CDC says masks are still required…

[chengkp75]

13 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.  🙂

While you may think that cruise ships are different from planes, trains, or other transportation, they are legally defined as a "common carrier" (have been since cruise ships started), and so are every ship afloat on the ocean.

 

According to Cornell Law:  "A common carrier is a person or a commercial enterprise that transports passengers or goods for a fee and establishes that their service is open to the general public. Typical examples of common carriers include, a shipowner, railroad, airline, taxi service, etc."  A cruise ship transports passengers for a fee, and are open to the general public.  Sounds like a common carrier to me.  

 

Further, looking at the Order from the CDC, it references 42 CFR 70.1 and 42 CFR 71.1 for the definitions of "carrier" and "conveyance", which are synonymous.  42 CFR 70.1 defines "conveyance" as:  "Conveyance means an aircraft, train, road vehicle, vessel (as defined in this section) or other means of transport, including military", and the definition of vessel is:

 

"Vessel means any passenger-carrying, cargo, or towing vessel exclusive of:

Fishing boats including those used for shell-fishing;

Tugs which operate only locally in specific harbors and adjacent waters;

Barges without means of self-propulsion;

Construction-equipment boats and dredges; and

Sand and gravel dredging and handling boats."

 

I don't see cruise ships mentioned as one of the types that are not "vessels", do you?  Do these cites of Federal Regulations sound like I've made them up?

 

Florida took the CDC to court and won, yet the decision has never been challenged in court, since the cruise lines found a cheaper way to get out of the Florida vaccination law.  However, that was for a requirement that applied only to cruise ships.  This "new" requirement, which has been in place for over a year on all public transportation, and even commercial transportation, since all cargo ships are included, does not single out the cruise industry.

 

Sure you can sue the CDC.  Anyone can sue anyone in the US.  But, in order to win, you have to have a basis for the suit.  What basis would the cruise lines propose?

 

As for going back to the 1700's, that is when the Continental Congress started to define the quarantine requirements for ships entering the US, and these laws and regulations, as recognized even in maritime and international law, have been found to be the Constitutional authority of the Federal Government since those days.  And, since in those days, they didn't have drugs or vaccinations, or testing for disease, or even knowledge of what caused disease, ships were almost invariably quarantined when entering US waters.  We could always go back to that model.  But, since the Federal Government has the recognized right to set quarantine requirements for entry into the US, how can the cruise lines say that the mask mandate does not apply to cruise ships, and only cruise ships?

[geegee1]

49 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.  

In what way is a cruise ship not public transportation?  The ships aren't sitting in port and not going anywhere.  They actually transport paying members of the public from one destination to another and back

[Karaboudjan]

48 minutes ago, RocketMan275 said:

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.

 

Not to say that I agree with the rules, but 'brief' and 'extended' are rather vague terms.  I suspect that is aimed at the person who wants to get on a plane, open a bag of pretzels and then make a 'meal' of them for the next 3 hours.  I think the CDC is well aware that diners are removing masks for sit down meals on cruise ships and seemingly there have not been concerns with that.

 

 

[WorkNCruise]

Well I am no legal expert nor do I pretend to be.

 

Here is my take on this.

 

Mask mandates are on a rapid decline in the United States.  There are many examples and some exceptions that are to much to list here.

 

Previously the attitude was that if I can wear it shopping, working, or wherever then putting it on to cruise will be as normal as life back home.

 

If mask mandates mostly disappear on land in most all aspects of life people are not going to pick a cruise for their vacation where a mask is required  Especially after they get used to not having to wear it.

 

I am not advocating one way or the other just stating my opinion on how people are going to mull the prospect of not wearing a mask at home and then wear one on vacation.

 

I just got off the Encore on Jan. 30th and I can say for myself that it didn't ruin my vacation.  I didn't see anyone else fuss about it either.  I look forward to when its no longer a thing.

 

So the Coast Guard, CDC, and whomever can legally require whatever they see fit but if cruising experience does not return to the way it was in 2019 the cruise industry is toast.

 

With rising inflation and a crashing stockmarket it may toast either way because of the double shock of a pandemic mixed with a recession.

 

I sure hope I am wrong because the 2019 cruise experience is how I want to vacation.

[RocketMan275]

1 hour ago, Karaboudjan said:

Not to say that I agree with the rules, but 'brief' and 'extended' are rather vague terms.  I suspect that is aimed at the person who wants to get on a plane, open a bag of pretzels and then make a 'meal' of them for the next 3 hours.  I think the CDC is well aware that diners are removing masks for sit down meals on cruise ships and seemingly there have not been concerns with that.

