NEWS FLASH: HAL to favor Triples and Quads

[Mary229]

6 minutes ago, TRLD said:

I expect it is more a matter of feedback they receive from a number of sources which probably include some of the same things as discussed here, more than they are reacting to CC posts.

The AARP example was CC.  But yes and I advocate all forms of communication when you complain.  My response was to someone who was being dismissive of complaining here 

[Wehwalt]

8 minutes ago, TRLD said:

Not really. One still has to into account the context.

 

Other language in the contract might cover them that paragraph does not.

That could be, but if it's a question of arguing whether "any other reason" means that or something else, I know which side of the question I'd care to be arguing. No offense.

 

[Mary229]

1 minute ago, Mary229 said:

The AARP example was CC.  But yes and I advocate all forms of communication when you complain.  My response was to someone who was being dismissive of complaining here 

Actually this is not even a situation about complaining, it is commentary on how to properly execute a change of policy especially when it is a very longstanding policy 

[Real NHDOC]

1 hour ago, Wehwalt said:

That could be, but if it's a question of arguing whether "any other reason" means that or something else, I know which side of the question I'd care to be arguing. No offense.

 

It's blatantly obvious that section 4 of the contract wouldn't grant HAL the latitude to change your cabin at will or else they wouldn't have changed section 8 to explicitly give them that.  Even they, in good conscience couldn't interpret it that way.   Unfortunately, now that they have granted themselves such unilateral power over cabin assignments it's something they could easily exploit to maximize their profits any way they see fit.  As I said before, they CAN do a lot of things, but SHOULD they?  No, they shouldn't.  If they choose to offer triple and quad rooms to singles or couples that's their choice, but they want it both ways.  They want to be able to under-fill them with whomever wants to buy them but then reserve the right to put you anywhere on the ship to accommodate a larger party who happens to book after you do.  It should be "first come first served" not "we don't care what YOU want it's all about stuffing as many people on the ship as we can legally stuff onto it". At some point they should be taking into account how it makes the guest feel about booking a cruise with them.  I know it certainly makes me less likely to book a triple or quad room if it is being offered to me with the understanding that it's only "at will".  

Edited April 22 by Real NHDOC

[TRLD]

Just now, Real NHDOC said:

It's blatantly obvious that section 4 of the contract wouldn't grant HAL the latitude to change your cabin at will or else they wouldn't have changed section 8 to explicitly give them that.  Even they, in good conscience couldn't interpret it that way.   Unfortunately, now that they have granted themselves such unilateral power over cabin assignments it's something they could easily exploit to maximize their profits any way they see fit.  As I said before, they CAN do a lot of things, but SHOULD they?  No, they shouldn't.  If they choose to offer triple and quad rooms to singles or couples that's their choice, but they want it both ways.  They want to be able to under-fill them with whomever wants to buy them but then reserve the right to put you anywhere on the ship to accommodate a larger party who happens to book after you do.  It should be "first come first served" not "we don't care what YOU want it's all about stuffing as many people in the ship as we can legally stuff onto it".    

Basically your options are

 

1. book a 2 person cabin and not worry about it

2. book a specific 3/4 cabin paying to choose a specific cabin knowing that at some point there is a chance that you could get moved

3. pay less and book a guarantee

4. Not book at all or with a different line which may or may not follow the same practice

 

Considering that their competition (NA adult focused lines Celebrity and Princess) are already doing this or similar steps increasing their ability to maximize their use of room inventory I would not expect them to reverse this direction. If anything lines are moving more in the directions of guarantees instead of preselected rooms.

[Real NHDOC]

Unfortunately, now, with the contract being the way it is even if you book a 2 person cabin for 2 they can move you for any reason so basically every booking is a guarantee cabin booking as you have no control over where they want to put you and no recourse if you are unhappy with it. 

 

Instead of calling a particular cabin your "chosen cabin" it should just be called your preferred choice of cabin.

Edited April 22 by Real NHDOC

[TRLD]

4 minutes ago, Real NHDOC said:

Unfortunately, now, with the contract being the way it is even if you book a 2 person cabin for 2 they can move you for any reason so basically every booking is a guarantee cabin booking as you have no control over where they want to put you and no recourse if you are unhappy with it. 

