Jump to content

CDC denies cruise sector's request to lift US sailing restrictions


mnocket
 Share

Recommended Posts

Why does no one mention the hundreds of thousands of people who have sailed on ships in the last 6 months with MSC, TUI, Royal?  Yes, a few cases have popped up on a few cruises, all have been handled by the cruise lines.  No horror stories of dead bodies and ruined cruises.  Some missed ports here and there.  

 

It's obvious it can be done.  Little in life has zero risk, and cruising has several risks, COVID has added another one.  If you're looking for guarantees it's not going to happen no matter what the protocols put in place or demands of the CDC.

 

 

Edited by Gracie115
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to a related thead..see post no 1 if you wish to expess support  to US Reps and Sens via CLIA.....(but .no need to further debate  if  one should or should not  do so already covered in that thread)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Gracie115 said:

Why does no one mention the hundreds of thousands of people who have sailed on ships in the last 6 months with MSC, TUI, Royal?

 

With due respect, it has not been hundreds of thousands of people. By my count, less than 200,000:

 

Costa started sailing in mid-September with 2 ships (Deliziosa and Diadema), each at about 50% capacity. They had to stop sailing again in mid-December and to date they have not re-started (due mainly to conditions in Italy). So, for about 3 months they sailed the equivalent of about 4650 passengers per week, or about 55,800 passengers.

 

MSC restarted sailing in mid-August with one ship, Grandiosa, at "significantly reduced" capacity.  (I'm going to assume 50%), so about 2500 pax per cruise. This ship also had to cancel itineraries during the December/January holidays. So about 38,400 passengers in 2020 by my estimate of # of cruises. So far in 2021 only Grandiosa has restarted (as of Jan 24th) and this year has carried about another 24,000 pax.

 

RCCL has only been sailing Quantum of the Seas from Singapore with around 1700 pax since December, and since that time one cruise was shortened and another one canceled due to a false-positive COVID case.

 

So far that's only about 107,000 -- and those are by far the larger ships that have been sailing. As already noted, resurgence of COVID has also caused periodic stoppages for Costa and MSC, and both have also had COVID cases aboard.

 

TUI ships, according to their own info, have carried about 60,000 passengers since the restart. Still not up to 200k, even probably if you toss in the few very much smaller lines that have had mixed success with restarts....

 

Numbers are not my thing but I think this is fairly accurate. 

 

All of that aside, there is nothing like a full-scale re-start anywhere. Even if sailing were to re-start on a trial basis in the US, there would not (or in my opinion SHOULD not) be anything more than this: a handful of ships at most, sailing short itineraries at half capacity, until it is clear that the situation is not dangerous to either passengers or crew or those living in the ports visited.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

 

 

All of that aside, there is nothing like a full-scale re-start anywhere. Even if sailing were to re-start on a trial basis in the US, there would not (or in my opinion SHOULD not) be anything more than this: a handful of ships at most, sailing short itineraries at half capacity, until it is clear that the situation is not dangerous to either passengers or crew or those living in the ports visited.

 

 

 

I don't know the actual number but I know that Richard Fain referred to a couple hundred thousand having sailed already in his last video, between the MSC, TUI, Costa and ROYAL cruises.  That's what I based my statement on.

 

I agree with you about a handful of ships from USA ports in the beginning, not at full capacity and I think ALL passengers and crew should be require to be vaccinated.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Hlitner said:

My understanding is that some ships (and yes, the Framework was weirdly ship-specific) have met phase 1.  Phase 1 was simply establishing laboratory testing of the onboard crew in US Waters.   But understand that any phasing on the part of the cruise lines is expensive because it means crewing the ship and getting it into US waters.   You need to add to this the recent comments of Frank del Rio (CEO of Norwegian Holdings and one of the most experienced cruise executives in the world) that it will take his cruise line about 90 days to restart after being given a green light from the CDC.

 

But instead of playing with words lets look at what the CDC has said: 

 

"CDC will help ships prepare and protect crew members during the initial phases by:

  • establishing a laboratory team dedicated to cruise ships to provide information and oversight for COVID-19 testing,
  • updating its color-coding system to indicate ship status,
  • updating its technical instructions, as needed, and
  • updating the “Enhanced Data Collection (EDC) During COVID-19 Pandemic Form” to prepare for surveillance for COVID-19 among passengers."

