Ncl can't get act together re jones act

[punkincc]

On 10-19, we attempted to book a B2B on the Sun:

 

5-06-13 Pacific Coastal LA to Vancouver

5-13-13 Vancouver to Vancouver via Alaska

 

We were told by NCL RES Dept that this is in violation of Jones Act.

 

I then posted here on the board and another CC member contacted the VP of Passenger Services Office on our behalf. I was advised by this CCer that changes would be made to the reservation system to allow the bookings.

 

10-23-13 Was able to book the b2b successfully. This is were it starts to get maddening!

 

On signing up for our 5-13 roll call, I met someone who was scheduled for the following:

 

5-5-13 Pacific Coastal LA to Vancouver on PEARL

5-13-13 Vancouver RT via Alaska on SUN

 

She mentioned that they had wanted a b2b on Pearl, but could not due to Jones Act, so booked the above instead. I advised her we had just booked the same itinerary on the Sun, and with no break between the cruises.

 

She contacted NCL to see if they could now substitute the Sun for the Pearl and have a true b2b.

 

On 10-24, she received a call back and was advised no go by a cruise consultant due to Jones Act.

 

10-25 So now I'm nervous about our b2b and call NCL RES Dept to verify once again, is this or is this not a violation. I believe I may have been transferred to group booking Dept as we are booked through a TA. They confirmed that our Sun b2b is legal. Stated RES Dept is "misinterpreting regulation". I notify fellow cruiser of this and provide her with ph # to VP of Passenger Services. She contacts them and is advised to wait for call back.

 

Fellow passenger receives 2 calls, one from Reservation Supervisor, who confirms Sun b2b is violation. One one from "Administrators Office" also confirming this is a violation.

 

10-26. I call VPs office and go through this entire thing both for myself and fellow cruiser. Call back received from Gene at Executive Dept at Corporate saying our B2B is LEGAl. He requests fellow cruiser call him with names of those spoken to. Info relayed to fellow cruiser who will check with them next week.

 

This is not NCLs first rodeo! They do these repositioning cruises every year. Surely they know someone is going to want to book a b2b! Is it too much trouble to have someone from legal or whoever, review these in advance to see which b2bs are permissible and have the reservation system reflect this rather than go through this circus? How much revenue do they need to lose?

[S.S.Oceanlover]

On 10-19, we attempted to book a B2B on the Sun:

 

5-06-13 Pacific Coastal LA to Vancouver

5-13-13 Vancouver to Vancouver via Alaska

 

We were told by NCL RES Dept that this is in violation of Jones Act.

 

I then posted here on the board and another CC member contacted the VP of Passenger Services Office on our behalf. I was advised by this CCer that changes would be made to the reservation system to allow the bookings.

 

10-23-13 Was able to book the b2b successfully. This is were it starts to get maddening!

 

On signing up for our 5-13 roll call, I met someone who was scheduled for the following:

 

5-5-13 Pacific Coastal LA to Vancouver on PEARL

5-13-13 Vancouver RT via Alaska on SUN

 

She mentioned that they had wanted a b2b on Pearl, but could not due to Jones Act, so booked the above instead. I advised her we had just booked the same itinerary on the Sun, and with no break between the cruises.

 

She contacted NCL to see if they could now substitute the Sun for the Pearl and have a true b2b.

 

On 10-24, she received a call back and was advised no go by a cruise consultant due to Jones Act.

 

10-25 So now I'm nervous about our b2b and call NCL RES Dept to verify once again, is this or is this not a violation. I believe I may have been transferred to group booking Dept as we are booked through a TA. They confirmed that our Sun b2b is legal. Stated RES Dept is "misinterpreting regulation". I notify fellow cruiser of this and provide her with ph # to VP of Passenger Services. She contacts them and is advised to wait for call back.

 

Fellow passenger receives 2 calls, one from Reservation Supervisor, who confirms Sun b2b is violation. One one from "Administrators Office" also confirming this is a violation.

