Balcony Smoking ending !

[Chunky2219]

Chunky2219, initially I said "Quite a lot of people will not be truly happy in their lives until smoking is against the law." some posts earlier. And you clearly fall into that category of people.

 

There are plenty of things in this world that other people do that I am opposed to, but that's the way it is. It's also a fact that things change because a vocal minority shout the loudest (but the majority tend not to care very much one way or the other). Smoking is a case in point; most people who don't smoke just accept it, but a very vocal minority have manged to get their own way.

And there we have it again, yet another piece of completely unsupported, evidence-free opinion presented as complete and absolue fact. You're not getting away with that one either.

 

Even if a majority don't tend so say much either way, it doesn't mean that they are supporters of your point of view or mine, it just means that it's a subject they choose not to be vocal about. I'd re-phase your own comment along the lines of, "most people who don't smoke have been in circumstances of having to put up with it; now they don't have to put up with quite so much, but sometimes do so to be polite."

 

Since you seem to have got my point of view so wildly in error let me be perfectly clear about where I stand. If a mature, consenting adult is so stupid or so addicted as to wish to smoke then I have no desire to stand in their way. By the same token, I don't see why I should have to put up with their second hand smoke drifting on the wind or the mouldy stink of their clothes and hair when wedged against them in a lift. I don't want their fag ends blowing around on my garden and I don't want the manufacturers peddling their death sticks to my grandkids by making it look glamourous.

 

I don't want my daughter, a nurse in a respiratory ward, to be wasting her time on the idiots who still sneak outside in the rain for a crafty drag when she could be devoting time to patients whose illness isn't their own fault. But that boat has sailed and being in the caring profession she treats the addicted and the unfortunate entirely the same.

 

The problem isn't that people want to ban smoking, it's that those who remain addicted to the habit think they are some persecuted minority and have no respect for the wishes of the majority who do not share their world view. I don't see a need for a world where smokers have to collect their fix from the chemist like any other addict and have to smoke in a hermetically sealed booth, but if that's what it takes for the rest of us to not be affected by it then I'd vote for that solution.

 

If I'm stumping up a big proportion of my earnings or savings on a cruise that includes a balcony then I want to enjoy it without smoke drifting under my nose. I don't think it's much to ask. If your average smoker had enough respect for other people I wouldn't need to ask.

 

And just so that you have no misconceptions about my earlier, sarcastic post, I have absolutely no problem with beards and I think Cheshire orange looks quite good on some people. Neither of them are for me, but they are lifestyle choices affecting no one but the individual.

.

.

.

[Shining Clem]

We are very pleased to see this change - finally!

 

We expressed our views when Mr Peter Shanks visited CC. At that time we asked that Cunard consider corralling smoking to one or two outside deck areas. It is not only a problem for people who are annoyed by second hand smoke, but a serious health issue for some and it is a safety factor in preventing on-board fires for all.

 

Although there may be some, to leap to the conclusion that ALL of us who wish to curtail smoking in interior or total outside areas, wish to ban smoking from entire countries, is being silly & unreasonable. Unlike being on land, on a ship it cannot be avoided, if allowed everywhere.

 

Cunard is being most reasonable in allowing the e-cigarettes. Why not concentrate on what you can do? I know some don't see it this way, but consideration should bring those around to this COMPROMISE.

 

After Mr Shanks replied, Salacia pointed out that being on a QM outside deck on the cold stormy North Atlantic, was not a safe place to have a cigarette. She also was concerned about her fancy formal dancing shoes :p not being safe footwear for slippery decks! ;) She has a point! :D For that reason, I do hope Cunard encloses a convenient area with good ventilation for smokers in such weather with their heels & patent leather. Or maybe offer football cleats by the door........

 

It would be a mistake to ban all smoking, because then people would try to sneak away to hidden spots which would be even more dangerous.

 

When we booked our HAL cruise to Alaska, we chose a 7 day journey and booked the most forward suite cabin we could on a ship which went into Glacier Bay. It was a strategy which worked. But we indicated we would not be back unless smoking was curtailed on balconies & general deck areas.

