Another situation where people came back late from an excursion, were left behind, and blamed the cruise line...

[Ocean Boy]

3 hours ago, GetToLivin said:

I think that people who don't cruise or those who tried it once and didn't like it will jump on the bandwagon of, "why would you want to be on a floating city anyway, one more reason not to cruise, blah blah" and they'll comment as such. But for people who cruise regularly, I can't imagine there's too much in the way of support for the decision-making of these individuals and the nightmare press they ultimately created for the cruise line (whether or not it was their fault, they knew the risks). I never understand the "rules for thee, but not for me" mentality of some people, just ick.

All the more reason for RCI to appreciate its long time customers.

[SRF]

13 hours ago, ace2542 said:

I think you mean Hati didn't you? Temps are in the mid 30s in Lagos at least right now. And the nearest embassy hundreds of miles away.

 

There is a US Consulate in Lagos.

 

Sao Tome and Principal are more off the coast of Gabon.

 

The article tried to blame them not having credits cards on NCL.  REALLY??

 

Supposedly the tour operator called "the Captain" to inform them that they would be late.  Want to take bets on that having actually happened.

 

Time is different in Africa.  African Time.  It is like Manana time, but without the sense of urgency.  Now means something totally different there.

[A&L_Ont]

3 hours ago, SilkySal said:

Come back here and let us know your thoughts, so I don't have to read all of those pages.😜

I’m caught up, at least for now. 

 

One poster was very opinionated for a days worth of posts and then faded away to be replaced 6-10 pages later by another opinionated poster.  Both strong against NCL’s treatment of the guests. I’m not as sympathetic.
 

I screenshotted a couple of my favourite posts. Each are great for different reasons. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 4 by A&L_Ont

[FionaMG]

6 hours ago, A&L_Ont said:

I’m caught up, at least for now. 

 

One poster was very opinionated for a days worth of posts and then faded away to be replaced 6-10 pages later by another opinionated poster.  Both strong against NCL’s treatment of the guests. I’m not as sympathetic.
 

I screenshotted a couple of my favourite posts. Each are great for different reasons. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Mods have now locked the thread. I'm surprised it took so long.

[A&L_Ont]

3 hours ago, FionaMG said:

 Mods have now locked the thread. I'm surprised it took so long.

I was too.  The last hour it got to the point you could see it coming. 

[Oakman58]

On 4/3/2024 at 7:52 AM, smokeybandit said:

Hopefully they got banned from sailing NCL in the future.

 

Those people made a grievous mistake and paid the price.  You can bet they went through a lot of grief trying to catch up to the ship in Senegal.  Since they feel NCL should have bent the rules for them, you can bet they won't be looking to book a future cruise with NCL.  NCL certainly wouldn't have to ban them.  I'm sure those folks will be bad-mouthing NCL for the rest of their lives.

[GetToLivin]

13 hours ago, A&L_Ont said:

I’m caught up, at least for now. 

 

 

I read here and there last night, my favorite? They are officially known as THE LATE EIGHT 😆

[HBE4]

I skimmed thru the NCL thread reading a few pages here and there. I might go back a re-read but I'm sure all the "good" posts are gone.

 

I can imagine the emotional roller coaster the Late Eight must've felt. Maybe slight panic when they realized the tour was running late. Then relief as the driver called ahead to let "them" (Port Authorities? Captain? NCL HQ?, his wife?) that they were running late. Then joy that the ship was still there when they arrived at port.  Disappointment that the tenders had left & been tucked in for the night. Ecstatic when the coast guard offered to take them to the ship. What a wonderful country they must thought & then crestfallen when denied boarding when they were sooooo close and yet sooooo far. Then fear when they realized they were being left behind with only their passports & clothing on their backs. Determination to make it to the next port Gambia only to have their hope crushed once again as the ship could not make port. Finally, anger at NCL even though NCL was helping them to get to the next port Senegal.

 

Murphy's Law at its' best (or worst).  

 

[A&L_Ont]

2 hours ago, HBE4 said:

Determination to make it to the next port Gambia only to have their hope crushed once again as the ship could not make port. Finally, anger at NCL even though NCL was helping them to get to the next port Senegal.

When I saw they were headed to Senegal I kept humming the theme song to the documentary called The Race to Dakar. It followed actor and motorbike enthusiast Charlie Boorman’s journey from Lisbon to Dakar in 2006, in that years race. 

 

Below are some of the lyrics, which seem appropriate for the late eight’s journey across Africa. 

 

I hope my god’s beside me

here to guide me on this rocky road

And when I get to heaven 

I think I’m going to send him

a very fine thank you note

 

It’s the race to Dakar

Doesn’t really matter if you win or lose

It’s the race to Dakar

All that really matters is you got to see it through. 

 

Don’t let my senses desert me

Nothing to divert me

I’m setting my sights on you

And in the far of distance 

I’m afraid of wishing 

I was safe at home with you. 