That is too funny. Technically they could sell you a cruise go out and sail in a circle, touch one foreign port if out of the US, not let anyone off ship, and feed you a steady diet of pork and beans according to the cruise contract. Surprised someone doesn't raise that concern.

 

They could and have always done some room changes  with sufficient reason. Sometimes as an unasked for upgrade, sometimes for the rather ambiguous operational reasons.

 

In this they are making a pretty well defined policy change concerning high capacity rooms. Pretty clear in what they are saying if you are a party of 2 and book a 3/4 room you have some potential risk of getting bumped to an equivalent or better 2 person room based upon their room grading system.

Edited April 22 by TRLD

[Mary229]

6 minutes ago, TRLD said:

That is too funny. Technically they could sell you a cruise go out and sail in a circle, touch one foreign port if out of the US, not let anyone off ship, and feed you a steady diet of pork and beans according to the cruise contract. Surprised someone doesn't raise that concern.

 

They could and have always done some room changes  with sufficient reason. Sometimes as an unasked for upgrade, sometimes for the rather ambiguous operational reasons.

 

In this they are making a pretty well defined policy change concerning high capacity rooms. Pretty clear in what they are saying if you are a party of 2 and book a 3/4 room you have some potential risk of getting bumped to an equivalent or better 2 person room based upon their room grading system.

That is a well known clause and the only thing that keeps them in check is the power of the purse.  For a most recent example go to the Oceania boards when they tried just such a cruise when the Middle East conflict began.  There are many examples. For the people on the initial cruise it is a terrible event but going forward the line starts losing business as people do become very vocal. I just warned someone away from NCL because of news articles published about this same topic.  Turns out publicly shaming does work 

[TRLD]

21 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

That is a well known clause and the only thing that keeps them in check is the power of the purse.  For a most recent example go to the Oceania boards when they tried just such a cruise when the Middle East conflict began.  There are many examples. For the people on the initial cruise it is a terrible event but going forward the line starts losing business as people do become very vocal. I just warned someone away from NCL because of news articles published about this same topic.  Turns out publicly shaming does work 

What keeps them in check is more that they are actually trying to deliver a reasonable value in return for the fees charged. 

 

Can be lots of disagreement around exactly what that means.

 

The point is that the contract does and has always given them the power to do lots of things, that in reality represent clauses to protect them from unanticipated events and from technicalities in our very litigious society. Not because they are going to the extremes of the document. The main thing the document does is to enable them to determine compensation in case of unexpected events and make it clear that in most cases such compensation is goodwill.

 

With the warnings they are starting to put into the system it is unlikely that there will be any compensation when they actually implement bumping small parties from large capacity rooms.

[Gsel]

I now cruise single and have two cruises booked. DH and I preferred Neptune Suites which , I think will hold actually three or four persons. Now that he is gone I still book Neptunes, fortunately he left me able to afford that. If HAL decides to "move" me they are going to face one very upset "old" lady!  

[TRLD]

Just now, Gsel said:

I now cruise single and have two cruises booked. DH and I preferred Neptune Suites which , I think will hold actually three or four persons. Now that he is gone I still book Neptunes, fortunately he left me able to afford that. If HAL decides to "move" me they are going to face one very upset "old" lady!  

Are there any Neptune suites that only hold 2? If not then it should not be an issue. The problem arises when a class has both 2 cabins and 3/4 cabins and books a 3/4 with 2 people.

[YourWorldWithBill]

I think we have to see how this plays out. As others have said, it's not in HAL's interest to offend its customers. My suspicion is that it won't happen too often.

 

My PCC, probably stating the company line, said that any move would be to an "equal" or better cabin. All of us who chose our cabins know that we are particular about what cabin we want, so the idea of "equal" may not work; but let's see how HAL actually deals with it.

 

After all, I'd be fine with an upgrade in most cases, but not all. And as far as your point, @Gsel, I seriously doubt that they would move someone from a Neptune suite.

[3rdGenCunarder]

5 minutes ago, YourWorldWithBill said:

After all, I'd be fine with an upgrade in most cases, but not all. And as far as your point, @Gsel, I seriously doubt that they would move someone from a Neptune suite.

 

Well, there is the Pinnacle Suite...