 

We now look forward to checking out the schedules for next year on Cunard, especially TAs which leave from northern Europe! We like the smoking policies on Oceania & Celebrity ships. Pleased that we now have more options with Cunard.

[Sweetpea711423]

Chunky2219

 

You have now - me. Twenty years of loyalty to Cunard has just been blown off the balcony.

 

Good thing I booked my 2014 World Cruise before they did this.

 

andhow

 

 

And me too. Goodby to Cunard (with sadness).

[fantasy51]

I hate cigarettes; in fact I could say I have a mild phobia.

 

I can't always afford balcony cabins. The first time I managed it, we (a friend who was unwell and spent a lot of time resting) had chain smokers next door who used their balcony a lot, so we could hardly use ours in the rare times that the weather was good enough (an unseasonably cool April).

 

HOWEVER, I do believe that smokers need somewhere to smoke. That place needs to be convenient for them. It is ridiculous to expect them to get dressed and perhaps walk the length of the ship, especially as some smokers are old and unwell (as are some non-smokers - I would hate to have to walk the length of the ship to indulge in my past addiction to chocolate!). I grew up with parents who smoked continually. I know the need they had. I will certainly turn a blind eye if I find out that a person in a neighbouring balcony has been getting up in the middle of the night for a private smoke. It's far better than them ending up smoking in the cabins, which is what I am afraid will happen in SOME cases.

 

We have to be realistic.

[ToadOfToadHall]

If a mature, consenting adult is so stupid or so addicted as to wish to smoke then I have no desire to stand in their way.

 

But you clearly do, otherwise you not be so opposed to what other people do.

 

 

By the same token, I don't see why I should have to put up with their second hand smoke drifting on the wind or the mouldy stink of their clothes and hair when wedged against them in a lift. I don't want their fag ends blowing around on my garden and I don't want the manufacturers peddling their death sticks to my grandkids by making it look glamourous

 

No one forces you grandchildren to smoke.

 

You have changed your argument from "I don't like smelling smoke from the people on the next balcony" to "death sticks".

 

... wasting her time on the idiots who still sneak outside in the rain for a crafty drag

 

Your hatred comes across quite clearly. If people want to smoke, let them. It does not affect you.

 

those who remain addicted to the habit think they are some persecuted minority and have no respect for the wishes of the majority who do not share their world view

 

Again, more hatred. If others are "addicted" what has that got to do with you ? Millions of people in the UK smoke, that's their choice. Who are you to dictate them them ? But you clearly think you have that right.

 

As I said before, smoking has been all but banished in the UK. You should be happy with that - but no, some people keep on and on and see it as their goal in life to make smoking illegal.

 

Your views are rather like thinking if you drink a bottle of whisky a day is the same as drinking a glass a day. It's not - in the same way as smoking 40 a day is not the same as spending 2 weeks on a balcony in the middle of sea with someone smoking several feet away from you.

 

But you have decided in your head that it's the same. It's not.

[paulista1950]

"If people want to smoke, let them. It does not affect you."

Are denying that second hand smoking is harmful to your health?

[paulista1950]

"If others are "addicted" what has that got to do with you ?"

Are denying that second hand smoking is harmful to your health?

[paulista1950]

"Your views are rather like thinking if you drink a bottle of whisky a day is the same as drinking a glass a day. It's not"

100% agreed, it's not

 

"in the same way as smoking 40 a day is not the same as spending 2 weeks on a balcony in the middle of sea with someone smoking several feet away from you."

Once more 100% agreed, it's not

 

but.... how much whisky I drink doesn't affect other people.

[travelqueen101]

We are very pleased to see this change - finally!

 

We expressed our views when Mr Peter Shanks visited CC. At that time we asked that Cunard consider corralling smoking to one or two outside deck areas. It is not only a problem for people who are annoyed by second hand smoke, but a serious health issue for some and it is a safety factor in preventing on-board fires for all.