 

No BS...just the facts.  The CDC has not "updated its technical instructions" despite the cruise industry making the request on several occasions.  The document also says"

 

'CDC will continue to update its guidance and recommendations to specify basic safety standards and public health interventions based on the best scientific evidence available."

 

But now a year after the cruise line halt and 5 months after the publishing of the framework nothing has been done by the CDC!  And, as I mentioned in an earlier post, this week we learned that the current Director of the CDC was not even aware her agency was responsible for the cruise line shut down. 

 

And lets look at another aspect.  When the framework was written there were no approved COVID vaccines anywhere in the world.  Vaccines are a game changer and need to worked into the framework/guidelines.  But so far, not a word from the CDC!  

 

Hank

 

 

Lets take a look at what the CDC has said

 

"CDC will help ships prepare and protect crew members during the initial phases by:

  • establishing a laboratory team dedicated to cruise ships to provide information and oversight for COVID-19 testing,
  • updating its color-coding system to indicate ship status,
  • updating its technical instructions, as needed, and
  • updating the “Enhanced Data Collection (EDC) During COVID-19 Pandemic Form” to prepare for surveillance for COVID-19 among passengers."

 

Do you have any information that these items have not been done?

 

Do you have a current copy of the CDC technical instructions to show that no modifications have taken place?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nocl said:

Lets take a look at what the CDC has said

 

"CDC will help ships prepare and protect crew members during the initial phases by:

  • establishing a laboratory team dedicated to cruise ships to provide information and oversight for COVID-19 testing,
  • updating its color-coding system to indicate ship status,
  • updating its technical instructions, as needed, and
  • updating the “Enhanced Data Collection (EDC) During COVID-19 Pandemic Form” to prepare for surveillance for COVID-19 among passengers."

 

Do you have any information that these items have not been done?

 

Do you have a current copy of the CDC technical instructions to show that no modifications have taken place?

There are NO CDC technical instructions so no, I and nobody else has a copy of what has never existed.   I understand you are trying to defend the CDC, but at this point I no longer see any reason to defend an agency whose Director was not even aware of the issue until it was pointed out to her at a Senate Hearing.  Let us hope that now that Dr. Walensky is aware of the issue that she can take some action to move things along.  

 

Hank

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hlitner said:

There are NO CDC technical instructions so no, I and nobody else has a copy of what has never existed.   I understand you are trying to defend the CDC, but at this point I no longer see any reason to defend an agency whose Director was not even aware of the issue until it was pointed out to her at a Senate Hearing.  Let us hope that now that Dr. Walensky is aware of the issue that she can take some action to move things along.  

 

Hank

I would be willing to bet she has never been on a cruise and has not needed to pay attention to this issue.  It was def NOT on her top of list things to address as the new CDC Director, nor should it have been.  The previous director, had much more to focus on as well, and probably much more than she is inheriting, now that vaccines are rolling out.  It is going to get better and I think soon, no not July but this year, at least this is how I feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hlitner said:

There are NO CDC technical instructions so no, I and nobody else has a copy of what has never existed.   I understand you are trying to defend the CDC, but at this point I no longer see any reason to defend an agency whose Director was not even aware of the issue until it was pointed out to her at a Senate Hearing.  Let us hope that now that Dr. Walensky is aware of the issue that she can take some action to move things along.  

 

Hank

There are CDC technical instructions, just not new ones related to passenger boarding.  The lines you quoted did not say anything about generating new technical instructions just updating the existing ones.  You will also note that your quotation said when necessary.  

 

Technical instructions are generally issued when the regulated industry has indicated that there is a lack of clarity concerning a regulation or guidance.  The original order did not specify if any new technical documents would be generated.  It also did not say that the industry had to wait for such before submitting proposals and plans.  

 

I would expect that a new Director, who was named to head the CDC about 2 months ago, has had much larger issues to deal with than the foreign cruise industry,  Just little things like getting up tp speed concerning the CDC's current info,  recommendations, the vaccine roll-out. Filling other positions in the agency.  I would not expect that cruising would top of mind.  It would be being delegated to and handled by a department within.  I would expect that it might be handled by the NCEH (National Center for Environmental Health) since that is where the VSP program is located.

 

If the Director of CDC was personally more focused on cruise ships than the other elements of the pandemic than I would have problems with them.

