Cruise line meeting with CDC is Today

[Elaine5715]

57 minutes ago, DANCING GRANDMOMMY said:

I thought they were closed for the year. But then I stay away from a lot of the news. Keeps me from waking up with a panic attack and needing to pray myself through them. 

 

No, Disneyland is opening July 17 and Disney World is opening July 11.  There is no reason for them to remain closed based on what the medical experts were spouting about outside and heat/humidity. 

[Bevv]

Universal in Florida opened on the 5th.

 

[DGP1111]

8 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

I think the CDC will just provide a list of requirements to cruise lines that need to be met to resume cruising and leave it up to the individual cruise lines as to how they meet them. The plans will likely need to be approved by CDC, but I don't see a lot of negotiations going on.

 

After reading through the entire thread, this was the closest post matching what I've very recently been overhearing from some 'little birdies'.  

 

In addition to the "meet them" situations mentioned above, there could (potentially/hypothetically) be some things deemed "delete them completely" and leave it up to the individual line(s) to figure out how to inform their passenger base(s) to make that happen.

 

There has been at least one moment when I so wished I could channel the technical expertise of Chief Engineer to help balance the chatter being heard . . . a combination of many personalities, including b/w analytical and very blue sky peeps.

 

I really hope each of the industries doing current re-openings (and those coming up quite soon) have done enough internal research, in tandem with science, to really get it right.  Of all those making recent announcements, the one cause me to personally cringe is film theatres (i.e. AMC).  Also, because of the seat configuration within mostly small theatres, Broadway has a hurdle to overcome as well if a Labor Day opening is to be successful.  Again, I'm hoping that each any every industry has success because they've worked hard to succeed beyond the challenges.

 

.

[Organized Chaos]

3 hours ago, beerman2 said:

Where did I specifically say Carnival, it was cruise lines in general. Before the layoffs could they ( cruise lines) have shifted workers  to  process the credits in a more timely manner?  

 

Reading these boards the majority of pax  think the cruise lines could do better. 

 

Well, considering we are on the Carnival forum, I decided to relate my response to, you know...Carnival.

 

Even if they had been fully staffed, that's thousands upon thousands of refunds to process, just within a single cruise line. And it happened every time they had to extend the shutdown. That's not something that happens every day. It's never happened. Maybe it's true that most people thought they could do better, but then again, most people who want their money are basing their reactions off of emotions and not thinking about what a monumental task it actually is. For the record, I've seen plenty of people on this forum say they got their refund much sooner than 90 days. I don't know how Carnival determines the order in which they're processed, but out of thousands of people, someone gets to be first and someone has to be last.

 

 

[Organized Chaos]

3 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

I.e., the CDC has jurisdiction over cruise ships and all ships entering the US, as well as interstate transportation, like airlines, long distance buses, intercontinental trains, etc.

 

Therein lies part of the problem with the CDC, in my opinion. They may have jurisdiction over airlines and cruise lines, but their attitude towards cruise lines has been quite different. One of those industries did more to spread the virus worldwide than any other, and it wasn't cruise lines. Yet they're the ones that keep getting the stink-eye from the CDC.

 

1 hour ago, DGP1111 said:

There has been at least one moment when I so wished I could channel the technical expertise of Chief Engineer to help balance the chatter being heard . . . a combination of many personalities, including b/w analytical and very blue sky peeps.

 

The chatter, as you called it, is no less relevant just because chengkp75 is participating in a conversation about COVID-19 guidelines. No disrespect to him, there's no arguing his knowledge of the engineering field. But when we're discussing topics beyond that field, for example steward/waiter pay (another recent thread) or methods to combat COVID-19, engineering expertise isn't as relevant to the topic at hand. Maybe I misunderstood you, but I got the impression that you were dismissing everyone else just because chengkp chimed in. All I'm trying to say is, there's a point where a person's expertise ends, so the mere act of them joining in on certain discussions doesn't turn all other comments into irrelevant chatter.

[molly361]

Any updates on the meeting?  Can't find anything on line

[chengkp75]

5 hours ago, Organized Chaos said:

 

Therein lies part of the problem with the CDC, in my opinion. They may have jurisdiction over airlines and cruise lines, but their attitude towards cruise lines has been quite different. One of those industries did more to spread the virus worldwide than any other, and it wasn't cruise lines. Yet they're the ones that keep getting the stink-eye from the CDC.