[YourWorldWithBill]

46 minutes ago, 3rdGenCunarder said:

 

Well, there is the Pinnacle Suite...

Maybe that's out new plan! That's the path.....

[TiogaCruiser]

5 hours ago, Mary229 said:

There have been examples of HAL responding quickly because of Cruise Critic threads.  The one that I recall most recently was the introduction of the AARP OBC.  The language changed two or three times in one day in response to comments on these boards 

 

 

6 hours ago, Mary229 said:

I think HAL does read this forum. I also think we need to speak up. Many businesses go happily along because no one speaks up. it is not because we work for HAL which saying so is just plain snarky.  It is because I meet so many people who have been manhandled by agencies, tour companies or cruise lines and sit quietly stewing.  If you speak up effectively you might be surprised.  Sitting back and saying nothing gets you absolutely nothing 

Maybe, maybe not. HAL has its own private forum that several CC posters haunt (some even using the same screen name) also. Topics and discussions are identical to similar CC, but HAL knows who is who.  

On the other hand, some 10 years ago a poster came on CC HAL board and asked a question concerning a family member set to cruise with them who had limited capacities, and within a few hours they had received an email from HAL addressing their concerns and what would/could happen if that person had an issue on a ship.

[shadow 123]

On 3/20/2024 at 3:18 PM, crystalspin said:

Had a phone conversation with my PCC yesterday, to confirm cancelling Voyage of Vikings 2024 and booking VOV 2025. The ship is the Zuiderdam both years, and we were booked in a Verandah on Observation Deck 10 and wanted to stay in that area for 2025. I had emailed her with choice of cabin.

 

After a couple days of phone tag, we finally connected. She had done the cancellation and was holding my cabin of choice, but wanted to tell me that Holland America was going to the system (like Carnival and Princess) of only booking the max number of pax in a cabin... PCCs were told of this change last month. In the meantime, they are allowed to book solos and couples into triples and quads, BUT she informed me that if a "family" wanted the cabin, we would be bumped! At which time, we might not have much of a selection of two-only cabins, so she recommended I look at a different deck -- all of the outside cabins on Deck 10 are quads! Suddenly I understood why one time last week, the website was not showing me any cabins on Observation Deck -- I was searching for just the two of us.

 

I have no reason to doubt her word, she has been a PCC a long time and been my PCC since before the shutdown. 

I booked a veranda cabin for my cruise in October of this year. I travel solo. I asked not to have an upgrade.   Does this mean they could change my cabin even though I told them I didn't wanna upgrade?

[0106]

52 minutes ago, shadow 123 said:

I booked a veranda cabin for my cruise in October of this year. I travel solo. I asked not to have an upgrade.   Does this mean they could change my cabin even though I told them I didn't wanna upgrade?

Look on the deck plan.  How many people can your cabin hold?  If it is more than two there is a possibility you could be moved if they need your cabin for a group of 3 or 4 passengers.  I feel that this is less likely to happen on longer (more than 7 day) cruises.

[Mary229]

1 hour ago, shadow 123 said:

I booked a veranda cabin for my cruise in October of this year. I travel solo. I asked not to have an upgrade.   Does this mean they could change my cabin even though I told them I didn't wanna upgrade?

Which cruise?   Here is my guess as to safety of not being bumped 

1. over 12 days

2. When school is in session except for the holidays

3. requires an expensive flight

4. expensive cruises especially grands and legendary voyages and a couple of other expensive locales with high operational costs reflected in the port fees

[Niagarawine]

On 3/24/2024 at 8:29 PM, kazu said:

 

Everyone’s experience is different and subjective.  the places I like to be and usually are not busy were packed.

I’m glad you had a wonderful cruise - I enjoyed mine despite the medical disembarkation but I guess I’m not used to those lines that snake around Club Orange to get into the dining room and fighting my way to get to CO through the crowd.  

 

I had a fabulous time on the Rotterdam later so it’s not the Pinnacle Class.

IMO that ship did not have enough crew to handle the passengers onboard let alone the children.  

 

the ship was short on crew and full on passengers - check my numbers which I got at sail away.  In any case, it’s not a situation I would do again without very careful planning on a much longer cruise.  YMMV.

