Possible policy change....what are your thoughts?

[Vitality08]

I was reading a USA Today article about the Explorer returning home 2 days early because of the Noro Virus outbreak.

 

There was a quote from a tourism manager/instructor (or something) from Pace University stating that 1) people bring Noro Virus with them when they board (which we knew) and 2) If people don't have insurance but are feeling ill, they don't want to cancel and lose their money.

 

I know many here buy and insurance and don't think it's fair for people who "self insure" to get refunds but it got me to thinking:

 

Should cruise lines offer some sort of last minute cancellation option for those who develop gastro intestinal issues 1 or 2 days before a sailing? Not a cash refund but maybe a credit for a future cruise. I think a policy like this may help in the long run to keep cruises free of people who know they are ill but just don't want to lose their money.

 

What do you guys think? This wouldn't be designed to take the place of purchasing insurance but more so give the cruise line some peace of mind that sick individuals won't purposely join the cruise.

 

I think it'd be a decent option for some and I of course think they person requesting the cancellation and credit should have to send in medical documentation. I kind of view it as a reward for being honest and thinking of others.

[tserface]

You do have a point. I'm sure lots of people have gone through the process of trying to figure out if they will be well enough to enjoy part of the cruise then get on the ship thinking that if they don't they lose their investment completely.

 

I'm not sure how the illness would be validated. Doctor's note? In other words, how do you know the difference between someone canceling for being sick, or other reasons and just using the sick excuse?

 

Tom

 

I was reading a USA Today article about the Explorer returning home 2 days early because of the Noro Virus outbreak.

 

There was a quote from a tourism manager/instructor (or something) from Pace University stating that 1) people bring Noro Virus with them when they board (which we knew) and 2) If people don't have insurance but are feeling ill, they don't want to cancel and lose their money.

 

I know many here buy and insurance and don't think it's fair for people who "self insure" to get refunds but it got me to thinking:

 

Should cruise lines offer some sort of last minute cancellation option for those who develop gastro intestinal issues 1 or 2 days before a sailing? Not a cash refund but maybe a credit for a future cruise. I think a policy like this may help in the long run to keep cruises free of people who know they are ill but just don't want to lose their money.

 

What do you guys think? This wouldn't be designed to take the place of purchasing insurance but more so give the cruise line some peace of mind that sick individuals won't purposely join the cruise.

 

I think it'd be a decent option for some and I of course think they person requesting the cancellation and credit should have to send in medical documentation. I kind of view it as a reward for being honest and thinking of others.

[stones902]

I was reading a USA Today article about the Explorer returning home 2 days early because of the Noro Virus outbreak.

 

There was a quote from a tourism manager/instructor (or something) from Pace University stating that 1) people bring Noro Virus with them when they board (which we knew) and 2) If people don't have insurance but are feeling ill, they don't want to cancel and lose their money.

 

I know many here buy and insurance and don't think it's fair for people who "self insure" to get refunds but it got me to thinking:

 

Should cruise lines offer some sort of last minute cancellation option for those who develop gastro intestinal issues 1 or 2 days before a sailing? Not a cash refund but maybe a credit for a future cruise. I think a policy like this may help in the long run to keep cruises free of people who know they are ill but just don't want to lose their money.

 

What do you guys think? This wouldn't be designed to take the place of purchasing insurance but more so give the cruise line some peace of mind that sick individuals won't purposely join the cruise.

 

I think it'd be a decent option for some and I of course think they person requesting the cancellation and credit should have to send in medical documentation. I kind of view it as a reward for being honest and thinking of others.

 

That's an interesting concept that I have not considered. I believe you are on track with people being reluctant to report gastro illnesses because they are worried about not being allowed on board and taking a 100% loss on the cruise.

 

A possible solution would be to offer someone who must cancel under these circumstances space on a future cruise during specified times a couple of months out. I don't think they should offer a 100% refund (seems ripe for abuse) but I think giving sick passengers an opportunity to rebook at a later date might be a solution worth considering.

 

I'm looking forward to reading everyone's opinions on this.

[workingonlytocruise]

I do not agree. They should buy insurance as others do and not be rewarded for trying to board sick and not having insurance.

 

Perhaps there is a better way of checking for illness when boarding or making sure illness is reported when onboard, but rewarding - no.

[BuccaneersFan]

I think it could be a very good idea for the cruise lines because just think about how much money is lost in revenue when a decent sized outbreak happens and they start issuing partial refunds, full refunds, on board credit etc. It only takes one person to infect many people so if you could potentially keep infected people off the ship it could keep the outbreak from happening or at least reduce it by a great deal.

[Aggiebuttercup]

For many people it isn't just money, it is also time. They have taken time off work. They may not be able to arrange that length of trip again any time soon, if at all. They think they'll be well again in just a day or two, so it will be okay.

 

Or, possibly, they board without symptoms and come down sick the first day of the cruise.

[Scotty G]

I do not agree. They should buy insurance as others do and not be rewarded for trying to board sick and not having insurance.

 

Perhaps there is a better way of checking for illness when boarding or making sure illness is reported when onboard, but rewarding - no.