 

Although there may be some, to leap to the conclusion that ALL of us who wish to curtail smoking in interior or total outside areas, wish to ban smoking from entire countries, is being silly & unreasonable. Unlike being on land, on a ship it cannot be avoided, if allowed everywhere.

 

Cunard is being most reasonable in allowing the e-cigarettes. Why not concentrate on what you can do? I know some don't see it this way, but consideration should bring those around to this COMPROMISE.

 

After Mr Shanks replied, Salacia pointed out that being on a QM outside deck on the cold stormy North Atlantic, was not a safe place to have a cigarette. She also was concerned about her fancy formal dancing shoes :p not being safe footwear for slippery decks! ;) She has a point! :D For that reason, I do hope Cunard encloses a convenient area with good ventilation for smokers in such weather with their heels & patent leather. Or maybe offer football cleats by the door........

 

It would be a mistake to ban all smoking, because then people would try to sneak away to hidden spots which would be even more dangerous.

 

When we booked our HAL cruise to Alaska, we chose a 7 day journey and booked the most forward suite cabin we could on a ship which went into Glacier Bay. It was a strategy which worked. But we indicated we would not be back unless smoking was curtailed on balconies & general deck areas.

 

We now look forward to checking out the schedules for next year on Cunard, especially TAs which leave from northern Europe! We like the smoking policies on Oceania & Celebrity ships. Pleased that we now have more options with Cunard.

i am going to recommend that that they ban offensive perfumes and colognes as I choke on it . Cannot have decent meal anywhere on ship because of that. When does it stop why don't cruise lines just make smoking on balconies on one side of ship.

[candle in the wind]

i am going to recommend that that they ban offensive perfumes and colognes as I choke on it . Cannot have decent meal anywhere on ship because of that. When does it stop why don't cruise lines just make smoking on balconies on one side of ship.

 

travelqueen101 There WILL be no end to it.

 

I witnessed a television programme in Canada in the last couple of years which was Anti Homeopathic [investigative journalism, don't you know].

I cringed at their ignorance and that of the 'rent a mob' who looked like they could hardly be bothered to breathe, let alone demonstrate on behalf of anything.

I think some people need a cause or a good story.

[ToadOfToadHall]

"If others are "addicted" what has that got to do with you ?"

Are denying that second hand smoking is harmful to your health?

 

What I am saying is that there's a vast difference between being in a room day after day full of second hand smoke and spending two weeks on a balcony, in the middle of the sea, several feet away from one or two people smoking.

 

The amount of smoke, if any at all, you will inhale on your balcony is almost nothing, and for 2 weeks a year, makes no odds at all.

 

But plenty of people, including yourself it clearly seems, are happy to confuse the two situations in order to try and win their argument.

 

It's like smoking a cigar a couple of times a year; it wont harm your health one iota, so don't try and make out it will (hence my bottle of whiskey/single glass comparison).

[ToadOfToadHall]

but.... how much whisky I drink doesn't affect other people.

 

Oh but it does, if you apply the same argument that others are using. It may not affect others directly, but it certainly does indirectly (that's not my argument, but its one that is being made on here).

[MeredithFairfax]

i am going to recommend that that they ban offensive perfumes and colognes as I choke on it . Cannot have decent meal anywhere on ship because of that. When does it stop why don't cruise lines just make smoking on balconies on one side of ship.

 

I have seen this suggestion several times now on the two smoking threads that are running. I just don't understand how this could be a viable solution to the smoking issue. Imagine that smoking is allowed one one side of the ship or say, on two decks on one side of the ship. If smokers account for approx 20% of passengers, Cunard would have to assign a suitable number of cabins to be available on any given cruise. So what happens if smokers don't book? Sometimes there would be less smokers wanting to book than other times, so now Cunard have a bunch of empty cabins. These cabins are designated smoking cabins so they would have to make that clear to other people who booked the cabin. Some people would not care - a cheap fare is a cheap fare after all, but lots of non-smokers probably would care (judging by a lot of the comments I've seen on this forum) and they would not want to book those cabins, so now Cunard have cabins they can't sell.

