Will U.S. Passengers Comply with the Covid Requirements On Board?

[jocap]

12 hours ago, babs135 said:

And here's an example of an idiot, except it was Pringles, not peanuts.

https://www.dailystar.co.uk/travel/travel-news/man-avoids-wearing-face-mask-22622495

From Huddersfield- and his county, Kirklees- is teetering on the edge of going into Tier 3, so I hope he enjoys the enforced lockdown when it comes.

A tube of Pringles salt and vinegar won't be much help then... 

[sail7seas]

5 hours ago, cbr663 said:

 

Yours is a great example of the challenges with compliance.

 

I haven't eaten or dined out anywhere since the pandemic began.  I can tell you though that several weeks ago I have the unfortunate experience of being in an ER.  There was a guy there waiting who lowered his mask to eat a pastry and drink his coffee and he kept it lowered while eating.  The ER nursed immediately approached him and advised him that he is only to lower his mask to take a bite or a sip and must then raise it and cover his most and nose to chew and swallow.

 

The takeaway for me is that regardless of the reason why, every time that you lower that mask you are putting yourself and others at risk.

 

 

 

Room Service is likely to get Very busy especially in Caribbean and a  suite guest with verandah or an y cabin with a  balcony

 

 

[sail7seas]

3 hours ago, sanger727 said:

It is not bad. It’s manageable. If I lived where some of the other posters lived and had to pull it down for every bite, I don’t think I would go out to eat. That just sounds crazy to me. Buuuut. It is clearly obvious where I live that mask wearing is waning and our state is also skyrocketing in case. So we may not be a good example.

 

 

 

Any  clues as to locale of where you are speaking?

 

 

[cbr663]

4 hours ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

Thank you.

 

I haven't dined out a lot since the pandemic began but when I have done it I haven't seen anyone, staff or guests, wearing a mask. I have seen a few in the grocery store but not many and most times I go there I don't see anyone wear a mask.

 

Masks are not required or even recommended anywhere here so almost noone wear one. 

 

This may sound off topic but I don't think that it is. How good people will follow the rules may depend on how strict the rules are. I will defenitely follow every possible rule but if the rule is that masks shall be used I will rather stay at home.

 

You bring up another great point.  Masks are not required in Sweden and almost no one wears one whereas in my corner of the world in Ontario, Canada, masks are required to be worn in any interior public area.  There is no common set of rules anywhere in the world.  In Canada, different provinces have different rules and different cities have different rules.  So I imagine that no only will different cruise lines have different rules, but the rules may very well change from ship to ship.

 

Every port can also have different rules and that restrictions can change over night depending on outbreaks or even low numbers and the lifting of restrictions and you have the reality that cruise passengers have a tremendous responsibility to know the rules before they can follow them.  

 

There will definitely be cruisers who will simply not adhere to restrictions but I wonder how many will not follow them because they simply did not take the time to familiarize themselves with them?

[cruizergal70]

1 minute ago, fyree39 said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/violated-protocols-cruiser-carnival-corp-133310061.html

 

It didn't work out so well for this AIDA passenger.

 

That AIDA was from Italy. Americans are a different breed.

[donaldsc]

Based on how well many of us have followed most of the other Covid safety requirements, I doubt that many Americans will comply with the rules.  I predict that if the companies actually enforce their rules, a large number of people will end up getting kicked off their ships.  I also predict that a lot of these people will try to sue the cruise companies for kicking them off the ship.

 

DON

[Roz]

On 10/21/2020 at 9:20 PM, jtwind said:

I believe there will be trouble.  In my personal experience, and in VERY GENERAL terms, the cautious, always masked up and social distanced folks are still not interested in flying or eating their meals indoors at restaurants.  The same folks who are currently eating indoors at restaurants are the ones that I'm always having to back away from because they are too close for comfort.  But I would be so pissed if the crew wasn't doing their job and it became the responsibility of passengers to enforce this stuff.

 

I observe my city's mask directives, but I also eat indoors at a restaurant once or twice a week.  The 2 aren't mutually exclusive.  

[sanger727]

6 hours ago, fyree39 said:

https://www.yahoo.com/news/violated-protocols-cruiser-carnival-corp-133310061.html

 

It didn't work out so well for this AIDA passenger.

 

another shore excursion violation. Those are pretty black and white and easy to document and enforce. It’s the onboard ship violations that will only be witnessed by a crew member here and there that will be difficult to enforce

 

8 hours ago, sail7seas said:

 

 

 

Any  clues as to locale of where you are speaking?

 

 

Ohio. As I said, like many places in the country we are not a shining example right now of what to do. Our daily case load now is double what it was during our first week. And it’s not the result of more testing of asymptotic people - I know many more people who are sick with Covid right now than at any more time during the pandemic. For some reason despite all this, I see more and more people unmasked every day.

 

https://www.wlwt.com/article/ohio-reports-highest-single-day-increase-in-covid-19-cases-for-second-day-in-a-row/34452757#
 

 

Edited October 23, 2020 by sanger727

[cbr663]

18 hours ago, sanger727 said:

It is not bad. It’s manageable. If I lived where some of the other posters lived and had to pull it down for every bite, I don’t think I would go out to eat. That just sounds crazy to me. Buuuut. It is clearly obvious where I live that mask wearing is waning and our state is also skyrocketing in case. So we may not be a good example.

