Solstice Alaska tendering nightmare

[dkjretired]

Despite current first hand reports to the contrary (with regard to tendering)

 

Just another criticism... That's their opinion from actually being there.

[POPDISPLAY]

Just another criticism... That's their opinion from actually being there.

 

Actually being there...

Gee- that sounds pretty qualified to me. :rolleyes:

[sldispatcher]

From my point of view, with a group of 40, they were apparently able to get all if not most of the Priority Tender ticket folks off the ship by 210pm (and that's after all of the early excursions had gone).

 

For me, the entire cruise was a delight. I was loaded down with first timers to Alaska and Celebrity and they loved both.

 

I do wonder why they scheduled Victoria for 6pm when we lazed along at 18 knots all the way from Skagway. I'd like someone to let me know why they choose to hit Victoria so late (another ship in docking berth earlier?). Part of the issue was a prevailing wind that did cause a slight delay in docking the ship. For a moment, I thought this stop (Victoria) is toast.

 

But back to original post, I'm sure that there was frustration in trying to get everyone over, but the tenders were moving rapid fire from both spots on the ship. If anything, I wished they didn't wait to "fill up" a tender shore side before they let it return to the ship...when one is simply waiting out there for us to leave the spot at the pier.

 

Overall, well done from my perspective.

[gw2fll]

I was on the Solstice last week as well. It was suggested to go to deck 4 for tender tickets at 1:30. A celebrity worker told me that the line was to get off, not for tickets. He stated that you do not need tickets for the tender. If you didn't have an early excursion just come down later. My nephew went to the front to ask what the procedure was. The line was for tender tickets! I asked the young man why he was giving wrong information and he said that it was all he knew and that if I wanted to I could report him. It was a mess. We were not too far back in line. Our tender number was 22. We were called at 3:10 and almost missed our 3:30 tour. It was independent of celebrity. The celebrity tours were taken off first. Many people missed their tours. The ship was also 45 minutes late in Victoria. They announced for the Canadians with visas to come to the lounge for 1 hour. People lined up at the stairs because they were afraid they would miss their tours. Some of my family went on Celebrity's whale watching tour in Victoria and they missed 45 minutes of their tour. We went to Alaska 6 years ago on Princess and it was superb. Everything was perfect. I did not find this on the Solstice last week. I would definitely go back to Princess if I did Alaska again. There were 20 of us on Celebrity for the first time and they did not wow us although the Solstice is a beautiful ship.

 

We were on the 05/17 sailing and also experienced a delay in Victoria. I believe they started letting people off around 6:30 (we docked on-time). We remained on the ship - although most venues were closed. The martini bar was open, but that was about it.

 

From what I understand, in Victoria, the issue is Canadian immigration. There are certain nationals that immigration must "clear" before anyone is allowed off the ship. They did a great job of advising that if you are told to meet with immigration to please meet at the assigned location at the appropriate time. Otherwise nobody is allowed off the ship. (The meetings with immigration were required whether you are staying on the ship or not.)

 

You could tell who they were looking for. Starting about 5:45 they started paging certain cabin numbers. About 10 minutes later they started paging passengers by name.

 

I wish we had longer in Victoria - would have enjoyed seeing the city.

[curtdesilets]

Despite current first hand reports to the contrary (with regard to tendering)

 

Apparently, they will dock (not tender) next year. A Juneau local said the new dock built exclusively for Solstice (a post-Panama sized ship) was not completed yet. :p

[gw2fll]

This is what the Port was like in Juneau for the 05/17 sailing. (This was 20 May 2013 when we visited.) You can see one of the lifeboats tendering (the little dot in the water between Solstice and the pier.)

 

As you can see, Holland has two of the berths and Princess has the other. I wonder if Holland and Celebrity could reach an agreement where they alternated dock space and tender each week, e.g., Holland uses both slots and the next week they tender one ship and Celebrity docks Solstice?

 

OR, I wonder if Celebrity could adjust the itinerary and do Juneau on a different day - perhaps after Skagway?

 

I'm sure they have looked at all possibilities, but you know how we love to try to figure out a better way.

 

[curtdesilets]

This is what the Port was like in Juneau for the 05/17 sailing. (This was 20 May 2013 when we visited.) You can see one of the lifeboats tendering (the little dot in the water between Solstice and the pier.)