 

Couple this with the fact that if all the smokers were in one area - imagine how much smoke there would be from this area/these balconies. Would this side of the ship become a no-go area for non smokers? What a picture this conjures up - the smokers creating plumes of smoke to fend off the dreaded anti-smoking brigade! :D

[travelqueen101]

I have seen this suggestion several times now on the two smoking threads that are running. I just don't understand how this could be a viable solution to the smoking issue. Imagine that smoking is allowed one one side of the ship or say, on two decks on one side of the ship. If smokers account for approx 20% of passengers, Cunard would have to assign a suitable number of cabins to be available on any given cruise. So what happens if smokers don't book? Sometimes there would be less smokers wanting to book than other times, so now Cunard have a bunch of empty cabins. These cabins are designated smoking cabins so they would have to make that clear to other people who booked the cabin. Some people would not care - a cheap fare is a cheap fare after all, but lots of non-smokers probably would care (judging by a lot of the comments I've seen on this forum) and they would not want to book those cabins, so now Cunard have cabins they can't sell.

 

Couple this with the fact that if all the smokers were in one area - imagine how much smoke there would be from this area/these balconies. Would this side of the ship become a no-go area for non smokers? What a picture this conjures up - the smokers creating plumes of smoke to fend off the dreaded anti-smoking brigade! :D

need to couple the fact that designated smoking areas will have hundreds of people smoking. What then the whole ship will smell of smoke. No one will be able to avoid it. The smoke will travel I assure you.

[Salacia]

PARTIAL QUOTE

...

but.... how much whisky I drink doesn't affect other people.

 

<sigh>

[Salacia]

I have seen this suggestion several times now on the two smoking threads that are running. I just don't understand how this could be a viable solution to the smoking issue. Imagine that smoking is allowed one one side of the ship or say, on two decks on one side of the ship. If smokers account for approx 20% of passengers, Cunard would have to assign a suitable number of cabins to be available on any given cruise. So what happens if smokers don't book? Sometimes there would be less smokers wanting to book than other times, so now Cunard have a bunch of empty cabins. These cabins are designated smoking cabins so they would have to make that clear to other people who booked the cabin. Some people would not care - a cheap fare is a cheap fare after all, but lots of non-smokers probably would care (judging by a lot of the comments I've seen on this forum) and they would not want to book those cabins, so now Cunard have cabins they can't sell.

 

Couple this with the fact that if all the smokers were in one area - imagine how much smoke there would be from this area/these balconies. Would this side of the ship become a no-go area for non smokers? What a picture this conjures up - the smokers creating plumes of smoke to fend off the dreaded anti-smoking brigade! :D

 

No worries. I suspect that the message given has been recieved: passengers who smoke are not welcome on Cunard ships.

 

I will not argue further that it makes no sense to complain about smoking on balconies. Since 2008, I've experienced 11 voyages on QM2, and I can tell you will that while at sea, the wind blows, and the sea roars. Under those conditions, I have spent many hours on my balcony because I love the sea. But the smell of diesel is unmistakeable. I never understood why those who tracked the smell of nicotine missed the diesel fumes, but happily, there will soon be no distracting scents. Ah! Bunker fuel.

 

Complaints about air pollution as a result of cigarette smoking on board cruise ships is hypercritical.

 

Salacia

[Salacia]

need to couple the fact that designated smoking areas will have hundreds of people smoking. What then the whole ship will smell of smoke. No one will be able to avoid it. The smoke will travel I assure you.

 

 

What? That's some kind of crazy. :eek:

[pmb1]

I don't agree with Cunard's latest anti-smoking ukase, but I think I know why they issued it: no amount of cleaning time and effort can rid a cabin or its balcony or the very air within it of the imagined remnants of stale cigarette smoke. Of course, occasionally there are real remnants which may be bothersome to the hypersensitive, but as of mid-2014 Cunard will have a zero-cost response to all "I smell cigarette smoke" complaints, i.e. "Impossible, because we don't allow smoking anywhere near your cabin."

