Grand Princess November 2013 Suicide

[Escapes2010]

I am posting this for opinions. I was on the November 2013 cruise on the Grand Princess to Hawaii. We had a passenger go overboard (suicide) on November 13th. We lost our port stop in Kauai and all Luau's were cancelled in Honolulu. We have to circle in the sea for 2 days until the Coastguard arrived. I emailed Customer Relations and received a call from them regarding any FFC compensations being considered for the losses and inconvenience on this cruise. I was told the Board decided no compensation was in order and none to be given. I accepted their decision and reasons.

 

On January 4th cruise on the Grand Princess to Hawaii, a staff member jumped overboard and committed suicide, causing the same losses to passengers (Hilo Cancelled). Princess Cruise Lines gave all passengers a 20% discount for a FFC.

 

Do you think this is fair that the passengers on the January sailing received a compensation and not our passengers on the November 2013 cruise. Same incident, same inconveniences. ?

 

Our suicide jumper did it at 1pm in front of someone and caused an immediate trauma to passengers with announcement that "Man Overboard" and security and staff running everywhere. The January suicide jumper did it late at night with no witnesses. A Opus Band member discovered his uniform near a bathroom and reported it with no immediate trauma to passengers.

 

I find it unfair to give the January passengers a 20% FFC and not the November 2013 passengers. What is your opinion.

[Gunner22aa]

Perhaps the cruise line decided that because it was a crew member and he was their responsibility that compensation was in order as opposed to a passenger. That's the only reason I can think of as to the decision that they took.

[Pam in CA]

I think both are very sad. It's hard to imagine that someone would go this route to end their lives, but they do. :(

 

As for fairness, I'm not familiar with the circumstances nor the legalities involved so I can't comment. They may be similar on the surface but there could be a number of important differences. I don't know. There are a number of variables such as crew member vs. passenger.

 

Several years ago, I was on the Coral Princess and we were asked to participate in a search for lost seamen. It didn't affect our schedule but then it wouldn't occur to me to ask for a refund or compensation. All boats and ships participate in rescues and searches. It's what mariners do.

[kendon]

My son goes to a maritime academy, and to think that the world would stop in order to help him is a wonderful feeling (heaven forbid anything happened at sea!). Thanks for a nice post Pam.

[Psychedout]

My son goes to a maritime academy, and to think that the world would stop in order to help him is a wonderful feeling (heaven forbid anything happened at sea!). Thanks for a nice post Pam.

 

Agree!!

 

Hugh

[JimmyVWine]

I think this issue has to be looked at from the perspective of passengers and the effect on the respective itineraries. If PCL concluded that the January passengers had the enjoyment of their cruise impacted enough to warrant a 20% FCC, then it is only natural to weigh and balance the impact on their cruise in comparison to the November cruise. I do not know enough to make that call. But if the November cruise was impacted to a similar degree, then it would be fair to offer similar compensation. My guess is that PCL took some heat from passengers on the November cruise and decided not to go through that again, and offered up 20% hoping and expecting that the November passengers would have put this behind them by now. So you lost out by being first. Have you contacted PCL since the January event to let them know that you are aware of the 20% offer and think that they should re-visit your situation? It could be that they will give it to anyone who asks, but aren't publicizing it so that they do not have to give the benefit to everyone. Rest assured that if you have noticed an incongruity in response, someone at HQ has noticed the same thing. It might be that you have to be a proactive squeaky wheel here. (And again, this assumes that there is a high degree of equality in circumstances, which I simply do not know.)

Edited February 5, 2014 by JimmyVWine

[Escapes2010]

I think this issue has to be looked at from the perspective of passengers and the effect on the respective itineraries. If PCL concluded that the January passengers had the enjoyment of their cruise impacted enough to warrant a 20% FCC, then it is only natural to weigh and balance the impact on their cruise in comparison to the November cruise. I do not know enough to make that call. But if the November cruise was impacted to a similar degree, then it would be fair to offer similar compensation. My guess is that PCL took some heat from passengers on the November cruise and decided not to go through that again, and offered up 20% hoping and expecting that the November passengers would have put this behind them by now. So you lost out by being first. Have you contacted PCL since the January event to let them know that you are aware of the 20% offer and think that they should re-visit your situation? It could be that they will give it to anyone who asks, but aren't publicizing it so that they do not have to give the benefit to everyone. Rest assured that if you have noticed an incongruity in response, someone at HQ has noticed the same thing. It might be that you have to be a proactive squeaky wheel here. (And again, this assumes that there is a high degree of equality in circumstances, which I simply do not know.)

