Excursion Safety

[Hobbins]

After reading the excellent Cruise Critic Main Page article on Shore Excursion Savvy yesterday, I realized that I have never seen any posts mentioning how NCL actually goes about making sure everything is in order for excursion operators they use. –

From article:

“Cruise lines hold tour operators responsible for quality control as well as make sure that all necessities -- liability insurance, registration and other areas of compliance -- are complete.”

Does anyone actually know what form of audit and what frequency is used to assure compliance? I think we all expect NCL to check validity of documentation supplied by operators, but do they? I wonder if they check whether document records are authentic and current or do they just ask the operators? And how often? After all, forged documents are not so hard to imagine anywhere, let alone some third world countries. Just wondering.

[sjbdtz]

After reading the excellent Cruise Critic Main Page article on Shore Excursion Savvy yesterday, I realized that I have never seen any posts mentioning how NCL actually goes about making sure everything is in order for excursion operators they use. –

 

From article:

“Cruise lines hold tour operators responsible for quality control as well as make sure that all necessities -- liability insurance, registration and other areas of compliance -- are complete.”

 

Does anyone actually know what form of audit and what frequency is used to assure compliance? I think we all expect NCL to check validity of documentation supplied by operators, but do they? I wonder if they check whether document records are authentic and current or do they just ask the operators? And how often? After all, forged documents are not so hard to imagine anywhere, let alone some third world countries. Just wondering.

 

 

Not sure, but they cancelled our excursion to Moscow because their insurance company didn't think the airflight operator was worthy of transporting their passengers.

 

Needless to say, this cost NCL some future cruise credits to assuage our disappointment (Moscow was a highlight of the Baltics Cruise).

 

So I would say they do adequate investigation, they 3rd-party insure (who do their own investigations), and they take responsibility when things happen, even when they're beyond NCL's control.

 

S

[Mooder]

I don't know the answer, but I know I was glad to see a staff person joining us on a shore excursion we took in St. Martin. It made me feel they do quality control.

[Zeno]

After reading the excellent Cruise Critic Main Page article on Shore Excursion Savvy yesterday, I realized that I have never seen any posts mentioning how NCL actually goes about making sure everything is in order for excursion operators they use. –

From article:

“Cruise lines hold tour operators responsible for quality control as well as make sure that all necessities -- liability insurance, registration and other areas of compliance -- are complete.”

Does anyone actually know what form of audit and what frequency is used to assure compliance? I think we all expect NCL to check validity of documentation supplied by operators, but do they? I wonder if they check whether document records are authentic and current or do they just ask the operators? And how often? After all, forged documents are not so hard to imagine anywhere, let alone some third world countries. Just wondering.

 

I don't know if how frequently or thoroughly NCL checks out the private operators it uses. In my experience with tours taken through NCL, I only had safety concerns on one - a snorkeling excursion in Belize (I felt the boat was overcrowded and there were not enough tour employees in the water to ensure safety (conditions were rough and there were a lot of novice snorkelers) and the boat's announcements were nearly inaudible. The only good thing I had to say was that the operators were very diligent about making sure everyone knew the appropriate hand signals for distress etc in the water. As a result I would probably hesitate before booking a snorkeling excursion with NCL.

[Cosmopolitan]

After reading the excellent Cruise Critic Main Page article on Shore Excursion Savvy yesterday, I realized that I have never seen any posts mentioning how NCL actually goes about making sure everything is in order for excursion operators they use. –

 

From article:

“Cruise lines hold tour operators responsible for quality control as well as make sure that all necessities -- liability insurance, registration and other areas of compliance -- are complete.”

 

Does anyone actually know what form of audit and what frequency is used to assure compliance? I think we all expect NCL to check validity of documentation supplied by operators, but do they? I wonder if they check whether document records are authentic and current or do they just ask the operators? And how often? After all, forged documents are not so hard to imagine anywhere, let alone some third world countries. Just wondering.

 

Due to recent circumstances...

I would DEFINITELY use an NCL excursion.

 

Unless you are "walking" the port on your own;)

[Hobbins]

Thanks for the replies. It seems there is no definitive information so far. It is good to know that at least NCL's insurance company is looking out for itself and that NCL people take some of those excursions. I am still wondering how NCL accomplishes what the article indicated. I would not expect them to only rely on the insurance company and experiences of their people on the excursion. The article clearly said the cruise lines took a very active part. My suspicion is that they do not do all that we kind of hope they do. I hope I'm wrong about that.

