Jump to content

*******Judge's June 3rd Decision re Carnival Corp Sanctions*****


 Share

Recommended Posts

I couldn't help but chuckle a bit when I first read that they'll be creating the new position of Chief Compliance Officer as a result of all this. Which will assuredly come with a hefty 6-7 figure salary. Carnival: "What if we created MORE executives within the corporation, would that help?"

 

I'd like to address some of the items that will be eliminated in the near future, as per their recent statement.

 

Foil-wrapped butter pats - surely we won't have to scoop butter from a community tub. That's not sanitary for thousands of people. I'm assuming they'll switch to paper-wrapped butter pats (which I don't see to much of anymore). What else is there?

 

Sugar packets, but excluding artificial sweeteners - Why eliminate the sugar packets, but keep the sweeteners? That's doesn't make sense to me. Does this mean there's no sugar? Or sugar in glass dispensers? Those would get real nasty real quick. And with the humid weather, they'd be clumped up in no time.

 

Cereal boxes - this one really bites because I liked to use those as snacks for our cabin. I guess we'll see those large cereal dispensers that are found in some hotels. Twist the knob, dump some cereal into a bowl. No more individual boxes for cabin snacks or taking off the ship. Bummer.

 

Eliminating things like toothpicks, stir sticks, and olive picks is silly to me. These things are so prevalent everywhere else, that removing them from their cruise ships isn't going to help. I definitely see this, among the other things, as something that's done in full view of the passengers to make Carnival look good. "See, we've done something."

 

Some of these things just create more things for the crew to have to wash. So I guess that's more gray water to dump in Glacier Bay (slight joke, but considering their past, slight truth). They switch hot beverages over to paper cups and paper lids, yet eliminate some of the other paper products (like cereal boxes and wooden coffee stirrers). Why eliminate some paper products just to introduce new paper products?

 

In the end, I feel like a lot of these eliminations are being done more so to make it easier on themselves, not to protect the environment. They've had a long history of illegal dumping, so instead of disposing of much of this waste properly, they decide to just eliminate it altogether. It's almost as if they're saying, "We don't want to do it the right way, so we'll just get rid of these things completely so we don't even have to deal with it."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Arnold truly didn't know that all this was going on, it's almost worse than if he had condoned and authorized it. It's a lack of institutional control and gross failure of leadership. He may need to be replaced at the top. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Thorncroft said:

If Arnold truly didn't know that all this was going on, it's almost worse than if he had condoned and authorized it. It's a lack of institutional control and gross failure of leadership. He may need to be replaced at the top. 

He has been in the job since 2013, is 65 (ish).  His time is certainly in the sunset years.....that said, I would be SHOCKED if he were removed (or left, which is the way it will happen) in the next 12 months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jimbo5544 said:

He has been in the job since 2013, is 65 (ish).  His time is certainly in the sunset years.....that said, I would be SHOCKED if he were removed (or left, which is the way it will happen) in the next 12 months.

He won't go.  Any more than Arison will go.  Donald has made his "apology" to the employees.  End of story.  This has been going on for so long, that there cannot have been any direction from the board or senior management that environmental compliance was a priority, so why should this change things.  They are being dragged kicking and screaming to do things that should have been addressed 26 years ago.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

He won't go.  Any more than Arison will go.  Donald has made his "apology" to the employees.  End of story.  This has been going on for so long, that there cannot have been any direction from the board or senior management that environmental compliance was a priority, so why should this change things.  They are being dragged kicking and screaming to do things that should have been addressed 26 years ago.

Arison will go when he wants....not before.  We don’t have to like it, but just stating facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Arison will go when he wants....not before.  We don’t have to like it, but just stating facts.

 

I mean listen, the emotion of this situation aside....as a long time shareholder and someone who stays fairly dialed in to the company I think they have both done a fine job over the last 20 years, from a company/stock/growth perspective.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read all this and I am sorry I feel it is all ssdd.  Dumping stuff into the oceans,  like as if there are not commercial ships doing it every day.  not to count the land areas of cities and towns doing it also.  I cannot get all excited about establishing a program to prevent all this.  I was on a cruise ship decades ago that i saw a sign that explained the dumping of items at sea.  There was a distance from land factor that was included.  And the idea of having plastic waste on board a ship is a terrible idea.  It all boils down to the convenience to humans.  They have to have their plastic bottle of water and then hope that it makes it to a recycling plant.  I was on an AWACS plane once off the european coast and we spotted a ship leaving a long trail of black in its wake.  we thought it was in serious trouble and reported it as a possible ship in distress.  we were told it was just a garbage boat dumping from the nearest country.  They do this daily.   I believe this whole thing is smoke and mirrors, all ships will just have to be more careful is all. And people are gullible and think that it is all solved and the guilty are all punished and we can go feeling better about ourselves. Maybe the company will get rid of all the 'individual serving" offers like cereal and butter pats and plastic straws.  But they would need to be replaces with dispensers and that costs money.  the changes will make things "inconvenient" for people and they will gripe or decide that things are not sanitary but in the big picture the planet will say thank you for your support.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, mredandchis said:

 I was on an AWACS plane once off the european coast and we spotted a ship leaving a long trail of black in its wake.  