 

Ditto!!!! If you can't afford the insurance then you really can't afford to cruise. Sorry but that is reality.

 

A program as suggested would only raise the cruise fares of others since someone must pay for it. We always buy insurance and would not appreciate cruise fare increases due to such an idea being implemented.

[setsail]

They already offer and have for some time now cancel for any reason insurance. You just have to anti up the bucks

[okiecruiser71]

Ditto!!!! If you can't afford the insurance then you really can't afford to cruise. Sorry but that is reality.

 

A program as suggested would only raise the cruise fares of others since someone must pay for it. We always buy insurance and would not appreciate cruise fare increases due to such an idea being implemented.

 

I can afford to cruise and I can afford the insurance and yet I still don't get it. I like to live dangerously, and I know the companies that offer the policies will literally do everything and anything they can to keep from paying out one cent to anyone making a claim. The horror stories I have heard when it comes to dealing with those companies match anything I've heard from those not purchasing the insurance.

Edited January 27, 2014 by okiecruiser71

[stones902]

I do not agree. They should buy insurance as others do and not be rewarded for trying to board sick and not having insurance.

 

Perhaps there is a better way of checking for illness when boarding or making sure illness is reported when onboard, but rewarding - no.

 

Ditto!!!! If you can't afford the insurance then you really can't afford to cruise. Sorry but that is reality.

 

A program as suggested would only raise the cruise fares of others since someone must pay for it. We always buy insurance and would not appreciate cruise fare increases due to such an idea being implemented.

 

I understand your very valid points but as a practical matter I'm not sure how you would screen 3,000 passengers to ensure that all were healthy when boarding the ship?

 

While I don't want to see anyone "game the system" either as it raises costs for everyone else, the discussion is how can you prevent (to a reasonable extent) passengers who know they are ill and likely to infect others from boarding. I think they best way is to offer them a way out whether they have insurance or not.

 

BTW, I do purchase the cruise insurance.

[ducklite]

Perhaps a better idea would be to require the purchase of insurance--it simply becomes part of the cruise price. If one can produce a privately purchased policy they could get a rebate or on board credit for the cost.

 

Of course some people will continue to be selfish and sail anyhow...

[PuterMonkey]

I understand the point BUT a person with norovirus can remain contagious for a full week or two after the main symptoms have passed. That's a long grace period to offer anyone who claims to have been sick.

[time4u2go]

For many people it isn't just money, it is also time. They have taken time off work. They may not be able to arrange that length of trip again any time soon, if at all. They think they'll be well again in just a day or two, so it will be okay.

 

Or, possibly, they board without symptoms and come down sick the first day of the cruise.

Not just that, but the airfare/hotel cost (like for a night in a hotel pre-cruise). With this plan, it's doubtful the cruise line would refund the cost of either.

[time4u2go]

I have to wonder, even WITH INSURANCE, how many people walk away from a cruise (almost literally) because they are sick. I would bet that it's very few.

[TC1957]

We never buy insurance...and we can afford it. It is safe to say that over the years, when all travel is considered, we have saved considerable money. Buying insurance is just placing a bet that something bad will happen to you...and like someone has pointed out, getting paid by many of the companies is very difficult.

 

As for the idea posted by the OP...how much would that increase the cost of cruising for everyone? Within the last two days before sailing the company has virtually no chance to fill the cabin. If they give credit, even partial, for a future cruise at the last minute it cost them money in lost revenue. If it is just an inside cabin that is probably no big deal...but what if it is a huge suite that is going empty. Confirming that it really was for an illness would also be a huge issue.

 

Good idea...too many problems and cost.

[Thetrail]

I can afford to cruise and I can afford the insurance and yet I still don't get it. I like to live dangerously, and I know the companies that offer the policies will literally do everything and anything they can to keep from paying out one cent to anyone making a claim. The horror stories I have heard when it comes to dealing with those companies match anything I've heard from those not purchasing the insurance.

But the cruise insurance from RCL is very simple, cut and dried, you buy the insurance and can't go for whatever reason, weather, sickness, death in family, you get a future cruise certificate for another cruise, we have had this happen once, I believe it's .75 cents on the dollar, no fuss no muss, very simple.....:) So I guess my point is, your wrong when it comes to the cruise insurance you can choose through RCL.....

[SA Traveler]

We have had to make claims with RCI's Cruise Care, Travelguard and Access America and have never had a hassle. Filled out the claim form, attached required documentation, received a check - that simple.

 

What we would have saved in premiums over the last 20 years could be wiped out with one medical evacuation. We can't afford to self insure for that.

[LMaxwell]

If you travel anywhere beyond the borders of the United States and do not have some form of travel insurance to ensure you can receive medical treatment and transportation back to the US you are out of your mind.

[reney313]

I had thought the same--wondered if they offered to rebook on a different sailing for those with GI related illnesses leading up to the cruise, if it would reduce the chance of these large outbreaks. Then I decided with the extra cost of airfare, etc. many would still be "selfish" and cruise. The cruise cost for many of us who do not live near a port is the smallest "expense".

