Enforcement

[ToniV]

My only complaint, after 50+ cruises, is that ALL cruise lines make rules they don’t enforce. Whether it’s no diapers in the pool, no kids in Solarium (nor in casino/gym/adult shows/spa), wash hands before entering buffet, don’t wear shorts to dinner, no “saving” chairs, cannot cruise six months pregnant, cannot cruise until six months old, wear a mask, be vaccinated, WHATEVER, there are always blind eyes turned, conflict seemingly avoided, exceptions made, loopholes left open. Most of the time all it takes is a guest willing to lie (“I’m not pregnant!” “Fluffy’s my service animal; she’ll stay with my husband while I go ashore!” “My baby’s six months old and already toilet-trained!”) and an employee too busy or too intimidated or totally untrained and unempowered in how to deal with it. (I’ve heard all of these whoppers on board.) Crew members responsible for enforcement seem more fearful of angering rule-breakers with correction than of angering the rest of us who see what others get away with — who see what others shamelessly BRAG about getting away with. Failure to enforce some of these rules results in a health or safety hazard. Failure to enforce others compromises the atmosphere of a given venue and creates resentment among the rule followers who are made out to be chumps. If you aren’t going to enforce even the most fundamental parts of a dress code, for example, why have one? If you are leaving it up to adult guests in the Solarium to report the 10yos in the Solarium pool or hot tub, why promote the Solarium as being for those 18 and up, leading me to believe that it actually WILL be for those 18 and up? I actually would like to see a few NEW rules — 21+ in Solarium, no one under 21 on barstools, ONE elegant bar on board for strictly 21+, for example. But I’d be satisfied with genuine enforcement of the rules ALREADY IN PLACE.

[jsn55]

YUP, you are so right, and I think 99% of adult cruisers will agree with you.  Easy to solve this problem.  Every ship needs an 'enforcement officer' who sweetly strolls around informing the dopes of the rules and taking action if they don't comply.  Hopeless to think that crew members, who are trained to please the pax, will enforce anything.  The job is their tix out of poverty, as well as their family's source of income back home.  But what mass-market cruiseline is going to add a crew member like an enforcement officer?  The job produces no revenue for the cruiseline.  

[Ferry_Watcher]

At least pier side, we did enforce the vaccination rule during the 2021 and 2022 seasons (unless a passenger presented a falsified vaccination card).  Any baby cruising does need a birth certificate, so we can make sure for health and safety reasons that babies under 6 months don't cruise.  As for pregnancy, we have to accept whatever answer the passenger gives (Is anyone in the traveling group more than 23 weeks pregnant?).  As for service animals  (dogs), again we can't ask.  We make a copy of the dog's vaccination record and a copy of the dog's "boarding pass" and send them on to the ship.

[navybankerteacher]

13 minutes ago, jsn55 said:

… But what mass-market cruiseline is going to add a crew member like an enforcement officer?  The job produces no revenue for the cruiseline.  

Perhaps it would produce no revenue,  but it may come to be seen as a way of maintaining revenue.  There is one line I doubt 

I will ever sail again, in large part because of the ambience created by the schlubs - and a number of others I will avoid unless they offer an extraordinary itineraries at good prices.  

[mom says]

Rather a lot of inaccuracies and over the top exaggerations by the OP, but I get it. You are angered by lack of rule and policy enforcement generally. And now you want more rules that won't be enforced. In a perfect world, enforcement would be universal and without exception and you'd be happy. But in a perfect world, those rules wouldn't need to be enforced, because everyone would simply comply. But we don't live in a perfect world, so I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for it. 

 

Since you feel that every cruise line is equally guilty, and this adversely affects your cruises so badly, perhaps you might want to look at alternate vacations.

[lisiamc]

I was booted out of a cocktail party on a Celebrity ship because my sandals with high heels and jewelled straps were dubbed flip-flops because they had a strap that went between my toes. I wasn’t terribly happy, but I did accept that if they wanted to enforce the rules (no flip-flops) there were going to be some interesting judgement calls. It did make me laugh that I could have worn my wellies and been allowed in because they were not flip-flops. You can trust that I would have worn them, if only they had been with me! 😀

 

That may be one of the many reasons we no longer sail with Celebrity, but it isn’t one of the important ones.

Edited March 6 by lisiamc

[chengkp75]

The simple fact is that while many may be irritated by the actions of a few, unless the many actually complain, en masse, the rules will not be enforced.  "The passenger is always right" means that we don't want a complaint from the one bad actor, since the rest of the passengers aren't complaining.  However, if they have to balance the complaint of the one rule breaker against the complaints of a hundred people who feel affected by that person's actions, then you will get enforcement.