Edited by nocl
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, LGW59 said:

I would be willing to bet she has never been on a cruise and has not needed to pay attention to this issue.  It was def NOT on her top of list things to address as the new CDC Director, nor should it have been.  The previous director, had much more to focus on as well, and probably much more than she is inheriting, now that vaccines are rolling out.  It is going to get better and I think soon, no not July but this year, at least this is how I feel.

Geez I do dislike excuses.  What is happening with the cruise industry has nothing to do with the previous CDC Director (Dr. Redfield) who has been out of the picture since January.  The original no-sail order (under Dr. Redfield) was certainly a reasonable decision given the situation that existed with COVID at that time.  The Framework that the CDC published in late October was likely in response to Vice President Pence's opposition to a blanket extension of the, then, existing no-sail order.  Apparently the Framework (which did have the effect of extending the shutdown) satisfied Pence (back in October) because if seemed to offer a way forward for the cruise industry.  But, as I warned in some posts back in November, a careful reading of the CDC's Framework showed it was carefully crafted to allow the CDC to extend the shutdown until at least Nov 2021 (or later if they extended the framework).   Some would argue that the cruise lines were being punished by the CDC for several early missteps (involving COVID) but we know that government officials would would never seek retribution against an industry that caused them some grief :(.

 

The reality, now understood by the CLIA, is that the Framework does not allow for any cruising until the CDC takes the next step and issues technical rules regarding the 2nd phase (i.e. Test Cruises).  While many just assumed the CDC would quickly do this after Nov 1, here we are 5 months later without any technical guidance for the cruise lines.  A change in leadership at the CDC has, so far, resulted in no change in policy...which seems to be to "slow walk" any attempt to restart cruising in North America.  

 

Speaking of the CDC's framework, many folks may not realize that the phase 1 (which is the only phase that can be done at the moment) only involves the crew.  There has still been zero guidance from the CDC about what specific restrictions, rules, etc. must be done by the cruise lines that would get them a green light.  And since the Framework was carefully worded to make approval's vessel specific (as opposed to a company or industry wide policy) the burden on the cruise industry is truly onerous (if not punitive).  

 

I have suggested that there should be some compromise between the industry and the cruise lines.  The CDC might want to consider allowing cruises from US Ports that follow the procedures adopted by RCI and Celebrity for their June cruises out of Nassau and St Maarten.  They should drop the entire "test cruise" baloney which really proves little and seems unnecessary.   And I think all parties need to accept that there will inevitably be some COVID cases on cruises and the cruise lines need to have appropriate measures in place (including isolation beds) to handle it.  With a mandatory vaccination policy it is likely that any COVID case would be manageable just like many other diseases that show-up onboard ships.   

 

My personal view is that COVID is here to stay and the time has come for us to learn how to live (as a society) with this disease just like we live with other diseases.  Just like any disease there is going to be a long learning curve as the medical experts continue to learn more about how to treat and prevent COVID.  But the death rates and serious morbidity seem to be significantly reduced among those who are vaccinated, are young (without underlying conditions) and those with Natural Immunity.  This knowledge should be enough to get the cruise industry back into operations.  Those looking for perfection (which seems to mean zero risk) are never going to be satisfied so no need to waste our time trying to meet their objections (because they will always have another objection).

 

Hank  

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hlitner said:

Geez I do dislike excuses.  What is happening with the cruise industry has nothing to do with the previous CDC Director (Dr. Redfield) who has been out of the picture since January.  The original no-sail order (under Dr. Redfield) was certainly a reasonable decision given the situation that existed with COVID at that time.  The Framework that the CDC published in late October was likely in response to Vice President Pence's opposition to a blanket extension of the, then, existing no-sail order.  Apparently the Framework (which did have the effect of extending the shutdown) satisfied Pence (back in October) because if seemed to offer a way forward for the cruise industry.  But, as I warned in some posts back in November, a careful reading of the CDC's Framework showed it was carefully crafted to allow the CDC to extend the shutdown until at least Nov 2021 (or later if they extended the framework).   Some would argue that the cruise lines were being punished by the CDC for several early missteps (involving COVID) but we know that government officials would would never seek retribution against an industry that caused them some grief :(.