 

 

The chatter, as you called it, is no less relevant just because chengkp75 is participating in a conversation about COVID-19 guidelines. No disrespect to him, there's no arguing his knowledge of the engineering field. But when we're discussing topics beyond that field, for example steward/waiter pay (another recent thread) or methods to combat COVID-19, engineering expertise isn't as relevant to the topic at hand. Maybe I misunderstood you, but I got the impression that you were dismissing everyone else just because chengkp chimed in. All I'm trying to say is, there's a point where a person's expertise ends, so the mere act of them joining in on certain discussions doesn't turn all other comments into irrelevant chatter.

But, the difference is that while the airlines likely did more to spread the virus around the globe, the passengers were off the airplane and dispersed to widely separated localities before they or those they infected became health care issues.  The ships came to port with enough cases to overwhelm a single hospital's ICU.  Those optics are what made the CDC and the government in general to give the cruise industry the "stink eye".

 

And, while I will freely admit that I don't know everything, I do have some expertise in the two areas you mention.  I have worked on cruise ships, as a senior officer, and therefore have attended both the weekly department head meetings, and the daily Captain's meeting (Captain, Staff Captain, Chief Engineer, Staff Chief, Hotel Director), where issues of crew contracts, wages, crewing budgets, and onboard revenue from DSC and the amounts of reductions/reasons for reductions are discussed.  And, while I don't know any more about covid than anyone else who has been following the pandemic from news sources, I have been trained, and worked with, the CDC/USPH in infectious disease remediation measures, as have all senior and mid-level officers and supervisors on cruise ships.

 

Having said all that, and not wanting to get into the political arena of opening/lockdown, I will say that I don't see anything in this thread that is "idle chatter".  My personal feelings are that much of what has been proposed by the CDC during the "no sail order" period will be scaled back as more is learned about covid, and prevention/treatment measures improve, but that there will be a lot of issues that will need to be addressed by the cruise lines both short term and long term.  I feel that the CDC is continuing their "special treatment" of cruise ship crew as a punishment to the cruise lines, but that this is really punishing the crew far more than the lines, and while the "color code" system they have recently instituted is a step in the right direction, it might need to be slackened (or perhaps tightened) depending on the actual data of crew infections received from the ships, to which I am not privy.

 

While some may question why it took so long for this meeting to take place, I think that it gave the cruise lines time to explore solutions to the requirements put into the "no sail order", or find reasons they cannot be done, and also because up until now, the CDC was sort of busy with the rest of the country, and now that they have made their recommendations for measures to slow/prevent the spread, and as I've said, those recommendations can be accepted or ignored by the various state CDC/Public Health agencies, the CDC now finds itself with resources it can direct to its primary mandate of preventing the introduction of the disease into the country, by starting dialogue about the cruise industry.

[Nic6318]

5 hours ago, Organized Chaos said:

 

Therein lies part of the problem with the CDC, in my opinion. They may have jurisdiction over airlines and cruise lines, but their attitude towards cruise lines has been quite different. One of those industries did more to spread the virus worldwide than any other, and it wasn't cruise lines. Yet they're the ones that keep getting the stink-eye from the CDC.

 

 

 

Hi

 

I agree with your premise, but it is the cruise lines where people are in an environment where even if a passenger was "well" on boarding, they can not only contract the virus but depending on the cruise, can be on board long enough to start showing symptoms, as well as passing the virus on to others. We know screening isn't going to be perfect, so, it is just likely, that some people with the virus will be on board. It is hard to ignore this.

 

The obvious solution is for cruise line to, at least for some time, is to only have shorter cruises. Get on the ship, have your trip, go home and then get sick. That's what was happening with those spreading the virus all around the world on airplanes. Don't forget, most people fly to the cruise. You just don't want to have that 2-3-4 wk. cruise, where (older) people will be getting on the ship only to find a couple of weeks in that there are a few people who seem to be exhibiting symptoms. By then it's too late, we have seen it before. Do we want to see if things will turn out differently this time?

