Princesss fined $40 million for pollution

[greenie082756]

Not necessarily. I drive an electric car and I produce my own electricity via solar panels on the roof of my house.

 

Statistically speaking, you are one our of how many cars on the road? Same thing with cruise ships.

[lovey1103]

Really? Even though this has long since been corrected?

 

0 tolerance.

[thinfool]

0 tolerance.

 

I understand. But, fair warning, Royal Caribbean/Celebrity is guilty of the same offences. Princess is just the latest one to get caught.

 

And it would be no surprise if, in the future, some other cruise line will do it again.

[memoak]

Really? Even though this has long since been corrected?

 

Good luck finding a cruise line or holding company that has not been fined for this sort of thing before. RCCL took a huge fine as well for dumping - of course you need to boycott all lines run by Carnival or RCCL if that is your take on this.

[sfaaa]

Never say NO to a sweet cruise deal. You want to boycott and punish Princess over this, that's fine and it's your right. Just don't expect the rest of the world to follow suit especially with Wave Season just around the corner.

[SheriffJoe]

As Cheng has stated cruise ships are BY FAR the least polluters at sea even with these activities being as normal and that's exactly what they were, Standard Operating Procedures.....and as someone who has spent thousands of days at sea not getting served cocktails and eating great food I can tell all of you that those of you who are "outraged" should have done your homework prior to cruising becoming your favorite holiday....Cruise ships ages and anti pollution technology compared to commercial shipping vessels is like night and day so the next time you purchase something that was made somewhere that lies on the other side of an ocean from you, you may need to amp up your outrage even further...:rolleyes: Not to mention looking in the mirror and seeing a MAJOR contributor to ocean pollution....And to those all outraged about the effects of the UK coastline....you may want to look into the Royal Navy's midnight pump and dump procedures when cruising about 20 miles off your coast....:eek: LOL though I am sure it much better than it was 20 years ago...hopefully...

[tioalmsp]

Not surprised.....We all knew save the waves program was BS.

Greedy greedy companies.Sitting on the pool deck onRoyal princess right now. Not a bad cruise but something seems off. A few snarky employees ,staff seems lost. They were literally tieing their ties at the pub lunch today. Horizon court last night we were not asked if we wanted a drink. I went behind a station and poured us some ice water.few other strange happenings...sorry about typos on iPad wind is fierce.

 

This is a back to back ,New Captain,did not know the other was leaving.

 

Never had a bad cruise and thi is certainly not bad just has as strange vibe.

 

Back to my rum & coke ��

 

We just got off the Royal (4 days) on Wednesday and also thought something was off with the crew. This time the experience we had fell below our expectations. We share our feedback with Princess.

[jchris1230]

This is in no way OK!! All of that Crap, ruins delicate eco systems and kills plants, critters etc. in the ocean. The oceans are already in trouble due to being more acidic. People have no idea. There are so many good documentaries our there recently talking about this.

[buggins0402]

I guess what I find so disturbing is how pervasive the practice was among the fleet and how long it went on. It speaks volumes about the corporate culture.

 

The fact that other lines were caught doesn't make this more tolerable..... it makes it less tolerable!

Edited December 2, 2016 by buggins0402

[Cruiser411]

My take is that this was reported three years ago and an investigation started. Princess assisted with that investigation and the perpetrators have been fired. Since only 5 ships were involved (out of a fleet of 15-18 ships depending on the year) I would surmise that certain officers were involved as they moved from ship to ship. That the majority of their fleet was found to be compliant suggests that it wasn't a corporate mandate to cut costs.

 

Since Princess has taken corrective measures, I think we can be assured that their ships are probably the cleanest afloat, otherwise the punitive fine if they are found to be non-compliant again would be devastating.

 

At this point, I have no problem sailing with them again.