 

Cosmopolitan's remark about definitely using NCL was my own feeling that I questioned and the reason for this post. I felt that certainly it must be safer to take an NCL excursion...but how would I actually know that? Where's the proof? Anyone can have an accident and if you ask any excusion operator if they are safe they will all say yes. I am not convinced any cruise lines's excusions are necessarily safer than the private ones, especially since they seem to operate with many more people per guide.

 

Maybe next time I go on an NCL excursion I will ask the operator if he knows what NCL does to assure their standards. I bet he won't know what I'm talking about.:)

[newmexicoNita]

Thanks for the replies. It seems there is no definitive information so far. It is good to know that at least NCL's insurance company is looking out for itself and that NCL people take some of those excursions. I am still wondering how NCL accomplishes what the article indicated. I would not expect them to only rely on the insurance company and experiences of their people on the excursion. The article clearly said the cruise lines took a very active part. My suspicion is that they do not do all that we kind of hope they do. I hope I'm wrong about that.

 

Cosmopolitan's remark about definitely using NCL was my own feeling that I questioned and the reason for this post. I felt that certainly it must be safer to take an NCL excursion...but how would I actually know that? Where's the proof? Anyone can have an accident and if you ask any excusion operator if they are safe they will all say yes. I am not convinced any cruise lines's excusions are necessarily safer than the private ones, especially since they seem to operate with many more people per guide.

 

Maybe next time I go on an NCL excursion I will ask the operator if he knows what NCL does to assure their standards. I bet he won't know what I'm talking about.:)

I too think I prefer to use the cruise lines tours: yes, they are more expensive and often not a personable, but I think right now I feel safer. I have been on a couple private tours that I would recommend and I would use again. NMNita

[TinAngel]

Seems NCL has to have a Risk Management insurance staff that includes professionals with real world "hands on" skills.

 

I did this stuff off and on as a consultant.

 

Seems we have a fair indication of accidents from this and that cruisecritic.com? the place that post "incidents". I am amazed that there are so few SCUBA and snorkeling or water accidents. Private cabs seem to be issue number one then buses.

 

People also have to use that inner feeling, if it looks bad it may be so.

Like I lecture on: please if you want to snorkel get a decent vest. The Mrs and I but mostly her now (as I am now disabled) do look at SCUBA gear and such, heck I checked the O2 tank facility of where she was diving on Roatan and guess what, the manager allowed me to have a "tour" he said I was the first person ever to request looking at the SCUBA gear area and that I wanted to see the O2 filling made him very happy. This was , what last year, on NCL. I did have a "SCUBA" insignia on my hat but suspect he would have shown anyone.

 

I am also one who books local excursions but I know the staff capacities.

CC's SCUBA and Snorkel board is great, be carefull: esp with ATV's, scooters, mopeds and "Jeeps". I have a few friends in Cozumel who tell me they can meet NCL's safety issues but not the volume of people they would have to take. We (The Mrs. and I) also are bilingual, she fluent, I can order a

dinner:D in Spanish.

 

Joe

 

Some the local "Hotels" have excursions in a few Ports that are very scary.

[marilynd]

Even though the cost of an NCL excursion can cost more than booking on your own, I like the security of knowing that the shore excursion desk is aware of the tour and the ship will not leave the port without those on the excursion onboard.

 

On my last cruise our tour was late. We were on the bus returning to Cabo at the time all passengers were to be onboard the Star. Our tour guide received a call on his cellphone from the ship and informed them that we would be about 1/2 hour late. We arrived and were hustled off to the last tender and onboard the ship as other passengers waited. On a excursion booked individually we may have been waving at the departing Star sailing off into the distance.

[Hobbins]

Yes, I agree it's a great feeling to know the ship will wait for you. This alone may be worth the extra money, safety not considered. No matter what, I like Tinangel's approach in that you make a judgement for yourself about what your "inner feeling" is tellig you. Regardless if the excursion is through NCL or not. I wouldn't blindly rely on the operator assuring safety. But it would be kind of awkward to pay for a tour and then find the equipment or actions of a driver, for instance, less than what you considered safe. Anyone been in that kind of situation? What did you do?

[iancal]

I do not think that you should feel very secure about NCL's words, or any other cruise company, for that matter around the '...we ensure that....' After an incident on RCI a few years ago regarding medical treatment, it became VERY clear that they have everything covered. In our case, the medical service was 'outsourced' therefore the possiblily of legal action against the cruise line was significantly reduced. Combine this, the laws of the country that you are visiting, and the high cost of any action in another country and you will find that you have little recourse. I am sure that they occasionally have the odd inspection for quality, safely, value, etc but this is not a big deal. On our Feb Sun cruise many were complaining about safetly on the Samana tours-things like not enough or NO life preservers. We usually go private, not for the price but for the quality/value/people ratio.