[molly361]

38 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

But, the difference is that while the airlines likely did more to spread the virus around the globe, the passengers were off the airplane and dispersed to widely separated localities before they or those they infected became health care issues.  The ships came to port with enough cases to overwhelm a single hospital's ICU.  Those optics are what made the CDC and the government in general to give the cruise industry the "stink eye".

 

And, while I will freely admit that I don't know everything, I do have some expertise in the two areas you mention.  I have worked on cruise ships, as a senior officer, and therefore have attended both the weekly department head meetings, and the daily Captain's meeting (Captain, Staff Captain, Chief Engineer, Staff Chief, Hotel Director), where issues of crew contracts, wages, crewing budgets, and onboard revenue from DSC and the amounts of reductions/reasons for reductions are discussed.  And, while I don't know any more about covid than anyone else who has been following the pandemic from news sources, I have been trained, and worked with, the CDC/USPH in infectious disease remediation measures, as have all senior and mid-level officers and supervisors on cruise ships.

 

Having said all that, and not wanting to get into the political arena of opening/lockdown, I will say that I don't see anything in this thread that is "idle chatter".  My personal feelings are that much of what has been proposed by the CDC during the "no sail order" period will be scaled back as more is learned about covid, and prevention/treatment measures improve, but that there will be a lot of issues that will need to be addressed by the cruise lines both short term and long term.  I feel that the CDC is continuing their "special treatment" of cruise ship crew as a punishment to the cruise lines, but that this is really punishing the crew far more than the lines, and while the "color code" system they have recently instituted is a step in the right direction, it might need to be slackened (or perhaps tightened) depending on the actual data of crew infections received from the ships, to which I am not privy.

 

While some may question why it took so long for this meeting to take place, I think that it gave the cruise lines time to explore solutions to the requirements put into the "no sail order", or find reasons they cannot be done, and also because up until now, the CDC was sort of busy with the rest of the country, and now that they have made their recommendations for measures to slow/prevent the spread, and as I've said, those recommendations can be accepted or ignored by the various state CDC/Public Health agencies, the CDC now finds itself with resources it can direct to its primary mandate of preventing the introduction of the disease into the country, by starting dialogue about the cruise industry.

In your opinion do you see cruises starting back out of Florida in August?  Thanks

[chengkp75]

16 minutes ago, molly361 said:

In your opinion do you see cruises starting back out of Florida in August?  Thanks

Without knowing what has been going on in the background, I can't say with any real confidence, but my gut feeling is, no.

 

The challenges I see are:

 

1.  Repatriation of overdue crew from the ships:  agreements/protocols from the departure and home countries

2.  Re-crewing the ships:  again, agreements/protocols for crew travel, and whether commercial means are allowed

3.  Meeting, or modifying through negotiation with CDC and USCG the requirements set out for future cruise ship operations outlined in the "no sail order".  This involves some very costly measures, and some that would require time to complete.

4.  Time to train crew in new protocols/procedures, perhaps using other crew as "soft opening" guests as we do during shipyards with the contractors

 

The Governor can wish that the state is open to cruise ships all he wants, and the same for the cruise line executives, but it is the USCG and CDC that have the final word, and I don't think enough time has passed to think all of this through.

[wolfie11]

I think the cruise lines have a bit of a conundrum to deal with.  People here are pointing to theme parks opening as an example of why cruise lines could sail.  However, if you look at the requirements for theme parks, they include no events where crowds gather, e.g. fireworks, parades, or character meet and greets, a reservation system to manage capacity, temperature checks, and mandatory wearing of masks. Translate these requirements to a cruise ship and I think you would have trouble filling a ship with people who would be willing to abide by all of the above.  As an example, if you want to use the pool deck, capacity is limited and "pods" must lounge six feet away from each other and wear masks.  Because space is limited, you only get an hour a day during prime time that you have to reserve.  Dining?  You have to have a reservation (or are assigned a place and time).  Onboard activities? Limited to a certain capacity, everyone six feet apart and wearing masks.  
 

You can call me a Debbie Downer, but until there is an effective vaccine, it is likely that the cruise lines will be held to the same standards as the theme parks.  Many on this board have already stated they won't cruise if masks are required, but I don't see how the CDC will allow them to sail without that provision.  You can question the efficacy of masks all you want, but they have become pretty much a requirement for high-risk activities.

