CDC says masks are still required…

[Ray4Fun]

Reality check. CDC is a USA team. Once the ship, which is not a USA flagged vessel, leaves USA waters its  a nice idea but not a requirement. Oh, also Mr D is ok and I do listen to him. But that's politics and I'm not thinking that way. Will the CDC come after the cruise line after? Who knows. however given the news today, I'd laugh if they did. My opinion folks. 

[BulldustHHH]

Wistfully I recall when according to science actually had gravitas...

[chengkp75]

10 hours ago, Ray4Fun said:

Once the ship, which is not a USA flagged vessel, leaves USA waters its  a nice idea but not a requirement

While this is true for the majority of the cruise, the mask mandate is a requirement for the ship to enter US waters.  It has to have been in place at least since the last foreign port.  Without a declaration from the Captain that the mandate has been enforced that long, then the USCG will not grant clearance to enter US waters.  Should the Captain falsify this declaration, he would, personally, be liable for criminal charges.  Not sure any Captain values his job over incarceration and fine.

[Fredric22]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

While this is true for the majority of the cruise, the mask mandate is a requirement for the ship to enter US waters.  It has to have been in place at least since the last foreign port.  Without a declaration from the Captain that the mandate has been enforced that long, then the USCG will not grant clearance to enter US waters.  Should the Captain falsify this declaration, he would, personally, be liable for criminal charges.  Not sure any Captain values his job over incarceration and fine.

It will be hard to find creative ways around that for sure.  Perhaps a middle of the night stop in the Bahamas right before returning to FL? HA!  Either the cruise lines will try to negotiate something else with the CDC or there may be some kind of legal action coming.  I just can't see them adopting the booster requirements... their already decimated business would be cut so much further.  I can't see how it would work financially.  But, I've been wrong before... 

[Karaboudjan]

18 minutes ago, Fredric22 said:

It will be hard to find creative ways around that for sure.  Perhaps a middle of the night stop in the Bahamas right before returning to FL? HA!  Either the cruise lines will try to negotiate something else with the CDC or there may be some kind of legal action coming.  I just can't see them adopting the booster requirements... their already decimated business would be cut so much further.  I can't see how it would work financially.  But, I've been wrong before... 

I'm not so sure that they have to adopt boosters for the Standard of Excellence in order to avoid masking.  From what I can tell the boosters are all about testing, isolation and quarantine.  I think as long as they maintain 95% vaccinated (not necessarily boosted) they can avoid masking if they choose.  

[chengkp75]

54 minutes ago, Fredric22 said:

It will be hard to find creative ways around that for sure.  Perhaps a middle of the night stop in the Bahamas right before returning to FL? HA!  Either the cruise lines will try to negotiate something else with the CDC or there may be some kind of legal action coming.  I just can't see them adopting the booster requirements... their already decimated business would be cut so much further.  I can't see how it would work financially.  But, I've been wrong before... 

I haven't studied the CDC or USCG requirements completely, since I've retired and the regulations no longer apply to me, but I believe there may be a certain amount of days required for the mask mandate to be in place.  As to legal action, what would be the standing?  This regulation applies to every ship, whether cruise, container, tanker, bulker, RO/RO, whatever, that wants to enter the US.  The US has every legal right to make requirements and restrictions for vessels wishing to enter US waters.

[chengkp75]

33 minutes ago, Karaboudjan said:

I'm not so sure that they have to adopt boosters for the Standard of Excellence in order to avoid masking.  From what I can tell the boosters are all about testing, isolation and quarantine.  I think as long as they maintain 95% vaccinated (not necessarily boosted) they can avoid masking if they choose.  

Not following the "boosters are all about testing, isolation, and quarantine" part.  The requirements for the "vaccination standard of excellence" is pretty clear, 95% of pax and crew have to be vaccinated and "boosted" (i.e. have a booster dose) to discontinue masking.  The next category of ships are "highly vaccinated", where 95% are vaccinated, but not boostered, and this requires masks, but not social distancing.   Then come ships without 95% vaccination, and this requires masks and social distancing.

[SliderNc]

 

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

While this is true for the majority of the cruise, the mask mandate is a requirement for the ship to enter US waters.  It has to have been in place at least since the last foreign port.  Without a declaration from the Captain that the mandate has been enforced that long, then the USCG will not grant clearance to enter US waters.  Should the Captain falsify this declaration, he would, personally, be liable for criminal charges.  Not sure any Captain values his job over incarceration and fine.

 

I definitely appreciate reading your posts and your experience and knowledge that you share here.  But let me ask this?  Let's just say the last port is Nassau on a cruise.  When leaving Nassau, the captain announces that there is a mask mandate in effect until they dock in Miami tomorrow.  Passengers for the most part comply with the mandate and wear masks.  You have your few that will go against the mandate as we have seen here and there both on the ship and also on land.  Wouldn't that be enforcing the mandate from the last port?  That is what the policy states.  Passenger compliance with the mandate is something that cannot be controlled.  This is such a grey area at this point and neither side would be right or wrong.