I too think the CDC is well aware that dinners are removing masks for sit down meals.  That statement is designed to eliminate that.  I doubt the CDC sees any difference between the guy munching on peanuts for a couple of hours and the guy taking a couple of hours to eat dinner. Both are unacceptable to the CDC.  BTW, you did notice that rule applied to having a drink in a bar as well.

[ChiefMateJRK]

If the CDC rules so clearly require masking, then why does NCL's website currently state the following:

 

"Effective fleetwide on March 1, 2022:  Our cruises will operate with 100% vaccination of crew and guests age five and over, therefore face coverings are not required while onboard."

 

Are their lawyers less familiar with the evolving CDC requirements than the expert lawyers here on the forum?

[Karaboudjan]

1 hour ago, RocketMan275 said:

I too think the CDC is well aware that dinners are removing masks for sit down meals.  That statement is designed to eliminate that.  I doubt the CDC sees any difference between the guy munching on peanuts for a couple of hours and the guy taking a couple of hours to eat dinner. Both are unacceptable to the CDC.  BTW, you did notice that rule applied to having a drink in a bar as well.

"That statement" has been around for a long time.  I found it quoted verbatim in an article from May 2021.  So whatever the intent is it is not some new restriction to crack down on unmasked dining.

 

[habitatnal]

5 hours ago, WorkNCruise said:

Well I am no legal expert nor do I pretend to be.

 

Here is my take on this.

 

Mask mandates are on a rapid decline in the United States.  There are many examples and some exceptions that are to much to list here.

 

Previously the attitude was that if I can wear it shopping, working, or wherever then putting it on to cruise will be as normal as life back home.

 

If mask mandates mostly disappear on land in most all aspects of life people are not going to pick a cruise for their vacation where a mask is required  Especially after they get used to not having to wear it.

 

I am not advocating one way or the other just stating my opinion on how people are going to mull the prospect of not wearing a mask at home and then wear one on vacation.

 

I just got off the Encore on Jan. 30th and I can say for myself that it didn't ruin my vacation.  I didn't see anyone else fuss about it either.  I look forward to when its no longer a thing.

 

So the Coast Guard, CDC, and whomever can legally require whatever they see fit but if cruising experience does not return to the way it was in 2019 the cruise industry is toast.

 

With rising inflation and a crashing stockmarket it may toast either way because of the double shock of a pandemic mixed with a recession.

 

I sure hope I am wrong because the 2019 cruise experience is how I want to vacation.

What if the only thing that cruise lines required was a negative test/proof of vaccination to get on board and then the experience was like in 2019?  Would you be ok with that?

[ChiefMateJRK]

2 hours ago, habitatnal said:

What if the only thing that cruise lines required was a negative test/proof of vaccination to get on board and then the experience was like in 2019?  Would you be ok with that?

Isn't that exactly what they're selling for March 1 and on?

[WorkNCruise]

2 hours ago, habitatnal said:

What if the only thing that cruise lines required was a negative test/proof of vaccination to get on board and then the experience was like in 2019?  Would you be ok with that?

I am ok with it as it exists today.  I've done 3 cruises since restart.  Its the general public that has to fill the ships and turn a profit that have to be ok with it.

[Hutcha]

Glad to see all the subject matter experts are here on Cruise Critic. Someone should get in touch with the cruise lines and tell them to fire their lawyers. Obviously they're incompetent. How could they possibly advise dropping their mask mandates??

 

Starting today with Celerity...

Effective for all sailings departing February 12, 2022 forward, masks will not be required onboard for vaccinated guests unless attending activities in the Theatre or Casino. Masks will continue to be required for unvaccinated guests, under 12 years old, at all times indoors except while eating or drinking.

[leveedogs]

Cruising NCL Breakaway 2/27 to 3/6.  NCL masking rules are apparently easing on 3/1.  I wonder if they will enforce masking on the first two days of our cruise and then on 3/1 (Mardi Gras day) tell us masks are no longer required.  Or is it likely that NCL will ask us to mask for the entire cruise since it started before 3/1?  I did not receive any email notification from NCL on the mask rule change.

 

And as we plan to be "actively" eating and drinking during waking hours our masks will essentially be a chin diaper.  Gotta love mask theater.

