Carnival Cruise Line sited in Pollution Case

[Duffysmom]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/cruises/2019/10/03/carnival-cruise-line-not-doing-enough-to-clean-up-pollution/3850107002/

[chengkp75]

Well, they were actually sited a couple of years ago, and then again a couple of months ago, for continued violations of the previous probation agreement.  This hearing was simply to determine what the plan was that Carnival had implemented to meet the conditions of the probation, and whether or not this plan met the judge's requirements.  The hearing later this year will address how quickly Carnival is meeting that plan.  As I've said over on the thread on the Carnival board, Carnival corporate structure still does not appear to be taking this very seriously.

[pms4104]

According to a a Miami Herald story I saw this a.m. (sorry, I don't have link but found it thru Google), Micky Arison and Jan Swarz appeared Oct 2 in front of the same judge who has seen them recently.  The same judge who threatened to ban the entire fleer from US ports.

 

Bottom line:  she told them they're not working hard enough and fast enough to remedy their corporate pollution issues. 

[Daniel A]

I have been sporadically following this case in Federal Court.  The case is being handled by a retired judge who decided to hold on to this case in retirement.  It sounds like she has an axe to grind against Carnival.  Maybe Carnival hasn't offered any free cruises to her and her family. 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if she is deliberately trying to tank Carnival's stock by making empty threats against the company.  She can't ban Carnival's ships from using U.S. Ports.  She has stated she wants to imprison Carnival's executives but she can't do that either (all she can do is fine the corporation.)  Does she really think she can put tens of thousands of people out of work with a nationwide ban on using ports?  Just another case of a judge with an oversized image of her self importance.  She can help the U.S. the most by going into total retirement.

[MrMan]

Might get more traction in the Carnival board rather than Princess 

[pms4104]

2 hours ago, Daniel A said:

I have been sporadically following this case in Federal Court.  The case is being handled by a retired judge who decided to hold on to this case in retirement.  It sounds like she has an axe to grind against Carnival.  Maybe Carnival hasn't offered any free cruises to her and her family. 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if she is deliberately trying to tank Carnival's stock by making empty threats against the company.  She can't ban Carnival's ships from using U.S. Ports.  She has stated she wants to imprison Carnival's executives but she can't do that either (all she can do is fine the corporation.)  Does she really think she can put tens of thousands of people out of work with a nationwide ban on using ports?  Just another case of a judge with an oversized image of her self importance.  She can help the U.S. the most by going into total retirement.

Conspiracy theory?

 

IMHO ... probably good this judge held on to this case.

Bottom line is that the corporaton apparently did not learn their lesson, continued with their many violations ... AND covered up their violations.

 

Why do you think there is a current flurry to reduce waste? Eliminate single-use plastics? Etc?

 

Edited October 3, 2019 by pms4104

[Daniel A]

1 hour ago, MrMan said:

Might get more traction in the Carnival board rather than Princess 

The case is against the parent company of Princess due to alleged violations committed by Princess.  The threat to ban all Carnival Cruise Line ships covers over 100 ships across 9 cruise lines owned by Carnival Corp.  It would certainly block all Princess cruises entering or leaving from the United States as well as the other 8 brands.  

[pms4104]

6 minutes ago, Daniel A said:

The case is against the parent company of Princess due to alleged violations committed by Princess.  The threat to ban all Carnival Cruise Line ships covers over 100 ships across 9 cruise lines owned by Carnival Corp.  It would certainly block all Princess cruises entering or leaving from the United States as well as the other 8 brands.  

So, that threat has come and gone.

 

A multi-million dollar fine was levied.

 

The court is monitoring the corporation's remediation measures.

 

Princess was not the sole offending line in the corporation.

 

The corporation needs to be held accountable for the violations ... they need to pay

[neverbeenhere]

Some might want to get the facts straight before accusing others of illegal activities. 

[chengkp75]

4 hours ago, Daniel A said:

I have been sporadically following this case in Federal Court.  The case is being handled by a retired judge who decided to hold on to this case in retirement.  It sounds like she has an axe to grind against Carnival.  Maybe Carnival hasn't offered any free cruises to her and her family. 

 

I wouldn't be surprised if she is deliberately trying to tank Carnival's stock by making empty threats against the company.  She can't ban Carnival's ships from using U.S. Ports.  She has stated she wants to imprison Carnival's executives but she can't do that either (all she can do is fine the corporation.)  Does she really think she can put tens of thousands of people out of work with a nationwide ban on using ports?  Just another case of a judge with an oversized image of her self importance.  She can help the U.S. the most by going into total retirement.

As one who has also followed this case, and one who has been employed by two shipping lines that were placed under DOJ probation for environmental violations, the fines set out by this judge have been restrained, and Carnival has been given far more leeway than other cases.

