News -HA may be banned from accessing US ports

[Copper10-8]

1 hour ago, 1ANGELCAT said:

I have to wonder if this information had made it to the Amsterdam yet , I wonder if Orlando and the rest of the top brass will still go ahead with the big event at  the Rijksmussen .

I believe it’s been mentioned in WCB thread from the world cruise that Hazel Donald is onboard for the full voyage,

Tough to be her.

 

You can bet that judge's displeasure as well as the violations listed has/have made it all the way to the top of the various board rooms, as well as to the management of all ships in the Carnival Corp. Mrs. Hazel D. has been onboard AMDM for the last four or so Grand World Voyages. What a nice, unassuming, low key and humble lady she is. Not many of AMDM's regular GWV pax know who she is and/or who she is married to, so I don't believe this news will have any impact on her enjoyment of her voyage and so it should be

[qoap24]

2 hours ago, Sir PMP said:

The impact on the economy should take last place here, destroying a pristine environment like Glacier Bay with dirty water should be everyone's main concern..

I absolutely agree with you. For me the best part of an Alaska cruise is seeing all the wild life from the ship. If they continue to destroy and pollute the waters, there will be little reason for some people to visit and that will have an impact on the economy. 

 

I have my first cruise booked on HAL for June. I have never cruised on Carnival and 1 time on Princess. But after reading this article I am truly disturbed by what I read. I have a cruised booked in 2020 on HAL. My family and I are going to be canceling that cruise. If we hadn't already made our final payment, we would be canceling the June cruise. Other's can disagree with me and that is ok as well. But I think if you can't play by the rules THAT YOU WERE WARNED ABOUT, then you shouldn't get to play the game. So I think they should be banned and somebody should be in jail. 

 

I know I am going to get flamed for this, but I can handle it. 🔥

[CruiserBruce]

I don't think you will get flamed...most everyone here has said it is really stupid that the Carnival family has behaved this way.

 

The two bigger questions in my mind is how to change the culture of the Corporation, and the appropriate penalty. The current government administration doesn't care about the environment, so appeals up the legal chain will probably not result in stiffer penalties being enforced. A penalty so severe it pushes Carnival out of business is highly unlikely....that sort of defeats the purpose. Penalties so severe they push companies out of business are fairly rare.

 

The idea that a CEO or Chairman of the Board spends time behind bars, while very satisfying, are also pretty rare. 

[Sailor Taylor]

Will it affect east coast too?  

 

I finally got our large family ranging from 20 to 92 booked on an awesome New England/Canada cruise on Zuidy (9/3/2019) but if the itinerary gets altered some of us will be bitterly disappointed.  

Edited April 13, 2019 by Sailor Taylor

[imescaping]

So, as has been said, the likelihood of the judge following through on the threat is low due to the harm that could be caused to innocent parties,  however, hypothetically, If the judge did impose the ban what would that mean to passengers already booked? Would Carnival refund? What about non refundable flights?  Is this something that would be covered by travel insurance? What about people who are thinking of booking? If it was covered by travel insurance for someone who booked prior to the news getting out about a possible ban, would it now not be covered for new bookings, you know like exclusions for once a hurricane is named, or workers strikes once they are announced. I have a cruise booked out of Fort Lauderdale this fall, and I am considering booking an Alaska this summer, (3 state rooms) I have mostly cruised Princess and HAL and really prefer them over RCCL and Celebrity  and don't want to risk losing thousands of dollars if they were to be banned from US ports.  I know the the risk is small, but not an impossibility.  

[chengkp75]

13 hours ago, frankc98376 said:

I agree 100%.  This would be appealed and wouldn't surprise me if new legislation is drafted to lower the requirements as environmental concerns don't seem to be at the top of the current priority list. 

As these are international requirements, there can be no lowering of the requirements.