 

The reality, now understood by the CLIA, is that the Framework does not allow for any cruising until the CDC takes the next step and issues technical rules regarding the 2nd phase (i.e. Test Cruises).  While many just assumed the CDC would quickly do this after Nov 1, here we are 5 months later without any technical guidance for the cruise lines.  A change in leadership at the CDC has, so far, resulted in no change in policy...which seems to be to "slow walk" any attempt to restart cruising in North America.  

 

Speaking of the CDC's framework, many folks may not realize that the phase 1 (which is the only phase that can be done at the moment) only involves the crew.  There has still been zero guidance from the CDC about what specific restrictions, rules, etc. must be done by the cruise lines that would get them a green light.  And since the Framework was carefully worded to make approval's vessel specific (as opposed to a company or industry wide policy) the burden on the cruise industry is truly onerous (if not punitive).  

 

I have suggested that there should be some compromise between the industry and the cruise lines.  The CDC might want to consider allowing cruises from US Ports that follow the procedures adopted by RCI and Celebrity for their June cruises out of Nassau and St Maarten.  They should drop the entire "test cruise" baloney which really proves little and seems unnecessary.   And I think all parties need to accept that there will inevitably be some COVID cases on cruises and the cruise lines need to have appropriate measures in place (including isolation beds) to handle it.  With a mandatory vaccination policy it is likely that any COVID case would be manageable just like many other diseases that show-up onboard ships.   

 

My personal view is that COVID is here to stay and the time has come for us to learn how to live (as a society) with this disease just like we live with other diseases.  Just like any disease there is going to be a long learning curve as the medical experts continue to learn more about how to treat and prevent COVID.  But the death rates and serious morbidity seem to be significantly reduced among those who are vaccinated, are young (without underlying conditions) and those with Natural Immunity.  This knowledge should be enough to get the cruise industry back into operations.  Those looking for perfection (which seems to mean zero risk) are never going to be satisfied so no need to waste our time trying to meet their objections (because they will always have another objection).

 

Hank  

You need to increase the font then and re-read it, was not making an excuse, in any way, was defending the previous director, totally understand why he did what he had to do.  Not going to write a novel about it like you, it would take a ream of paper to print what you just wrote.  

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, LGW59 said:

I would be willing to bet she has never been on a cruise and has not needed to pay attention to this issue.  It was def NOT on her top of list things to address as the new CDC Director, nor should it have been.  The previous director, had much more to focus on as well, and probably much more than she is inheriting, now that vaccines are rolling out.  It is going to get better and I think soon, no not July but this year, at least this is how I feel.

She may well have not been on a cruise but I think that an agency that has control over whether multi-million dollar corporations should at least have an idea of that control.  She did not.   Huge companies and also the impact on thousands of Americans who depend on those companies for their livelihoods...seems to me she should have been aware.  

 

At least she is now and hopefully will get up to speed on the issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gracie115 said:

 

I don't know the actual number but I know that Richard Fain referred to a couple hundred thousand having sailed already in his last video, between the MSC, TUI, Costa and ROYAL cruises.  That's what I based my statement on.

 

I agree with you about a handful of ships from USA ports in the beginning, not at full capacity and I think ALL passengers and crew should be require to be vaccinated.  

 

Likely he was including staff and crew in those numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many of the ships currently sailing are restricted to carrying only citizens of the home port country.  Quantum for example, sailing from Singapore (an extremely low covid country) is only doing cruises to nowhere and carrying only citizens of Singapore.  Under those circumstances would expect little or no outbreaks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Hlitner said:

Geez I do dislike excuses.  What is happening with the cruise industry has nothing to do with the previous CDC Director (Dr. Redfield) who has been out of the picture since January.  The original no-sail order (under Dr. Redfield) was certainly a reasonable decision given the situation that existed with COVID at that time.  The Framework that the CDC published in late October was likely in response to Vice President Pence's opposition to a blanket extension of the, then, existing no-sail order.  Apparently the Framework (which did have the effect of extending the shutdown) satisfied Pence (back in October) because if seemed to offer a way forward for the cruise industry.  But, as I warned in some posts back in November, a careful reading of the CDC's Framework showed it was carefully crafted to allow the CDC to extend the shutdown until at least Nov 2021 (or later if they extended the framework).   Some would argue that the cruise lines were being punished by the CDC for several early missteps (involving COVID) but we know that government officials would would never seek retribution against an industry that caused them some grief :(.