 

As you can see, Holland has two of the berths and Princess has the other. I wonder if Holland and Celebrity could reach an agreement where they alternated dock space and tender each week, e.g., Holland uses both slots and the next week they tender one ship and Celebrity docks Solstice?

 

OR, I wonder if Celebrity could adjust the itinerary and do Juneau on a different day - perhaps after Skagway?

 

 

I'm sure they have looked at all possibilities, but you know how we love to try to figure out a better way.

 

 

Heck, there was a lot of snow for this late into May. The top of Mount Roberts looks totally covered with snow. That would be some tough hiking without snowshoes or X-country skiis!! :eek:

[cruisestitch]

"From what I understand, in Victoria, the issue is Canadian immigration. There are certain nationals that immigration must "clear" before anyone is allowed off the ship. They did a great job of advising that if you are told to meet with immigration to please meet at the assigned location at the appropriate time. Otherwise nobody is allowed off the ship. (The meetings with immigration were required whether you are staying on the ship or not.)"

 

I wonder that Canadian Immigration doesn't board ahead of time so that this can all be taken care of prior to arrival. On Eclipse's TA, a British Immigration official boarded prior to the transatlantic crossing and cleared everyone so that there was no delay on arriving in Southampton

[POPDISPLAY]

"From what I understand, in Victoria, the issue is Canadian immigration. There are certain nationals that immigration must "clear" before anyone is allowed off the ship. They did a great job of advising that if you are told to meet with immigration to please meet at the assigned location at the appropriate time. Otherwise nobody is allowed off the ship. (The meetings with immigration were required whether you are staying on the ship or not.)"

 

I wonder that Canadian Immigration doesn't board ahead of time so that this can all be taken care of prior to arrival. On Eclipse's TA, a British Immigration official boarded prior to the transatlantic crossing and cleared everyone so that there was no delay on arriving in Southampton

 

I thought the reason is the Jones Act

 

Two parts of the Jones Act are of particular historical importance. The first heavily promoted American built, owned, and staffed ships. This was accomplished by restricting shipping and passenger trade within the United States to American owned or American flagged ships, and stipulated that 75% of a ship's crew must consist of American citizens. In addition, the use of foreign parts and labor in ship construction and repair was also heavily restricted. This section of the act was intended to create a strong, well staffed Merchant Marine that could ably serve the United States during both peace and war.

 

As I understand the act, a foreign flagged ship must make a stop in a foreign port if the itinerary is a US round trip.

[neverbeenhere]

You think "tendering" to Juneau is bad, try driving there.

[dkjretired]

I thought the reason is the Jones Act

 

Two parts of the Jones Act are of particular historical importance. The first heavily promoted American built, owned, and staffed ships. This was accomplished by restricting shipping and passenger trade within the United States to American owned or American flagged ships, and stipulated that 75% of a ship's crew must consist of American citizens. In addition, the use of foreign parts and labor in ship construction and repair was also heavily restricted. This section of the act was intended to create a strong, well staffed Merchant Marine that could ably serve the United States during both peace and war.

 

As I understand the act, a foreign flagged ship must make a stop in a foreign port if the itinerary is a US round trip.

 

The act you are referring to is called the Passengers Services Act not the Jones act, Jones act is similar but deals with cargo transportation.

[cruisestitch]

Stopping in Victoria is a result of the PVSA, not the Jones Act. The question is, why does the Immigration process take so long, cutting down the time in Victoria?

[POPDISPLAY]

The Jones-Shafroth Act (the Jones Act as it is known) was signed into law on March 2, 1917, by President Woodrow Wilson. Even today, close to 90 years later, many provisions of the Act are very pertinent especially those dealing with Seamen's health, accident and disability benefits. So what is the "Jones Act" and how does it influence us as resellers of cruises?

 

The Jones Act is the everyday name for Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (46 U.S.C. 883; 19 CFR 4.80 and 4.80b). Its intent is very simple, to promote a healthy U.S-Flag fleet and protect that fleet from unfair foreign competition, the Jones Act requires that cargo moving between U.S. ports be carried in a vessel that was built in the United States and is owned (at least 75 percent) by American citizens or corporations. Since the Jones Act vessels are registered in the United States, our general labor and immigration laws require that crewmembers be American citizens or legal aliens. (In fact most maritime nations have an equivalent to the Jones Act - (50 countries).