[senorjim]

 
You can bet that judge's displeasure as well as the violations listed has/have made it all the way to the top of the various board rooms, as well as to the management of all ships in the Carnival Corp. Mrs. Hazel D. has been onboard AMDM for the last four or so Grand World Voyages. What a nice, unassuming, low key and humble lady she is. Not many of AMDM's regular GWV pax know who she is and/or who she is married to, so I don't believe this news will have any impact on her enjoyment of her voyage and so it should be

Hi John,
Don’t think we’ve met. I’ll be boarding Veendam tomorrow (if it makes it out of dry dock). :) haven’t cruised since last February on the grand voyage on Prinsendam so wonder if ISO-14001 is still happening at HAL? For those that don’t know, it’s an environmental program. Used to hear lots of talk about it but most staff other than officers I met knew nothing about it. Some would say”oh ya I think they showed us a video. This program requires 100% buy in from the very top all the way down. It’s a huge undertaking to implement.

Thanks, Jim


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LF23]

😳 February 

 

Roger Frizzell: “From the very beginning, we have made the environment one of our most important priorities, as our very existence is tied to protecting the oceans, seas and communities in which we operate. With more than 120 000 employees, most of whom live and work at sea, our commitment to protecting and maintaining healthy oceans, seas and local communities is not just an operating necessity.” 

 

https://www.lngindustry.com/small-scale-lng/21032019/carnival-corp-wins-greenest-shipowner-of-the-year-neptune-award/

 

 

[3rdGenCunarder]

29 minutes ago, LF23 said:

😳 February 

 

Roger Frizzell: “From the very beginning, we have made the environment one of our most important priorities, as our very existence is tied to protecting the oceans, seas and communities in which we operate. With more than 120 000 employees, most of whom live and work at sea, our commitment to protecting and maintaining healthy oceans, seas and local communities is not just an operating necessity.” 

 

https://www.lngindustry.com/small-scale-lng/21032019/carnival-corp-wins-greenest-shipowner-of-the-year-neptune-award/

 

 

 

Thanks for the link. Ironic that HAL seems to be doing well with modern technology to be cleaner in how they use fuel, while their transgressions were mostly "old school" graywater, trash, etc. 

[leerathje]

Wow, was on the Koningsdam in January, and my dad loved it so much, he wanted to book Alaska in June 2020....he's rethinking that now with HAL and looking at NCL....not impressed!!

[RocketMan275]

Some of this ruling is absurd. 

 

The judge cited Carnival for "...preparing ships in advance of audits."  Inspecting ships for compliance prior to audits should be a common place occurrence.  Does the judge believe the corporation should wait until after the audits to learn if their ships are in compliance?

 

The judge also cited Carnival for corresponding with the Coast Guard about the definition of "major non-conformity".  Such attempts to clarify definitions are common in compliance inspections.  

 

[Copper10-8]

4 hours ago, senorjim said:

 

Hi John,
Don’t think we’ve met. I’ll be boarding Veendam tomorrow (if it makes it out of dry dock). 🙂 haven’t cruised since last February on the grand voyage on Prinsendam so wonder if ISO-14001 is still happening at HAL? For those that don’t know, it’s an environmental program. Used to hear lots of talk about it but most staff other than officers I met knew nothing about it. Some would say”oh ya I think they showed us a video. This program requires 100% buy in from the very top all the way down. It’s a huge undertaking to implement.

Thanks, Jim


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Hi Jim

 

HAL's environmental management system was certified under ISO-14001 in 2006. One of the follow up's to it was the creation of the environmental officer, one of whom can be found on all fifteen ships. All crew receive training and instruction from the EO on ISO-14001 which is good for a certain time period and then has to be retaken. So yes, ISO-14001 is still "happening" at HAL

 

Have a great time on VEDM across the pond to Civitavecchia!

[Fouremco]

22 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Some of this ruling is absurd. 

 

The judge cited Carnival for "...preparing ships in advance of audits."  Inspecting ships for compliance prior to audits should be a common place occurrence.  Does the judge believe the corporation should wait until after the audits to learn if their ships are in compliance?

 

The judge also cited Carnival for corresponding with the Coast Guard about the definition of "major non-conformity".  Such attempts to clarify definitions are common in compliance inspections.  