 

10-26. I call VPs office and go through this entire thing both for myself and fellow cruiser. Call back received from Gene at Executive Dept at Corporate saying our B2B is LEGAl. He requests fellow cruiser call him with names of those spoken to. Info relayed to fellow cruiser who will check with them next week.

 

This is not NCLs first rodeo! They do these repositioning cruises every year. Surely they know someone is going to want to book a b2b! Is it too much trouble to have someone from legal or whoever, review these in advance to see which b2bs are permissible and have the reservation system reflect this rather than go through this circus? How much revenue do they need to lose?

 

If the 5/6/13 sailing from LA ends in Vancouver on May 13, 2013 and leaves the same day and ends in Alaska it is definitely in violation of the PVSA (Jones Act).

 

If there were a day between sailings or you used 2 different ships you'd be fine.

 

Bill

[daffodiliaz]

I know nothing about this except my understanding that you can't begin and end in two u.s. ports without a foreign port in between (which is why r/t from Seattle ships stop in Victoria), but since your second leg is r/t Vancouver why would this Act even come into play? Someone educate us please. I'm pretty sure people some people on our Jewel coastal to LA last month had down a Seattle-Vancouver leg on same ship the week prior.

[S.S.Oceanlover]

I know nothing about this except my understanding that you can't begin and end in two u.s. ports without a foreign port in between (which is why r/t from Seattle ships stop in Victoria), but since your second leg is r/t Vancouver why would this Act even come into play? Someone educate us please. I'm pretty sure people some people on our Jewel coastal to LA last month had down a Seattle-Vancouver leg on same ship the week prior.

 

you are almost correct. It has to be a "DISTANT" foreign port when the port you end at in the U.S. is not the same U.S. port you left from.

 

They can use a near foreign port on a closed loop cruise but the OP's cruise is not a closed loop cruise.

 

Bill

[JohnIreland]

If the 5/6/13 sailing from LA ends in Vancouver on May 13, 2013 and leaves the same day and ends in Alaska it is definitely in violation of the PVSA (Jones Act).

 

If there were a day between sailings or you used 2 different ships you'd be fine.

 

Bill

 

The second cruise ends in Vancouver , so no Jones act issues.

[anthem]

I know nothing about this except my understanding that you can't begin and end in two u.s. ports without a foreign port in between (which is why r/t from Seattle ships stop in Victoria), but since your second leg is r/t Vancouver why would this Act even come into play? Someone educate us please. I'm pretty sure people some people on our Jewel coastal to LA last month had down a Seattle-Vancouver leg on same ship the week prior.

 

You can't begin and end in DIFFERENT ports without an international stop in between. Basically you can't start in Miami and end in New York without a stop in between of a foreign port UNLESS your a US flagged vessel. It's a big issue with cruise lines because most of the cruise line ships are not flagged in the US (unless the hawaii cruises which kind of forces US flagged ships). basically the archaic low forbids foreign ships from carrying cargo or passengers to different US ports.

[punkincc]

Yes, the 2nd leg is Vancouver to Vancouver not Vancouver to Whittier.

 

My point, regardless of how this turns out, and I believe our legal ruling will be eventually upheld, is that this should have been determined before the repositioning cruises were ever published and opened for booking!

 

It should not be left to the discretion of various individuals with no expertise in legal matters to try and make on the spot judgements. You then end up with situations like this.

[njhorseman]

You can't begin and end in DIFFERENT ports without an international stop in between. Basically you can't start in Miami and end in New York without a stop in between of a foreign port UNLESS your a US flagged vessel. It's a big issue with cruise lines because most of the cruise line ships are not flagged in the US (unless the hawaii cruises which kind of forces US flagged ships). basically the archaic low forbids foreign ships from carrying cargo or passengers to different US ports.

 

No...you have that wrong . All closed loop cruises require a stop in any foreign port. Open jaw cruises (those that begin and end in different ports) require a stop in a distant foreign port. No ports in Mexico, Canada, the Bahamas, Bermuda most of the Caribbean and Central America. qualify as a distant foreign port. The nearest distant foreign ports to the Continental US are the ABC islands...Aruba, Bonaire and Curacao, and Cartagena, Colombia.