 

The reality, now understood by the CLIA, is that the Framework does not allow for any cruising until the CDC takes the next step and issues technical rules regarding the 2nd phase (i.e. Test Cruises).  While many just assumed the CDC would quickly do this after Nov 1, here we are 5 months later without any technical guidance for the cruise lines.  A change in leadership at the CDC has, so far, resulted in no change in policy...which seems to be to "slow walk" any attempt to restart cruising in North America.  

 

Speaking of the CDC's framework, many folks may not realize that the phase 1 (which is the only phase that can be done at the moment) only involves the crew.  There has still been zero guidance from the CDC about what specific restrictions, rules, etc. must be done by the cruise lines that would get them a green light.  And since the Framework was carefully worded to make approval's vessel specific (as opposed to a company or industry wide policy) the burden on the cruise industry is truly onerous (if not punitive).  

 

I have suggested that there should be some compromise between the industry and the cruise lines.  The CDC might want to consider allowing cruises from US Ports that follow the procedures adopted by RCI and Celebrity for their June cruises out of Nassau and St Maarten.  They should drop the entire "test cruise" baloney which really proves little and seems unnecessary.   And I think all parties need to accept that there will inevitably be some COVID cases on cruises and the cruise lines need to have appropriate measures in place (including isolation beds) to handle it.  With a mandatory vaccination policy it is likely that any COVID case would be manageable just like many other diseases that show-up onboard ships.   

 

My personal view is that COVID is here to stay and the time has come for us to learn how to live (as a society) with this disease just like we live with other diseases.  Just like any disease there is going to be a long learning curve as the medical experts continue to learn more about how to treat and prevent COVID.  But the death rates and serious morbidity seem to be significantly reduced among those who are vaccinated, are young (without underlying conditions) and those with Natural Immunity.  This knowledge should be enough to get the cruise industry back into operations.  Those looking for perfection (which seems to mean zero risk) are never going to be satisfied so no need to waste our time trying to meet their objections (because they will always have another objection).

 

Hank  

Nice to know that you consider the CLIA to be absolutely truthful.  After all its not like they are a lobbying organization whose clients have a vested interest. I guess with your earlier comment about the CDC's actions being unamerican that you consider CLIA to be the beacon of truth, justice and the American way.

 

There is one reason why I think that the cruise lines have not seriously taken action to get back cruising in the US.  That is because CLIA is still taking the lead.  Lead in working with CDC.  Lead in communications.  Taking action saying that they are waiting, talking about the impact, asking for the entire order to be dropped, but not talking about specific items that they feel are unnecessary and offering alternatives.

 

An industry uses lobbying organizations when they want a single input when it comes to trying to influence a new law or regulation being developed or to change and existing one.

 

But when it comes time to actually implement the law with in an organization or to ask specific questions related to implementing it from the regulatory authorities I have never seen a company route it through a lobbying organization.  When the rubber meets the road and it is time to implement the company works with their compliance, regulatory affairs, legal (what ever it might be is a particular industry and communicates directly.  Would be interesting if a Pharmaceutical company tried routing their communications for a clinical trial design through PhRMA instead of their Regulatory Affairs department communicating directly.

Edited by nocl
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listed in the order are the following two paragraphs

 

(c) A cruise ship operator shall not apply for approval to conduct a simulated voyage until all of CDC’s requirements relating to the protection of crew onboard ships in U.S. waters have been satisfied. The cruise ship operator’s responsible officials must sign the application for permission to conduct a simulation and certify under 18 U.S.C. § 1001 that all of CDC’s requirements relating to the protection of crew onboard cruise ships in U.S. waters have been satisfied.

 

(d) CDC will respond to the written notice and request for approval to conduct a simulation in writing in a timely manner. CDC may deny the request to conduct a simulation if the cruise ship operator is not in compliance with any provision of this framework, technical instructions, or orders, or if in CDC’s determination the simulation does not provide adequate safeguards to minimize the risk of COVID-19 for all participants. (e) CDC may conduct such oversight and inspection of simulated

 

Now we know that step C has been completed because the CDC is reporting that states.

 

Note that the first line of the next paragraph

 

CDC will respond to the written notice and request for approval to conduct a simulation in writing in a timely manner.

 

I have not heard of anyone asking for approval for a simulation, let alone being turned down. 

 

Edited by nocl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, nocl said:

Nice to know that you consider the CLIA to be absolutely truthful.  After all its not like they are a lobbying organization whose clients have a vested interest. I guess with your earlier comment about the CDC's actions being unamerican that you consider CLIA to be the beacon of truth, justice and the American way.