 

Yes, I contacted PCL CR and am sure I'll receive a call soon from them as I did with the November cruise. And yes, as stated in my original post, the equality of circumstances were almost identical in port loss, lost time at sea, cancellations. I have a personal friend that was on the January cruise and another friend who's friend was on the January cruise. My other friend mentioned last was with me on the November cruise.

[kiwipete]

I am posting this for opinions. I was on the November 2013 cruise on the Grand Princess to Hawaii. We had a passenger go overboard (suicide) on November 13th. We lost our port stop in Kauai and all Luau's were cancelled in Honolulu. We have to circle in the sea for 2 days until the Coastguard arrived. I emailed Customer Relations and received a call from them regarding any FFC compensations being considered for the losses and inconvenience on this cruise. I was told the Board decided no compensation was in order and none to be given. I accepted their decision and reasons.

 

On January 4th cruise on the Grand Princess to Hawaii, a staff member jumped overboard and committed suicide, causing the same losses to passengers (Hilo Cancelled). Princess Cruise Lines gave all passengers a 20% discount for a FFC.

 

Do you think this is fair that the passengers on the January sailing received a compensation and not our passengers on the November 2013 cruise. Same incident, same inconveniences. ?

 

Our suicide jumper did it at 1pm in front of someone and caused an immediate trauma to passengers with announcement that "Man Overboard" and security and staff running everywhere. The January suicide jumper did it late at night with no witnesses. A Opus Band member discovered his uniform near a bathroom and reported it with no immediate trauma to passengers.

 

I find it unfair to give the January passengers a 20% FFC and not the November 2013 passengers. What is your opinion.

 

The old W.I.I.F.M. bug strikes again.

[Escapes2010]

The old W.I.I.F.M. bug strikes again.

 

Pete, what does W.I.I.F.M. mean?

[CI66774]

Pete, what does W.I.I.F.M. mean?

 

What's in it for me....

[bdjam]

The old W.I.I.F.M. bug strikes again.

 

Amen brother. Two people were in such distress that they decided to end their lives. Asking for or expecting compensation, in my opinion, is callous at best. Why Princess provides it to one cruise and not another isn't my business and I certainly wouldn't ask for parity if Princess hadn't compensated me. At least in this kind of a situation.

[kiwipete]

What's in it for me....

 

Correct

[JimmyVWine]

Why Princess provides it to one cruise and not another isn't my business and I certainly wouldn't ask for parity if Princess hadn't compensated me. At least in this kind of a situation.

 

But since the OP was on one of those two cruises, it is their business. I certainly can see your side, but since Princess crossed the Rubicon, the OP's position is not unreasonable. We may not share that view, but it doesn't make the other side untenable. Someone at PCL concluded that offering compensation was not callous.

[caribill]

I agree with those who posted the difference was due to a passenger vs. a crew member.

[Mom33]

I agree with those who posted the difference was due to a passenger vs. a crew member.

 

I think so too. Perhaps travel interruption insurance would have compensated the OP, if they had it.

[paul929207]

I can see a difference between the employee committing suicide and a passenger doing it.

[jean s]

I agree that it is probably due to the fact that one of the deceased was a crew member. Thinking about this situation however I would not expect nor would I ask for any kind of compensation. Suicide is a tragedy for all involved.

[fluffyscruffy]

Sorry you have not gotten the 20% FCC. I was on the January 4th sailing and although it happened at about 1:00 am we were awaken by an announcement in the cabin first calling security personnel. Then received, I think, 3 more announcements throughout the night keeping us informed and providing some direction if we needed to move about the ship. It was a very disturbing and sad event. The captain was very good about keeping us informed throughout the search. I think Princess made the best of a bad situation on this cruise and I do appreciate the FCC. I hope they come through for you as well.