 

Unfortunately, the media reports provide very little detail. If Carnival was preparing ships in advance of audits with temporary fixes that would be reversed post audit, for example, the criticism is warranted. 

 

As for your second point, while Carnival claimed that they were only seeking clarification of the definition, the article states that "Holland America Group’s senior vice president for safety, environmental & management services, emailed his former colleagues at the Coast Guard seeking support for Carnival’s definition, according to federal prosecutors." Again, there is insufficient detail to determine solely on the basis of the media reporting whether this was an innocent attempt by Carnival to simply clarify the definition, or really an attempt to influence the interpretation of the definition in a manner more favourable to them.

 

Lacking far greater detail, I think it's a bit premature to call these parts of the ruling absurd. Given everything else in the case, I for one am not inclined to give Carnival the benefit of the doubt.

[senorjim]

 
Hi Jim
 
HAL's environmental management system was certified under ISO-14001 in 2006. One of the follow up's to it was the creation of the environmental officer, one of whom can be found on all fifteen ships. All crew receive training and instruction from the EO on ISO-14001 which is good for a certain time period and then has to be retaken. So yes, ISO-14001 is still "happening" at HAL
 
Have a great time on VEDM across the pond to Civitavecchia!

Great news!
Thanks for the update.
Jim


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RocketMan275]

14 minutes ago, Fouremco said:

Unfortunately, the media reports provide very little detail. If Carnival was preparing ships in advance of audits with temporary fixes that would be reversed post audit, for example, the criticism is warranted. 

 

As for your second point, while Carnival claimed that they were only seeking clarification of the definition, the article states that "Holland America Group’s senior vice president for safety, environmental & management services, emailed his former colleagues at the Coast Guard seeking support for Carnival’s definition, according to federal prosecutors." Again, there is insufficient detail to determine solely on the basis of the media reporting whether this was an innocent attempt by Carnival to simply clarify the definition, or really an attempt to influence the interpretation of the definition in a manner more favourable to them.

 

Lacking far greater detail, I think it's a bit premature to call these parts of the ruling absurd. Given everything else in the case, I for one am not inclined to give Carnival the benefit of the doubt.

Perhaps, but it does raise credibility issues about these reports.  I think it would be wise to avoid condemnation of the cruise line based upon these reports.

[slidergirl]

58 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Some of this ruling is absurd. 

 

The judge cited Carnival for "...preparing ships in advance of audits."  Inspecting ships for compliance prior to audits should be a common place occurrence.  Does the judge believe the corporation should wait until after the audits to learn if their ships are in compliance?

 

The judge also cited Carnival for corresponding with the Coast Guard about the definition of "major non-conformity".  Such attempts to clarify definitions are common in compliance inspections.  

 

Not absurd.  Only making fixes to pass compliance and then going back to "business as usual" is not unheard of.  In most businesses, there are ways to find out when you may get your audit/inspection.   Even in my business (hotels), for some reason we seem to find out when the secret Forbes inspector will be coming, who it is, get a photo.  We make sure the room they get is done extra-special and inspected by the Director of HK, have supervisors and managers at the Front Desk at all time to take phone calls, talk to the "guest", using all the required verbiage, have extra bellmen available just in case the "guest" has a request, etc.  When the "guest" leaves, we basically go back to business as usual...

 

It is about time that business are punished in the only way they know for ignoring/abusing environmental laws - hit them in the pocketbook big-time.  If some cruisers don't get their cruise, they can sue the Corp.  

[SilvertoGold]

7 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

Not absurd.  Only making fixes to pass compliance and then going back to "business as usual" is not unheard of.  In most businesses, there are ways to find out when you may get your audit/inspection.   Even in my business (hotels), for some reason we seem to find out when the secret Forbes inspector will be coming, who it is, get a photo.  We make sure the room they get is done extra-special and inspected by the Director of HK, have supervisors and managers at the Front Desk at all time to take phone calls, talk to the "guest", using all the required verbiage, have extra bellmen available just in case the "guest" has a request, etc.  When the "guest" leaves, we basically go back to business as usual...