[VillaHappy]

Archaic law :mad:

[anthem]

No...you have that wrong . All closed loop cruises require a stop in any foreign port. Open jaw cruises (those that begin and end in different ports) require a stop in a distant foreign port. No ports in Mexico, Canada, the Bahamas, Bermuda most of the Caribbean and Central America. qualify as a distant foreign port. The nearest distant foreign ports to the Continental US are the ABC islands...Aruba, Bonaire and Curacao, and Cartagena, Colombia.

 

Agreed. I was only using the different ports jones act. For close loop cruises, only a foreign port. For different ports, it has to be distant and nothing in Canada or Mexico applies. Though I wonder if its no canadian ports along the same coast or no canadian ports period. I wonder if Seattle to Alaska around the cape to Newfoundland (Canada) and then back to Alaska would count (not that it happens, but just hypothetically). Probably wouldn't since its based on distant port to the US and not distant port from where you embarked from.

[Agent999]

It should not be left to the discretion of various individuals with no expertise in legal matters to try and make on the spot judgements. You then end up with situations like this.

 

It seems that if you really believed that statement that you would be taking this issue up with U.S. Customs and Border Protection instead of the expertly trained legal minds found on an Internet message board.

 

Lots of people will have lots of opinions...why not just get the answer from the agency that is charged with enforcing the law?

[LAFFNVEGAS]

First let me state that a cruise starting in Los Angeles ending in Vancouver and doing a Back 2 Back 7 day Alaska ending in Vancouver is totally legal. I did the exact same thing on the Holland America Zuiderdam last May and will be doing it again this coming May. If it makes you feel any better a few Holland America Reps also tried to question doing this until I asked to speak to a Lead Supervisor then they agreed that we were totally fine because we are not ending in a US Port.

 

Unfortunately the Reps we talk to on the phone are not always experienced cruisers and there are plenty of travel agents that also do not understand the rules. This past May while on the 2nd portion of our cruise we were Dining at the Hotel Directors Table and there was another couple that stated they had to take another repositioning cruise stay a night in Vancouver because the Travel Agent told them they could not do the Back to Back we told them we were on for the full 11 days and had started in Los Angeles.

 

The big Key here is you are not starting your voyage in one US City and ending in another US City you are in Canada which is not the United States. So you are not violating the Passengers Services Act.

[punkincc]

It seems that if you really believed that statement that you would be taking this issue up with U.S. Customs and Border Protection instead of the expertly trained legal minds found on an Internet message board.

 

Lots of people will have lots of opinions...why not just get the answer from the agency that is charged with enforcing the law?

 

Well, perhaps it will come to that. What I meant is that it should not be left to a reservation clerk to try and interpret the law. NCL legal should have already done this and then we would not have this situation in which one party is allowed to book and another is not. I should not have to be the one who contacts US Customs to make a determination. It is the responsibility of NCL to know what they are doing and to give correct and consistent information.

[njhorseman]

It seems that if you really believed that statement that you would be taking this issue up with U.S. Customs and Border Protection instead of the expertly trained legal minds found on an Internet message board.

 

Lots of people will have lots of opinions...why not just get the answer from the agency that is charged with enforcing the law?

 

First, if you read the thread carefully, as well as the OP's original thread, you'll find that this itinerary was cleared for the OP by senior management at NCL as being in compliance with the PVSA.

 

Second, some of us "expertly trained legal minds" actually are fully familiar with this law as a result of our education and /or professional experience, and even someone without expert training such as yourself can actually learn about the application of this law by reading CPB's official guidance publication:

http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/trade/legal/informed_compliance_pubs/pvsa_icp.ctt/pvsa_icp.pdf

[njhorseman]

Agreed. I was only using the different ports jones act. For close loop cruises, only a foreign port. For different ports, it has to be distant and nothing in Canada or Mexico applies. Though I wonder if its no canadian ports along the same coast or no canadian ports period. I wonder if Seattle to Alaska around the cape to Newfoundland (Canada) and then back to Alaska would count (not that it happens, but just hypothetically). Probably wouldn't since its based on distant port to the US and not distant port from where you embarked from.

