Safety Issue on the Jade

[dtracker]

Good luck and best wishes, G-Funk.

Happy Sailing,

 

DT

[JsMom2]

I was also on the sailing the OP was on. I think the main problem is that the crew is not used to tender operations. The Jade usually docks at all of the ports on both her current itineraries. And since I was on the Jade last December I can say with certainty that there was a large turnover of crew members between then and the March 29th sailing we were on with the OP.

 

The stop at Nafplion wasn't solidified until the day prior, and the tendering operation was a madhouse for everyone, not just those with limited mobility! We had VIP tickets, since we were in a suite, and it was still almost impossible for us to get off. When we got down to deck 5, the stairway to deck 4 was roped off, and the passengers had formed a huge mob. They were in fact ready to riot as I searched for a crew member. Eventually a few officers finally came down to deck 5 where everyone was lined up. They looked absolutely overwhelmed as the passengers started yelling at them.

 

Finally I went up a deck, and called the concierge who was actually down in the middle of the mess. She escorted us off, and we got on the next tender - that one situation alone made the suite so worth it!

 

So yes, NCL messed up. The crew should practice tendering operations, so that they are always prepared to execute them safely and efficiently. But I honestly don't think the OP was any more inconvenienced than anyone else. I think the people that carried him off, did the best they could at that moment. I'm sure they would've preferred to use the chairlift, but in the chaos didn't know it was an option. Believe me, it wasn't a case of everyone except the person with mobility problems being taken care of. I'm sure there were plenty of complaints about the tendering mess, and there is only so much that can be done after the fact.

 

Also, I was told by the front desk that they are not allowed to setup a queue line because of the Freestyle concept. The person I spoke to said they'd tried to explain to the head office in Miami that the passengers were getting upset because there were no clear lines to wait in. But she said they will not allow it. I wonder if this impacts on the the ability of the ship to setup queues for tender loading.

 

I just hope that the Jade crew learns from this incident. In the old days, the Captain could've issued an apology to everyone on board. But with today's litigious environment, its just really not an option.

[SPMorrissey]

we also were on a cruise that was diverted from Pireaus to Naplion because of a strike - only difference was that Athens was the termination of the cruise. So they had to tender over 700 passengers and their luggage. What a harrowing ride that was at 10pm and when we arrived at the dock the tender was too low to unload the wheelchair up a ramp. so they had 4 burly Greeks lift me in the wheelchair up over their heads and on to the dock. We have tendered many times since in other ports of the world, but never would I risk it if I deemed it unsafe. We make a point to travel on new ships equipped with lifts for wheelchairs or similar arrangements. I make sure that I, and not the crew at the tender, determine what I think is safe.

OHHH 4 burly Greek men can lift me over their heads anyday.

[CanadaFour]

So yes, NCL messed up. The crew should practice tendering operations, so that they are always prepared to execute them safely and efficiently. But I honestly don't think the OP was any more inconvenienced than anyone else. I think the people that carried him off, did the best they could at that moment. I'm sure they would've preferred to use the chairlift, but in the chaos didn't know it was an option. Believe me, it wasn't a case of everyone except the person with mobility problems being taken care of. I'm sure there were plenty of complaints about the tendering mess, and there is only so much that can be done after the fact.

.

 

We are not discussing the inconvenience of a disordered tendering process-- which was certainly shared by the others-- but the issue of safety. If you felt that the safety of others was compromised by the 'mob', then you are discussing a comparable situation. Were others trampled or fearful of this? From your description, this wasn't the case. You are discussing the frustration and inconvenience of others. Very, very different matter. The OP felt (with full justification) that his safety was compromised by the crew behaviour. NCL has responsibilities (legal and ethical) to ensure the safety of passengers.

[mbisson]

As for a response from NCL, since I know they look at this board, I don't know if he'll get one or not. Maybe a little, 'thank you for bringing this to our attention' is all that's in order as far as a reply

 

When someone says something like "we will not sail NCL again and I would suggest the same to others", it may be best to just take whatever onboard actions they deem necessary and let it go.

[Arwenmark]

JSmom2,

This is not about inconvenience. the point is that they should NEVER lift someone in a wheelchair, it is NOT designed for it. Secondly trying to carry one down a flight of stairs means that they are jockeying for position as they try to go down, One slight tip, one incidence of the arm of the chair letting go, or someone being caught on something etc. and the OP could have easily tumbled down those stairs. In my case I could have easily been dumped in the ocean.

This is a safety issue and NCL is responsible for the safety on their ship. An appology would do nothing. Fixing the situation so it never happens to anyone else would be a start.