 

To reduce the terminology to something the layman can understand - this is termed "cabotage" and applies not only to shipping but to airlines and other forms of international transportation. The statute covering cabotage as it applies to passengers is known as the Passenger Services Act (PSA) and became law in 1886.

 

Does the Jones Act apply to passengers? The Act, no; the principle, yes. What is known as the Passenger Vessel Act (PSA) of 1886 (46 U.S.C. 289) states that “no foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, under penalty of $200 for each passenger so transported or landed.”

 

Another question we are frequently asked is, can the Jones act be waived or suspended? the answer is Yes, but only during a national emergency. However, over time, a number of exceptions have been made, for example Canadian vessels may transport passengers between Rochester and Alexandria Bay, New York and between southern Alaska and U.S. ports until an American carrier enters the markets. Similarly, foreign vessels may transport passengers between Puerto Rico and the U.S. mainland as long as a U.S. carrier does not provide such service. Foreign-flagged cruise ships may carry passengers from a U.S. port as long as they return them to the same port (a "cruise to nowhere"). Foreign vessels may also call at intermediate U.S. ports as long as no passenger permanently leaves the vessel at those ports and the vessel makes at least one call at a foreign port.

 

While the PSA prevents foreign cruise ships from carrying passengers directly from Alaska and the West Coast to Hawaii and from competing for Hawaiian inter-island cruise traffic, a considerable number of foreign cruise ships do visit Hawaii in any given year. American passengers on foreign cruise ships to Hawaii must board in another country—typically, Vancouver, Canada or Ensenada, Mexico. These ships cannot pick up a passenger in one U.S. port and drop off the passenger in another U.S. port. However, after arriving from Canada or Mexico, they may tour the islands and drop off passengers in Hawaii. They may then pick up new passengers, tour the islands, and return to Canada or Mexico. As a consequence, these "foreign" cruise ships made approximately over 300 calls in Hawaii ports during 2002.

 

In October 1997, federal legislation was passed that permits a person to operate a foreign-built cruise ship in the U.S. coastwise trade provided that the person had entered a binding contract for the delivery of two U.S.-built cruise ships. The first ship must be delivered no later than January 1, 2005, and the second ship must be delivered no later than January 1, 2008. Moreover, in Hawaii, only the existing cruise ship operator may operate a foreign-built ship among the islands unless a new U.S.-built cruise ship is placed into regular service outside of Hawaii. This legislation makes it possible to temporarily employ a foreign-built vessel among the Hawaiian Islands despite the Passenger Services Act while new U.S.-built cruise ships are constructed.

 

In the mid- and late 1990s, there was a debate about the continued need for the nation's cabotage laws, key among which is the Jones Act. A group calling itself the Jones Act Reform Coalition (JARC), which was claiming service shortfalls in every part of the nation made an unsuccessful effort to repeal the law. As it later turned out, the JARC criticisms of the US Flag fleet galvanized the industry into a coalition that won statements of support for the Jones Act from a majority of the House, the Clinton (and now Bush) Administrations, the Department of Defense, to the extent that the JARC was disbanded in 2000.

 

The situation in other parts of the world are somewhat more confusing. In Europe the European Economic Union has indicated that it intends to make the carriage of passengers and goods between members countries as open as its frontiers (another story). To date this is not the case and each country appears to have its own interpretation of how the cabotage laws are applied. For example, we recently had a charter doing a site inspection on a ship that was traveling between contiguous ports of one of the Atlantic Coast EEC countries - this was no problem. A couple of weeks later a different group wanted to do the same thing on a cruise ship traveling between Mediterranean ports of another EEC country - and this was not possible.

[dkjretired]

The Jones-Shafroth Act (the Jones Act as it is known) was signed into law on March 2, 1917, by President Woodrow Wilson. Even today, close to 90 years later, many provisions of the Act are very pertinent especially those dealing with Seamen's health, accident and disability benefits. So what is the "Jones Act" and how does it influence us as resellers of cruises?

 

The Jones Act is the everyday name for Section 27 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (46 U.S.C. 883; 19 CFR 4.80 and 4.80b). Its intent is very simple, to promote a healthy U.S-Flag fleet and protect that fleet from unfair foreign competition, the Jones Act requires that cargo moving between U.S. ports be carried in a vessel that was built in the United States and is owned (at least 75 percent) by American citizens or corporations. Since the Jones Act vessels are registered in the United States, our general labor and immigration laws require that crewmembers be American citizens or legal aliens. (In fact most maritime nations have an equivalent to the Jones Act - (50 countries).