[clo]

1 hour ago, mom says said:

Rather a lot of inaccuracies and over the top exaggerations by the OP, but I get it. You are angered by lack of rule and policy enforcement generally. And now you want more rules that won't be enforced. In a perfect world, enforcement would be universal and without exception and you'd be happy. But in a perfect world, those rules wouldn't need to be enforced, because everyone would simply comply. But we don't live in a perfect world, so I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for it. 

 

Since you feel that every cruise line is equally guilty, and this adversely affects your cruises so badly, perhaps you might want to look at alternate vacations.

I think the nuns I had in school would settle this...in one day.

[clo]

25 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The simple fact is that while many may be irritated by the actions of a few, unless the many actually complain, en masse, the rules will not be enforced.  "The passenger is always right" means that we don't want a complaint from the one bad actor, since the rest of the passengers aren't complaining.  However, if they have to balance the complaint of the one rule breaker against the complaints of a hundred people who feel affected by that person's actions, then you will get enforcement.

But they come here instead rather than in addition to.

[Kristelle]

1 hour ago, lisiamc said:

I was booted out of a cocktail party on a Celebrity ship because my sandals with high heels and jewelled straps were dubbed flip-flops because they had a strap that went between my toes. I wasn’t terribly happy, but I did accept that if they wanted to enforce the rules (no flip-flops) there were going to be some interesting judgement calls. It did make me laugh that I could have worn my wellies and been allowed in because they were not flip-flops. You can trust that I would have worn them, if only they had been with me! 😀

 

 

 I guess this is a good illustration of why there are grey areas in rules and sometimes is up to discretion of rule enforcers.

 

This seems a silly 'letter of the law' enforcement of no flip flops. Probably 'no shorts' could be similar at times.

 

Perhaps if 10 yrs olds are with parents and well behaved - it is reasonable to discretionally allow them in hot tubs or suchlike.

 

You would never get a 21 and up rule anywhere - since in most countries 18 is legal adult

[jsn55]

6 hours ago, lisiamc said:

I was booted out of a cocktail party on a Celebrity ship because my sandals with high heels and jewelled straps were dubbed flip-flops because they had a strap that went between my toes. I wasn’t terribly happy, but I did accept that if they wanted to enforce the rules (no flip-flops) there were going to be some interesting judgement calls. It did make me laugh that I could have worn my wellies and been allowed in because they were not flip-flops. You can trust that I would have worn them, if only they had been with me! 😀

 

That may be one of the many reasons we no longer sail with Celebrity, but it isn’t one of the important ones.

OMG, this is an astonishing story!  Shows why large corporations are so wary of giving employees discretion to deal with the customers.  I would have been tempted to find a Sharpie. paint some Mary Janes on a pair of white socks and return to the party.  Of course it's not the reason you no longer sail with Celebrity, but it surely affects their standing when you are comparing future cruises.  I once got ripped up for $50 by an agent at Grand Circle Cruises.  I had paid using the offered discount, but she said I didn't qualify.  After a bit of discussion on the phone, I asked her if she was going to cancel my $17K cruise if I didn't cough up the $50 and she said yes.  We were very happy GCC customers but, gee whiz, we've never found another trip to book with them.

[Aquahound]

My last 4 cruises were on RCI and they were very good at enforcing the Solarium age rules.  I saw pool attendants pouncing on parents almost immediately after entering the Solarium with kids and if they made it past that layer of defense, the lifeguards were excellent at politely redirected them toward the exits.

 

Regarding other rules, I don't think everything can be enforced all the time.  You have to accept that if you choose to cruise a mega ship with more people than a small town on board, the likelihood of observing abhorrent behavior is pretty good.  Just gotta be patient.  

Edited March 7 by Aquahound

[K32682]

There are some people who are sticklers for the RULES and are easily outraged when anyone breaks even the most insignificant of them. Others take a live and let live approach unless the rule breaking directly affects them in a substantial way. A kid in the solarium, a pair of shorts in the MDR, an underage teenager in a casino, someone else not washing their hands before going into the buffet is not worth other passengers or the cruise line making a federal case over.

 

 

Edited March 7 by K32682

[cruiseaholic777]

Well said K32682. If it bothers you that much don't cruise. It is that simple.

[MacMadame]

4 hours ago, K32682 said:

There are some people who are sticklers for the RULES and are easily outraged when anyone breaks even the most insignificant of them. Others take a live and let live approach unless the rule breaking directly affects them in a substantial way. A kid in the solarium, a pair of shorts in the MDR, an underage teenager in a casino, someone else not washing their hands before going into the buffet is not worth other passengers or the cruise line making a federal case over.

