Norwegian Cruise Line Bans Smoking on Balconies

[johnql]

... at table games, players must be seated to play.

Not true. Or at least not enforced. I have often stood up while playing blackjack in order to stretch my legs. I've never been told that I need to be seated in order to play.

[dangler25]

Totally agree. I wrote a letter to Mr Sheehan, not an email. I actually got a response from one of his staff today in the way of a telephone interview.

Who knows if it made a difference, but at least I was able to voice my opinion and let them know my feelings on the subject.

 

talk about beating a dead dog....its ncl's pocket that just needs to be hit,myself if i didnt have a garden ville planned i would jump ship too :D

[CasinoCruzGirl]

Totally agree. I wrote a letter to Mr Sheehan, not an email. I actually got a response from one of his staff today in the way of a telephone interview.

Who knows if it made a difference, but at least I was able to voice my opinion and let them know my feelings on the subject.

 

 

What was the letter about. I know smoking but what is your opinion.

[Out to sea!]

Totally agree. I wrote a letter to Mr Sheehan, not an email. I actually got a response from one of his staff today in the way of a telephone interview.

Who knows if it made a difference, but at least I was able to voice my opinion and let them know my feelings on the subject.

 

Which are? (if you don't mind me asking) :confused:

[dangler25]

In the letter I had said that I wouldn't be cruising anymore on lines where balcony smoking was not allowed. I have one booked for November, and told them that since I couldn't cancel flights, I would go, but would not spend anything on NCL sponsored shore excursions, drinks, gift shop purchases etc.

I explained that I did agree with no cabin smoking, but felt that NCL and other lines were not willing to accommodate this minority, who also spend their disposable income, by allowing some cabins to be balcony smoking, with the understanding that when you booked, you had no right to complain one way or the other depending on which type you booked. The person I spoke with did not have a specific set of questions, we discussed my opinion, the opinions of non smokers and industry wide changes- the main concern I felt, was my saying I would not cruise again. I'm not a person who only does cruises, but I did enjoy the freestyle cruising offered by NCL. I also pointed out that in my opinion, smoking being allowed only while actively gambling was nothing more than a cash grab, and did not correspond with their "policy" of making the cruise safer for all customers. In regards to the e-cigarettes- which I have used, I explained that I felt this was totally ridiculous- if it looks like a duck- it must be a duck?? Anyone who has used them knows that a great majority of them look nothing like a cigarette- and for the ones that do-right back to the duck!! And a great many of the people who use them do not use nicotine- that is an option- it is not standard in all e-cigarettes. They also range in flavors from bubble gum and cinnamon, to pipe tobacco and cigarette flavor.

I try not to post on here because, as I pointed out to her, there are smokers with strong opinions, and non smokers with strong opinions- to say one is right or wrong is very narrow minded. Any one of a number of groups is in the "minority" in society. I just want to be given the option to smoke- on a balcony that I also have paid for- and of their choosing if that is the case.

And yes- I've heard all the comments- good- stay home, more balconies for us non smokers. Again- you have the right to have that opinion. I also have a right to mine. I am fine with all inclusives, bus tours in Europe, there are so many other options out there. I will not stop travelling, I will just travel differently.

 

Inquiring minds wanna know lol. I'm curious to and as to what kind of questions they asked

[CasinoCruzGirl]

In the letter I had said that I wouldn't be cruising anymore on lines where balcony smoking was not allowed. I have one booked for November, and told them that since I couldn't cancel flights, I would go, but would not spend anything on NCL sponsored shore excursions, drinks, gift shop purchases etc.

I explained that I did agree with no cabin smoking, but felt that NCL and other lines were not willing to accommodate this minority, who also spend their disposable income, by allowing some cabins to be balcony smoking, with the understanding that when you booked, you had no right to complain one way or the other depending on which type you booked. The person I spoke with did not have a specific set of questions, we discussed my opinion, the opinions of non smokers and industry wide changes- the main concern I felt, was my saying I would not cruise again. I'm not a person who only does cruises, but I did enjoy the freestyle cruising offered by NCL. I also pointed out that in my opinion, smoking being allowed only while actively gambling was nothing more than a cash grab, and did not correspond with their "policy" of making the cruise safer for all customers. In regards to the e-cigarettes- which I have used, I explained that I felt this was totally ridiculous- if it looks like a duck- it must be a duck?? Anyone who has used them knows that a great majority of them look nothing like a cigarette- and for the ones that do-right back to the duck!! And a great many of the people who use them do not use nicotine- that is an option- it is not standard in all e-cigarettes. They also range in flavors from bubble gum and cinnamon, to pipe tobacco and cigarette flavor.

