline for when the failed ship must submit a Corrective Action Statement. Of course, it seems logical that be in the best interest of the failed ship to post it as soon as possible in an effort to assuage potential passengers, but no deadline is given.

[DizzyDallasDi]

QUOTE PAGE 134 OF THE OPERATIONS MANUAL

 

11.6.1 Procedures . . .

 

I'm not sure what "Operations Manual" you're reading because page 134 of the Vessel Sanitation Program 2011 Operations Manual starts with Section 8.1.2.2 and ends with Section 8.2.1.1.2. Section 8.1 deals with Plan Development, Evaluation, and Use of Pesticides.

 

Furthermore, Section 11.6.1 does not exist. Section 11.3.1 is the last subsection under Section 11. Even more interesting is Section 11 you keep referencing deals with HVAC Construction and Maintenance.

 

 

. . .

public distribution

11.6.1.4 The correctiveaction

statement shall be appended to the final inspection report for future reference and, if requested, madeavailable for public distribution.

. . .

 

Once again, Section 11.6.1.4 does not exist. However, Section 12.6, Corrective Action Statement, on page 154 sets forth the relevant language that I believe you are trying quote:

"12.6.1.4

Public Distribution

The corrective-action statement will be appended to the final inspection report for future reference and, if requested, made available for public distribution."

Section 12.8, Inspection Publication, on page 155 sets forth the rules for publishing these reports on the VSP Web Site:

"12.8.1.3

Public Record

Reports, including the corrective-action statements, are available on the VSP Web site. Paper copies are available to the public on request."

What was that you mentioned earlier about arguing in court and getting your facts straight? :p Take my word for it, if you're citing case law or section references in a document, you want to be absolutely certain you get it right. The other side (not to mention the judge) will tear you apart if you give the wrong citations. :D

[peaches from georgia]

Arguing in court about WHAT?

[DizzyDallasDi]

Arguing in court about WHAT?

 

You'll have to ask Betty... :D

 

. . . If you are going to argue in court folks, get the facts straight!

 

Betty

[tangerinebunny]

Has anyone posted at CC that they've cancelled a Veendam cruise because of the sanitation rating failure?

 

I'm just wondering what HAL's response was.

[jimmy2x]

Has anyone posted at CC that they've cancelled a Veendam cruise because of the sanitation rating failure?

 

I'm just wondering what HAL's response was.

 

If they get more than a dozen cancellations over the next couple of months, I'd be surprised. We all need to remember that those of us that hang out on this forum probably represent less than 10% of the cruising population.

[Salacia]

If they get more than a dozen cancellations over the next couple of months, I'd be surprised. We all need to remember that those of us that hang out on this forum probably represent less than 10% of the cruising population.

 

Good point Jimmy2x. But then 1 out of 10 passengers tells maybe a two or three people, and they tell maybe three or four people, then sooner or later, people who choose their voyages carefully have their questions answered, and they don't need to be members of Cruise Critic to get the drift. But the newbies, who don't know where to look or who to ask will find themselves on the ship. Heck, even experienced cruisers found themselves on the Veendam after it failed inspection: my husband and I were two of them on Aug 19. How many repeat customers are likey?

 

I can't help but wonder what the passengers response to the survey was at the end of that cruise, or how many passengers purchased a future voyage? As for myself, it was the first time in many years I didn't purchase a future cruise credit (or deposit, or whatever it's called these days). But no worries, there will be passengers who are willing to pay the price, especially as the fare is reduced. -S.

[cruisemom42]

If they get more than a dozen cancellations over the next couple of months, I'd be surprised. We all need to remember that those of us that hang out on this forum probably represent less than 10% of the cruising population.

 

True, but the story ran on CNN and in USA Today. Also, anyone who may have missed that but who is doing even a bit of research on the ship will find those stories listed at the top if doing a search on "Veendam" under Google news.

[peaches from georgia]

And eventually it can affect bookings on other ships also as people forget which ship failed an inspection but remember it was Holland America.

[KirkNC]

And some will figure the reaction by ship personnel will make it the cleanest ship on the seas.

[onthegogirl]

Feel the same way.

Someone may have already mentioned this but the Veendam and the Rotterdam were the two ship modified with the removal of the aft pool. Plumbing problems and leaks may have resulted from this poorly though out and poorly engineered modification. Hope the decision makers in Seattle responsible have been handed their walking papers.

 

Two wonderful vessels are now the shame of the line.

 

Wake up Seattle before its too late. Think and double think and triple think major modifications to increase revenues. You just maybe shooting yourself in the foot.

[Randyk47]

True, but the story ran on CNN and in USA Today. Also, anyone who may have missed that but who is doing even a bit of research on the ship will find those stories listed at the top if doing a search on "Veendam" under Google news.

 

I have had two non-cruising friends, who know we cruise regularly, ask me about this story. They're not cruisers and have no interest so in their case I don't think the Veendam situation will have much impact one way or the other. I imagine there will be some, and I hesitate to even venture a guess at a percentage or number, who cancel a booked Veendam cruise, maybe even a HAL cruise, and even another line's cruise because of this story. More troublesome for HAL, the larger Carnival corporation, and just cruising in general is the number of people who will either delay or not book a cruise because of this. It's hard to quantify the impact of events like failed inspections, on-board illness, sinkings, fires, etc., etc. It can be an "in-your-face" reaction with an outright "you'll never catch me cruising" to the more subliminal, almost subconscious, decision to not even consider cruising. I'm sure it's frustrating for cruise industry managers and executives but it's a rude reminder that you can do 99 out of 100 things right and that one mistake or misstep can wipe away the other.

[iancal]

Failure to pass a CDC inspection would not necessarily deter us from avoiding a ship.

 

I have no doubt that HAL will quickly address the issues. The problems have probably already been rectified and measures put in place to ensure that they will not happen again.

 

We won't consider Veendam for other reasons. For us, it it a broken ship that Hal seems unwilling or unable to fix. To add insult to injury per diem fares are in the medium to high range while our perception of the 'value' is at the bottom of the scale.

 

It is shame really. HAL is a great cruise line. Veendam only serves to detract from that image and reputation.

[cruisemom42]

I have had two non-cruising friends, who know we cruise regularly, ask me about this story. They're not cruisers and have no interest so in their case I don't think the Veendam situation will have much impact one way or the other. I imagine there will be some, and I hesitate to even venture a guess at a percentage or number, who cancel a booked Veendam cruise, maybe even a HAL cruise, and even another line's cruise because of this story. More troublesome for HAL, the larger Carnival corporation, and just cruising in general is the number of people who will either delay or not book a cruise because of this. It's hard to quantify the impact of events like failed inspections, on-board illness, sinkings, fires, etc., etc. It can be an "in-your-face" reaction with an outright "you'll never catch me cruising" to the more subliminal, almost subconscious, decision to not even consider cruising. I'm sure it's frustrating for cruise industry managers and executives but it's a rude reminder that you can do 99 out of 100 things right and that one mistake or misstep can wipe away the other.

 

Yes, very true.

 

And just think of all the people one runs across who cannot even remember the names of the ships they've cruised on in the past and/or are booked on in future. So in a certain sense, the cancellations will be limited to knowledgeable cruisers.

 

I suppose it is also possible that knowledgeable TAs would begin to avoid booking customers and would steer them to other ships.