Should HAL follow suit

[sail7seas]

deleted by poster

[kakalina]

Well I am glad to see that some folks think their opinion is the only opinion. I don't care one way or the other. I think the restrictions that HAL has in place are strict enough. As an ex-smoker it won't bother me, but as an ex-smoker I don't think it is right to discriminate against smokers. And I don't care how anyone else see it, it is discrimination. It is not illegal and therefore should not be the concern of anyone other than the smoker.

[Golfette]

It is of concern to everyone (or should be). Second-hand smoke is dangerous. If a smoker has a balcony next to a nonsmoker, then the nonsmoker is going to get the smoke. Smokers don't realize how easy it is to smell smoke. For those concerned smokers who don't want to bother nonsmokers - I would like to see a few designated areas where they can smoke. But, as Saltybill says, dividing a room into two parts - smoking & non-smoking - is ridiculous. Smoke takes over wherever it is.

[Gonzo70]

Did I misread but didn't NCL also announce tigher smoking restrictions?

 

Yes, NCL announced very stringent restrictions on smoking (i.e. all indoor bars/lounges smoke free except for casino and a cigar bar. I think that HAL needs to ban smoking in both staterooms and balconies ASAP. They seem to do a good having some smoke free bars, but could use a couple more per ship. Also need more smoke-free outdoor areas (i.e. designate a couple outdoor spots for smoking, but not massive areas. I agree that having a bar half smoking, half non-smoking makes no sense. Allow smoking in a couple of bars for now. The non-smokers can stay away from those. The cruise lines are definitely lagging behind the rest of the world in restricting smoking.

[jtl513]

The whole industry in going to be watching what happens on RCI, of course. Since smoking will still be allowed on verandahs, the main effect will be to "force" smokers to book verandah cabins, or leave their cabins periodically.

 

As an ex-smoker I like the idea, because there's nothing more repulsive to me now than to get a rental car or hotel room that stinks of stale smoke residue.

[Dena]

Now that HAL is offering As You Wish Dining, DH and I are considering it as an alternative to Princess. However, if HAL has, or soon will have, a higher percentage of smokers than Princess, we'll just stay put.

 

I remember reading some time ago that HAL caters to smokers - much more so other lines (except maybe Costa). If this is still true, and HAL does not keep pace with the times on this issue, then it really isn't an option for us.

 

How can we learn which of the mainstream lines have the fewest smokers?

[Hondu]

I would like to see a ban on the balconies. How many cruisers really complain about stink cabins? Not that I won't be please with the restriction in the cabins too. But I have been on 22 cruises, with only 3 of them in a balcony cabin. Would you believe that most of the time the balcony was unusable because of cigar and cigarette smokers? That's darn annoying when you spend the extra money for the added enjoyment of a balcony.

[Hondu]

Other lines implementing smoking restrictions in 2008:

 

Regent Seven Seas

Update as of July 5, 2007:

In light of continuing legislative changes in smoking policies around the world as well as the comfort, health and safety of our guests and crew, both in terms of the proven dangers of second hand smoke and the fire hazard that smoking presents, Regent Seven Seas Cruises will be changing our policy of smoking in staterooms, suites and on private balconies. Not only does smoking present a fire hazard, but it is also an inconvenience to other guests as the smoke, or its odor, invades surrounding suites, balconies and public areas, creating discomfort for the guests in these areas. Smoking will therefore be prohibited in all staterooms, suites and balconies fleet-wide.

This change will take effect on the following dates:

Seven Seas Voyager: December 21, 2007

Seven Seas Mariner: December 21, 2007

Seven Seas Navigator: December 27, 2007

Paul Gauguin: December 29, 2007

Failure to comply with this ban will result in guests being asked to leave the ship at their expense, without refund or credit for the unused portion of their cruise.