Agree about all but the hand-washing. That does impact all the other passengers.

[CDNPolar]

7 hours ago, K32682 said:

There are some people who are sticklers for the RULES and are easily outraged when anyone breaks even the most insignificant of them. Others take a live and let live approach unless the rule breaking directly affects them in a substantial way. A kid in the solarium, a pair of shorts in the MDR, an underage teenager in a casino, someone else not washing their hands before going into the buffet is not worth other passengers or the cruise line making a federal case over.

 

 

 

We are the live and let live, but I won't say that I don't look and wonder why some are allowed to get away with what they do.

 

I think as in the dress code violation discussions, there is concern that some may break dining room dress code in the first few days because their luggage did not follow them to the ship.

 

There will always be rule followers and rule breakers.  Drive through any city and look at the number of people who don't follow the rules of the road.

 

This crap happens everywhere and all the time.

 

I / We just move one.  We don't let these things trouble us in the least.  If it bothers us that much we move away from what is bothersome.

 

We are on vacation to have fun and relax and not be stressed by the rule breakers.

[K32682]

4 hours ago, MacMadame said:

Agree about all but the hand-washing. That does impact all the other passengers.

 

The impact however is generalized and not equally shared. Is handwashing before entering the buffet a rule, a recommendation or a request? Is a stop at the handwashing station mandatory for admission and has a cruiser ever been denied access for refusing or is this "rule" similar to not using the same cup or plate more than once? 

[mjkacmom]

On every NCL ship I’ve been in with my kids, they’ve been told to keep on walking in the casino (unfortunately a lot of their ships have casinos as walk through areas). Pretty much shorts allowed everywhere. As for infants, I’m guessing they are very strict with the 6 month rule, since a birth certificate or passport is required. No way to do that with a pregnancy (although I’m baffled how that would upset another passenger).

[sparks1093]

Society overall is very lax at rule following and since the members of the society cruise that tendency naturally follows them. 

[Joebucks]

This is the whole world. Rules and laws are turning into polite asks. To enforce them is fascist.

[Keksie]

Americans have not been rule followers since the 1700s.

[ontheweb]

2 hours ago, mjkacmom said:

On every NCL ship I’ve been in with my kids, they’ve been told to keep on walking in the casino (unfortunately a lot of their ships have casinos as walk through areas). Pretty much shorts allowed everywhere. As for infants, I’m guessing they are very strict with the 6 month rule, since a birth certificate or passport is required. No way to do that with a pregnancy (although I’m baffled how that would upset another passenger).

I believe the pregnancy rule is not about bothering other passengers. I believe it is more about the ship's medical facilities are not really equipped to handle a premature childbirth. (I am assuming no one would really board with a sailing date that included the due date.)

[ontheweb]

20 hours ago, Ferry_Watcher said:

At least pier side, we did enforce the vaccination rule during the 2021 and 2022 seasons (unless a passenger presented a falsified vaccination card).  Any baby cruising does need a birth certificate, so we can make sure for health and safety reasons that babies under 6 months don't cruise.  As for pregnancy, we have to accept whatever answer the passenger gives (Is anyone in the traveling group more than 23 weeks pregnant?).  As for service animals  (dogs), again we can't ask.  We make a copy of the dog's vaccination record and a copy of the dog's "boarding pass" and send them on to the ship.

If a woman looks very pregnant, are you or a supervisor allowed to ask when her due date is to confirm that she is less than 23 weeks pregnant? If not satisfied with the answer, can you ask for some sort of proof from her doctor?

[mjkacmom]

Just now, ontheweb said:

If a woman looks very pregnant, are you or a supervisor allowed to ask when her due date is to confirm that she is less than 23 weeks pregnant? If not satisfied with the answer, can you ask for some sort of proof from her doctor?

Of course not! Heck she could be just a little fluffy. She could be pregnant with twins. I don’t think HIPAA allows one to ask, especially something like pregnancy when many measure bigger of smaller. I measured a lot smaller with #1 than #4/#5 at 23 weeks.

[ontheweb]

1 minute ago, mjkacmom said:

Of course not! Heck she could be just a little fluffy. She could be pregnant with twins. I don’t think HIPAA allows one to ask, especially something like pregnancy when many measure bigger of smaller. I measured a lot smaller with #1 than #4/#5 at 23 weeks.

1. I think HIPPA only applies to medical providers.

 

2. It could be possible that the pregnant potential passenger never read the rule pertaining to pregnancy.