 

As a former SC, I'd be interested in hearing this story. How did you spot it? Visual? From 25K? The E-3 doesn't have an EO camera and doesn't have an SS or ISR role, so getting any identifying information from the boat would be impossible.

Edited by Sean_B
spelling
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, elcuchio24 said:

I mean listen, the emotion of this situation aside....as a long time shareholder and someone who stays fairly dialed in to the company I think they have both done a fine job over the last 20 years, from a company/stock/growth perspective.

 

That's the only thing that matters in Business and they will continue to do so. There isn't going to be an overnight boycott of Carnival lines and I'm almost sure there will be very little effect on their year end numbers. Fines like this are usually paid out through insurance and not the actual company so technically, Carnival wouldn't be losing any money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Sean_B said:

 

As a former SC, I'd be interested in hearing this story. How did you spot it? Visual? From 25K? The E-3 doesn't have an EO camera and doesn't have an SS or ISR role, so getting any identifying information from the boat would be impossible.

It was on mission and spotted from the cockpit. The radar does do surface tracking and i cant be sure what all info was gathered from the SO.   I was sitting in seat 5 and saw  the ship was making turns in the water. The dark water trailing the ship was significant.   The aircraft commander called it in as a possible ship in distress and the ground units after a bit responded with their answer. How they made this determination is beyond me but the report was closed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mredandchis said:

It was on mission and spotted from the cockpit. The radar does do surface tracking and i cant be sure what all info was gathered from the SO.   I was sitting in seat 5 and saw  the ship was making turns in the water. The dark water trailing the ship was significant.   The aircraft commander called it in as a possible ship in distress and the ground units after a bit responded with their answer. How they made this determination is beyond me but the report was closed.  

 

So many holes, but I'll let it go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, elcuchio24 said:

I mean listen, the emotion of this situation aside....as a long time shareholder and someone who stays fairly dialed in to the company I think they have both done a fine job over the last 20 years, from a company/stock/growth perspective.

 

Someone in the other thread brought up how emotions are driving many of the comments that have been posted on CC. Well, we're not the judge, the lawyers, or the DOJ. We're simply a bunch of customers voicing our opinions, so we're allowed to inject emotion into it.

 

Often times throughout the corporate world, what's good for investors isn't always what's good for consumers.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Organized Chaos said:

 

Someone in the other thread brought up how emotions are driving many of the comments that have been posted on CC. Well, we're not the judge, the lawyers, or the DOJ. We're simply a bunch of customers voicing our opinions, so we're allowed to inject emotion into it.

 

Often times throughout the corporate world, what's good for investors isn't always what's good for consumers.

 

 

 

Well I would disagree on one point: we are not a 'bunch' of customers. We are a tiny segment of very well informed customers. If EVERY cruiser was informed on this issue, then the backlash on wallstreet and in general may have been greater.

 

That said, as an investor and consumer, CCL has done well by me. Just not in THIS incident.  But for me, not enough to deep6 the rest of my experiences. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, elcuchio24 said:

 

Well I would disagree on one point: we are not a 'bunch' of customers. We are a tiny segment of very well informed customers. If EVERY cruiser was informed on this issue, then the backlash on wallstreet and in general may have been greater.

 

That said, as an investor and consumer, CCL has done well by me. Just not in THIS incident.  But for me, not enough to deep6 the rest of my experiences. 

Well, I disagree. Carnival is getting away with it, just like every company in the market. That is precisely why Carnival has YET to put a statement on their website about the matter, and instead redirecting the issue to the Cuba ban. They do not want their consumers to know, plain and simple. John Heald only reaches a fraction of the people the CCL website reaches. Carnival is hiding what the consumers want to know, and the media is doing an excellent job getting the word around! I won't say Carnival is fraudulent. However, I do not think it is right to hide such a heinous act from their consumers completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jbethel11 said:

Well, I disagree. Carnival is getting away with it, just like every company in the market. That is precisely why Carnival has YET to put a statement on their website about the matter, and instead redirecting the issue to the Cuba ban. They do not want their consumers to know, plain and simple. John Heald only reaches a fraction of the people the CCL website reaches. Carnival is hiding what the consumers want to know, and the media is doing an excellent job getting the word around! I won't say Carnival is fraudulent. However, I do not think it is right to hide such a heinous act from their consumers completely.

