Jump to content

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


 Share

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

As I've said, I've lived through two of these probations, so I have nothing but contempt for Carnival's half hearted efforts towards compliance.  Yes, it takes a massive effort, from the boardroom to the engine room, from everyone in the company to make this work.

 

 

 

Sitting on the sidelines it sounds bad enough, but clearly it's likely even worse than I imagined based on your insight.  Sometimes a company has to hit rock bottom before being absolutely forced to make significant changes .. and they come out better in the end.  Hopefully this is the case with Carnival.  I'm disappointed they let it get this far and have taken such a complaisant approach ... but their future actions will be very telling for sure.  For me the first sign they really didn't care is when neither Arison or Donald even bothered to show up for that first hearing.  That showed their true colors.    

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I'm bumping this again because I found a couple of articles relating to Carnival's latest visit to court on December 19.  The first article is about how the visit itself went: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article238541118.html

 

I skimmed the article and my very basic TL,DR is that they are making progress in several different ways and the major players will all be back in court on January 8.

 

The other article is about Pete Anderson, Carnival Corporation's new Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer at https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article238043299.html .  He's in charge of fixing the messes Carnival has made through the years and getting through their current legal trouble.  TL,DR:  His credentials look good, and he's optimistic but realistic about the job at hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Honolulu Blue said:

I'm bumping this again because I found a couple of articles relating to Carnival's latest visit to court on December 19.  The first article is about how the visit itself went: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article238541118.html

 

I skimmed the article and my very basic TL,DR is that they are making progress in several different ways and the major players will all be back in court on January 8.

 

The other article is about Pete Anderson, Carnival Corporation's new Chief Ethics and Compliance Officer at https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article238043299.html .  He's in charge of fixing the messes Carnival has made through the years and getting through their current legal trouble.  TL,DR:  His credentials look good, and he's optimistic but realistic about the job at hand.

Excellent finds, thanks for posting.  Chief, would love to hear your comments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it sounds very positive, and the personnel mentioned in the articles appear to embrace the ISM culture, rather than the "blame culture", it is early times.  While I agree that "perfection is not realistic", and that in the early years, violations will still happen, it is how the company deals with the violations, in other words, is the "process" working (is it being reported up the chain, and are the lessons learned implemented into future policy) that is important.  One thing I noted from the article, is that the compliance office has a budget.  For a corporation like Carnival, that budget seems very small, even though it is tens of millions of dollars.  My company has a saying that "there is no budget for environmental compliance", meaning the company will pay whatever is needed to operate within current policies and procedures, and will implement whatever is needed to implement future policies and procedures when faults in the system are identified.  That is the kind of commitment I would like to see from Carnival, essentially saying that environmental compliance comes ahead of corporate profit, before I fully embrace their posture.

 

I would love to know if Carnival has adopted a "KPI" (key performance indicator) system for compliance.  This sets a corporate goal for the number of each type of violation that is allowed, and publishes to the company how each KPI was met over the past year.  During the first years, some violations should be planned for in the KPI's, but they should trend towards zero infractions, and this gives the company as a whole a clear picture of how the entire system is working.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

While it sounds very positive, and the personnel mentioned in the articles appear to embrace the ISM culture, rather than the "blame culture", it is early times.  While I agree that "perfection is not realistic", and that in the early years, violations will still happen, it is how the company deals with the violations, in other words, is the "process" working (is it being reported up the chain, and are the lessons learned implemented into future policy) that is important.  One thing I noted from the article, is that the compliance office has a budget.  For a corporation like Carnival, that budget seems very small, even though it is tens of millions of dollars.  My company has a saying that "there is no budget for environmental compliance", meaning the company will pay whatever is needed to operate within current policies and procedures, and will implement whatever is needed to implement future policies and procedures when faults in the system are identified.  That is the kind of commitment I would like to see from Carnival, essentially saying that environmental compliance comes ahead of corporate profit, before I fully embrace their posture.

 

I would love to know if Carnival has adopted a "KPI" (key performance indicator) system for compliance.  This sets a corporate goal for the number of each type of violation that is allowed, and publishes to the company how each KPI was met over the past year.  During the first years, some violations should be planned for in the KPI's, but they should trend towards zero infractions, and this gives the company as a whole a clear picture of how the entire system is working.

Thanks for the input, as always.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, bury me at sea said:

Thanks for posting the updates Honolulu Blue.

 

You're welcome.  I figured at least a few people were interested in this ongoing story.

 

It looks like the Miami Herald, at least, will be covering this well into the future, so you might want to look there for stories about Carnival's next appearance in court next week.  I'll be prepping for a cruise then and I may not be able to provide updates to this thread.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, ronrythm said:

While this sounds serious according to an uninformed media type, it shows that the "process" is working (the problem was located quickly, it was reported, and they are working to find ways to prevent it in future).  And the "uninformed" part of my statement is because what they somewhat sensationalize is really a very technical violation.  This "gray water", which is in the ship's ballast tanks, is actually treated effluent from the waste water plant.  The water has been treated to near clear drinking water quality, but is nevertheless classified as "gray water" as long as it is in the ship.  The ship is not allowed to place untreated water into the ballast tanks.  So, while this is a "technical" violation, in that the water, by definition, should not have been discharged, it posed absolutely no hazard to the environment.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

While this sounds serious according to an uninformed media type, it shows that the "process" is working (the problem was located quickly, it was reported, and they are working to find ways to prevent it in future).  And the "uninformed" part of my statement is because what they somewhat sensationalize is really a very technical violation.  This "gray water", which is in the ship's ballast tanks, is actually treated effluent from the waste water plant.  The water has been treated to near clear drinking water quality, but is nevertheless classified as "gray water" as long as it is in the ship.  The ship is not allowed to place untreated water into the ballast tanks.  So, while this is a "technical" violation, in that the water, by definition, should not have been discharged, it posed absolutely no hazard to the environment.