 

The law specifically defines all ports in North America as nearby foreign ports, so your sample trip that stops at Newfoundland doesn't satisfy the PVSA...as you say the relevant measure is not how far the port is from where you embarked. Here's the exact explanation from CBP:

 

A “nearby foreign port” is defined as "any port in North America, Central America, the Bermuda Islands, or the West Indies (including the Bahama Islands, but not including the Leeward Islands of the Netherlands Antilles, i.e., Aruba, Bonaire, and Curacao)." 19 CFR § 4.80a(a)(2).

[Agent999]

Well, perhaps it will come to that. What I meant is that it should not be left to a reservation clerk to try and interpret the law. NCL legal should have already done this and then we would not have this situation in which one party is allowed to book and another is not. I should not have to be the one who contacts US Customs to make a determination. It is the responsibility of NCL to know what they are doing and to give correct and consistent information.

 

I understood what you meant. I agree that a reservation clerk should not be interpreting the law. However, I don't think random posters on an Internet message board should either.

 

NCL told you "no" thus indicating that they'd rather be safe then sorry. Since YOU are not happy with their answer, then YOU should go to the proper authorities and get an"etched in stone" answer. Speaking with numerous clerks and strangers on the Internet isn't going to resolve this for you. You need to talk to the agency that will be enforcing the law...they can say whether or not they would find that reservation to be a violation.

[S.S.Oceanlover]

The second cruise ends in Vancouver , so no Jones act issues.

 

you are correct. I read it as Alaska so you are correct.:)

 

My apologies.:o

 

Bill

[njhorseman]

I understood what you meant. I agree that a reservation clerk should not be interpreting the law. However, I don't think random posters on an Internet message board should either.

 

NCL told you "no" thus indicating that they'd rather be safe then sorry. Since YOU are not happy with their answer, then YOU should go to the proper authorities and get an"etched in stone" answer. Speaking with numerous clerks and strangers on the Internet isn't going to resolve this for you. You need to talk to the agency that will be enforcing the law...they can say whether or not they would find that reservation to be a violation.

 

The OP was NOT told "no" by NCL after senior management intervened... they were told "yes" after senior management reviewed the case. If you take the time to read the OP's post carefully you'll see that.

[JohnIreland]

No...you have that wrong . All closed loop cruises require a stop in any foreign port.

 

Except a CTN :D

[njhorseman]

Except a CTN :D

 

Correct

[punkincc]

The OP was NOT told "no" by NCL after senior management intervened... they were told "yes" after senior management reviewed the case. If you take the time to read the OP's post carefully you'll see that.

 

After initially being denied by reservation department, senior management said yes and it was my understanding that the reservation system would somehow flag these cruises as allowable. I was indeed able to book the following day through reservations and assumed that the system had been corrected. I became aware however, that another person is attempting to book the same b2b and has been denied by everyone from reservation, to res supervisor to "administration". So now they will have to also contact corporate if they wish to pursue this.

 

I am understandably feeling a little uncomfortable is continuing with both legs as NCL seems unable to provide a consistent answer. I certainly do not want to incur a fine from the powers that be.

 

I am a huge fan of NCL, but in this instance I feel management could do much more to prevent these situations. And when the situation is brought to their attention, they seem unable to get the message down to the areas involved.

 

We will probably cancel our pacific coastal portion and I wonder how many people have inquired and been told they cannot book it? If this b2b is indeed legal, then they are losing revenue.

[Agent999]

The OP was NOT told "no" by NCL after senior management intervened... they were told "yes" after senior management reviewed the case. If you take the time to read the OP's post carefully you'll see that.