 

[chengkp75]

7 minutes ago, SliderNc said:

Passenger compliance with the mandate is something that cannot be controlled.  This is such a grey area at this point and neither side would be right or wrong.

Passenger compliance is definitely something that can be controlled, but not necessarily in a way that would be beneficial to the cruise line.  The Captain makes the announcement that if anyone is seen not wearing a mask, the ship will either confine them to be turned over to US authorities for failure of the mandate (much as those who disrupt airline flights are being detained), or the ship turns around and disembarks the violators in Bahamas.  Since the Captain is personally responsible for ensuring the mandate is enforced (not the company), he is going to make sure it is.

 

Also, as noted above, I think there may be a number of days for ships, unlike for airplanes.  I haven't looked at the rules since I retired, but I thought early on that there was an "last foreign port or 7 days, whichever is longer" phrase.

 

USCG could board a ship as soon as it crosses the 12 mile limit, and look around at whether or not everyone is masked.  If not, they radio the USCG Captain of the Port, get the clearance rescinded, and take the Captain into custody for the felony of falsely reporting to the US government.  Not saying it would happen, but the threat is there, to the Captain, for jail and fines.

Edited February 11, 2022 by chengkp75

[ontheweb]

21 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Passenger compliance is definitely something that can be controlled, but not necessarily in a way that would be beneficial to the cruise line.  The Captain makes the announcement that if anyone is seen not wearing a mask, the ship will either confine them to be turned over to US authorities for failure of the mandate (much as those who disrupt airline flights are being detained), or the ship turns around and disembarks the violators in Bahamas.  Since the Captain is personally responsible for ensuring the mandate is enforced (not the company), he is going to make sure it is.

 

Also, as noted above, I think there may be a number of days for ships, unlike for airplanes.  I haven't looked at the rules since I retired, but I thought early on that there was an "last foreign port or 7 days, whichever is longer" phrase.

 

USCG could board a ship as soon as it crosses the 12 mile limit, and look around at whether or not everyone is masked.  If not, they radio the USCG Captain of the Port, get the clearance rescinded, and take the Captain into custody for the felony of falsely reporting to the US government.  Not saying it would happen, but the threat is there, to the Captain, for jail and fines.

And in the unlikely event of this happening with the Captain being led away in handcuffs, many of the unmasked would be cheering for him for having stood up for their freedoms.🤦‍♂️😒

[Fredric22]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

And in the unlikely event of this happening with the Captain being led away in handcuffs, many of the unmasked would be cheering for him for having stood up for their freedoms.🤦‍♂️😒

This is also so completely ridiculous it isn't even funny anymore.  The cruise lines absolutely have a right to sue and I am sure that attorneys on their side are looking into any an all options with regards to these new "guidelines."  

[logan25]

From the articles I have read, adhering to the Standard of Excellence does not seem to garner much “advantage” over the two other categories.  The most significant was reducing quarantine time from 10 days to 5 days.  Not enough benefit in my opinion for requiring all eligible to boost.

[Karaboudjan]

8 minutes ago, logan25 said:

From the articles I have read, adhering to the Standard of Excellence does not seem to garner much “advantage” over the two other categories.  The most significant was reducing quarantine time from 10 days to 5 days.  Not enough benefit in my opinion for requiring all eligible to boost.

 

I thought so too, but go to the page linked below and scroll down to the Mask Use section.  It appears to be saying that the only way to avoid falling under the Mask Order (ie masks are required) is to adhere to the Standard of Excellence.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/covid19-operations-manual-cso.html

[logan25]

5 minutes ago, Karaboudjan said:

 

I thought so too, but go to the page linked below and scroll down to the Mask Use section.  It appears to be saying that the only way to avoid falling under the Mask Order (ie masks are required) is to adhere to the Standard of Excellence.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/cruise/covid19-operations-manual-cso.html

Masking does not change my opinion that payback is worth the cost of compliance to achieve Standard of Excellence.  At this point, I am actually on Team Grey.

[chengkp75]

56 minutes ago, Fredric22 said:

The cruise lines absolutely have a right to sue and I am sure that attorneys on their side are looking into any an all options with regards to these new "guidelines."

Okay, in your legal opinion, what is the basis of the suit?  Are the cruise lines going to be discriminated against, or singled out over mask mandate?  Does the US government not have the right to place requirements and restrictions on vessels entering the US?  I suppose that the government could say that no masks, no vaccinations, no nothing, and we will board every ship as it enters the US and look for signs of contagious disease, and quarantine the ship if found.  Lets go back to the 1700's.

[chengkp75]

3 hours ago, SliderNc said:

Let's just say the last port is Nassau on a cruise.  When leaving Nassau, the captain announces that there is a mask mandate in effect until they dock in Miami tomorrow. 