 

[Karaboudjan]

34 minutes ago, Hutcha said:

Glad to see all the subject matter experts are here on Cruise Critic. Someone should get in touch with the cruise lines and tell them to fire their lawyers. Obviously they're incompetent. How could they possibly advise dropping their mask mandates??

 

Starting today with Celerity...

Effective for all sailings departing February 12, 2022 forward, masks will not be required onboard for vaccinated guests unless attending activities in the Theatre or Casino. Masks will continue to be required for unvaccinated guests, under 12 years old, at all times indoors

except while eating or drinking.

 

You don't need a lawyer to know that that policy does NOT square with the CDC regulations.  See this if you don't believe people on CC:

 

https://www.seatrade-cruise.com/environmental-health/cdc-holds-level-4-cruise-warning-new-voluntary-covid-program-has-booster-facet

 

Obviously more to come...

[luckyinpa]

12 hours ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

If the CDC rules so clearly require masking, then why does NCL's website currently state the following:

 

"Effective fleetwide on March 1, 2022:  Our cruises will operate with 100% vaccination of crew and guests age five and over, therefore face coverings are not required while onboard."

 

Are their lawyers less familiar with the evolving CDC requirements than the expert lawyers here on the forum?

 

CC indeed is the definitive forum on every legal matter. or people just love to bicker on here..unsure which is true..hmmm  but during the heart of the virus it was a total turnoff and i'm sure many turned away from the forums. but it wont ever go away. 

[Hutcha]

23 minutes ago, Karaboudjan said:

 

You don't need a lawyer to know that that policy does NOT square with the CDC regulations.  See this if you don't believe people on CC:

 

https://www.seatrade-cruise.com/environmental-health/cdc-holds-level-4-cruise-warning-new-voluntary-covid-program-has-booster-facet

 

Obviously more to come...

I see it, but the cruise lines obviously think something different. Also, the program is still voluntary, with cruise lines having to opt in by Feb 18th

[Karaboudjan]

15 minutes ago, Hutcha said:

I see it, but the cruise lines obviously think something different. Also, the program is still voluntary, with cruise lines having to opt in by Feb 18th

 

Yes, but if they don't opt in then they fall under the transportation mask order like airlines and masks are required period.  I agree they seem to think something different (or plan to announce something more) but the question is what.

Edited February 12, 2022 by Karaboudjan

[BermudaBound2014]

3 hours ago, Hutcha said:

I see it, but the cruise lines obviously think something different. Also, the program is still voluntary, with cruise lines having to opt in by Feb 18th

 

NCL has already opted in. In fact, they were the very first cruise line to do so. Here is what Del Rio had to say about the new voluntary CDC program just a few weeks ago.......

 

Frank Del Rio, CEO of NCLH, said that the program "provides the cruise industry with a set of operating provisions to protect the health and safety of guests and crew. Our adoption of the voluntary program provides guests, crew, travel partners and other stakeholders with the assurance that our brands will continue to meet and exceed the provisions laid out by the CDC and provide unparalleled health and safety protocols not found in any other sector of the travel and leisure space."

 

You can read the full article here:

Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings opts into CDC Covid program: Travel Weekly

 

There certainly seems to be a conflict of policies between parties. RCL (celebrity) have also greatly relaxed their mask mandate, however they have designated specific vaccinated and unvaccinated venues.

 

 

 

 

[BermudaBound2014]

16 hours ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

If the CDC rules so clearly require masking, then why does NCL's website currently state the following:

 

"Effective fleetwide on March 1, 2022:  Our cruises will operate with 100% vaccination of crew and guests age five and over, therefore face coverings are not required while onboard."

 

Are their lawyers less familiar with the evolving CDC requirements than the expert lawyers here on the forum?

 

Seatrade magazine pointed out a discrepancy between the new CDC guidelines and NCL mask policy. NCL isn't the only cruise line reducing masking requirements and none of the cruise lines meet 'gold standards', so I believe that cruise lines have a plan to respond.

 

In the meantime, some of us find this turn of events interesting to follow. I know I have learned a bit from this thread  :).

[Earthworm Jim]

16 hours ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

If the CDC rules so clearly require masking, then why does NCL's website currently state the following:

 

"Effective fleetwide on March 1, 2022:  Our cruises will operate with 100% vaccination of crew and guests age five and over, therefore face coverings are not required while onboard."