 

 

 

Link if you want to hear the song. 
https://youtu.be/WqBAa0rhMdk?si=T9IolfhwNib-FXxll

 

Edited April 4 by A&L_Ont

[F27TW]

On 4/3/2024 at 2:05 PM, spelican said:

All things considered, I have a feeling NCL wishes the ship captain had waited an hour to get them back on board.  The national media ran hard with this story, and there is just no good way to spin it for NCL.  This seemed a bit different to me than drunken pier runners in Cozumel who can't tell time.  I'm all for policies until they create a damn fool result.

 

Except that they didn't know where those people were or when they might be back. - if at all.   If they did wait one hour .. or 2 or 3 ... and then left, people would still be criticizing them for not waiting longer.    NCL and the captain did nothing wrong here.  NCL is telling it like it is in their own comments .. they were on a private excursion and got back to the tendering location over an hour past cut off  time. Go off on your own .. then you assume all responsibility for getting yourself back on time. If not, oh well. 

Edited April 5 by F27TW

[IntolerantLlama]

The only one I feel bad for is the 80 yr old stroke victim that when she received her wallet from the care team it was missing all her cash and credit cards and the couple from SC that was the only responsible people that had cash and credit cards on them that ended up supporting all the others.

[Tommynice]

I find it absolutely rediculous that, outside this thread, I have not found one related article, nor a single comment that addresses personal responsibility.  These cruisers did not get on board by the deadline.  It's their fault, not the cruiselines. It really is that simple.  Gone are the days of people acting like adults, NOT acting like victims for their errors, and NOT blaming everyone but themselves.....

Edited April 6 by Tommynice

[Starry Eyes]

1 hour ago, IntolerantLlama said:

The only one I feel bad for is the 80 yr old stroke victim that when she received her wallet from the care team it was missing all her cash and credit cards and the couple from SC that was the only responsible people that had cash and credit cards on them that ended up supporting all the others.

Per a media report, that wallet was not left on the ship.  The wallet was recovered from in a tour van, so some random tourist or a local could have gotten into the in the wallet.  The wallet was returned to her more than 24 hours after she left the hospital (so 2 days after the ship sailed).  https://www.businessinsider.com/norwegian-cruise-passenger-stranded-africa-stroke-2024-4?amp

 

In several media reports, the 80 year olds family expresses frustration and anger that they were not contacted by the cruiseline.  The family does not seem to acknowledge that conscious, reasonably competent patients have privacy rights and make such decisions themselves.  If mom does not call her son or ask that son be called, neither cruise line nor hospital nor hotel will call that son.  

Edited April 6 by Starry Eyes

[not-enough-cruising]

22 minutes ago, Tommynice said:

I find it absolutely rediculous that, outside this thread, I have not found one related article, nor a single comment that addresses personal responsibility.  These cruisers did not get on board by the deadline.  It's their fault, not the cruiselines. It really is that simple.  Gone are the days of people acting like adults, NOT acting like victims for their errors, and NOT blaming everyone but themselves.....

That is because in the media, as a whole, the cruise industry is the devil

[Starry Eyes]

27 minutes ago, Tommynice said:

I find it absolutely rediculous that, outside this thread, I have not found one related article, nor a single comment that addresses personal responsibility.  These cruisers did not get on board by the deadline.  It's their fault, not the cruiselines. It really is that simple.  Gone are the days of people acting like adults, NOT acting like victims for their errors, and NOT blaming everyone but themselves.....

This showed up in my news feed.  Of course it cannot balance all those other articles.

https://www.escape.com.au/travel-advice/cruise-passengers-stranded-the-travel-lesson-we-had-to-have/news-story/29ac559969eea6ff52e5b042b6d6bb70?amp&nk=6eb43bf5e3f1644397e212cb3c6b515e-1712414303

 

[broberts]

33 minutes ago, Starry Eyes said:

....

 

In several media reports, the 80 year olds family expresses frustration and anger that they were not contacted by the cruiseline.  The family does not seem to acknowledge that conscious, reasonably competent patients have privacy rights and make such decisions themselves.  If mom does not call her son or ask that son be called, neither cruise line nor hospital nor hotel will call that son.  

 

Putting the onus to communicate on the stroke victim seems particularly removed from reality. 

[Ocean Boy]

2 hours ago, Tommynice said:

I find it absolutely rediculous that, outside this thread, I have not found one related article, nor a single comment that addresses personal responsibility.  These cruisers did not get on board by the deadline.  It's their fault, not the cruiselines. It really is that simple.  Gone are the days of people acting like adults, NOT acting like victims for their errors, and NOT blaming everyone but themselves.....

Isn't that the way the 1-800 lawyer commercials on TV are teaching the U.S. society to think?

[Ocean Boy]

1 hour ago, broberts said:

 

Putting the onus to communicate on the stroke victim seems particularly removed from reality. 

Stroke does not imply any sort of mental incompetence or inability to communicate. Apparently, she is capable of sailing solo on a cruise ship as well as taking excursions.