 

Your point is well taken.  At the beginning of the pandemic we were told that masks were not that effective as people don't wear them correctly and they cause people to constantly touch their face - the very thing we should all be avoiding. Having to constantly pull a face mask up and down while eating doesn't seem to offer any level of protection whatsoever.

 

FWIW:  The guy who was eating in the ER without wearing his face mask and then told he must wear it while eating simply stopped eating and threw his coffee and pastry away.

[sail7seas]

That seems to b e a reasonable solution.  IMO

🤗

 

Got his priorities sorted out

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mnocket]

16 hours ago, sail7seas said:

 

Any  clues as to locale of where you are speaking?

 

 

I'm guessing California.  Gov. Newsom made the inane statement that diners should wear a mask between bites when eating in a restaurant. Even more comical, he was standing in front of a poster that implored people to touch their masks a little as possible. As far as I know this is not actually a requirement in CA.

[Philob]

1 hour ago, mnocket said:

 

I'm guessing California.  Gov. Newsom made the inane statement that diners should wear a mask between bites when eating in a restaurant. Even more comical, he was standing in front of a poster that implored people to touch their masks a little as possible. As far as I know this is not actually a requirement in CA.

I'm in CA, technically masked between bites is required. I haven't been inside a restaurant since March except to pick up, but my observation of outdoor dining is very few people comply once the food arrives.

 

The restaurant association is pleading for people to comply because it protects the employees. As I mentioned earlier the primary purpose of masks is now to protect others from the wearer.

Edited October 23, 2020 by Philob

[sverigecruiser]

1 hour ago, Philob said:

I'm in CA, technically masked between bites is required.

 

Does people really enjoy eating in a restaurant under thoose circumstances? I should defenitely prefer to eat at home or just eat a sandwich in my car if a meal at home wasn't an option. 

[FredT]

What everyone is not thinking about is that cruise lines make lots (and LOTS) of money selling booze.....   And once drunk "HOW" many passengers are gonna rebel?  Like another poster pointed out, many different locations have different rules, many of them way more lax than the cruise lines probably will have.  There is bound to be resentment of those rules... and once you add 4-5 drinks (and the sun).....   good luck.  

 

Sit back, relax , and enjoy the show!  😁

Edited October 23, 2020 by FredT

[FredT]

4 minutes ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

Does people really enjoy eating in a restaurant under those circumstances? I should definitely prefer to eat at home or just eat a sandwich in my car if a meal at home wasn't an option. 

In central/northern Florida no one seems to wear a mask at restaurants, and here in Connecticut they are only required when "up" from the table....   (Yes we eat out a couple times a week, and NOT outside by the road!)

[Hlitner]

Fascinating thread.  I have been cruising (extensively) since 1975 and the attraction of being on a ship is that we love the sea, the atmosphere on most ships, to socialization with many fellow cruisers, and most importantly we have always found cruising (no matter where in the world) to be a lot of fun.  Just reading this thread has me thinking that cruises will no longer be fun, but will likely degenerate into the rule followers, the rule breakers, the self appointed police, the whiners, etc.  So one of the questions that DW and I now talk about is whether we should even bother with cruises for the next few years.  We have several 2021 cruises booked, (62 days) but will possibly cancel them all if the cruise lines do not cancel first (this is likely).

 

DW and I are already thinking about spending more time doing independent travel in the USA and Europe (if and when it opens) via rental/leased cars and some apartment rentals.  We are very comfortable driving anywhere in Europe and it is safest form of transportation in this COVID world.  It also gives us the freedom and flexibility to go where we please, when we please, with just ourselves.  Unlike the closed environment of a ship, when on land we can simply pick and choose where we want to go.  If we walk into a restaurant and it does not look safe we can simply walk out the door and hear to a different restaurant.   If a museum is too crowded we can simply leave and return another time when there is less of a crowd.

 

I think the cruise industry is now willing to sell their souls to convince various authorities to let them cruise..and various ports to open up to ships.  But somewhere along the way they are forgetting the reason that most folks cruise...because it is fun.  If they take the fun (and quality) out of a cruise vacation the demand will quickly dry up.

 

I do think that the luxury small ship cruise market will be well suited for the post COVID world and we will likely increase our cruising on lines like Seabourn.  Their vessels easily accommodate social distancing without being too intrusive on one's ability to have fun.  Ships of that category do not pack in folks like sardines and there is usually a level of decorum not always found on mass market ships.  While we have always enjoyed the mass market lines (as well as luxury lines) I just do not think the current situation is going to be handled well on those vessels.

 

Hank 

 

Hank

[Smokeyham]

23 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

I do think that the luxury small ship cruise market will be well suited for the post COVID world and we will likely increase our cruising on lines like Seabourn.  Their vessels easily accommodate social distancing without being too intrusive on one's ability to have fun.  Ships of that category do not pack in folks like sardines and there is usually a level of decorum not always found on mass market ships.  While we have always enjoyed the mass market lines (as well as luxury lines) I just do not think the current situation is going to be handled well on those vessels.