 

It is about time that business are punished in the only way they know for ignoring/abusing environmental laws - hit them in the pocketbook big-time.  If some cruisers don't get their cruise, they can sue the Corp.  

 

How you prep for and treat an inspector makes for interesting reading.  Did you ever get the impression that any inspector figures this out?  That sort of over-the-top treatment cold make them suspicious.

[slidergirl]

11 minutes ago, SilvertoGold said:

 

How you prep for and treat an inspector makes for interesting reading.  Did you ever get the impression that any inspector figures this out?  That sort of over-the-top treatment cold make them suspicious.

 

I can't imagine they don't realize.  Every hotel I've worked at that does Forbes has done the same thing.  Forbes inspectors will not do anything to try to trick, but there are 400+ items they will "test" on.  We make sure everyone is "refreshed" on the standards for their job and department.   I've had a young couple with a 5 year-old, a gay couple, a single woman, a single man, an older couple at various times as my inspector.   

Also, there are people at the hotels that go through reservations and mark them as "possible inspectors" - so we have multiple times to go over standards.  

My current hotel will never reach 5 star because we do not have 24 hour room service and year-round dedicated concierge.  But, we are a solid 4 star over all and our last inspection we scored 92% on service, which would be 5 stars - it was a better service score than our sister property, who is a legit 5 star property.  I was the person who did the check-in of our last inspector - proud to say I scored 100% on the report.  I got a $100 bonus for that!

 

Edited April 13, 2019 by slidergirl

[RocketMan275]

13 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

Not absurd.  Only making fixes to pass compliance and then going back to "business as usual" is not unheard of.  In most businesses, there are ways to find out when you may get your audit/inspection.   Even in my business (hotels), for some reason we seem to find out when the secret Forbes inspector will be coming, who it is, get a photo.  We make sure the room they get is done extra-special and inspected by the Director of HK, have supervisors and managers at the Front Desk at all time to take phone calls, talk to the "guest", using all the required verbiage, have extra bellmen available just in case the "guest" has a request, etc.  When the "guest" leaves, we basically go back to business as usual...

 

It is about time that business are punished in the only way they know for ignoring/abusing environmental laws - hit them in the pocketbook big-time.  If some cruisers don't get their cruise, they can sue the Corp.  

Government compliance inspections are a bit different.  I had a complete Quality Assurance division reporting to me.    We expected the contractor to conduct his own inspections on a regular basis to insure compliance.   We 'inspected' the results of these contractor 'internal inspections' to ensure these inspections were conducted and that corrective actions were identified and that there was follow-up.  It would be a sign of concern should these internal inspections identify the same deficiencies inspection after inspection.  We also conducted our own independent inspections in addition to these internal inspections.  The contractor inspections would be conducted on a more frequent basis than the government inspections.  However, it wasn't unheard of for the government to implement 100% inspections.  (We dealt with ammunition and explosives.  Non-compliance could cost lives.)

 

 

[slidergirl]

2 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

Government compliance inspections are a bit different.  I had a complete Quality Assurance division reporting to me.    We expected the contractor to conduct his own inspections on a regular basis to insure compliance.   We 'inspected' the results of these contractor 'internal inspections' to ensure these inspections were conducted and that corrective actions were identified and that there was follow-up.  It would be a sign of concern should these internal inspections identify the same deficiencies inspection after inspection.  We also conducted our own independent inspections in addition to these internal inspections.  The contractor inspections would be conducted on a more frequent basis than the government inspections.  However, it wasn't unheard of for the government to implement 100% inspections.  (We dealt with ammunition and explosives.  Non-compliance could cost lives.)

 

 

 

Back in the day, I was in QA for a defense contractor.  It was always a "busy" time right before a compliance inspection...  We weren't a life&death contract, but there was the usual "get this done/fixed by next Tuesday" stuff to be sure things were OK for inspection...