 

********************************

 

NEW YORK, June 18, 2007 – Peter Deilmann Cruises is expanding the no-smoking restrictions on its European river fleet to include all areas inside the vessels without exception beginning in 2008. The policy will become effective at the start of the river cruise season in March 2008, the cruise line announced today. Peter Deilmann Cruises, which operates a fleet of nine river vessels, first extended the smoke-free areas on its ships in 2005 to include all cabins and corridors along with its no-smoking policy in the restaurants. Now smoking will only be permitted on the open decks.

 

“We are happy to have our river ships smoke free now that the laws in Europe are evolving to ban smoking indoors and we are adjusting our policy to reflect this shift in sentiment. The changing attitude in Europe helps us please our American guests even more”, Ron Santangelo, Deilmann’s North America president, said in announcing the new policy.

 

“This change fits surprisingly well with the growing interests of the majority of Americans who seem to prefer non-smoking environments.

[Arizona Cruiser II]

I don't see smoking as the main point here.

Should HAL change to what the other lines are doing, when does it stop.

[serendipity1499]

Yes, I believe Smoking should be banned both in cabins & on balcony's...They should however, have designated Smoking areas..

 

Oceania bans smoking in Cabins & Balcony's & are doing very well..They've even ordered two more larger ships.. Oceania has two designated places for smokers & don't seem to have any problem with enforcing the rule..

 

You might be interested in reading post No. 61 of this thread:This lady's cabin mate was thrown off the Insignia, after being warned once about smoking on their balcony..It's very funny!

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=509662&page=4&highlight=smoking

 

Florida banned smoking in restaurants several years ago..All the restaurants were up in arms & said they would lose business..It was just as Bryan mentioned about SFO & NYC.. Business actually increased!

 

JMO..:) Betty

[bUU]

I don't see smoking as the main point here.

I agree. The main point is: "What's going to help the company achieve its goals best?" Not from the perspective of what all of us should necessarily want, but from the perspective of what they will do.

 

Should HAL change to what the other lines are doing

As long as the changes are for the good, as is in this case IMHO, surely.

[BruceMuzz]

Copper has it right. How does the cruise line PROVE that somebody was smoking in the cabin? Hidden video cameras, lie detector tests, fingerprinting of ashtrays and cigarette butts? Suppose the occupant claims that it was the cabin steward smoking in his cabin - or smoke blowing in from a nearby balcony?

I can see plenty of lawsuits coming to RCCL. Maybe Judge Judy can get a job on a ship????

[bepsf]

Copper has it right. How does the cruise line PROVE that somebody was smoking in the cabin? Hidden video cameras, lie detector tests, fingerprinting of ashtrays and cigarette butts? Suppose the occupant claims that it was the cabin steward smoking in his cabin - or smoke blowing in from a nearby balcony?

I can see plenty of lawsuits coming to RCCL. Maybe Judge Judy can get a job on a ship????

 

Have you ever seen a Cabin Steward smoking while working - much less any crew member smoking ever?

 

And the "the smoke flew in the door when I opened it" excuse doesn't fly with me either - smoke dissipates outside too quickly when the ship is underway for it to come indoors even if the door were to remain open the entire time (which is also not a good idea...)

 

Cigarette/Cigar smoking is entirely appropriate in the Cigar/Smoking Room and plenty of places on deck. I don't see that it will be a problem for RCCL, hasn't been a problem for Oceania, wouldn't be a problem for HAL.

[seaisme]

My vote is to have a "smoking room" like at the airports...where all the smokers can breathe in all that smoke and not annoy others. Don't want to sound like a prude...used to be a smoker and never realized how disgusting my smoke was to non-smokers. There are a lot of considerate smokers out there...but then again, there are as many non-considerate ones who can ruin an enjoyable experience for others due to their smoking.

[eh2zed]

bicker has it right. Cruise lines will do what is best for their shareholders. Throughout much of the world smoking restrictions are becoming the norm. Generally this has been good for business. Many business owners who vehemently opposed restrictions are now thankful.

Enforcement is a red herring and is always the first argument used by those in opposition to any regulatory change . Been there. People generally are law abiding and smokers have adapted to restrictions elsewhere. I acknowledge that restricting smoking in a downtown restaurant where you are only spending an hour or two is different than 7/14/21+ days on a cruise ship. Thats why I am sure and hope smokers will be accommodated.