I try not to post on here because, as I pointed out to her, there are smokers with strong opinions, and non smokers with strong opinions- to say one is right or wrong is very narrow minded. Any one of a number of groups is in the "minority" in society. I just want to be given the option to smoke- on a balcony that I also have paid for- and of their choosing if that is the case.

And yes- I've heard all the comments- good- stay home, more balconies for us non smokers. Again- you have the right to have that opinion. I also have a right to mine. I am fine with all inclusives, bus tours in Europe, there are so many other options out there. I will not stop travelling, I will just travel differently.

 

Very good. Happy travels wherever you end up going

 

I do wonder in the end what kind of dollar impact this change has made.

[Out to sea!]

In the letter I had said that I wouldn't be cruising anymore on lines where balcony smoking was not allowed. I have one booked for November, and told them that since I couldn't cancel flights, I would go, but would not spend anything on NCL sponsored shore excursions, drinks, gift shop purchases etc.

I explained that I did agree with no cabin smoking, but felt that NCL and other lines were not willing to accommodate this minority, who also spend their disposable income, by allowing some cabins to be balcony smoking, with the understanding that when you booked, you had no right to complain one way or the other depending on which type you booked. The person I spoke with did not have a specific set of questions, we discussed my opinion, the opinions of non smokers and industry wide changes- the main concern I felt, was my saying I would not cruise again. I'm not a person who only does cruises, but I did enjoy the freestyle cruising offered by NCL. I also pointed out that in my opinion, smoking being allowed only while actively gambling was nothing more than a cash grab, and did not correspond with their "policy" of making the cruise safer for all customers. In regards to the e-cigarettes- which I have used, I explained that I felt this was totally ridiculous- if it looks like a duck- it must be a duck?? Anyone who has used them knows that a great majority of them look nothing like a cigarette- and for the ones that do-right back to the duck!! And a great many of the people who use them do not use nicotine- that is an option- it is not standard in all e-cigarettes. They also range in flavors from bubble gum and cinnamon, to pipe tobacco and cigarette flavor.

I try not to post on here because, as I pointed out to her, there are smokers with strong opinions, and non smokers with strong opinions- to say one is right or wrong is very narrow minded. Any one of a number of groups is in the "minority" in society. I just want to be given the option to smoke- on a balcony that I also have paid for- and of their choosing if that is the case.

And yes- I've heard all the comments- good- stay home, more balconies for us non smokers. Again- you have the right to have that opinion. I also have a right to mine. I am fine with all inclusives, bus tours in Europe, there are so many other options out there. I will not stop travelling, I will just travel differently.

 

Thank you for sharing. I'm glad you were actually able to get that off your chest to someone who actually has the power to make or modify policy.

[JulieAF]

I called NCL today to express my appreciation for changing their policy, so we may now enjoy our balcony cabins.

 

I encourage others who are pleased with the new fresh air policy to do the same. As the majority, our concerns were heard. Remain the squeaky wheel!!

 

I am also writing to Mr. Sheehan to praise his sensibility.

[hftmrock]

For all of those who have followed this thread and may still be unsure just how wrong it is for NCL to restrict electronic cigarette use to places where people will be smoking real cigarettes, there is a new paper on the subject from some of the top scientists in the field, published in Addiction Journal.

 

While it is necessary to purchase the full paper, the abstract of the paper is freely available.

 

Here is that part of the abstract that concerns results of their study:

 

"EC [electronic cigarette] aerosol can contain some of the toxicants present in tobacco smoke, but at levels which are much lower. Long-term health effects of EC use are unknown but compared with cigarettes, EC are likely to be much less, if at all, harmful to users or bystanders. EC are increasingly popular among smokers, but to date there is no evidence of regular use by never-smokers or by non-smoking children. EC enable some users to reduce or quit smoking."