 

But NCL did, in fact, tell the OP "no". The OP has confirmed that in two posts in this thread. YOU inserted the phrase "after senior management intervened" so you could argue against a statement that I never made. In fact, if NCL had not said "no" then there would be no need for senior management to intervene in the first place.

 

By leading the charge for constant argument here, you have shown the OP that this is certainly NOT going to be the place to get a consistent correct answer. The OP already doubts NCL's ability to interpret the law on their behalf.

 

All that is left is for the OP to take the matter up with the source: The US Cutoms & Border Patrol Office. Some things are too important to leave up to phone reps and/or self-appointed Internet legal experts. The OP needs to decide if their vacation is important enough to take the time to talk with the right people, or decide if they feel confident showing up at the pier armed with "but the people on Cruise Critic said it was OK!!!".

[LAFFNVEGAS]

OK I did a bit more checking here because I can.....and the problem has nothing to do with Jones Act and or Passengers Services Act it is just that Norwegian is not allowing it plain and simple, they are the cruise line and they can make what ever decision they want as long as it does not violate any laws.

It appears they are not allowing bookings of any B2B cruises for voyage that include May 6th, May 13th, and May 20th. I have seen things like this pop up before stating it would violate Passengers Service Act but in this case it is simply NCL states they are not allowing this. I can tell you that it does not violate any act but NCL can make the choice of not selling B2B voyages. Why they would want to chose this I have no idea but it does appear it is their decision.

[njhorseman]

But NCL did, in fact, tell the OP "no". The OP has confirmed that in two posts in this thread. YOU inserted the phrase "after senior management intervened" so you could argue against a statement that I never made. In fact, if NCL had not said "no" then there would be no need for senior management to intervene in the first place.

 

By leading the charge for constant argument here, you have shown the OP that this is certainly NOT going to be the place to get a consistent correct answer. The OP already doubts NCL's ability to interpret the law on their behalf.

 

All that is left is for the OP to take the matter up with the source: The US Cutoms & Border Patrol Office. Some things are too important to leave up to phone reps and/or c. The OP needs to decide if their vacation is important enough to take the time to talk with the right people, or decide if they feel confident showing up at the pier armed with "but the people on Cruise Critic said it was OK!!!".

 

NCL has consistently had a problem over the years on this situation with the training of its front line reservations staff and programming of its reservation system. Every year the same problems come up, and every year they are eventually resolved in favor of those passengers who are persistent enough to pursue it up the line.

 

This is strictly an NCL management problem and once it's brought to the attention of the proper executive it gets resolved. It doesn't require any great depth of legal training to understand the PVSA. The OP has had this resolved by NCL senior management...a person on Cruise Critic just helped bring it to the attention of the right person...one of the people on Cruise Critic you keep calling "self appointed Internet legal experts". Guess what...there are people here who are lawyers, or who are deeply involved in the cruise industry...they're not "self appointed experts"...they are experts. Just because you're not doesn't mean others aren't.

[njhorseman]

After initially being denied by reservation department, senior management said yes and it was my understanding that the reservation system would somehow flag these cruises as allowable. I was indeed able to book the following day through reservations and assumed that the system had been corrected. I became aware however, that another person is attempting to book the same b2b and has been denied by everyone from reservation, to res supervisor to "administration". So now they will have to also contact corporate if they wish to pursue this.

 

I am understandably feeling a little uncomfortable is continuing with both legs as NCL seems unable to provide a consistent answer. I certainly do not want to incur a fine from the powers that be.

 

I am a huge fan of NCL, but in this instance I feel management could do much more to prevent these situations. And when the situation is brought to their attention, they seem unable to get the message down to the areas involved.

 

We will probably cancel our pacific coastal portion and I wonder how many people have inquired and been told they cannot book it? If this b2b is indeed legal, then they are losing revenue.

 

Your problem was resolved by one of NCL's most knowledgeable and senior executives. Yes, NCL has an ongoing problem of lower level staff training and systems management with regard to this issue...but the fact that the problem still persists at lower levels in their organization shouldn't be the reason for you to cancel this cruise if it's something you really want to do.