[chengkp75]

Here's some thoughts that I posted over on the Disney forum about this topic.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showpost.php?p=51678928&postcount=13

 

As I say there, while this is an inexcusable act, the severity of it is difficult to determine, and this is nowhere near a case of raw fuel or oil being discharged. Note as I mention in the post, that oil is legally discharged at sea as long as the concentration is below 15ppm. Was this wrong? Sure it was. Was this an ecological disaster like the Exxon Valdez or the Deepwater Horizon, nope.

[smithm1986]

Really? Even though this has long since been corrected?

 

Didn't the former CEO effectively get a promotion?

[cruisemom42]

As Cheng has stated cruise ships are BY FAR the least polluters at sea even with these activities being as normal and that's exactly what they were, Standard Operating Procedures.....and as someone who has spent thousands of days at sea not getting served cocktails and eating great food I can tell all of you that those of you who are "outraged" should have done your homework prior to cruising becoming your favorite holiday....Cruise ships ages and anti pollution technology compared to commercial shipping vessels is like night and day so the next time you purchase something that was made somewhere that lies on the other side of an ocean from you, you may need to amp up your outrage even further...:rolleyes: Not to mention looking in the mirror and seeing a MAJOR contributor to ocean pollution....And to those all outraged about the effects of the UK coastline....you may want to look into the Royal Navy's midnight pump and dump procedures when cruising about 20 miles off your coast....:eek: LOL though I am sure it much better than it was 20 years ago...hopefully...

 

It is not simply the ecological impact -- although that in itself is appalling.

 

What bothers me, and why I would not sail with Princess again soon, is the deceptive practices that continued for years, encouraged (apparently) by some top officers and that resulted in no less than 7 felony charges.

 

How else am I to register my displeasure if not by the time-tested practice of taking my vacation dollars elsewhere? (And cruising is not the only way to vacation and/or to see the world....)

[Brisbane41]

Looking at the articles and what is published I am convinced that more people senior up above Princess corporate level would have known. The chairman of Carnival arison would have to have known for sure even by hush hush word of mouth. Doing something criminal like that on a ship presents a liability that no middle manager would want to risk being the one with their head on the chopping block if they got caught out. This had to go all the way to the top.

[Charles4515]

My take is that this was reported three years ago and an investigation started. Princess assisted with that investigation and the perpetrators have been fired. Since only 5 ships were involved (out of a fleet of 15-18 ships depending on the year) I would surmise that certain officers were involved as they moved from ship to ship. That the majority of their fleet was found to be compliant suggests that it wasn't a corporate mandate to cut costs.

 

 

 

Since Princess has taken corrective measures, I think we can be assured that their ships are probably the cleanest afloat, otherwise the punitive fine if they are found to be non-compliant again would be devastating.

 

 

 

At this point, I have no problem sailing with them again.

 

 

 

I am sure they will have corrective measures. For at least five years anyway.

 

What I did when Royal Caribbean was penalized was vow not to sail with them for two years. And I didn't. Ironically that is when I took my first Princess cruise and I cruised with them during the two years. I think I will do the same with Princess, not cruise with them for a year or two, probably not two years.

 

I am not advocating that others do the same. It is just a personal choice.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Edited December 2, 2016 by Charles4515

[Chunder Worthy]

Shameful, dishonorable actions and burgeoning (albeit well-deserved) embarrassment. Princess is now the Wells Fargo Bank of the cruising industry.

[ceba]

This is the sort of thing that could end up costing them the privilege of sailing Glacier Bay. Stupid, very stupid.

Completely agree. Shame on them.

[chengkp75]

Looking at the articles and what is published I am convinced that more people senior up above Princess corporate level would have known. The chairman of Carnival arison would have to have known for sure even by hush hush word of mouth. Doing something criminal like that on a ship presents a liability that no middle manager would want to risk being the one with their head on the chopping block if they got caught out. This had to go all the way to the top.

 

You'd be surprised. I doubt that Mickey Arison, as Chairman of the parent corporation had any knowledge of day to day operations, and neither would Arnold Donald the CEO of Carnival Corp. I really doubt that the President of Princess or her predecessor had any knowledge of this going on. They just don't get that far down into the nuts and bolts of the operation, and shipping lines operate "fleets" or groups of ships within a line as separate profit centers, and the managers and vice-presidents have enormous decision making power.