Okay, I read the order from the CDC, and it states that international vessels entering the US should ensure that masks are worn at "embarkation, disembarkation, and for the duration of travel" in order to obtain free pratique (health clearance to enter the US).  Note it does not make any distinction as to when the conveyance starts or ends, except that it be for the "duration" of travel, and no restrictions on where that travel is from or to.  So, since the carrier is conveying you from embarkation to disembarkation, the "duration of travel" is the entire cruise.

[scar4711]

from the new order under Masks:

 

• Cruise ship operators choosing to opt into CDC’s COVID-19 Program for Cruise Ships, at their discretion, may designate areas as only accessible to passengers and crew who are up to date with their COVID-19 vaccines where masks are not required (e.g., casinos; bars; spas; entertainment venues; and dining areas, including self-serve buffets).

[Stealthdog]

We are probably done with mandatory masking on cruise ships until next flu season starts later this year, or a new dominant variant that is highly contagious starts spreading.

 

Even before COVID even existed, the CDC recommended not to go on cruise ships.  They are never going to drop their mask recommendation.

 

 

Edited February 11, 2022 by Stealthdog

[Sam Ting]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Okay, I read the order from the CDC, and it states that international vessels entering the US should ensure that masks are worn at "embarkation, disembarkation, and for the duration of travel" in order to obtain free pratique (health clearance to enter the US).  Note it does not make any distinction as to when the conveyance starts or ends, except that it be for the "duration" of travel, and no restrictions on where that travel is from or to.  So, since the carrier is conveying you from embarkation to disembarkation, the "duration of travel" is the entire cruise.

You don’t know that.  You are jumping to conclusions.  Duration of travel could mean from the last port.   

[ontheweb]

40 minutes ago, Sam Ting said:

You don’t know that.  You are jumping to conclusions.  Duration of travel could mean from the last port.   

If they meant from the last port, why wouldn't they plainly write travel from the last port rather than duration of travel?

[RocketMan275]

7 hours ago, ontheweb said:

And in the unlikely event of this happening with the Captain being led away in handcuffs, many of the unmasked would be cheering for him for having stood up for their freedoms.🤦‍♂️😒

Perhaps all of the ships passengers would then throw their masks overboard in support of the captain.

[Fredric22]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

Okay, in your legal opinion, what is the basis of the suit?  Are the cruise lines going to be discriminated against, or singled out over mask mandate?  Does the US government not have the right to place requirements and restrictions on vessels entering the US?  I suppose that the government could say that no masks, no vaccinations, no nothing, and we will board every ship as it enters the US and look for signs of contagious disease, and quarantine the ship if found.  Lets go back to the 1700's.

Absolutely they are being singled out!  A cruise ship should NOT be treated the same as a plane, train, or other form of "public transportation" because they are nowhere close to being alike.  The basis of the suit can be that the CDC mask order should not actually have any jurisdiction over cruise ships.  Regardless of whether you believe it is right or wrong, there is no one entity who should be able to control huge areas of society/business without that entity being legally challenged.  Florida already took the CDC to court once and they prevailed.  You are making up arguments in your head about going back to the 1700s... I am not sure what that is about but it sounds like you have a very active imagination.  🙂

[Sam Ting]

2 hours ago, ontheweb said:

If they meant from the last port, why wouldn't they plainly write travel from the last port rather than duration of travel?

Things are rarely plainly written. If they meant the entire trip, why didn’t they just say that?  When people are off the ship they embark getting back on regardless of home port

[RocketMan275]

From the CDC guidance.

• While the Order permits temporarily removing a mask for brief periods of time while eating or drinking, removal of the mask for extended meal service or beverage consumption would constitute a violation of this Order.

IOW, to be complaint one cannot remove the mask while seated at a bar or at a dinning table except while  actually taking a sip from the drink or while physically placing food in your mouth.  Pull the mask down, take a sip or bite, replace the mask while swallowing or chewing.  Repeat, repeat.

 

The only reason the CDC is imposing these ridiculous rules on cruise ships is because they think they can.  If they thought they could do so, they would impose these rules in every city, county, state.

Edited February 11, 2022 by RocketMan275

[Sam Ting]

8 minutes ago, Fredric22 said:

Absolutely they are being singled out!  A cruise ship should NOT be treated the same as a plane, train, or other form of "public transportation" because they are nowhere close to being alike.  The basis of the suit can be that the CDC mask order should not actually have any jurisdiction over cruise ships.  Regardless of whether you believe it is right or wrong, there is no one entity who should be able to control huge areas of society/business without that entity being legally challenged.  Florida already took the CDC to court once and they prevailed.  You are making up arguments in your head about going back to the 1700s... I am not sure what that is about but it sounds like you have a very active imagination.  🙂

If they dont like the rules, they can take their ships to wherever they are flagged or where the company is incorporated, and run their business from there