Shadow --- i'll wait for the facts

[UKCruiseJeff]

This is just another area where "flags of convenience" benefit the shipowner. While there are International Health Regulations, it is up to the various countries to inspect the ships while calling at one of their ports, and many do not have the interest or money to do so. Also, the only entity that could punish a shipowner for a corporate culture of deceit in food safety would be the "flag state" or the Bahamas for the Silversea fleet.

 

The US seems to strong on many things ... is it impractical to warn a ship ( and line) that operates under a "flag of convenience" that if it's caught subverting inspections it will receive a ban from US waters for a suitable period of time? Each subsequent infringement brings a longer "sentence".

 

This type of subversion should surely be taken more seriously?

[chengkp75]

The US seems to strong on many things ... is it impractical to warn a ship ( and line) that operates under a "flag of convenience" that if it's caught subverting inspections it will receive a ban from US waters for a suitable period of time? Each subsequent infringement brings a longer "sentence".

 

This type of subversion should surely be taken more seriously?

 

Absolutely. This is why the final report took so long, and resulted in a lower score than was on the initial report. USPH hierarchy were looking at the findings and questioning the inspectors as to the nature of the infractions, and also trying to get feedback from the company. As I've said, USPH can suspend or revoke a ship's certificate to carry passengers, if it embarks from a US home port.

 

Now, can the USPH inspectors make life very difficult for a ship or company that routinely flaunts the requirements, oh boy, can they make life miserable, if they want to. There is also the option to call on the USCG to make stepped up SOLAS inspections, so that embarkation is disrupted, and "unintentionally" causing economic hardship to the owner. Neither agency is allowed to place undue economic stress on the ship's commerce, but if they both "happen" to be inspecting on the same day, and both are not happy with results, and require corrections prior to sailing, that can "just happen".

[UKCruiseJeff]

...... thanks.

[Travelcat2]

I want to add my thanks for your taking the time to educate us on the system. Since the Shadow will be in U.S. waters most of the time for the next month and a half, they will no doubt be under many watchful eyes. At least I hope so.

[Goofyisme]

This is why I feel that there is a corporate culture of disdain for the USPH. Corporate would need to feel that they needed an impartial inspector, but they don't.

 

The system we used at NCL, while by no means perfect nor infallable, was that we had weekly USPH inspections by the senior officers and staff. About 20 people (likely more positions than a smaller Silversea ship has) would take part. You would rotate what area of the ship you were inspecting each week.

I, as Staff Chief Engineer, whose main responsibility under USPH was to maintain all the equipment in working order, was free to inspect and comment on operations, food storage, food worker hygiene, and other areas that I saw during the inspection, and the Executive Chef could comment on equipment that was not maintained properly. This brought constant "fresh eyes" to all areas of USPH compliance, and the weekly report was sent via the Captain to corporate Hotel Operations for review and comment.

 

And your NCL inspectors were probably more qualified than the majority of the USPH.

[Goofyisme]

Absolutely.

Now, can the USPH inspectors make life very difficult for a ship or company that routinely flaunts the requirements, oh boy, can they make life miserable, if they want to.

 

I am sure you are correct. As someone who used to do government announced and unannounced inspections (though not in this area). Government regulations are usually so detailed and convoluted that I could have legitimately come up with a failing score just about every time I conducted and inspection. Inspectors must demonstrate restraint, but I also know of situations where one violation so inflamed an inspector that they went looking for a reason to give a failing score.

 

Such is the nature of government inspections.

[RachelG]

Yes,i would not believe it if it was not for the fact that it was shown on an undercover health inspector programme.

The bleach makes the chicken look a bit healthier to the eye and after you coat it with the secret herbs and spices,you have no idea what you are eating.

 

A grocery store here in Tulsa (no longer in business thank heaven) got caught doing this with fish.

[duct tape]

One of the reasons that the ships get rotated every few years is because whichever ship (Shadow/Whisper) is in the Pacific/SE Asia circuit, is away from the States too long. Ergo, no USPHS until they return to an American port.

[chengkp75]

And your NCL inspectors were probably more qualified than the majority of the USPH.

 

Actually, we were trained by the USPH. The company can pay for employees to attend a 5 day training held by USPH, and normally there will be guys from several companies there, and you can also compare notes.

[dougburns]

Maybe if all of us who are SS regulars just ignore these threads about Shadow, they'll just go away. It's an unfortunate occurrence, but things like that sometimes happen. I'm sure SS management is taking action to avoid any future occurrence and that's good enough for me. In all of our many cruises with SS and Radisson/Regent we've never had even a hint of a sanitation issue. And, yes, we have cruised Shadow.