 

Can the judge ban all Carnival ships from calling at US ports?  Yes she can.  Can she imprison Carnival's executives?  Yes she can.  Executives from the companies I've worked for have been found guilty of felony charges, and while not imprisoned, they were forced to wear ankle monitors for 5 years.

 

In my opinion, as a maritime professional, and who has worked for cruise lines, this judge needs to be far stricter with Carnival, since the fines placed against Princess go back 20 years, even before Princess was part of Carnival Corp, and the corporation continues to almost revel in their non-compliance with international environmental regulations.

[Daniel A]

2 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

As one who has also followed this case, and one who has been employed by two shipping lines that were placed under DOJ probation for environmental violations, the fines set out by this judge have been restrained, and Carnival has been given far more leeway than other cases.

 

Can the judge ban all Carnival ships from calling at US ports?  Yes she can.  Can she imprison Carnival's executives?  Yes she can.  Executives from the companies I've worked for have been found guilty of felony charges, and while not imprisoned, they were forced to wear ankle monitors for 5 years.

 

In my opinion, as a maritime professional, and who has worked for cruise lines, this judge needs to be far stricter with Carnival, since the fines placed against Princess go back 20 years, even before Princess was part of Carnival Corp, and the corporation continues to almost revel in their non-compliance with international environmental regulations.

 

chengkp75 – You are a respected member of the CC community and I respect your opinions on many facets of the cruise industry.  In the instant case Judge Seitz levied the largest criminal fine for a case of this type.  IMHO that didn’t demonstrate restraint.  In this case Princess Cruise Lines was the sole defendant and no persons were named as defendants in the court accusatory instrument.  Princess Cruise Lines was convicted of seven felonies and again, there were no individuals charged or convicted in the matter.  On April 10 of this year, Judge Seitz acknowledged that she lacked the ability to detain any Carnival executives in this case.  Judge Seitz may issue an order banning all Carnival owned ships from U.S. ports but she also knows she wouldn’t have the last word on the ban and that it most likely wouldn’t survive on appeal.  That certainly would have been a draconian punishment for a probation violation.

 

I don’t want to appear to be argumentative; I want to make sure that I am able to express my reasons for why I believe the judge is over reaching.  As citizens we all have the right to question the actions and motives of all government officials including the judiciary.  We all have the right to believe Judge Seitz is doing the right thing as well.  I look forward to reading many more of your thoughtful, skilled posts in the future.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Daniel A said:

In the instant case Judge Seitz levied the largest criminal fine for a case of this type.  IMHO that didn’t demonstrate restraint.

Each time a case like this comes to a settlement, the fine is the largest yet.  One company fined about 10 years ago received a fine of $35 million, so this is not a vast enlargement of punishment, and that company was told that if they violated probation, the likely fine the DOJ would seek would be 10 times the original, or $350 million, yet Carnival received a smaller fine for violation of probation than the original fine.  This shows that the judge is attempting to coerce Carnival into proper behavior not with a punishment (huge fine), but with a requirement to change their culture or face possible future fines.  This is an attempt to get Carnival to implement their environmental compliance through their ISM (International Safety Management) code, which holds more with adjusting the system and the process, and learning from mistakes and making corrective actions, than in punishment.  The ISM is an international code that all shipping companies must adhere to, and it appears to me that Carnival not only does not feel they need to abide by environmental regulations, but that they have not fully accepted the ISM culture at the corporate level as well.

 

And, as far as no individual being named as defendant, this is because during the plea negotiations, all of the responsible corporate officers were removed prior to the settlement.  So, while the judge could not arrest any corporate officer for the original violations, she certainly can for violation of the probationary plea agreement.

 

As I said during the original hearings on the probation violation, the judge would not have likely banned all Carnival ships from the US, but she could very easily banned those ships that were the worst "repeat offenders" (notably the QM2) listed in the auditors report for a period of years, and this would have easily stood up under appeal.

Edited October 4, 2019 by chengkp75

[JimmyVWine]

19 minutes ago, Daniel A said:

I want to make sure that I am able to express my reasons for why I believe the judge is over reaching. 

Yours were not “reasons”. They were “opinions”. And those opinions were very much insulting towards the federal judiciary and rather uninformed. The judge’s actions were colored by the fact that she wasn’t offered free cruises? Seriously? A federal judge intentionally trying to sink a company’s stock price? Seriously?  
 

And this was by no means the largest environmental fine. BP agreed to a Consent Decree in excess of $18B. Anasarko agreed to a fine in excess of $5B. This judge has actually shown great restraint in her dealings with Carnival. 

Edited October 4, 2019 by JimmyVWine