[G-Funk]

As for a response from NCL, since I know they look at this board, I don't know if he'll get one or not. Maybe a little, 'thank you for bringing this to our attention' is all that's in order as far as a reply

 

When someone says something like "we will not sail NCL again and I would suggest the same to others", it may be best to just take whatever onboard actions they deem necessary and let it go.

 

If they do what you suggested in your first paragraph, it will be yet another failure for NCL.

 

Now that the problem has been presented to them in writing, they only need to do 3 things, in order:

 

1. Acknowledge there was a problem;

2. Develop plans and actions to ensure that it will not happen in the future;

3. Implement those plans and actions.

 

Failure to complete all 3 steps would be a failure.

 

Real success would be a follow up 6 months to a year after the fact to ensure the implemention of the plans and steps went as designed. That's what really successful customer-oriented companies do.

 

You seem to be offended by the fact that I have no desire to sail NCL again and that I would counsel others that ask me similarly. In the absence of any changes, I have to stand by that opinion.

 

I would suggest that you are so quick to defend NCL in all circumstances (in this thread and many others) that you are unfairly closeminded and cannot be counted on for any objective opinions. Ironically, I am probably doing more to help the company by identifying issues that they can address than you are by blindly defending them. That's pretty funny.

[mbisson]

If they do what you suggested in your first paragraph, it will be yet another failure for NCL.

 

Now that the problem has been presented to them in writing, they only need to do 3 things, in order:

 

1. Acknowledge there was a problem;

2. Develop plans and actions to ensure that it will not happen in the future;

3. Implement those plans and actions.

 

Failure to complete all 3 steps would be a failure.

 

Real success would be a follow up 6 months to a year after the fact to ensure the implemention of the plans and steps went as designed. That's what really successful customer-oriented companies do.

 

You seem to be offended by the fact that I have no desire to sail NCL again and that I would counsel others that ask me similarly. In the absence of any changes, I have to stand by that opinion.

 

I would suggest that you are so quick to defend NCL in all circumstances (in this thread and many others) that you are unfairly closeminded and cannot be counted on for any objective opinions. Ironically, I am probably doing more to help the company by identifying issues that they can address than you are by blindly defending them. That's pretty funny.

 

 

I'm not offended at all that you won't sail NCL ever again. It lessens the chances that I would ever meet you. :D

 

As for the rest of this post of yours---Pure Bull Pucky! (I have another phrase that more closely matches your post, but it would be deleted). BTW-your 3 steps, could be completed without responding to you & I haven't defended NCL at all in their handling of your problem--you just seem to believe than anything except complete acceptance of everything you say as a defense of them, & in this you are wrong. So yep, I was on your side until those last few words of your original post.

 

So go eat a hot dog & quit pretending you know me-

[mbisson]

dupl

[G-Funk]

I'm not offended at all that you won't sail NCL ever again. It lessens the chances that I would ever meet you. :D

 

As for the rest of this post of yours---Pure Bull Pucky! (I have another phrase that more closely matches your post, but it would be deleted). BTW-your 3 steps, could be completed without responding to you & I haven't defended NCL at all in their handling of your problem--you just seem to believe than anything except complete acceptance of everything you say as a defense of them, & in this you are wrong. So yep, I was on your side until those last few words of your original post.

 

So go eat a hot dog & quit pretending you know me-

 

I would not worry, the chance that you and I run in the same circles is pretty slim.

 

Loyalty is admirable and a great character trait . . . fanatacism just seems kind of stupid to me.

[mbisson]

I would not worry, the chance that you and I run in the same circles is pretty slim.

 

Loyalty is admirable and a great character trait . . . fanatacism just seems kind of stupid to me.

 

Agreed! You are a fanatic!

[G-Funk]

Agreed! You are a fanatic!

 

Wow!! The "I know you are but what am I defence". Well played sir!!

[mbisson]

Wow!! The "I know you are but what am I defence". Well played sir!!

 

 

And back at ya mam!

How could such a nice guy be treated so poorly? ROTFL-maybe it was karma!

[maggiecatenjay]

You're in the midst of a no-win... There are lots of us out here that sympathize with you and are glad you took the steps you did after such a frightening event.

 

An exchange like this is lose-lose-lose... You, the other person and those of us who are watching the thread. With the moderator taking a closer look these days, it seems the biggest loss would be your not being able to post NCL's response in this thread because Host Star (Star Host?) may very well close it...

 

You've had the high ground IMHO (way high)... don't let it go (or your cool) now.