[Hawaiidan]

18 hours ago, JeffElizabeth said:

Wonder if cruise ships will start to become persona non grata due in part to these violations. Give more excuses for places like Bonaire to ban them. Or restrict how many passengers can come per year. 

very well might.....Venice has or is doing it... Disneyland and World are doing it ( insome cases disney  visitors now have to  have a park reservation... they can not just  show up and buy a ticket    Face it  the cruise  industry has grown  at an alarming pace since 1980....  ships used to be 500 to 800.   with newer ships that are floating cities of 3000 to 5000 they are overwhelming many ports.   When I lived in Kona,  when  more than 2 ships were in port the out-numbered the residents....      Capacity control has been used by airlines , hotels and cruises to manage travelers.       Now, it maybe that the ports are turning to  "capacity" control"    The result will be lines cutting deals with ports to get special treatment...  Fares will rise if you want to visit some ports that only a few " favored  ships are allowed in'        In Hawaii a $enator used to get $ent lo$t luggage from cruise$.... filled with green $tuff on a regular bais$...     Funny how that works?

Supply and demand will set the stage for new demand pricing........ hang on

Edited April 13, 2019 by Hawaiidan

[SilvertoGold]

8 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

 

I can't imagine they don't realize.  Every hotel I've worked at that does Forbes has done the same thing.  Forbes inspectors will not do anything to try to trick, but there are 400+ items they will "test" on.  We make sure everyone is "refreshed" on the standards for their job and department.   I've had a young couple with a 5 year-old, a gay couple, a single woman, a single man, an older couple at various times as my inspector.   

Also, there are people at the hotels that go through reservations and mark them as "possible inspectors" - so we have multiple times to go over standards.  

My current hotel will never reach 5 star because we do not have 24 hour room service and year-round dedicated concierge.  But, we are a solid 4 star over all and our last inspection we scored 92% on service, which would be 5 stars - it was a better service score than our sister property, who is a legit 5 star property.  I was the person who did the check-in of our last inspector - proud to say I scored 100% on the report.  I got a $100 bonus for that!

 

 

Thank you.  This is enormously interesting.  Congrats on your 92% and your personal 100%!!

Edited April 13, 2019 by SilvertoGold

[RocketMan275]

2 minutes ago, slidergirl said:

 

Back in the day, I was in QA for a defense contractor.  It was always a "busy" time right before a compliance inspection...  We weren't a life&death contract, but there was the usual "get this done/fixed by next Tuesday" stuff to be sure things were OK for inspection...

Well, then you know what I'm talking about.  We made sure the contractor implement extensive records keeping.  We inspected these records to ensure the contractor was following procedures.  We cross-checked these records too.   If the records indicated that a unique piece of inspection equipment was out of service, there shouldn't be any records indicating that inspections were performed while the equipment was available.  And, we found some issues.  Once we shut a major ammunition production line down for months.  

 

BTW, I'm not defending Carnival so much as I'm pointing out the poor reporting in this article.  That piece of journalism just doesn't support some of the comments in this thread.

[frankc98376]

The first I read about this was from an attorney site. My first reaction is the same as when I see commercials on TV saying that they will get you lots of cash from your car accident.

So much press about this- each story I see makes it sound worse. I think that the Westerdam incident was one person's poor judgement. HAL put gas turbine engine on Vista ships for locations like Alaska. I found a cruise log from 2013 Alaska on Oosterdam showing how much jet fuel the ship used on our cruise. Will wait to see what happens in June before I condemn CCL and all of their brands.

[Ken the cruiser]

It's funny, we were on a 14 day Alaska cruise on the Amsterdam in Jul 2017. We had just got back from an Anchorage excursion and were standing on our balcony watching folks come back to the ship when we saw a foamy substance floating on the water by the ship covering around 2,000 sq feet or so if I had to guess. We thought whatever was being dumped from the ship was safe because why would HAL so obviously be dumping this stuff in the water while docked. But after reading this article, I'm now not so sure.