 

There is one reason why I think that the cruise lines have not seriously taken action to get back cruising in the US.  That is because CLIA is still taking the lead.  Lead in working with CDC.  Lead in communications.  Taking action saying that they are waiting, talking about the impact, asking for the entire order to be dropped, but not talking about specific items that they feel are unnecessary and offering alternatives.

 

An industry uses lobbying organizations when they want a single input when it comes to trying to influence a new law or regulation being developed or to change and existing one.

 

But when it comes time to actually implement the law with in an organization or to ask specific questions related to implementing it from the regulatory authorities I have never seen a company route it through a lobbying organization.  When the rubber meets the road and it is time to implement the company works with their compliance, regulatory affairs, legal (what ever it might be is a particular industry and communicates directly.  Would be interesting if a Pharmaceutical company tried routing their communications for a clinical trial design through PhRMA instead of their Regulatory Affairs department communicating directly.

 

Spot on.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps NOCL has a good point with the last post.  However, it is interesting that quite a few cruise lines have been able to work with government agencies around the world (there are cruises in Europe, RCI and Celebrity cruises scheduled in the Caribbean, cruises in Asia, etc) but no line seems to have gotten to first base with the CDC.  Perhaps it is my imagination but when I look at the future cruise schedule I do not see any line operating out of the USA.   The funny thing is that when you read that CDC Framework they did talk about giving all the cruise lines "flexibility" so one line might choose to mitigate COVID and restart while other lines might choose to wait.  But in practice the CDC has yet to cut a deal with any cruise line (and they have dozens from which to choose).

 

So perhaps NOCL prefers to think that the bad actors are dozens of cruise lines and the CLIA while I find that hard to accept.  And we may never know because the cruise lines cannot bad mouth the CDC without risking their future wrath.  It is much easier to accept that the cruise lines have asked the CLIA (their own organization), the Governor of Florida, and the Mayor of Miami to take on the role of being the bad guys (in the eyes of the CDC).

 

Hank

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like a good conspiracy theory as much as anyone, but...

 

There's an executive order dated January 21, 2021 titled Executive Order on Promoting COVID-19 Safety in Domestic and International Travel. You can read it here: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/21/executive-order-promoting-covid-19-safety-in-domestic-and-international-travel/ 

 

Section 5 is International Travel. There are tasks for plans, which I have to assume have been submitted. There's a coordination requirement at the interagency level. The next release you see on this issue will not come from Atlanta; it will come from Washington, and it most likely will consider all those non-health related issues that keep coming up. I also assume there are at least three plans, and maybe more (branches and sequels) depending on the overall status of the pandemic. One of those is do nothing and leave everything in place. That decision is going to be made in either the Executive Office Building, or the White House, not the CDC in Atlanta. 

 

The CDC has not denied any request; there has been no request. There is a press release by CLIA https://cruising.org/en/news-and-research/press-room/2021/march/cruise-lines-ready-to-sail-again-in-the-united-states, tweeted out at 11:02 am EDT on Wednesday. They almost certainly provided that to the cruise press under embargo (do not release until) the night before. TradeWinds sent an email, probably with the release, to the CDC public affairs officer as soon as the embargo expired, and probably before the presser was actually released. At 2:11 pm, they published their article that the CDC "CDC denies cruise sector's request to lift US sailing restrictions by July", when in fact the PAO correctly stated "Returning to passenger cruising is a phased approach to mitigate the risk of spreading Covid-19. Details for the next phase of the CSO are currently under interagency review." Which is what the January 21st Executive Order calls for (it most directly addresses port operations). The CDC is advising on health issues, and has the authority to implement international quarantine, but it'll be at the direction of someone else (and honestly almost certainly was last fall as well).

 

Assuming CLIA has any value as a lobbying and advocacy body, they know how to request government action. A letter to the HHS Secretary with copies furnished to key committee chairs would be the norm. A presser is just that.