 

To reduce the terminology to something the layman can understand - this is termed "cabotage" and applies not only to shipping but to airlines and other forms of international transportation. The statute covering cabotage as it applies to passengers is known as the Passenger Services Act (PSA) and became law in 1886.

 

Does the Jones Act apply to passengers? The Act, no; the principle, yes. What is known as the Passenger Vessel Act (PSA) of 1886 (46 U.S.C. 289) states that “no foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, under penalty of $200 for each passenger so transported or landed.”

 

Another question we are frequently asked is, can the Jones act be waived or suspended? the answer is Yes, but only during a national emergency. However, over time, a number of exceptions have been made, for example Canadian vessels may transport passengers between Rochester and Alexandria Bay, New York and between southern Alaska and U.S. ports until an American carrier enters the markets. Similarly, foreign vessels may transport passengers between Puerto Rico and the U.S. mainland as long as a U.S. carrier does not provide such service. Foreign-flagged cruise ships may carry passengers from a U.S. port as long as they return them to the same port (a "cruise to nowhere"). Foreign vessels may also call at intermediate U.S. ports as long as no passenger permanently leaves the vessel at those ports and the vessel makes at least one call at a foreign port.

 

While the PSA prevents foreign cruise ships from carrying passengers directly from Alaska and the West Coast to Hawaii and from competing for Hawaiian inter-island cruise traffic, a considerable number of foreign cruise ships do visit Hawaii in any given year. American passengers on foreign cruise ships to Hawaii must board in another country—typically, Vancouver, Canada or Ensenada, Mexico. These ships cannot pick up a passenger in one U.S. port and drop off the passenger in another U.S. port. However, after arriving from Canada or Mexico, they may tour the islands and drop off passengers in Hawaii. They may then pick up new passengers, tour the islands, and return to Canada or Mexico. As a consequence, these "foreign" cruise ships made approximately over 300 calls in Hawaii ports during 2002.

 

In October 1997, federal legislation was passed that permits a person to operate a foreign-built cruise ship in the U.S. coastwise trade provided that the person had entered a binding contract for the delivery of two U.S.-built cruise ships. The first ship must be delivered no later than January 1, 2005, and the second ship must be delivered no later than January 1, 2008. Moreover, in Hawaii, only the existing cruise ship operator may operate a foreign-built ship among the islands unless a new U.S.-built cruise ship is placed into regular service outside of Hawaii. This legislation makes it possible to temporarily employ a foreign-built vessel among the Hawaiian Islands despite the Passenger Services Act while new U.S.-built cruise ships are constructed.

 

In the mid- and late 1990s, there was a debate about the continued need for the nation's cabotage laws, key among which is the Jones Act. A group calling itself the Jones Act Reform Coalition (JARC), which was claiming service shortfalls in every part of the nation made an unsuccessful effort to repeal the law. As it later turned out, the JARC criticisms of the US Flag fleet galvanized the industry into a coalition that won statements of support for the Jones Act from a majority of the House, the Clinton (and now Bush) Administrations, the Department of Defense, to the extent that the JARC was disbanded in 2000.

 

The situation in other parts of the world are somewhat more confusing. In Europe the European Economic Union has indicated that it intends to make the carriage of passengers and goods between members countries as open as its frontiers (another story). To date this is not the case and each country appears to have its own interpretation of how the cabotage laws are applied. For example, we recently had a charter doing a site inspection on a ship that was traveling between contiguous ports of one of the Atlantic Coast EEC countries - this was no problem. A couple of weeks later a different group wanted to do the same thing on a cruise ship traveling between Mediterranean ports of another EEC country - and this was not possible.

 

We are aware of the Passenger Vessel Services Act and the Jones Act, it is discussed quite frequently on this board and others. We were only correcting you as this is a common misconception that the Jones Act is what applies to the Passengers and it doesn't.

[WestLakeGirl]

What in heck was that quotation from?

 

Are you a travel agent?

[treehugr]

We were on the 5/24 sailing and we docked in Juneau...hopefully the problem is now resolved. I agree with others about Victoria, we were an hour late in finally getting off the ship. Everything was pretty much shut down by the time we got downtown. There is no good reason why they can't get into port sooner than 6:00 pm.