[duct tape]

Oh, Doug, you will pay for that with the upcoming rant!

[LaVieBoheme]

Maybe if all of us who are SS regulars just ignore these threads about Shadow, they'll just go away. It's an unfortunate occurrence, but things like that sometimes happen. I'm sure SS management is taking action to avoid any future occurrence and that's good enough for me. In all of our many cruises with SS and Radisson/Regent we've never had even a hint of a sanitation issue. And, yes, we have cruised Shadow.

 

Yes: I am sure that is exactly what SS management wants. Let's pretend that this was just an unfortunate isolated event and that these blatantly deceptive practices didn't happen. Give them a few months and everything can return to back to 'normal'.

 

I don't wear such rose-tinted glasses and hence it is extremely unlikely we'll ever sail on SS again.

[CanadianKate]

I don't wear such rose-tinted glasses and hence it is extremely unlikely we'll ever sail on SS again.

 

I guess my issue is that I'm considering how tinted my glasses are. You see, like you I suspect this is SS wide and not just Shadow. And the reading I've done since the story broke indicates it is almost industry-wide, not just SS.

 

So, do I give up SS and choose another line that may be just as bad but hasn't been caught yet?

 

Or do I give up cruising?

 

Or do I stick with SS in the hopes that now the curtain has been pulled back, they'll clean up their act?

 

Also of interest to me is the lawsuit over wages. Up until now, I've felt that I'm paying more but to a company that didn't exploit workers to the level other lines do. Now I'm waiting to see if that curtain has been pulled back too, and I'm just fooling myself that SS is different from other lines in their treatment of staff. Maybe the crews aspire to working on SS because it is the least worst of a bad bunch and only keel-hauls them 3 times a day instead of 6.

[UKCruiseJeff]

I guess my issue is that I'm considering how tinted my glasses are. You see, like you I suspect this is SS wide and not just Shadow. And the reading I've done since the story broke indicates it is almost industry-wide, not just SS.

 

So, do I give up SS and choose another line that may be just as bad but hasn't been caught yet?

 

Or do I give up cruising?

 

Or do I stick with SS in the hopes that now the curtain has been pulled back, they'll clean up their act?

 

Also of interest to me is the lawsuit over wages. Up until now, I've felt that I'm paying more but to a company that didn't exploit workers to the level other lines do. Now I'm waiting to see if that curtain has been pulled back too, and I'm just fooling myself that SS is different from other lines in their treatment of staff. Maybe the crews aspire to working on SS because it is the least worst of a bad bunch and only keel-hauls them 3 times a day instead of 6.

 

Great post.

 

:)

[chengkp75]

I guess my issue is that I'm considering how tinted my glasses are. You see, like you I suspect this is SS wide and not just Shadow. And the reading I've done since the story broke indicates it is almost industry-wide, not just SS.

 

So, do I give up SS and choose another line that may be just as bad but hasn't been caught yet?

 

Or do I give up cruising?

 

Or do I stick with SS in the hopes that now the curtain has been pulled back, they'll clean up their act?

 

Also of interest to me is the lawsuit over wages. Up until now, I've felt that I'm paying more but to a company that didn't exploit workers to the level other lines do. Now I'm waiting to see if that curtain has been pulled back too, and I'm just fooling myself that SS is different from other lines in their treatment of staff. Maybe the crews aspire to working on SS because it is the least worst of a bad bunch and only keel-hauls them 3 times a day instead of 6.

 

As condemnatory as I am about Silversea's transgressions, and I've been equally harsh on Carnival about the Splendor, and Costa about the Concordia, and any line that, as I've said, transgresses in safety, sanitation, or crew welfare, I truly believe, based on my experience, that this is not industry wide. Yes, some ships fail inspections. They can be hellishly hard. But despite Mr. Walker's blog by supposed crew members stating that 90% have seen this, I don't believe this is anything other than a single line's (or hopefully a single ship's) attempt to evade inspections.

 

My hope for the crew is that the recently adopted Manila Convention (Maritime Labor Convention of 2006) by the IMO does as intended and improves the lot of crew members on all ships worldwide. Most of the "mainstream" cruise lines pay what is considered an indecently low wage to their crew, but this is in fact mostly a middle class income in their home countries, which is why there is never a shortage of crew for cruise ships.