 

Given the 100 Day targets of the current administration, the earliest I'd expect anything is May 1st, which I think is actually 101 days. And Atlanta is writing whatever implementing guidance is required now. In fact, they're probably on the second or third draft, at least, if a change is the selected action. Which doesn't mean they'll recommend a change from November 1st, especially when they're still recommending against non-essential travel.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 3/27/2021 at 11:47 AM, waltlin37 said:

I do not understand why other travel is allowed but not cruises!!! Could part of the problem be that most cruises leave from Florida a red state. 🙈

 

On 3/27/2021 at 12:01 PM, terrydtx said:

Good point, the same can be said for cruises that sail to/from Alaska and Texas. You can fly to Alaska and do a number of land tours, but no cruising!

 

 

If you are looking for a conspiracy angle it's not about Red states or Blue states.

It's all about the green! 💲

The industry just doesn't provide the U.S Treasury with enough green and that's why the CDC is being tough on them. As Deep Throat said; "follow the money."🤑

Edited by DirtyDawg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand that a majority of folks who read these blogs do not spent the time NOCL and I (and others) spend looking at lots of different sources to gather facts.   While some of us have different points of view I am old fashioned enough to think that airing various points of view is a healthy exercise of our free speech.  So, I am not going to "Cancel" NOCL just because we disagree.   But rather then continuing to "mouth off" on this topic here is a link to a pretty decent article"

CDC rejects cruise company request to sail in July (msn.com)

 

Those that think of themselves as on the left should not have an issue with an MSN article.  As to those on the right I guess I could find a few right wing articles that say pretty much the same thing.  COVID is a virus, a pandemic, and should not be a political football.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

Perhaps NOCL has a good point with the last post.  However, it is interesting that quite a few cruise lines have been able to work with government agencies around the world (there are cruises in Europe, RCI and Celebrity cruises scheduled in the Caribbean, cruises in Asia, etc) but no line seems to have gotten to first base with the CDC.  Perhaps it is my imagination but when I look at the future cruise schedule I do not see any line operating out of the USA.   The funny thing is that when you read that CDC Framework they did talk about giving all the cruise lines "flexibility" so one line might choose to mitigate COVID and restart while other lines might choose to wait.  But in practice the CDC has yet to cut a deal with any cruise line (and they have dozens from which to choose).

 

So perhaps NOCL prefers to think that the bad actors are dozens of cruise lines and the CLIA while I find that hard to accept.  And we may never know because the cruise lines cannot bad mouth the CDC without risking their future wrath.  It is much easier to accept that the cruise lines have asked the CLIA (their own organization), the Governor of Florida, and the Mayor of Miami to take on the role of being the bad guys (in the eyes of the CDC).

 

Hank

 

 

However the markets with which those cruise lines working is not their primary market.  The other question is exactly what long term requirements those countries have when dealing with cruises lines.  In the case of Germany the sailing are a German registered company.  Same with Italy.

 

In the UK Cunard, P&O UK and Princess are also part of a UK company, Carnival UK.

 

In the EU what are the reporting requirements concerning health and cruise ships.  They do have something similar to the US VSP but have they mandated additional requirements as the CDC has.

For that matter are the health information reports in the EU subject to public release as in the US?

 

As far as the cruise lines bad mouthing the CDC considering the very clear lobbying and comments by the CLIA that the law is unnecessary, trying to get the White House to put pressure on them to drop the order.  There are numerous examples of the CLIA doing exactly that.  I doubt the CDC would be upset by an actual exchange of real details about points of agreement and disagreement.

 

I will remind you that in the early days of the outbreak the cruise lines were very quick to move their ships out of US waters so they would not have to report cases of COVID among their crew and would not have to meet CDC testing requirements.

 

They were very quick to blame the CDC about not being able to repatriate their crew via the US, when the hold up was the companies not being willing to sign the documents that the CDC was requiring.

 

That the companies were saying that it was too expensive to have to use charters.  When in the case of RCL and Celebrity they took their ships to Barbados and flew their crew home through the closed air port via CHARTERED JETS.  What was the difference?  Having to meet the CDC's reporting requirements.

 

The requirements for offloading crew through public US airports was done fairly quickly as you can see from the following events.  

 

June 1, 2020 Update

Added requirements for use of commercial travel to disembark crew members and clarified routine testing for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

April 28, 2020 Update

Clarified the stipulations for disembarking asymptomatic crew for transfer or repatriation.

