Jump to content

Round 1: FDR


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, floridatravelersforlife said:

Since Florida AG is appealing the Appelate Court decision to the Supreme Court, all this is conjecture.  Since O screwed me when they announced the delay in restart of the R Ships, I have cancelled all my cruises with O until July 2022.  I don't need to get whipsawed by the bureacrats and O.  Instead we are doing two land based vacations.  

How ever did you get hold of that internal O memo stating “let’s screw this guy?”

  • Like 5
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/20/2021 at 12:54 PM, Flatbush Flyer said:

How ever did you get hold of that internal O memo stating “let’s screw this guy?”

O must be spending all their time trying to "screw" that guy.  How do they find time to do anything else.  Lets take a breadth and get on to some important stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And apparently Round 2 to FL. The Appeals Court just reversed itself stating that the CDC failed to provide any legal reason for it's restrictions to continue.

IMHO, It's time for FDR to do what RCL has done, make it extremely unpalatable for any unvaccinated person to want to cruise with O from the US. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, Aloha 1 said:

And apparently Round 2 to FL. The Appeals Court just reversed itself stating that the CDC failed to provide any legal reason for it's restrictions to continue.

IMHO, It's time for FDR to do what RCL has done, make it extremely unpalatable for any unvaccinated person to want to cruise with O from the US. 

Absolutely not. I’d rather fly to a different embarkation port than not have a 100% vaccination requirement and I trust that most O regular passengers would agree.

Edited by Flatbush Flyer
  • Like 12
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Absolutely not. I’d rather fly to a different embarkation port than not have a 100% vaccination requirement and I trust that most O regular passengers would agree.

Agree!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Absolutely not. I’d rather fly to a different embarkation port than not have a 100% vaccination requirement and I trust that most O regular passengers would agree.

I certainly understand your position, but I do not understand how that applies to this court ruling.  Even if the CDC requirements were to remain in affect, the CDC does not require (nor has it ever) required all passengers to be 100% vaccinated.  
 

This “Round” does not really affect that decision based on my understanding.

Edited by jagoffee
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know that cruise industry experts have been brainstorming Miami workarounds for months, but I can't help thinking up crazy ideas myself. My favorite I-don't-know-what-I'm-talking-about-idea is Oceania (and NCL brands in general) making use of their private island in the Bahamas. Chartered fast ferries, yachts, and sea planes could get people to the island (hey Florida, no vaccine requirement to get on the ferry but the Bahamas may not let them in), then embarkation processing could happen according to the laws of the Bahamas. There are probably logistical challenges, but I can dream....🌈⛱️🦄 I'd go for Cancun too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Aloha 1 said:

And apparently Round 2 to FL. The Appeals Court just reversed itself stating that the CDC failed to provide any legal reason for it's restrictions to continue.

IMHO, It's time for FDR to do what RCL has done, make it extremely unpalatable for any unvaccinated person to want to cruise with O from the US. 

+ 1

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, RJB said:

+ 1 "... IMHO, It's time for FDR to do what RCL has done, make it extremely unpalatable for any unvaccinated person to want to cruise with O from the US."

A BIG 👍 +1

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, bigmjh said:

A BIG 👍 +1

The court fight isn’t over and, unless I’m not following that particular lawsuit correctly, it has more to do with the CDC’s CSO than it does with NCLH requiring 100% vaccination proof.

Of course, there’s nothing stopping O forewarning passengers that there is a 100% vaccination requirement at embarkation and requesting VOLUNTARY proof prior to that embarkation.
And, though initial proof will not be “required,” passengers (pre-embarkation) can be informed that, once the ship has left Florida, if no vaccine proof has been volunteered (for the “safety of passengers and crew” - a stock phrase long stated in the T&Cs), that passenger will be disembarked at the first stop with no refunds issued.

  • Like 12
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

The court fight isn’t over and, unless I’m not following that particular lawsuit correctly, it has more to do with the CDC’s CSO than it does with NCLH requiring 100% vaccination proof.

Of course, there’s nothing stopping O forewarning passengers that there is a 100% vaccination requirement at embarkation and requesting VOLUNTARY proof prior to that embarkation.
And, though initial proof will not be “required,” passengers (pre-embarkation) can be informed that, once the ship has left Florida, if no vaccine proof has been volunteered (for the “safety of passengers and crew” - a stock phrase long stated in the T&Cs), that passenger will be disembarked at the first stop with no refunds issued.

Great idea.  We are all for it.  FDR is just trying to keep all of us as safe as possible. Both passengers and crew. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/24/2021 at 4:17 PM, Flatbush Flyer said:

The court fight isn’t over and, unless I’m not following that particular lawsuit correctly, it has more to do with the CDC’s CSO than it does with NCLH requiring 100% vaccination proof.

Of course, there’s nothing stopping O forewarning passengers that there is a 100% vaccination requirement at embarkation and requesting VOLUNTARY proof prior to that embarkation.
 

This is exactly what Celebrity is doing. They are calling people on the phone a week before their cruise and asking them to voluntarily upload and send a copy of their vaccine record ahead of time, and to have the card with them and volunteer to show it at embarkation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/24/2021 at 4:17 PM, Flatbush Flyer said:

The court fight isn’t over and, unless I’m not following that particular lawsuit correctly, it has more to do with the CDC’s CSO than it does with NCLH requiring 100% vaccination proof.

Of course, there’s nothing stopping O forewarning passengers that there is a 100% vaccination requirement at embarkation and requesting VOLUNTARY proof prior to that embarkation.
And, though initial proof will not be “required,” passengers (pre-embarkation) can be informed that, once the ship has left Florida, if no vaccine proof has been volunteered (for the “safety of passengers and crew” - a stock phrase long stated in the T&Cs), that passenger will be disembarked at the first stop with no refunds issued.

I believe you are correct that the CDC’s CSO now being  a recommendations only has nothing to do with proof of 100% full vaccination.  The CSO does not even require 100% vaccinations.  Nor does the CDC, FDA, or the Administration  have a reliable source/method for determine fully vaccination status.  Or even whether things like mixed vaccines qualify.

 

As far as determining someone’s status after departure and kicking them off the ship, I assume you are joking.  That would be an expensive lawsuit and perhaps even subject to criminal prosecution.

 

Just  in case you were wondering, my wife and I are fully vaccinated with two Pfizer doses.  We were vaccinated as soon as we could. 
 

I believe that the NCL product lines will find a way to cruise just like other cruise lines.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope no one here is a lawyer would hate for you to defend me..

 

The issues are separate.  CDC rules being one and the "vaccine passport" requirement being 2nd.

They are not connected.

1) CDC is whether they can regulate/impose standards on cruise lines.  Yes they can. Governor is wrong. No different than requiring testing on passengers returning home.  They get the authority from the Trump Exec Orders and the fact that US Government can regulate cruise lines in US Ports.

2) Vaccine passport is another issue - we will see how it plays in the court with NCL Holdings law suit. The Governor has authority locally but is overstretching here IMO.

 

My suggestion just make it onerous to even come onboard without being vaccinated.

Masking all times except in cabin or dining, Testing regularly, no specialty dining, only can dine in the GDR in a separate protected area, COVID insurance, no Terrace Buffet, no access to gym or spa etc...

 

But then again you have two alphas trying to kill each other.

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
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: PONANT Cruises & Expeditions
      • Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Q&A with American Queen Voyages
      • 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...