[beckntom]

But since the OP was on one of those two cruises, it is their business. I certainly can see your side, but since Princess crossed the Rubicon, the OP's position is not unreasonable. We may not share that view, but it doesn't make the other side untenable. Someone at PCL concluded that offering compensation was not callous.

 

 

JimmyVWine, I am always glad to see your responses or follow-up responses to threads like this. (Why this one is controversial, I am not sure.) In any event, I can count on you to be fair, well spoken, and well informed. Even if I don't always agree with you (which is seldom), I ALWAYS respect your opinion and how you voice it. Thank you.

 

To Escapes2010, in MY opinion, you made a very reasonable request of Princess and posted about it here in a compassionate, reasonable manner. Please ignore some of the people on this thread and continue with your Cruise Critic involvement. I look forward to hearing from you again.

[JimmyVWine]

JimmyVWine, I am always glad to see your responses or follow-up responses to threads like this. (Why this one is controversial, I am not sure.) In any event, I can count on you to be fair, well spoken, and well informed. Even if I don't always agree with you (which is seldom), I ALWAYS respect your opinion and how you voice it. Thank you.

 

To Escapes2010, in MY opinion, you made a very reasonable request of Princess and posted about it here in a compassionate, reasonable manner. Please ignore some of the people on this thread and continue with your Cruise Critic involvement. I look forward to hearing from you again.

Thank you for the kind words. I will do my best in the future to live up to your lofty expectations. ;)

[IdahoCruises]

We owned a private yacht that cruised in the Washington San Juan Island for a number of years.

 

During that time, there were many marine emergencies we assisted in resolving.

 

It did impact our schedule, and cost us extra, but mariners come to mariners aid....

[Pam in CA]

I agree that it is probably due to the fact that one of the deceased was a crew member. Thinking about this situation however I would not expect nor would I ask for any kind of compensation. Suicide is a tragedy for all involved.

The bottom line is that any mariner on any ship or boat anywhere will go to the aid of another regardless of inconvenience or potential financial impact without expecting compensation. Passengers by default do the same. This is just a guess but I agree that Princess took responsibility because it was a crew member.

 

Thank you for the kind words. I will do my best in the future to live up to your lofty expectations. ;)

Count me in as a fan. :)

[calisilent]

I think both are very sad. It's hard to imagine that someone would go this route to end their lives, but they do. :(

 

As for fairness, I'm not familiar with the circumstances nor the legalities involved so I can't comment. They may be similar on the surface but there could be a number of important differences. I don't know. There are a number of variables such as crew member vs. passenger.

 

Several years ago, I was on the Coral Princess and we were asked to participate in a search for lost seamen. It didn't affect our schedule but then it wouldn't occur to me to ask for a refund or compensation. All boats and ships participate in rescues and searches. It's what mariners do.

Well said. Obviously no one wants to have their cruises interrupted for serious matters like men overboard, but we are humans and we are Mariners and if a man needs help it is a small thing to ask that everyone pitch in to do what we can to help.

[bdjam]

But since the OP was on one of those two cruises, it is their business. I certainly can see your side, but since Princess crossed the Rubicon, the OP's position is not unreasonable. We may not share that view, but it doesn't make the other side untenable. Someone at PCL concluded that offering compensation was not callous.

 

Well add me to the Jimmy Wine fan club list as well, but I disagree with you about this issue. The death of a fellow passenger can't be quantified by a 20% future cruise credit. As much as I have been touted as a Princess Cheerleader, I often question their corporate decisions and this would be one of those...although I don't know enough about the circumstances that brought about the compensation for one cruise vs. the other. Large businesses more often than not rely on dollars to resolve unfortunate issues.

 

While I'm sure in their heart, they feel differently, the original poster expressed no concern for the unfortunate person who perished. They requested compensation after their cruise and before the second suicide and subsequent pay out. There was only a concern about getting compensated for being inconvenienced and a conveyed sense of unfair play. That's what I find callous.

[hotdogworm]

I am fairly confident the reason for the difference is passenger vs employee. Cruise lines aren't in the habit of compensated for inconveniences, etc due to passengers. For example, there would be no compensation for a rude table mate that ruined your cruise. However, if company employee some how ruined your cruise, you may get some compensation, as supposedly, companies have control over (are responsible for) their employees.