April 21, 2020 Update

Clarified that notification to health departments for disembarking crews must include health departments with jurisdiction for the seaport and those with jurisdiction for the crew members’ residence.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

I understand that a majority of folks who read these blogs do not spent the time NOCL and I (and others) spend looking at lots of different sources to gather facts.   While some of us have different points of view I am old fashioned enough to think that airing various points of view is a healthy exercise of our free speech.  So, I am not going to "Cancel" NOCL just because we disagree.   But rather then continuing to "mouth off" on this topic here is a link to a pretty decent article"

CDC rejects cruise company request to sail in July (msn.com)

 

Those that think of themselves as on the left should not have an issue with an MSN article.  As to those on the right I guess I could find a few right wing articles that say pretty much the same thing.  COVID is a virus, a pandemic, and should not be a political football.  

As I have said the CLIA approach has been to request that the order be dropped.  That is exactly what the article says.

 

It does not say specific items be changed.  It does not provide that CLIA has offered alternatives.

 

It is only to request that it be dropped.

 

No sign of any cruise ships requesting a practice cruise and being turned down.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the EU Cruise Guidance.  Their health reporting seems to be more of an extension of the normal reporting process.  Compared to the CDC that has very specific schedules for testing and enhanced reporting requirements for COVID for any ship in or expected to enter US waters.

 

 

 

https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/COVID-19-cruise-guidance-27-07-2020.pdf

 

2.1.1 Arrival Ship calls at EU ports is a well-established process. Member States have National Single Windows for reporting formalities, including the Maritime Declaration of Health (MDH) (“free pratique”). The notification of ship calls at EU Ports is defined in Directive 2002/59/EU, as amended. In general, the prenotification period is 24 hours before arrival. However, cruise ship companies are recommended to extend the prenotification period due to the current circumstances to allow for a better coordination with the port authorities. Similarly, the MDH is also required to be reported through the National Single Window prior to arriving in a port situated in an EU Member State as specified above in accordance with EU law (Directive 2010/65/EU). It must be reported by the master or any other person duly authorised by the operator of the ship to the competent authority designated by that Member State. Any possible, probable or confirmed case of COVID-19 on board should be communicated without delay. It is recommended that Member States request the ship’s master to keep the MDH updated and communicate the following information to the relevant authority four hours before the estimated arrival in each port of call: (a) Total number of persons on board (both crew and passengers); (b) Number of persons infected with COVID-19 (confirmed cases); (c) Number of persons considered as possible or probable cases of COVID-19. This information can be communicated through the updated MDH via radio/telephone in case of imminent arrival. Providing information between any party should always comply with the data protection rules (GDPR). The company should facilitate the application of health measures and provide all relevant public health information requested by the competent authority at the port. If it is considered that symptomatic possible or probable case/cases should not remain on board the ship, disembarkation should be conducted as quickly as possible. Member States receiving information on a possible, probable or confirmed COVID-19 case may share it on a voluntary basis with the Member States along the planned route of the ship and the ship’s flag (if an EU Member State) via the SafeSeaNet system. For this, an addendum to the SafeSeaNet Incident Report Guidelines has been agreed in order to provide guidance to Member State Authorities on the best way to exchange information relating to possible, probable, or confirmed cases of COVID-19 infection on board ships, and on the measures taken by the competent authorities in Member States located along the routes taken by the ships concerned. Member States can share this information with other Member States on a voluntary basis using the Incident Report type “Others.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gracie115 said:

She may well have not been on a cruise but I think that an agency that has control over whether multi-million dollar corporations should at least have an idea of that control.  She did not.   Huge companies and also the impact on thousands of Americans who depend on those companies for their livelihoods...seems to me she should have been aware.  

 

At least she is now and hopefully will get up to speed on the issue. 

Considering that cruise lines were HUGE news articles during the early pandemic days, there is no way in the world she was not aware of this.  Whether she knew the exact specifics of the current situation at the time of her taking control is one thing. But I agree 100% that she definitely should have been more aware of what was going on with the industry.  People need to remember, she is not sitting up in the head chair running things alone.  There are dozens (if not hundreds) of staff members managed by her (or through her teams).  I find it hard to believe not a one of them brought this up as a topic!  If she really and truly was not aware after all the massive publicity cruise lines got in the beginning, then heaven help us all.  

  • Like 1
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
      • Q&A: Cruise Insurance with Steve Dasseos of the TripInsuranceStore.com Jan '22
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: AmaWaterways - Journey Through Europe
      • ICYMI Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Q&A with Silversea Cruises
      • 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...