 

BTW, there is an ignore thing-a-ma-jig someplace in personal settings... I'm heading there right now because I do not wish to be subjected to MBission's venom ever again. The inflammatory personal remarks are disturbing.

[G-Funk]

You're in the midst of a no-win... There are lots of us out here that sympathize with you and are glad you took the steps you did after such a frightening event.

 

An exchange like this is lose-lose-lose... You, the other person and those of us who are watching the thread. With the moderator taking a closer look these days, it seems the biggest loss would be your not being able to post NCL's response in this thread because Host Star (Star Host?) may very well close it...

 

You've had the high ground IMHO (way high)... don't let it go (or your cool) now.

 

BTW, there is an ignore thing-a-ma-jig someplace in personal settings... I'm heading there right now because I do not wish to be subjected to Bmission's venom ever again. The inflammatory personal remarks are disturbing.

 

Thanks and you are right. Sometimes it is hard to ignore, but I need to remember to consider the source. I appreciate your sage advice and will heed it immediately.

[4 cruisers]

OHHH 4 burly Greek men can lift me over their heads anyday.

 

Good one!!!!!:D

[4 cruisers]

Just wondering why, if the OP didn't feel comfortable with the way he was being transported to the tender, didn't he say "thanks, but I don't feel comfortable/safe with this arrangement?" Sure you didn't want to miss the port, but "stuff happens!"

[electricron]

Just wondering why, if the OP didn't feel comfortable with the way he was being transported to the tender, didn't he say "thanks, but I don't feel comfortable/safe with this arrangement?" Sure you didn't want to miss the port, but "stuff happens!"

 

Well, it wasn't until the OP returned to the ship and NCL used the stair chair climber (for lack of a better word/s) before the OP realized there was a safer way.

 

Did silence earlier mean approved consent? I honesty don't know.

[maggiecatenjay]

OP: "...and before you know it, I was transferred into a wheelchair and CARRIED, by 4 medium sized security personnel, down the 15 stairs on the port side of the ship and into a tender. It was by far the most terrifying experience of my life, and judging by the straining and grunting, no fun for them either. I weigh about 200 lbs, so with the wheelchair they are carrying about 220 lbs awkwardly down a narrow flight of stairs in a rocking ocean."

I certainly cannot speak for anyone but myself but I have been in situations that seemed to happen in a flash and I'd lost control of the situation and been either too terrified to speak OR too far into it when I regained my wits that objecting would make things even worse.

If somebody was going to pick me up I'd expect them to say something like "We're going to pick you up and... carry you..." NOT just pick me up like a non sentient sack of potatoes.

I certainly wasn't there but this is the impression I got.

[JsMom2]

We are not discussing the inconvenience of a disordered tendering process-- which was certainly shared by the others-- but the issue of safety. If you felt that the safety of others was compromised by the 'mob', then you are discussing a comparable situation. Were others trampled or fearful of this? From your description, this wasn't the case. You are discussing the frustration and inconvenience of others. Very, very different matter. The OP felt (with full justification) that his safety was compromised by the crew behaviour. NCL has responsibilities (legal and ethical) to ensure the safety of passengers.

 

Perhaps I didn't explain the situation properly. Yes, I myself felt threatened by the other passengers. As I was looking for a staff member, I had numerous people in my face telling me to get to the back of the line! People were pushing and shoving, and yelling, and we were worried for the children in our party. This is why we removed ourselves from the situation and called the concierge. On the way up the stairs, we passed a woman yelling at one of the front desk assistants. I think there was a scarcity of crew members in the area, because they were afraid of the passengers! Again, NCL messed up here, but hopefully they will do better next time.

 

It just seems that the OP kept demanding to go ashore, and so the crew members did the only thing they could at that point. I don't believe the starboard side was open for tendering until later in the day.

 

As others have said, the OP also had a responsibility to tell them "NO." I sympathize with the situation, but I don't think it's fair for the OP to let them carry him down 15 stairs, and then later say that it wasn't a safe thing to do.

[maggiecatenjay]

The man is/was wheelchair bound. It's not like he could step back with an outstretched hand chest-high protecting himself and say 'Whoa! Wait just a second!' as a person standing on two feet could!

 

They picked him up before he knew what was happening (AND I assume without warning) and he was on his way. Wouldn't it be a bit disorienting to be, all of a sudden moving when a moment ago you were at a standstill? Wouldn't it take a moment to get your bearings? And what if by then you were terrified of serious injury or drowning?

 

And I've not 'walked in his moccasins' by any means but I suspect fear of falling off the ramp/stairs was 1000 times more frightening than a non-wheelchair bound person. Being 100% at the mercy of others.