[rolloman]

They have already started Casino and Day trip cruises out of Florida.....therefore limited capacity short cruise Bahamian runs for major lines out of Florida would seem to be the next logical step. 

[footballbabe3]

18 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

I think the CDC will just provide a list of requirements to cruise lines that need to be met to resume cruising and leave it up to the individual cruise lines as to how they meet them. The plans will likely need to be approved by CDC, but I don't see a lot of negotiations going on.

That would have been done long ago. 

[PhillyFan33579]

9 minutes ago, wolfie11 said:

You can call me a Debbie Downer, but until there is an effective vaccine, it is likely that the cruise lines will be held to the same standards as the theme parks.  Many on this board have already stated they won't cruise if masks are required, but I don't see how the CDC will allow them to sail without that provision.  You can question the efficacy of masks all you want, but they have become pretty much a requirement for high-risk activities.

I don’t see any scenario where the CDC approves cruise lines resuming operations without masks being a requirement to some degree. If people won’t cruise because of a mask requirement, it actually might be a positive that helps ships reach their limited capacity, which is also another requirement I expect from the CDC.
 

People who say they won’t cruise until an effective vaccine is developed may be waiting a long time. The fastest vaccine ever developed took 4 years. I don’t think it is realistic to think that now a vaccine can be developed in a year. 
 

Personally I would go on a cruise tomorrow, but right now the CDC doesn’t allow individuals to make that choice. Hopefully that changes sooner than later. 

[jimbo5544]

9 hours ago, DGP1111 said:

 

After reading through the entire thread, this was the closest post matching what I've very recently been overhearing from some 'little birdies'.  

 

In addition to the "meet them" situations mentioned above, there could (potentially/hypothetically) be some things deemed "delete them completely" and leave it up to the individual line(s) to figure out how to inform their passenger base(s) to make that happen.

 

There has been at least one moment when I so wished I could channel the technical expertise of Chief Engineer to help balance the chatter being heard . . . a combination of many personalities, including b/w analytical and very blue sky peeps.

 

I really hope each of the industries doing current re-openings (and those coming up quite soon) have done enough internal research, in tandem with science, to really get it right.  Of all those making recent announcements, the one cause me to personally cringe is film theatres (i.e. AMC).  Also, because of the seat configuration within mostly small theatres, Broadway has a hurdle to overcome as well if a Labor Day opening is to be successful.  Again, I'm hoping that each any every industry has success because they've worked hard to succeed beyond the challenges.

 

.

Nice post

[chengkp75]

26 minutes ago, rolloman said:

They have already started Casino and Day trip cruises out of Florida.....therefore limited capacity short cruise Bahamian runs for major lines out of Florida would seem to be the next logical step. 

Not sure about all the passenger vessels operating out of Florida now, but Victory Casino for example, never leaves Florida waters (3 miles out), and are US flag, and do not plan on an overnight stay onboard, or 24 hour itinerary, so do not fall within the CDC jurisdiction, and are a state only concern.  Yes, limited capacity short cruises to the Bahamas would be logical, but must pass the additional hurdle of CDC and USCG clearance.

[ontheweb]

13 hours ago, beerman2 said:

Where did I specifically say Carnival, it was cruise lines in general. Before the layoffs could they ( cruise lines) have shifted workers  to  process the credits in a more timely manner?  

 

Reading these boards the majority of pax  think the cruise lines could do better. 

In theory shifting workers sounds good, but the problem in real life is that the workers new to that task would have to be trained. And taking the workers off processing refunds to train them would actually slow down the process.

[ontheweb]

15 hours ago, Covepointcruiser said:

If we don’t see an increase in cases after last weeks protests/riots, can’t see why they can’t begin sailing.    

And how about after the political rallies that will soon occur? And how about after the political conventions that are in the near future?

 

Could cruise ships adopt a policy of having passengers sign waivers limiting the liability the cruise line has if they catch the virus? This is what the Trump campaign is now doing.

 

https://www.rollcall.com/2020/06/11/trump-campaign-asks-supporters-to-waive-covid-19-liability-to-attend-tulsa-rally/

 

And, mods, this is not meant as a political statement of any kind either pro or anti Trump.