 

I tend to lean toward the requirement of insurance, but not just cruise insurance but total package (cruise+ hotel+ air) that would cover GI illnesses. I'm not sure if that is feasible or not, but maybe would be a small insurance cost that could be added when booking the cruise. They could also have the regular plans that would cover everything else and for other reasons.

 

It is an interesting concept. On one token, by not allowing cancellation prior to the cruise without financial loss, it is exacerbating the norovirus situation. On the other hand, how do you avoid the abuse.

 

*Note: While boarding last week for our Allure cruise, I could have sworn I saw or read or heard something that if you had been sick or were currently sick that they would offer a rebook of the same voyage on a different date. I can't for the life of me remember where I saw that though. I seem to recall being happy and surprised they were offering it. Or maybe I dreamt it...who knows. LOL.

[alfaeric]

Ditto!!!! If you can't afford the insurance then you really can't afford to cruise. Sorry but that is reality.

 

A program as suggested would only raise the cruise fares of others since someone must pay for it. We always buy insurance and would not appreciate cruise fare increases due to such an idea being implemented.

 

Question, you say if one can't afford cruise insurance, they should not be cruising, HOWEVER in the next sentace, if cruise insurance in baked into the price of the cruise, it would be bad, since you buy it.

 

I might have missed the point of the idea, but in essense, it's increasing the fare to include insurance. So for you, the price would not go up, it would stay the same. For others, it would go up, but would give all of the coverage.

 

Not sure how that is bad for people who already buy insurance...

 

Just curious.

[DrD]

Ditto!!!! If you can't afford the insurance then you really can't afford to cruise. Sorry but that is reality.

 

That's your opinion.

 

I feel just the opposite, if you have to buy insurance, you probably can't afford to cruise.

 

In the very unlikely event I have to cancel a cruise I'll just eat the cost and go next year. I lose the money either way. What people are really insuring is the ability to go on a cruise. In other words, if you cancel, lose the money, and that means you can never go on a cruise again, or not for a long time, then you need insurance. If OTOH you can afford to cruise again next year, then why take the insurance? (other than for medical evacuation which is really a different thing.)

 

We are limited much more by time off than money, so we don't buy insurance. After 14 cruises we are way ahead.

[ducklite]

That's your opinion.

 

I feel just the opposite, if you have to buy insurance, you probably can't afford to cruise.

 

In the very unlikely event I have to cancel a cruise I'll just eat the cost and go next year. I lose the money either way. What people are really insuring is the ability to go on a cruise. In other words, if you cancel, lose the money, and that means you can never go on a cruise again, or not for a long time, then you need insurance. If OTOH you can afford to cruise again next year, then why take the insurance? (other than for medical evacuation which is really a different thing.)

 

We are limited much more by time off than money, so we don't buy insurance. After 14 cruises we are way ahead.

 

It comes down to the cost of your cruise. Someone spending $1500 on a cruise who has a separate policy covering medical/evacuation probably has no reason to purchase trip insurance. However someone spending $20K on the trip (as we did on our last cruise vacation) would be rather foolish not to insure it.

 

Anyone leaving the country without medical and evacuation needs to either be rich or insured--medical evacuation can run $100K.

[amster65]

That's your opinion.

 

I feel just the opposite, if you have to buy insurance, you probably can't afford to cruise.

 

In the very unlikely event I have to cancel a cruise I'll just eat the cost and go next year. I lose the money either way. What people are really insuring is the ability to go on a cruise. In other words, if you cancel, lose the money, and that means you can never go on a cruise again, or not for a long time, then you need insurance. If OTOH you can afford to cruise again next year, then why take the insurance? (other than for medical evacuation which is really a different thing.)

 

We are limited much more by time off than money, so we don't buy insurance. After 14 cruises we are way ahead.

 

But you should deninitely get medical evac insurance, that can wipe yout out.

Big bucks...........

[ehfl]

Your body will develop immunity to Norovirus pretty quickly. Perhaps a better option would be to send a pill with norovirus to everyone 2 weeks before the cruise. If they, like most people, have immunity to it, then nothing would happen after taking it.

 

For those few that lack immunity, they would have 24 hours of discomfort at home (which is much better than having it on vacation!).

 

Taking it would be voluntary, of course. I would certainly do it. The most likely outcome is no reaction. The worst case, is that I know I won't get sick on my vacation. Sounds like a win-win for most people.

[galavant3]

I understand your very valid points but as a practical matter I'm not sure how you would screen 3,000 passengers to ensure that all were healthy when boarding the ship?

 

While I don't want to see anyone "game the system" either as it raises costs for everyone else, the discussion is how can you prevent (to a reasonable extent) passengers who know they are ill and likely to infect others from boarding. I think they best way is to offer them a way out whether they have insurance or not.

 

BTW, I do purchase the cruise insurance.

 

So interesting. I also buy insurance but I would like for there to be a way for sick passengers to postpone their trips. I agree that everyone should buy insurance but the reality is that they don't and they very likely travel when they are ill because they have no alternative.