I predict HAL will follow RCCL, NCL, Disney, Regent, Oceana. They have to. In todays world there is no positive business case to be considered smoker friendly. And at the end of the day it is mostly about dividends to CCL shareholders.:) :D :) :D

[Sea King]

I don't see smoking as the main point here.

Should HAL change to what the other lines are doing, when does it stop.

 

sorry, but that was the point of the thread:rolleyes:

 

the issue is this simple: when will the majority finally take priority to an ever decreasing minority

 

with respect to Copper, enforcement is IMHO irrelevant at this point .. implementing a change is where the focus should be not only because of health concerns but also because of safety and quite frankly annoyance to other pax

 

there may be a small, very small, segment of pax who will either not sail or chose another line (if this thread is at all representative that percentage will be insignificant at best) but I doubt that will occur any more than pax refused to sail when Lido and the dining room went totally smoke free

 

will HAL follow suit

 

for once, let's hope so

[catl331]

on a Med. cruise, a very 'considerate' gentleman chose not to smoke his hourly cigars in his cabin but on the veranda. Therefore, we could not sit or open our veranda door. There were times the stench came in anyway! This ship had a cigar smoking lounge which he should have used. Yuk. Smoking should be limited to a smoking lounge only like in the manor days when they retired after dinner with their smoking jackets to the smoking room.:eek: yuk

[mickeyfitz]

The simple fact is that people are becoming less and less tolerant of smoking. I grew up with parents and relatives who all smoked and thought nothing of it at the time. Now, however, I have largely become used to the absence of smoking. Many cities and states have banned smoking in places of public accomodation and people are getting used to it. In May we spent 4 nights in Rome before our cruise on the Westerdam (it was great!) and I noted that even Italy, where smoking has been a passion, has now actually banned smoking in restaurants and bars. It simply is the trend for the future, like it or not, and businesses will have to continue to recognize and accomodate people's expectations.

[sail7seas]

I know it is hard for people who do not live in 'non-smoking' states to understand how those of us who are used to rarely being exposed to smoke feel when we board the ships and there happen to be many smokers.

 

We are used to going about our everyday lives and rarely being near a smoking person. Suddenly we have to adjust to the fact that people are permitted to smoke in places they are not permitted to smoke during our 'regular lives'.

 

Of course we have an opinion about it. Those who support making no changes to existing smoking policy have their opinions also.

 

Our opinions obviously differ. That is the reason for this conversation.

If we all agreed, there would be nothing to discuss in this thread.

[bUU]

Very true, and that rather raises the question, "What is the context for the word 'should'?" Is the question, "Do you prefer a smoking or non-smoking environment?" Or is the question, "Is HAL's best long-term financial interest best served by a smoking or non-smoking environment?" Or something in-between? It's got to be confusing if different people are answering different questions and trying to reconcile what each other are saying! :)

[CroozeAddict]

:( :( :( :(

[CroozeAddict]

follow the world wide trend to more smoking restrictions.

 

Ever been to Europe or Asia? There is very little restriction there and none in Asia. I'd venture to say that the same applies to S. America and Africa.

[pvlover]

Crooze Addict, sorry, but you are dead wrong about Europe. Restrictions abound and are enforced. For instance, see message above re. Italy.

[mickeyfitz]

Even the once smoke-filled pubs in Britain and Ireland are now smoke free. More and more people are simply getting used to smoke-free public places.

[jtl513]

Even the once smoke-filled pubs in Britain and Ireland are now smoke free. More and more people are simply getting used to smoke-free public places.

In Britain now too? I know about Ireland and Scotland, but I find it hard to believe with the amount of smoking we encountered in London pubs on the three trips (last one in '05) that they would/could ever make them non-smoking! :eek:

 

Edit: I just checked and found out you're right ... England's ban just started July 1 this year ... 25 days ago. Wow!