[shof515]

17 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

Could cruise ships adopt a policy of having passengers sign waivers limiting the liability the cruise line has if they catch the virus? This is what the Trump campaign is now doing.

theme parks is doing something similar with signs that by entering the park you assume the risk of getting the virus

 

for decades, sporting events like baseball, hockey and others have a disclaimer on the back of the ticket that makes them not liable if  you get hit with a foul ball or any other objects

 

 

Most likey, cruise lines will now follow and do something similar

Edited June 12, 2020 by shof515

[ZoeyVictoria]

1 hour ago, wolfie11 said:

I think the cruise lines have a bit of a conundrum to deal with.  People here are pointing to theme parks opening as an example of why cruise lines could sail.  However, if you look at the requirements for theme parks, they include no events where crowds gather, e.g. fireworks, parades, or character meet and greets, a reservation system to manage capacity, temperature checks, and mandatory wearing of masks. Translate these requirements to a cruise ship and I think you would have trouble filling a ship with people who would be willing to abide by all of the above.  As an example, if you want to use the pool deck, capacity is limited and "pods" must lounge six feet away from each other and wear masks.  Because space is limited, you only get an hour a day during prime time that you have to reserve.  Dining?  You have to have a reservation (or are assigned a place and time).  Onboard activities? Limited to a certain capacity, everyone six feet apart and wearing masks.  
 

I think there are enough people willing to abide by those rules (at the very beginning) to send out some “guinea pig cruises”.  I think avoiding other people and wearing masks on a cruise ship is a more desirable option than avoiding other people and wearing masks at Wal Mart, for instance.   I wouldn’t do it indefinitely, perhaps only once, but I am perfectly willing to take a modified cruise at this point, and I don’t think I am alone.

[bitemyfly]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

And how about after the political rallies that will soon occur? And how about after the political conventions that are in the near future?

 

Could cruise ships adopt a policy of having passengers sign waivers limiting the liability the cruise line has if they catch the virus? This is what the Trump campaign is now doing.

 

https://www.rollcall.com/2020/06/11/trump-campaign-asks-supporters-to-waive-covid-19-liability-to-attend-tulsa-rally/

 

And, mods, this is not meant as a political statement of any kind either pro or anti Trump.

I would think theses waivers will certainly be part of the solution.. I do know many insurance plans are calling for waivers .. 

[bitemyfly]

We have an incredible amount of new data coming in starting with states that have  Introduced phased  openIng in the least 4 weeks to many thousands  of people close together protesting in cities , while not like being in a semi closed environment like a ship ... but great data will come of it .. and hopefully give us guidance 

[Honolulu Blue]

Brand Ambassador John Heald made a couple of posts mentioning the CDC meeting this morning.  His first post was to say he hadn't been told anything yet.  His second post quoted Chief Communications Officer Chris (no last name given).  The TL,DR is "we'll let you know if we have something to share".  I'm not holding my breath.

[DGP1111]

9 hours ago, Organized Chaos said:

 

The chatter, as you called it, is no less relevant just because chengkp75 is participating in a conversation about COVID-19 guidelines. No disrespect to him, there's no arguing his knowledge of the engineering field. But when we're discussing topics beyond that field, for example steward/waiter pay (another recent thread) or methods to combat COVID-19, engineering expertise isn't as relevant to the topic at hand. Maybe I misunderstood you, but I got the impression that you were dismissing everyone else just because chengkp chimed in. All I'm trying to say is, there's a point where a person's expertise ends, so the mere act of them joining in on certain discussions doesn't turn all other comments into irrelevant chatter.

 

Yes, you did . . . and I almost want to use the word Totally.

 

[DGP1111]

4 hours ago, chengkp75 said:

. . . .

 

And, while I will freely admit that I don't know everything, I do have some expertise in the two areas you mention  . . . .

 

Having said all that, and not wanting to get into the political arena of opening/lockdown, I will say that I don't see anything in this thread that is "idle chatter". . . .

 

 

Your name and the 'chatter' reference were due to a misunderstood post of mine . . . and for that I sincerely apologize to you.  It was meant to be not only a compliment to you, but a reference to my own limitations while actively (and unofficially) participating in some discussions that include some of the organizations mentioned in the overall comments.  All of this outside of Cruise Critic.  

Yes, I do wish I could channel some of your internal/technical knowledge before opening my own trap.  Again, sorry.

 

.