 

The authors go on to conclude that subjecting e-cigs to the same regulations and restrictions as real cigarettes is likely to harm public health, not help it.

 

The new NCL policy on e-cigs is not only based (openly, I might add) on hysteria and fears of false complaints, but is actively HARMFUL to e-cig users trying to quit tobacco. It is completely misguided.

 

I, too, will write a real letter to Mr. Shaheen - thanks for the idea.

 

Skallagrim

 

I certainly dont know if ecigs are harmful or not but I just want to say that in the 30s and 40s they said the same thing of how safe cigarettes were and how doctors were all recommending them...

 

basically we will just have to wait and see. its too early to tell. it took over 20 years before cigarettes were found to be harmful

[luvtheships]

I have read nearly all the smoking policy threads over the past ten years on the different cruise line boards as each has step by step restricted onboard smoking. NCL smokers have been the most childish in their response.

 

I will continue to complain about smoking onboard until all inside smoking is banned. I don't mind being called a complainer!

 

Like

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[gemsm]

In the letter I had said that I wouldn't be cruising anymore on lines where balcony smoking was not allowed. I have one booked for November, and told them that since I couldn't cancel flights, I would go, but would not spend anything on NCL sponsored shore excursions, drinks, gift shop purchases etc.

I explained that I did agree with no cabin smoking, but felt that NCL and other lines were not willing to accommodate this minority, who also spend their disposable income, by allowing some cabins to be balcony smoking, with the understanding that when you booked, you had no right to complain one way or the other depending on which type you booked. The person I spoke with did not have a specific set of questions, we discussed my opinion, the opinions of non smokers and industry wide changes- the main concern I felt, was my saying I would not cruise again. I'm not a person who only does cruises, but I did enjoy the freestyle cruising offered by NCL. I also pointed out that in my opinion, smoking being allowed only while actively gambling was nothing more than a cash grab, and did not correspond with their "policy" of making the cruise safer for all customers. In regards to the e-cigarettes- which I have used, I explained that I felt this was totally ridiculous- if it looks like a duck- it must be a duck?? Anyone who has used them knows that a great majority of them look nothing like a cigarette- and for the ones that do-right back to the duck!! And a great many of the people who use them do not use nicotine- that is an option- it is not standard in all e-cigarettes. They also range in flavors from bubble gum and cinnamon, to pipe tobacco and cigarette flavor.

I try not to post on here because, as I pointed out to her, there are smokers with strong opinions, and non smokers with strong opinions- to say one is right or wrong is very narrow minded. Any one of a number of groups is in the "minority" in society. I just want to be given the option to smoke- on a balcony that I also have paid for- and of their choosing if that is the case.

And yes- I've heard all the comments- good- stay home, more balconies for us non smokers. Again- you have the right to have that opinion. I also have a right to mine. I am fine with all inclusives, bus tours in Europe, there are so many other options out there. I will not stop travelling, I will just travel differently.

 

I think if they would just change their policy to allow e-cigarettes on balconies it would be a win/win for everyone

[mein18]

I think if they would just change their policy to allow e-cigarettes on balconies it would be a win/win for everyone

 

I agree however as their policy stated they are afraid of the balcony peekers seeing their neighbor with one of the few e-cigs that look like a real cigarette and having them tie up guest services while they complain about a smoker on their adjoining balcony. Its the only way they could tell is to peek around the divider.

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Forums mobile app

[kjbacon]

I agree however as their policy stated they are afraid of the balcony peekers seeing their neighbor with one of the few e-cigs that look like a real cigarette and having them tie up guest services while they complain about a smoker on their adjoining balcony. Its the only way they could tell is to peek around the divider.

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Forums mobile app

 

Given all of the hitches with every idea, this could be one of the better ideas. No one is going to be peaking around if they don't smell cigarette smoke. As a former smoker, I do feel for those who use the ecigs as their quit method who have to go to the smoker area to use them. I would so prefer allowing ecigs on balconies over smoking in the casino any day.