 

While the crowd situation must certainly have been harrowing (I was in a similar situation, I think once on the JFK Aircraft Carrier - VERY SCARY) a standing person could see it ... maybe on tip-toes... survey the situation and walk here or there to improve the immediate situaiton for the group... G-Funk was looking at people's belts and could probably see nor more than X feet from his position (I suspect).

 

I'm at a loss why this MAJOR factor escapes notice.

[SallyUK]

My DH works in safety for an airline and has done for a long time. Although I don't know NCL's view on this, I would imagine that they would say that their view is the same as an airline's: that is, that the safety of its passengers is paramount, way more important than whether you have a good time or whether you have your room cleaned on time.

 

However (and again I don't know, I hope James will post on this), staying on top of all of the safety issues is a major ongoing job. In the airline industry there are always new instructions, new things to take on and become part of procedure. The unfortunate fact is that planes (and I would imagine ships) become safer because an incident happens that then someone knows to write up and then there is a procedure in place. That's why I agree with the numerous posters that say this should be carried through to the end with NCL so that they are aware there is an issue and can act accordingly.

 

Although what happened to the OP was unpleasant, they were shaken up rather than harmed. In safety terms the issue should always be "if the same happened again, would other passengers be put at risk or can there be a lesson learned" in order to mitigate against any possible future safety issue. Crews are well trained and this is something that could easily be addressed through additional crew education.

[njhorseman]

My DH works in safety for an airline and has done for a long time. Although I don't know NCL's view on this, I would imagine that they would say that their view is the same as an airline's: that is, that the safety of its passengers is paramount, way more important than whether you have a good time or whether you have your room cleaned on time.

 

However (and again I don't know, I hope James will post on this), staying on top of all of the safety issues is a major ongoing job. In the airline industry there are always new instructions, new things to take on and become part of procedure. The unfortunate fact is that planes (and I would imagine ships) become safer because an incident happens that then someone knows to write up and then there is a procedure in place. That's why I agree with the numerous posters that say this should be carried through to the end with NCL so that they are aware there is an issue and can act accordingly.

 

Although what happened to the OP was unpleasant, they were shaken up rather than harmed. In safety terms the issue should always be "if the same happened again, would other passengers be put at risk or can there be a lesson learned" in order to mitigate against any possible future safety issue. Crews are well trained and this is something that could easily be addressed through additional crew education.

 

 

I doubt cruise ship crews are given saftey training at even a small fraction of the amount an airline crew is. Flight attendants go through rigorous training before ever setting foot on an aircraft.

[G-Funk]

My DH works in safety for an airline and has done for a long time. Although I don't know NCL's view on this, I would imagine that they would say that their view is the same as an airline's: that is, that the safety of its passengers is paramount, way more important than whether you have a good time or whether you have your room cleaned on time.

 

However (and again I don't know, I hope James will post on this), staying on top of all of the safety issues is a major ongoing job. In the airline industry there are always new instructions, new things to take on and become part of procedure. The unfortunate fact is that planes (and I would imagine ships) become safer because an incident happens that then someone knows to write up and then there is a procedure in place. That's why I agree with the numerous posters that say this should be carried through to the end with NCL so that they are aware there is an issue and can act accordingly.

 

Although what happened to the OP was unpleasant, they were shaken up rather than harmed. In safety terms the issue should always be "if the same happened again, would other passengers be put at risk or can there be a lesson learned" in order to mitigate against any possible future safety issue. Crews are well trained and this is something that could easily be addressed through additional crew education.

 

Interesting point, and one thing that I have not mentioned is this is not the first time I have been carried off a vessel. Last year, two men carried me off an Aer Lingus flight in Dublin because the gangway had broken down.

 

The experience was fine - the chair was designed to be carried, I was strapped into it, they told me exactly what would be happening, and they knew what they were doing. I had no problems whatsoever with the experience.

 

In the case of NCL, they might have had 1 of the 4 criteria above. They might have known what they were doing, I can give them the benefit of the doubt. The other 3 criteria - no way!

[G-Funk]

To report back on this issue, I just received a 1/2 page unsigned form letter from a coordinator of customer relations at NCL apologizing in general for any inconvenience I might have encountered on my cruise and giving me a form for a $100 OBC on a future cruise. It is obvious that I totally wasted my time even writing them a letter.

 

I thought service on the ship was bad - corporate managed to take a bad situation and make it even worse. It is doubtful they even read the letter, they certainly did not address any of the items in it, and then they did what I explicitly told them not to, which was give me something. This is a very disappointing conclusion to a sad situation.