Agree! How about that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

While this sounds serious according to an uninformed media type, it shows that the "process" is working (the problem was located quickly, it was reported, and they are working to find ways to prevent it in future).  And the "uninformed" part of my statement is because what they somewhat sensationalize is really a very technical violation.  This "gray water", which is in the ship's ballast tanks, is actually treated effluent from the waste water plant.  The water has been treated to near clear drinking water quality, but is nevertheless classified as "gray water" as long as it is in the ship.  The ship is not allowed to place untreated water into the ballast tanks.  So, while this is a "technical" violation, in that the water, by definition, should not have been discharged, it posed absolutely no hazard to the environment.

 

https://www.bradenton.com/news/state/florida/article238937103.html

 

This article states that it was untreated gray water.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ummgood said:

 

https://www.bradenton.com/news/state/florida/article238937103.html

 

This article states that it was untreated gray water.  

Sorry, I can't read the article, because the last time I turned off my adblocker for the Miami Herald article linked above, it corrupted my virus ware, so I won't do it again.  However, the "non-sewage" gray water system would be the food disposal system, and this is not allowed to be stored in the ballast tanks without treatment.  If these systems had been cross-connected to allow untreated water into the ballast water, the court-appointed monitor and the third party auditors would have found this long ago.  These days, even clean ballast water, taken onboard at sea is supposed to be treated before it is discharged.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Sorry, I can't read the article, because the last time I turned off my adblocker for the Miami Herald article linked above, it corrupted my virus ware, so I won't do it again.  However, the "non-sewage" gray water system would be the food disposal system, and this is not allowed to be stored in the ballast tanks without treatment.  If these systems had been cross-connected to allow untreated water into the ballast water, the court-appointed monitor and the third party auditors would have found this long ago.  These days, even clean ballast water, taken onboard at sea is supposed to be treated before it is discharged.

 

Thanks for the info.  Here is their quote:

"

Gray water is water left over from showers, baths, sinks and laundry facilities. Untreated gray water can contain bacteria, pathogens, oil and grease, detergent and soap residue, metals, solids and nutrients, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

 

The U.S. prohibits cruise ships from discharging untreated gray water within three miles from land. Carnival Corp. policy prohibits gray water discharges within 12 miles from land. The Intentional Maritime Organization, a United Nations body charged with preventing ocean pollution, does not regulate gray water."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, ummgood said:

 

Thanks for the info.  Here is their quote:

"

Gray water is water left over from showers, baths, sinks and laundry facilities. Untreated gray water can contain bacteria, pathogens, oil and grease, detergent and soap residue, metals, solids and nutrients, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

 

The U.S. prohibits cruise ships from discharging untreated gray water within three miles from land. Carnival Corp. policy prohibits gray water discharges within 12 miles from land. The Intentional Maritime Organization, a United Nations body charged with preventing ocean pollution, does not regulate gray water."

This is correct, and I work under these restrictions every day.  However, the gray water was stored in ballast tanks, and you cannot store untreated gray water in ballast tanks, because once there is gray water in them, they are no longer ballast tanks, but gray water tanks.  Treated gray water, however, while still considered to be gray water, can be stored in ballast tanks.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I'm bumping this for Taylor Dolven's article in the Miami Herald about the January 8 hearing:  https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article239089503.html .  Judge Seitz remains unhappy and wants more tangible proof of progress.  April 24 is the next scheduled hearing.

 

For extra homework, you can read Fabiola Santiago's opinion piece in the Herald from January 15:  https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/fabiola-santiago/article239246998.html

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Honolulu Blue said:

I'm bumping this for Taylor Dolven's article in the Miami Herald about the January 8 hearing:  https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article239089503.html .  Judge Seitz remains unhappy and wants more tangible proof of progress.  April 24 is the next scheduled hearing.

 

For extra homework, you can read Fabiola Santiago's opinion piece in the Herald from January 15:  https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/fabiola-santiago/article239246998.html

I found the first article informative, but the opinion piece I though was overkill. The columnist was all of a sudden speaking of cruisers jumping overboard to commit suicide. Really there are enough problems without literally throwing the kitchen sink at the Carnival Corporation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Semi related, and goes to policy changes, NCL has become the first major cruise line to eliminate plastic water bottles.
 

  https://www.cruiseindustrynews.com/cruise-news/22159-norwegian-becomes-first-major-cruise-line-to-eliminate-plastic-bottles.html

 

I wonder what they're doing for water.

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...