[sjbdtz]

I also pointed out that in my opinion, smoking being allowed only while actively gambling was nothing more than a cash grab, and did not correspond with their "policy" of making the cruise safer for all customers.

 

And a great many of the people who use them do not use nicotine- that is an option- it is not standard in all e-cigarettes. They also range in flavors from bubble gum and cinnamon, to pipe tobacco and cigarette flavor.

 

 

Only 2 quick comments:

 

1. As to the casino, there are only X number of seats (or places) around the tables, and only Y number of machines. When at least part of X & Y are occupied by non-smokers, the fact is that preventing all of the smokers onboard to congregate around those tables & machines, in fact will be safer than allowing it.

 

 

2. To you, those 'flavors' sound appealing. To people who are scent-sensitive, those 'flavors' - also known as 'smells', may induce migraines. Plus, I'm not convinced that the science is in yet, on having to inhale the chemicals which produce those smells - not as a user who has chosen to do so, but by an innocent by-stander who is forced to do so by somebody else's choice.

 

 

I'm just saying...a stick of gum would help the smoker just as much, and wouldn't have any potential harm to bystanders.

 

 

 

.

[jackson bernard]

Only 2 quick comments:

 

1. As to the casino, there are only X number of seats (or places) around the tables, and only Y number of machines. When at least part of X & Y are occupied by non-smokers, the fact is that preventing all of the smokers onboard to congregate around those tables & machines, in fact will be safer than allowing it.

 

 

2. To you, those 'flavors' sound appealing. To people who are scent-sensitive, those 'flavors' - also known as 'smells', may induce migraines. Plus, I'm not convinced that the science is in yet, on having to inhale the chemicals which produce those smells - not as a user who has chosen to do so, but by an innocent by-stander who is forced to do so by somebody else's choice.

 

 

I'm just saying...a stick of gum would help the smoker just as much, and wouldn't have any potential harm to bystanders.

 

 

 

.

 

Same goes for cologne

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Forums mobile app

[swedish weave]

To add my two cents to the discussion about E-cigs being less harmful than cigarettes.

 

I remember when they first started putting filters on cigarettes and they were advertised as safer with less tar and nicotine.

[Ewoodspark]

 

I remember when they first started putting filters on cigarettes and they were advertised as safer with less tar and nicotine.

 

And your point is what?

[JenLovesToTravel]

And your point is what?

 

While I can't speak to what the poster was thinking. It's likely that they are suggesting that an advertiser or user can claim something is harmless right up until the point that it is proven harmless. Proving harmfulness takes time and history has shown this to have devastating effects with asbestos, cigarettes, topical creams and medicines, food additives, medications, environmental pollution...

 

It's a health conscious, conservative stance to allow people to protect themselves with some additional limitations. If in 20-30 years the e-cigs are still not deemed (through medical science) harmful, then it's likely that the cruise lines will gladly hand back some additional locations to utilize them and likewise, non-smokers will have less resistance as well.

 

Personally I like the better safe than sorry route. E Cig users can still use them. It would be nice for the cruise lines to consider that their use is often to curtail the cigarette habit and provide a separate area for their use that doesn't tempt anyone to go back to the more harmful option.

 

Bottom line, though, is that the cruise line is there to protect "the many" and themselves. They are a business and don't owe smokers or ecig users anything except what they choose to offer them.

[Skallagrim]

To add my two cents to the discussion about E-cigs being less harmful than cigarettes.

 

I remember when they first started putting filters on cigarettes and they were advertised as safer with less tar and nicotine.

 

And I recall (from history books) when they first started pasteurizing milk.

 

A lot of people afraid of the new-fangled technology continued to get sick from bacteria in commercially produced but non-pateurized milk, insisting that pasteurization had not been proven safe.

 

So your point is?

[Skallagrim]

While I can't speak to what the poster was thinking. It's likely that they are suggesting that an advertiser or user can claim something is harmless right up until the point that it is proven harmless. Proving harmfulness takes time and history has shown this to have devastating effects with asbestos, cigarettes, topical creams and medicines, food additives, medications, environmental pollution...