[UKCruiseJeff]

As condemnatory as I am about Silversea's transgressions, and I've been equally harsh on Carnival about the Splendor, and Costa about the Concordia, and any line that, as I've said, transgresses in safety, sanitation, or crew welfare, I truly believe, based on my experience, that this is not industry wide. Yes, some ships fail inspections. They can be hellishly hard. But despite Mr. Walker's blog by supposed crew members stating that 90% have seen this, I don't believe this is anything other than a single line's (or hopefully a single ship's) attempt to evade inspections.

 

My hope for the crew is that the recently adopted Manila Convention (Maritime Labor Convention of 2006) by the IMO does as intended and improves the lot of crew members on all ships worldwide. Most of the "mainstream" cruise lines pay what is considered an indecently low wage to their crew, but this is in fact mostly a middle class income in their home countries, which is why there is never a shortage of crew for cruise ships.

 

Interesting.

 

Your post throws up a new question in my view.

 

If these practices aren't considered normal or acceptable in the industry generally, or "business as usual" I wonder how Manfredi can reconcile and sustain his position as Chairman of the European Cruise Council without making some sort of statement of contrition and condemnation about this. As many know he is Chairman of SS but not Executive Chairman or CEO. He doesn't effectively manage the business now as many people seem to believe.

 

It is difficult to be an "industry leader" unless you show "industry leadership".

 

Thanks again for sharing your experience, it's informative and interesting.

[chengkp75]

Interesting.

 

Your post throws up a new question in my view.

 

If these practices aren't considered normal or acceptable in the industry generally, or "business as usual" I wonder how Manfredi can reconcile and sustain his position as Chairman of the European Cruise Council without making some sort of statement of contrition and condemnation about this. As many know he is Chairman of SS but not Executive Chairman or CEO. He doesn't effectively manage the business now as many people seem to believe.

 

It is difficult to be an "industry leader" unless you show "industry leadership".

 

Thanks again for sharing your experience, it's informative and interesting.

 

Well put.

[UKCruiseJeff]

Well put.

 

I've not been accused of that for a while! :D

[5waldos]

A very weak solution.

 

Oops- this comment was directed at the bleach solution, not the one that Chengkp75 offered. Really sorry- I guess this is why you should always use the quotes.

[UKCruiseJeff]

Oops- this comment was directed at the bleach solution, not the one that Chengkp75 offered. Really sorry- I guess this is why you should always use the quotes.

 

I hope that this is not the effluence of incahol.:D

[Travelcat2]

Really do not think this issue is industry wide. In the past week I have read numerous CDC reports on luxury cruise ships and see some problems on almost every ship....... however, whatever was going on that day on the Shadow is deplorable. I seriously doubt if the first thing that enters the mind of the food/kitchen staff when hearing there is an inspection on board is to hide the food in crew cabins - under the bed - on the bed - in the covers, etc.

[5waldos]

I hope that this is not the effluence of incahol.:D

 

not a drop- another post or two snuck in astonishingly quickly. And my comment could fit as a very snarky one to Chengkp75s, which it most certainly was not meant to do.

[5waldos]

Really do not think this issue is industry wide. In the past week I have read numerous CDC reports on luxury cruise ships and see some problems on almost every ship....... however, whatever was going on that day on the Shadow is deplorable. I seriously doubt if the first thing that enters the mind of the food/kitchen staff when hearing there is an inspection on board is to hide the food in crew cabins - under the bed - on the bed - in the covers, etc.

 

And why not? My first impulse is to throw all the junk into the dishwasher when I have unexpected company. My mother in law used to put things under the bed. OK- no- not rotting fish and veggies but the idea is the same.

[Travelcat2]

And why not? My first impulse is to throw all the junk into the dishwasher when I have unexpected company. My mother in law used to put things under the bed. OK- no- not rotting fish and veggies but the idea is the same.

 

Yes -- do understand the concept of hiding things when company arrives but if I had rotting fish and veggies, my first instinct would be to get it in the trash. Although I know they didn't put rotting fish in beds, I now cannot get the mental vision out of my mind:)

[5waldos]

Yes -- do understand the concept of hiding things when company arrives but if I had rotting fish and veggies, my first instinct would be to get it in the trash. Although I know they didn't put rotting fish in beds, I now cannot get the mental vision out of my mind:)

 

Oh dear- this was all difficult enough without implanting further unpleasant pictures. Sorry (second sorry in 3 posts- I'm not doing well here!)