I will stay away from the emotional point you make, but I would be willing to wager that only single digits percentage of their customers even know about the fine (let alone the history) and the same for their employees (other than a letter from Duffy).  Whether that is correct or who should be told and in what matter is way above my pay grade.  John is the senior spokesperson of the company, I think he is exactly the one that would make the announcement they made, at least in the timeframe that it happened.  Who knows if more is forthcoming and in what manner/fashion it would be delivered.  

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

I will stay away from the emotional point you make, but I would be willing to wager that only single digits percentage of their customers even know about the fine (let alone the history) and the same for their employees (other than a letter from Duffy).  Whether that is correct or who should be told and in what matter is way above my pay grade.  John is the senior spokesperson of the company, I think he is exactly the one that would make the announcement they made, at least in the timeframe that it happened.  Who knows if more is forthcoming and in what manner/fashion it would be delivered.  

 

 

No, like how right now on Carnival's desktop website, you can see a little link on top of the screen, and it says, "Cuba update." They should have done the same thing, but with a "Federal Judge threatens Carnival" or something like that. It would have been courteous to us costumes for a direct update from Carnival, maybe even a word for word quote from what John Heald said! But no, they would rather hide it from us, and quite frankly, I agree to some parts of what @Cruisegirl6 noted on other threads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jbethel11 said:

John Heald only reaches a fraction of the people the CCL website reaches. Carnival is hiding what the consumers want to know, and the media is doing an excellent job getting the word around! I won't say Carnival is fraudulent. However, I do not think it is right to hide such a heinous act from their consumers completely.

 

16 minutes ago, jbethel11 said:

It would have been courteous to us costumes for a direct update from Carnival, maybe even a word for word quote from what John Heald said! But no, they would rather hide it from us, and quite frankly, I agree to some parts of what @Cruisegirl6 noted on other threads.

 

Help me out here because I don't follow John Heald.....but isn't Heald only a spokesman for Carnival Cruise Line?  Why would he make a statement on behalf of the corporation, especially when it was Princess who committed the most egregious offenses?  

 

Don't get me wrong.  I don't disagree with your thoughts though.  If anything, a statement should be on carnivalcorp.com by Mr. Arnold.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

 

Help me out here because I don't follow John Heald.....but isn't Heald only a spokesman for Carnival Cruise Line?  Why would he make a statement on behalf of the corporation, especially when it was Princess who committed the most egregious offenses?  

 

Don't get me wrong.  I don't disagree with your thoughts though.  If anything, a statement should be on carnivalcorp.com by Mr. Arnold.  

Even more of a reason! Carnival should attest their innocence then! So uninformed people won't make an irrational decision,  become confused and punish Carnival only!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Aquahound said:

 

 

Help me out here because I don't follow John Heald.....but isn't Heald only a spokesman for Carnival Cruise Line?  Why would he make a statement on behalf of the corporation, especially when it was Princess who committed the most egregious offenses?  

 

Don't get me wrong.  I don't disagree with your thoughts though.  If anything, a statement should be on carnivalcorp.com by Mr. Arnold.  

I was only. Referencing Carnival Cruise Line, not Carnival corp.  Not sure I have ever been to Carnivalcorp.com....  I would agree that posting something there (for the umbrella) would be the best spot for the corporation, that said, nobody (realistically speaking) would see that, in fact I had never been there and had to go find it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Aquahound said:

 

 

Help me out here because I don't follow John Heald.....but isn't Heald only a spokesman for Carnival Cruise Line?  Why would he make a statement on behalf of the corporation, especially when it was Princess who committed the most egregious offenses?  

 

Don't get me wrong.  I don't disagree with your thoughts though.  If anything, a statement should be on carnivalcorp.com by Mr. Arnold.  

And yet, Carnival Cruises led with 54% of the violations found by the auditor teams, and 4 Carnival ships tied for third place as the most "frequent flyers" with 20 violations each.  Every single line in the Carnival Corp umbrella was found with at least one ship in violation, so I feel that all the lines should post an apology and explanation on their websites.  Princess has one that talks about Oil Record Books and OWS, but not about the variety of other violations that ocurred.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, jbethel11 said:

No, like how right now on Carnival's desktop website, you can see a little link on top of the screen, and it says, "Cuba update." They should have done the same thing, but with a "Federal Judge threatens Carnival" or something like that. It would have been courteous to us costumes for a direct update from Carnival, maybe even a word for word quote from what John Heald said! But no, they would rather hide it from us, and quite frankly, I agree to some parts of what @Cruisegirl6 noted on other threads.

 

The cuba news is important to exponentially more people than this dumping news. Maybe not to you, but in general. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...