[Host Jazzbeau]

If you were coming through the Inside Passage, the timing issue may have been Seymour Narrows. Even very large ships can only transit this stretch safely at slack water. I suspect that since Victoria is only scheduled to satisfy the law, the captain plans the timing for maximum safety through Seymour Narrows at the expense of shore time in Victoria.

[rockfsh]

For the Solstice, this isn't the reason since it sails west of Vancouver Island.

[c-legs]

 

I wonder that Canadian Immigration doesn't board ahead of time so that this can all be taken care of prior to arrival.

 

And where would they '' board ahead of time'' from ? The ship leaves from Seattle and stays in US/Alaskan Waters the whole time until docking in Victoria....While the whole time issue of the Victoria stop is justifiably annoying, it is also unavoidable due to the infamous PVSA which has to be satisfied.....

[cruisestitch]

In the case of the Eclipse transatlantic, the British Immigration officer boarded in the Caribbean and was on the ship for the entire trip, working through the passenger list a few hours a day, pre-clearing everyone prior to arriving in England.

 

By extension, a Canadian official could board at the last US port and travel with the ship to Victoria and take care of everything prior to landing in Canada.

[4774Papa]

We did Solstice in Australia in February and March. There were some serious tendering problems in Bali and Cairns. Not sure how much of it was preventable.

[Markanddonna]

I was on the Westerdam last week and felt sorry for the Solstice passengers with the tendering issue. I was on the Pearl last time and we were on the dock where you need to be shuttled to downtown Juneau and I recall envying the HAL ships there.

 

One thing I learned about Alaska is that seniority seems to matter in Alaska. HAL and Princess have been there the longest and seem to get priority. That is why those two lines are the two who get the majority of Glacier Bay days. They allow only two ships in Glacier Bay per day.

 

That said, I envied the features of your lovely ship! Seems like things like docking, port choices and ship features make for a tough decision on which line to choose. I am looking forward to a Celebrity cruise in the future. So far it is RCCL, NCL and then HAL, in that order of preference.

[gw2fll]

We did Solstice in Australia in February and March. There were some serious tendering problems in Bali and Cairns. Not sure how much of it was preventable.

 

Interesting. Hearing this - sounds like there is an opportunity for a process improvement.

 

I have tendered on RCCL several times and it went very smoothly - granted it was in the Caribbean using those really large tenders and not a lifeboat, but still the process went quick and easy.

 

Absent this Bali / Cairns information I would assert it is a learning process of what works, best practices, etc. If the issue exists in other areas it speaks to a larger issue.

 

I included this on my survey and I hope other passengers do as well. Otherwise, the ships officers may not get the gist of what's going on.

 

Let's hope they get this sorted out soon so future passengers have an easier time.

[4774Papa]

Interesting. Hearing this - sounds like there is an opportunity for a process improvement.

 

I have tendered on RCCL several times and it went very smoothly - granted it was in the Caribbean using those really large tenders and not a lifeboat, but still the process went quick and easy.

 

Absent this Bali / Cairns information I would assert it is a learning process of what works, best practices, etc. If the issue exists in other areas it speaks to a larger issue.

 

I included this on my survey and I hope other passengers do as well. Otherwise, the ships officers may not get the gist of what's going on.

 

Let's hope they get this sorted out soon so future passengers have an easier time.

In Bali, it probably was how much to bribe the local authorities. We had a two hour delay there caused purely by the local authorities.

[Ship's Wake]

As you can see, Holland has two of the berths and Princess has the other. I wonder if Holland and Celebrity could reach an agreement where they alternated dock space and tender each week, e.g., Holland uses both slots and the next week they tender one ship and Celebrity docks Solstice?

 

If asked, Holland America will no doubt tell Celebrity to go pound sand.

 

 

One thing I learned about Alaska is that seniority seems to matter in Alaska. HAL and Princess have been there the longest and seem to get priority. That is why those two lines are the two who get the majority of Glacier Bay days. They allow only two ships in Glacier Bay per day.

 

 

Your information is correct. Seniority is how it works. HAL/Westours has been docking in Juneau long before Celebrity became a cruise line, let alone started sailing to Alaska.

 

I once had lunch with a HAL employee who was in a position of authority managing Alaska excursions. He stated that the docking situation and access to Glacier Bay is based on seniority.