[Starry Eyes]

1 hour ago, broberts said:

 

Putting the onus to communicate on the stroke victim seems particularly removed from reality. 

Strokes vary greatly so you should avoid generalizing about “stroke victims.”  This person  was medically disembarked, with care properly transferred to a local hospital.  If providers at the local hospital concluded she was incapable of making her own decisions, they’d have tried to reach her emergency contact.  If they determined she was capable of making her own decisions, then the onus is basically on her.  She’d have a right to privacy and self determination; that is reality.  She was able to communicate with the “late eight” after the stroke and she was then able to fly alone half way around the globe, including changing planes.

Edited April 6 by Starry Eyes

[broberts]

1 hour ago, Ocean Boy said:

Stroke does not imply any sort of mental incompetence or inability to communicate. Apparently, she is capable of sailing solo on a cruise ship as well as taking excursions.

 

She did not suffer the stroke before boarding. We have no idea the extent of the stroke or the patient ability to communicate. The comment I was responding to assumed she was fully capable of communicating. An assumption that does not strike me as reasonable.

.

1 hour ago, Starry Eyes said:

Strokes vary greatly so you should avoid generalizing about “stroke victims.”  This person  was medically disembarked, with care properly transferred to a local hospital.  If providers at the local hospital concluded she was incapable of making her own decisions, they’d have tried to reach her emergency contact.  If they determined she was capable of making her own decisions, then the onus is basically on her.  She’d have a right to privacy and self determination; that is reality.  She was able to communicate with the “late eight” after the stroke and she was then able to fly alone half way around the globe, including changing planes.

 

Strokes do vary greatly. So I wonder why people assume that the person was able to clearly make their wishes known. The fact is we have no idea the extent of any injury. All we know is that a couple was able to provide assistance when apparently nobody else would.

 

I also think it a real stretch to ascribe N.Am. hospital practices to the hospital in São Tomé.

 

[MadManOfBethesda]

15 hours ago, broberts said:

 

Putting the onus to communicate on the stroke victim seems particularly removed from reality. 

Exactly. It is one thing to blame the late eight for missing the ship, it is quite another to exonerate NCL's actions with regard to the 80-year-old stroke victim.  After all, what is the purpose of the cruise line requesting that passengers provide emergency contact information that includes the name, relationship, and telephone number of a person to be contacted in case of emergency if the cruise line isn't going to bother to actually make that phone call? And that doesn't even address the issue of whether the stroke victim would have been better served by remaining on the ship until she could be debarked at a larger mainland facility rather than what São Tomé could provide. And the ship's doctor didn't even make that determination. According to an article linked earlier in this thread, it was the ship's nurse who made the decision.

 

I have no problem at all with NCL leaving the late eight behind, but in my opinion, they really dropped the ball with regard to the stroke patient. 

[mjkacmom]

6 hours ago, MadManOfBethesda said:

Exactly. It is one thing to blame the late eight for missing the ship, it is quite another to exonerate NCL's actions with regard to the 80-year-old stroke victim.  After all, what is the purpose of the cruise line requesting that passengers provide emergency contact information that includes the name, relationship, and telephone number of a person to be contacted in case of emergency if the cruise line isn't going to bother to actually make that phone call? And that doesn't even address the issue of whether the stroke victim would have been better served by remaining on the ship until she could be debarked at a larger mainland facility rather than what São Tomé could provide. And the ship's doctor didn't even make that determination. According to an article linked earlier in this thread, it was the ship's nurse who made the decision.

 

I have no problem at all with NCL leaving the late eight behind, but in my opinion, they really dropped the ball with regard to the stroke patient. 

The health center is owned and run by a 3rd party, they are in charge of determining if medical care is better provided on board or off. It’s a for profit business, I’m sure they’d have loved to collect money from the patient if it were safe to do so. 

[liam1965]

What I don’t understand is why no one has the same level of vitriol towards the airlines, or the train, if it leaves on time and someone misses it.

 

Why is it suddenly one cruise ships to bend over backwards to help someone who won’t follow the departure time?

 

I heard someone say “Because the cruise line brought them there.”  So?  If I fly to a foreign land on Delta, and then fail to make it back in time for my return flight, it’s not Delta’s fault because they brought me there.

 

I understand the issues with maybe not having your meds or clothing, but still, shouldn’t that make it more important to you that you make it back?

 

Oh, and I just returned from the NCL Gem.  We left a couple in Bermuda.  They were late.  Why are the late 8 immune from personal responsibility?

[liam1965]

I should add, due to weather, we ended up leaving Bermuda about 18 hours early.  Since we were there for a couple of overnights, it was perfectly possible that someone might have booked a night at a resort and not gotten the news of the change.

 

In that case, I'd understand being annoyed, getting back when the ship initially said the return time was, and finding it gone.

 

The late 8 wasn't that...

[SRF]

On 4/6/2024 at 10:57 AM, broberts said:

 

Putting the onus to communicate on the stroke victim seems particularly removed from reality. 

 

The problem is privacy laws