 

Cunard already supplies its passengers with profitable (to Cunard) Bar Lists and Wine Lists; perhaps in late 2014 Cunard will be adding E-Cig Lists.

[Salacia]

I hate cigarettes; in fact I could say I have a mild phobia.

 

I can't always afford balcony cabins. The first time I managed it, we (a friend who was unwell and spent a lot of time resting) had chain smokers next door who used their balcony a lot, so we could hardly use ours in the rare times that the weather was good enough (an unseasonably cool April).

 

HOWEVER, I do believe that smokers need somewhere to smoke. That place needs to be convenient for them. It is ridiculous to expect them to get dressed and perhaps walk the length of the ship, especially as some smokers are old and unwell (as are some non-smokers - I would hate to have to walk the length of the ship to indulge in my past addiction to chocolate!). I grew up with parents who smoked continually. I know the need they had. I will certainly turn a blind eye if I find out that a person in a neighbouring balcony has been getting up in the middle of the night for a private smoke. It's far better than them ending up smoking in the cabins, which is what I am afraid will happen in SOME cases.

 

We have to be realistic.

 

Fantasy51, your empathic understanding is much appreciated.

 

Rules are rules, and discipline on a ship is paramount. I didn't smoke in my cabin when that was banned, and since smoking on the balcony will be banned in April/May, I wouldn't violate that rule - Nor would I book passage on a ship with terms and conditions with which I had strong objections - and that is becoming an increasing challenge.

 

I read my contract for passage carefully, and increasingly, I have noted the changing terms and conditions. Smoking cigarettes is only one consideration.

 

Again, thanks. Regards, -S

 

Quizz guestion: On Cunard ships, the laws of which country apply?

[Salacia]

Cunard ships are registered in Bermuda, ergo the laws of Bermuda apply on Cunard ships.

 

My understanding is that Bermuda law allows smoking on open-air balconies and patios.

 

Cunard, having disallowed smoking on open-air balconies, appears to be in contradiction to the laws of Bermuda.

 

Corrections/comments welcomed. Thanks, -S.

[Norfolk Brit]

My understanding is that Bermuda law allows smoking on open-air balconies and patios.

 

As does UK law, in fact designated smoking bedrooms in hotels are still legal. These new regulations are considerably more draconian than those on land here. Heading off on a tangent somewhat, our local hospital tried to introduce a ban on smoking in its grounds (ie outside) - the security staff, who were supposed to police it, refused and it's ignored by every smoker. And good luck to them.

 

My main puzzle, though, is how on earth these highly sensitive people cope in port, particularly European ones where every street and outside cafe area is full of smokers.

 

Oh, and can anyone point me towards a legitimate scientific paper proving a link between smoking outside and a health risks to others? After all, it is outside we are discussing.

 

Mary

[ToadOfToadHall]

Complaints about air pollution as a result of cigarette smoking on board cruise ships is hypercritical.

 

Very well put.

[balf]

 

Cunard, having disallowed smoking on open-air balconies, appears to be in contradiction to the laws of Bermuda.

 

Corrections/comments welcomed. Thanks, -S.

 

When a ship is at sea the master is in complete charge. So theoretically he/she could decide to allow smoking in all ares of the ship. Or put all the smokers and the smoke complainers ashore at the next port and there have been times when trouble makers have been evicted: no jury trial, just dumped on the key side.

 

The laws of Bermuda or anywhere else have nothing to do with the case. In practice of course policy comes from management as we have seen but forget Bermuda.

 

David.

[Pushka]

There are laws, and then there are the terms and conditions of a contract. As long as human rights aren't violated then a contract will use whatever terms and conditions it sees fit.

[cunardaddict]

Who are theese smokers to dictate me to smell their stinking odours?

 

There is no reason to discuss the rights of smokers as they are the only malicious party in this relation.

 

And - hadn't it been a cigarette being thrown over board and blown back into the aft of a cruise ship incending the lines store recently?

 

Just stop smoking - as I did 24 years ago. It is easy and saves lives.