 

Hank

Hank,

 

Thank you for such a well-considered post.  I agree that the luxury small ship market will be better able to meet the requirements, and cruisers' preferences, in the post Covid world.   It will be interesting to watch what this does to pricing for such lines.

 

 

[navybankerteacher]

19 hours ago, cruizergal70 said:

That AIDA was from Italy. Americans are a different breed.

Not sure what this means.

 

Americans can get infected like everyone else - and are at least  as likely as anyone to think that they do not have to comply with rules they don’t like.  The only relevant characteristic I can imagine is their litigiousness - are you suggesting that fear of law suits might make lines carrying Americans less likely to enforce?

 

[K32682]

On 10/23/2020 at 2:09 AM, donaldsc said:

Based on how well many of us have followed most of the other Covid safety requirements, I doubt that many Americans will comply with the rules.  I predict that if the companies actually enforce their rules, a large number of people will end up getting kicked off their ships.  I also predict that a lot of these people will try to sue the cruise companies for kicking them off the ship.

 

DON

 

Were the cruise line to convince me they had appropriate protocols in place only to discover they weren't being enforced I'd be off at the next port. Once home I'd commence my own legal action, file reports to the relevant health authorities and amuse myself posting videos of noncompliant passengers on a variety of social media sites.

 

Cruise lines can either face lawsuits from anti-mask kooks who break the rules or from those of us who damn well expect the rules are enforced. The second choice is the better of the two. 

[navybankerteacher]

On 10/22/2020 at 4:29 PM, sverigecruiser said:

 

As long as masks are mandatory, yes.

Having masks “mandatory” is one thing - actually effectively enforcing it is totally different.  While lines may state that wearing masks is mandatory, I seriously doubt that such requirement will result in 100% compliance

[sanger727]

2 hours ago, K32682 said:

 

Were the cruise line to convince me they had appropriate protocols in place only to discover they weren't being enforced I'd be off at the next port. Once home I'd commence my own legal action, file reports to the relevant health authorities and amuse myself posting videos of noncompliant passengers on a variety of social media sites.

 

Cruise lines can either face lawsuits from anti-mask kooks who break the rules or from those of us who damn well expect the rules are enforced. The second choice is the better of the two. 

if this is if so much concern to you, wouldn’t it save you a lot of time, money, and trouble to simply wait to book? That’s my attitude. While I think they will be strict with shore excursions, temperatures, and Covid testing; I am very skeptical that they can and would be strict with more grey areas like masks and social distancing. So my preference is to wait for cruising to restart, give it a couple months to see how it actually works, and then decide if I want to book or not. If cruise lines not following every rule strictly puts you in a situation where you incur the cost and inconvenience of a cancelled vacation, emergency flight home, and trying to recover that costs from the cruise line - booking a cruise right now is completely irrational. IMO traveling right now or in the near future shouldn’t even be considered unless you are willing to be somewhat flexible about the rules. I don’t think anyone anywhere is getting 100% compliance 100% of the time.

Edited October 24, 2020 by sanger727

[ontheweb]

14 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

Having masks “mandatory” is one thing - actually effectively enforcing it is totally different.  While lines may state that wearing masks is mandatory, I seriously doubt that such requirement will result in 100% compliance

What standard of compliance would you find acceptable realizing 100% is a goal, but unrealistic to be reached. 50% like some say is acceptable for a vaccine to be approved? 75%? 90%?

[sverigecruiser]

49 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

Having masks “mandatory” is one thing - actually effectively enforcing it is totally different.  While lines may state that wearing masks is mandatory, I seriously doubt that such requirement will result in 100% compliance

 

What I said was that if masks are mandatory people shall wear them. I agree with you that mandatory masks will not result in 100% compliance.

 

What I really meant was that if masks aren't mandatory, don't expect me to wear one.

[navybankerteacher]

4 minutes ago, sverigecruiser said:

 

What I said was that if masks are mandatory people shall wear them. I agree with you that mandatory masks will not result in 100% compliance.

 

What I really meant was that if masks aren't mandatory, don't expect me to wear one.

What is needed is a real understanding of “mandatory”.  Saying masks are required is one thing,  ensuring that masks are worn 100% is totally different.    Because many cruise line passengers traditionally act as though the rules do not apply to them, and cruise lines traditionally fail to effectively enforce their rules (be they dress code, no chair-hogging, whatever), there is no rational expectation that masks will be worn.

[navybankerteacher]

54 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

What standard of compliance would you find acceptable realizing 100% is a goal, but unrealistic to be reached. 50% like some say is acceptable for a vaccine to be approved? 75%? 90%?

Acceptable percentage of vaccine effectiveness is one thing - practical reality makes a 50% effectiveness rate acceptable to gain the real benefits because 100% is simply not achievable.    Compliance with requirements is completely different because only human selfishness/ignorance makes 100% difficult to achieve without harsh procedures.