 

Are their lawyers less familiar with the evolving CDC requirements than the expert lawyers here on the forum?

 

NCL made that announcement February 8th. The new CDC "recommendations" (which are really rules because if you don't follow them you fall under the same transportation mandatory mask order as planes) were released February 9th. So NCL didn't know the new rules when they announced they were dropping masks.

 

Since then, NCL's lawyers have presumably been evaluating their options. I wouldn't assume that means they'll figure out a way to get around the new mask rules. Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but it hasn't happened yet.

[Earthworm Jim]

5 minutes ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

.. none of the cruise lines meet 'gold standards'

 

I view that "standard of excellence" tier of compliance irrelevant because it's an unrealistic pie-in-the-sky notion. There haven't been remotely enough people willing to get the booster to make requiring on a viable option for any cruise line.

[BermudaBound2014]

8 minutes ago, Earthworm Jim said:

 

I view that "standard of excellence" tier of compliance irrelevant because it's an unrealistic pie-in-the-sky notion. There haven't been remotely enough people willing to get the booster to make requiring on a viable option for any cruise line.

 

You're preaching to the choir, but I am aware that there are many people so paralyzed by fear of Omicron that there was a very hard push to make boosters required in many places. That movement toward mandatory boosters was met with some very strong resistance.

 

Here on Maui, the Mayor made boosters a requirement on January 24th. In order to eat inside at any restaurant, go to the spa, bar, gym, etc we needed to be boosted.  At the same time, the state of Hawaii was toying with the idea of making boosters mandatory on their safe travels platform, meaning in order to enter the state under the vaccine exemption, one needed to be boosted. Both plans fell flat. Maui removed the booster requirement after 2 weeks and just this week Gov Ige abandoned the booster requirement for entry to the state before it was even enacted.

 

Because only 42% of Americans are willing to get the booster, I think the push toward mandatory boosters is dead and agree that requiring boosters is no longer viable for cruise ships.

[Karaboudjan]

 

Just now, BermudaBound2014 said:

Because only 42% of Americans are willing to get the booster, I think the push toward mandatory boosters is dead and agree that requiring boosters is no longer viable for cruise ships.

 

It might make a good niche for you, though, if the choice really comes down to booster or mask.

 

 

[BermudaBound2014]

21 minutes ago, Karaboudjan said:

 

 

It might make a good niche for you, though, if the choice really comes down to booster or mask.

 

 

 

I am totally speculating, but I see boosters off the table. Of course, just two weeks ago I thought boosters were going to be the norm. Covid is still very fluid,  but I do believe we have turned a corner.

 

I think Hawaii's current policies may work for cruise ships. If you are fully vaccinated you can apply to enter, nothing more needed. If you are not vaccinated, you can get a negative NAAT test within 72 hours to enter.  But they do still have masks indoors everywhere so that's a bit sticky.

 

It's a place to start. Obviously the current requirements of 100% vaccinated and pre-testing is not working. Something has to change. 

Edited February 12, 2022 by BermudaBound2014

[Karaboudjan]

11 minutes ago, BermudaBound2014 said:

 

I am totally speculating, but I see boosters totally off the table. Of course, just two weeks ago I thought boosters were going to be the norm. Covid is still very fluid,  but I do believe we have turned a corner.

 

I think Hawaii's current policies may work for cruise ships. If you are fully vaccinated you can apply to enter, nothing more needed. If you are not vaccinated, you can get a negative NAAT test within 72 hours to enter.  But they do still have masks indoors everywhere so that's a bit stick.

 

It's a place to start. Obviously the current requirements of 100% vaccinated and pre-testing is not working. Something has to change. 

 

I think the corner that really still needs to be turned (I'm looking at you CDC) is how we determine what is a bad COVID situation.  I think you can make a pretty good case that there has not been a single instance of that on a cruise ship even through the Omicron wave.

[Joebucks]

On 2/9/2022 at 9:47 PM, UKstages said:

 

i'm actually really familiar with the CDC guidelines for cruise ships.

 

which rule do you believe is anti-science?

 

please don't confuse a temporary drop in cases and hospitalizations with "the science" as it relates to cruise ship travel.

 

scientists say they have no idea if people can be reinfected by the new BA.2 sub-variant, but they do know that it is more highly transmissible. and it is also more skillful at infecting people who are vaxxed and boosted.

 

that's what the science says.

 

Here's the science. Summed up.

- We still don't fully understand the virus or its variants

- Boat scary