[joepeka]

You'd be surprised. I doubt that Mickey Arison, as Chairman of the parent corporation had any knowledge of day to day operations, and neither would Arnold Donald the CEO of Carnival Corp. I really doubt that the President of Princess or her predecessor had any knowledge of this going on. They just don't get that far down into the nuts and bolts of the operation, and shipping lines operate "fleets" or groups of ships within a line as separate profit centers, and the managers and vice-presidents have enormous decision making power.

Hi Chief, I bet you never thought you'd not only be explaining the technical details of cruise ship environmental systems but also the chain of command structure and "who probably knew what" workings of large corporate America? ;)

Edited December 2, 2016 by joepeka

[sfaaa]

Who knew what was an essential part of any investigation, pre trial discovery and witness cross examination by prosecutor during the trial. People can come here to speculate all they want. There is no evidence so far to support that top management at corporate office knew or took a direct role in what was going on.

[cheeseheads4ever]

Totally agree with jchris1230.. why? It totally damages our eco system. Its the cruise lines lively hood too.. After rewding the responses not sure why a cruise line would do this...

Im not sure what I believe.. cant believe the crew would have a conspiracy to dump crap in ocean and higher ups not know.

Not sure......

[ar1950]

Here's some thoughts that I posted over on the Disney forum about this topic.

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showpost.php?p=51678928&postcount=13

 

As I say there, while this is an inexcusable act, the severity of it is difficult to determine, and this is nowhere near a case of raw fuel or oil being discharged. Note as I mention in the post, that oil is legally discharged at sea as long as the concentration is below 15ppm. Was this wrong? Sure it was. Was this an ecological disaster like the Exxon Valdez or the Deepwater Horizon, nope.

 

I am detecting a lot of, what appears to be, selective outrage in this thread. I wonder how many people would have the courage of their convictions when it comes to everyday purchases if they knew the kind of pollution that is created by the production of these items. I especially would question their willingness to purchase anything made or partially made in China given the Chinese military's destruction of many coral reefs in the South China Sea by building bases on top of them. This is all in addition to the comment earlier about the pollution from the cargo ships hauling said goods.

 

Before anyone says I am advocating giving Princess a pass on their transgression, I am not. I was simply pointing out that there are a lot of pollution and environment destructive activities going on in the world other than cruising which we passively condone by our lifestyle.

Edited December 2, 2016 by ar1950

[RDC1]

I understand. But, fair warning, Royal Caribbean/Celebrity is guilty of the same offences. Princess is just the latest one to get caught.

 

And it would be no surprise if, in the future, some other cruise line will do it again.

 

A correction - Royal Caribbean/Celebrity was guilty, not is guilty. Their conviction was in 1999 and they successfully completed the supervision period.

 

 

I suspect that they tended to have learned their lesson from that criminal conviction, which included 2 chief engineers being convicted as well.

 

This should give you an idea on the rate of violations by different companies.

 

http://www.cruisejunkie.com/envirofines.html

 

Very few by RCCL.

[Renmar]

Although I think it is absolutely disgusting that this stuff happened I'm also convinced that Princess (and in particular the Caribbean Princess) is not the only cruise/shipping company that is guilty, they just got caught.

 

As for the people that say they will not cruise with Princess anymore because of this better think again before cruising with an other line, the other cruise line might have done the same but not been caught (yet).

 

Also, the fine (apparently a drop in the bucket) should have been way higher especially if Carnival Corp most likely will split the fine with all their brands.

 

JMHO of course.

 

Theo

[jeromep]

Looking at the articles and what is published I am convinced that more people senior up above Princess corporate level would have known. The chairman of Carnival arison would have to have known for sure even by hush hush word of mouth. Doing something criminal like that on a ship presents a liability that no middle manager would want to risk being the one with their head on the chopping block if they got caught out. This had to go all the way to the top.