 

It's a health conscious, conservative stance to allow people to protect themselves with some additional limitations. If in 20-30 years the e-cigs are still not deemed (through medical science) harmful, then it's likely that the cruise lines will gladly hand back some additional locations to utilize them and likewise, non-smokers will have less resistance as well.

 

Personally I like the better safe than sorry route. E Cig users can still use them. It would be nice for the cruise lines to consider that their use is often to curtail the cigarette habit and provide a separate area for their use that doesn't tempt anyone to go back to the more harmful option.

 

Bottom line, though, is that the cruise line is there to protect "the many" and themselves. They are a business and don't owe smokers or ecig users anything except what they choose to offer them.

 

No one has yet proven that cell phones do not cause brain tumors. In fact there was at least one study that concluded they might. :eek:

 

Cell phones should be banned until proven safe!

 

:rolleyes:

 

PS - "[T]he cruise line is there to protect "the many" and themselves. They are a business and don't owe NON-smokers anything except what they choose to offer them" is also a true statement.

Edited August 1, 2014 by Skallagrim

[mein18]

Given all of the hitches with every idea, this could be one of the better ideas. No one is going to be peaking around if they don't smell cigarette smoke. As a former smoker, I do feel for those who use the ecigs as their quit method who have to go to the smoker area to use them. I would so prefer allowing ecigs on balconies over smoking in the casino any day.

 

Even when I smoked I would never indoors anywhere and did not enjoy the casinos due to the smoke. Now with using e-cigs it is that much worse as the smell albeit bad makes one all too tempted.

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Forums mobile app

[mein18]

Only 2 quick comments:

 

1. As to the casino, there are only X number of seats (or places) around the tables, and only Y number of machines. When at least part of X & Y are occupied by non-smokers, the fact is that preventing all of the smokers onboard to congregate around those tables & machines, in fact will be safer than allowing it.

 

 

2. To you, those 'flavors' sound appealing. To people who are scent-sensitive, those 'flavors' - also known as 'smells', may induce migraines. Plus, I'm not convinced that the science is in yet, on having to inhale the chemicals which produce those smells - not as a user who has chosen to do so, but by an innocent by-stander who is forced to do so by somebody else's choice.

 

 

I'm just saying...a stick of gum would help the smoker just as much, and wouldn't have any potential harm to bystanders.

 

 

 

.

 

Stick of gum? Who are you kidding?

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Forums mobile app

[mein18]

Same goes for cologne

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using Forums mobile app

 

I cannot go into a cologne store or a candle store due to allergies. I wont detail what happens. Cologne ban? I would certainly like that.

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Forums mobile app

[swedish weave]

And your point is what?

 

My point is that these arguments are just plain silly !!!!!

 

You can find ads with studies and reports to support any stance you choose to take.

 

NCL has made the decision how they are going to handle smoking and E-cigs on their ships, and our choice is to sail with them or not.

[mein18]

While I can't speak to what the poster was thinking. It's likely that they are suggesting that an advertiser or user can claim something is harmless right up until the point that it is proven harmless. Proving harmfulness takes time and history has shown this to have devastating effects with asbestos, cigarettes, topical creams and medicines, food additives, medications, environmental pollution...

 

It's a health conscious, conservative stance to allow people to protect themselves with some additional limitations. If in 20-30 years the e-cigs are still not deemed (through medical science) harmful, then it's likely that the cruise lines will gladly hand back some additional locations to utilize them and likewise, non-smokers will have less resistance as well.

 

Personally I like the better safe than sorry route. E Cig users can still use them. It would be nice for the cruise lines to consider that their use is often to curtail the cigarette habit and provide a separate area for their use that doesn't tempt anyone to go back to the more harmful option.

 

Bottom line, though, is that the cruise line is there to protect "the many" and themselves. They are a business and don't owe smokers or ecig users anything except what they choose to offer them.

 

But it is not for any of these reasons that NCL is bannin e-cigs. They made it quite clear that they do not want to have to deal with the balcony peekers and complain addicted passengers on the ships. If they used those reasons albeit still wrong may make the e-cig ban a little more sensible and accepted.

 

 

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Forums mobile app