 

edited to say - I think the biggest problem is that HAL has nothing to keep children busy and occupied/entertained.  Club HAL only holds 45 what do the other 555 do?
 

Same with me cruise to Alaska and I did not have his issue on Rotterdam. The ship was packed and it was awful

[Niagarawine]

11 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

Which cruise?   Here is my guess as to safety of not being bumped 

1. over 12 days

2. When school is in session except for the holidays

3. requires an expensive flight

4. expensive cruises especially grands and legendary voyages and a couple of other expensive locales with high operational costs reflected in the port fees

Like Panama I hope

[Niagarawine]

On 4/22/2024 at 5:13 PM, TiogaCruiser said:

 

 

Maybe, maybe not. HAL has its own private forum that several CC posters haunt (some even using the same screen name) also. Topics and discussions are identical to similar CC, but HAL knows who is who.  

On the other hand, some 10 years ago a poster came on CC HAL board and asked a question concerning a family member set to cruise with them who had limited capacities, and within a few hours they had received an email from HAL addressing their concerns and what would/could happen if that person had an issue on a ship.

They sure read the comments in the Navigator app and they respond very effectively. I was very impressed with this.

[SilvertoGold]

57 minutes ago, Niagarawine said:

They sure read the comments in the Navigator app and they respond very effectively. I was very impressed with this.

Not necessarily. On last cruise (39 days) I used the App once to ask one question and make one request. Never received any response.  I thought this very strange. Nothing of huge importance, so I left it.

Attended the Front Desk once and thought the two"team members"  I dealt were average, not truly engaged in the job. Different ships, different "team members" equals different responses. I learned long ago not to generalize or have high expectations. When things go well, I am impressed and appreciative.

[Niagarawine]

1 hour ago, SilvertoGold said:

Not necessarily. On last cruise (39 days) I used the App once to ask one question and make one request. Never received any response.  I thought this very strange. Nothing of huge importance, so I left it.

Attended the Front Desk once and thought the two"team members"  I dealt were average, not truly engaged in the job. Different ships, different "team members" equals different responses. I learned long ago not to generalize or have high expectations. When things go well, I am impressed and appreciative.

Wow I used it three times on Koningsdam and received a call every time, guess I was lucky

[SilvertoGold]

12 minutes ago, Niagarawine said:

Wow I used it three times on Koningsdam and received a call every time, guess I was lucky

You could have been :). Different ships, different team members 

 

 

[Tampa Girl]

On 4/22/2024 at 9:46 AM, Wehwalt said:

This language from paragraph 4 has been there from before the change:

 

Carrier may without liability for refund, payment, compensation or credit, except as provided herein, disembark or refuse to embark You, confine You in a stateroom, quarantine You, restrain You, change Your accommodations or disembark You at any time if, in the sole opinion of Carrier, the Captain or any doctor, You or any minor or other person in Your care during the Cruise, Cruisetour, and/or Land Trip(s), are unfit for any reason for the Cruise, Cruisetour, and/or Land Trip(s), or Your presence might be detrimental to Your health, comfort or safety or that of any other person, or in the judgment of the Captain is advisable for any reason.

 

"For any reason" covers a lot. For whatever reason, they made it explicit.

 

I agree.  As another retired attorney herein, I think that  it does not apply solely to health and safety reasons.  The first sentence in that paragraph begins with the provision that a passenger may be disembarked, refused to be embarked, confined, quarantined, restrained or have their accommodations changed if for the reasons stated, all separated by "or" and each divided by commas, and ending with "or in the judgment of the captain..."    The use of "or" and the use of only commas and not semi-colons, which could shed a different interpretation on the final example, indicates to me that  the stated examples were separate and not related or dependent upon just health or safety.

 

As an illustration, DH and I experienced a situation on the 2018 Grand Asia, where a passenger's wife was confined or restrained in her cabin after several stolen items belonging to fellow passengers were found in her cabin.  That was not a health issue.  While it could arguably be considered a safety issue for the benefit of other passengers, the restraint was more likely as punishment.   

 

Consequently, my legal experience tells me that it is quite possible that  a court could find that  "or in the judgment of the captain, is a sufficient basis for changing a passenger's accommodations and that the paragraph covers far more than health reasons.