 

I'm afraid I can't agree. I've read as much as I can find and there is no clear link between the executive staff in Santa Clara and the actions of staff officers on board individual ships. What I am reading seems to indicate that there may have been a middle management level of encouragement for such behaviors, but there doesn't seem to be a clear link demonstrating specific instructions from Santa Clara to field management. But again, it isn't clear why middle managers (including staff officers) got the impression that they needed to, or should do the bilge dumping contrary to international law. It is also not clear why some ships practiced bilge dumping and others didn't.

 

Large organizations are very complex. Princess employs ~29,000 people. The CEO and even the executive staff do not know the whereabouts or individual actions of 29,000 people at any given time. It may be possible that executive management is intimately familiar with their ships' captains and possibly even their staff captains/first officers, but other departmental heads are just names on a payroll sheet. In most large organizations middle managers come and go and you hope that you hire replacements that will both act morally and legally, and within your own organizations policies, but again, it is impossible to determine the proclivities of individuals even with the best of background checks and extensive interviews. Additionally most organizations create policy which dovetails with the laws under which they operate. Again, you can write all the policy in the world, create all the cross checks you want, but individuals find ways around policies. Note that it was found that sea water was being pumped and fed through the oil separation systems to create a false log of pump and filter activity. This shows incredible creativity and knowledge about policies and the systems put in place to create compliance, and yet, it also shows that creative people found a way around them.

 

I have worked for large organizations in my life and am grateful that I work for a small organization, now; however in all the years I worked for corporations and large government entities, I never once had contact with "the leader". And my own employment was just as I described above, I was a name on a payroll sheet or a staff listing. My value to the organization was to show up every day and do whatever it was I was supposed to do. It is amazing how middle managers and functionaries choose to implement their own policies. In my own organization there are certain employees that will put "cost" above customer service and yet they aren't directly impacted by costs and nobody in management is drumming them about the cost of something. It is something they got into their own heads and we have to waste time as an organization trying to break them of that habit. The only explanation is that they are concerned about it, even if the organization has never overtly or covertly encouraged worrying about costs over customer service. Could the same thing have happened with Princess and individual staff members?

 

My take is that this was reported three years ago and an investigation started. Princess assisted with that investigation and the perpetrators have been fired. Since only 5 ships were involved (out of a fleet of 15-18 ships depending on the year) I would surmise that certain officers were involved as they moved from ship to ship. That the majority of their fleet was found to be compliant suggests that it wasn't a corporate mandate to cut costs.

 

Since Princess has taken corrective measures, I think we can be assured that their ships are probably the cleanest afloat, otherwise the punitive fine if they are found to be non-compliant again would be devastating.

 

At this point, I have no problem sailing with them again.

 

I agree. Here is a little story from well over 20 years ago. Jack in the Box, a west coast burger chain, had a significant e.coli outbreak associated with food from their operations. Many were sickened, a few even died. It was all over the news and was considered the worst case of food borne illness to ever originate from a quick serve restaurant. Jack in the Box was sued and there were settlements. But more importantly they investigated, found that their food handling policies were not being practiced in many of their restaurants and that there was a store level culture which didn't put food safety first. They never obfuscated the problems they found or the fact that they were responsible. They in turn established an industry organization for food safety and sanitation, changed their practices in restaurants and rebuilt customer trust over many years. If you are familiar with their food, well, its fast food, but they made positive changes for themselves, brought light to quick serve restaurant food safety issues and potentially helped improve the whole industry.

 

In much the same way, Princess didn't seem to obfuscate negative findings on board their ships, they seemed to actively participate in the investigation and also have taken their legal lumps. I also see the outcome being generally positive, for them and the industry, as they will, at least for now, be in the forefront of on board waste water treatment compliance and will probably be employing whatever the newest technology is for dealing with, treating, and properly disposing of all kinds of waste water generated on board, not just oily bilge water.