Westerdam took the wrong route - is this fair compensation ?

[puppycanducruise]

Seems like a generous offer.

[CruiserBruce]

The letter DOESN'T say they crew made a wrong turn. It says, in essence, the home office plotted the Inside Passage (but apparently didn't book the pilot). The crew plotted the Pacific route west of Vancouver.

 

The offer is pretty generous. 10% of a 15 or 20 day cruise? For missing the Inside Passage? Pretty generous.

[RMLincoln]

We were on a Carnival one-time repositioning from CA to NY around Cape Horn. The trip was sold in three legs.  The itinerary  included glacier viewing off Chile. As we were nearing the region DH and I quickly realized it was obvious that there was not enough time in the itinerary for departing off the direct route into the glacier areas if we’d get to our next port on time. The captain announced no time for glacier viewing. Many many people were very upset! It was a huge disappointment to those who only booked that leg. I think we got a free glass of champagne at dinner. 

[BaileyMJ]

9 minutes ago, CruiserBruce said:

The letter DOESN'T say they crew made a wrong turn. It says, in essence, the home office plotted the Inside Passage (but apparently didn't book the pilot). The crew plotted the Pacific route west of Vancouver.

 

The offer is pretty generous. 10% of a 15 or 20 day cruise? For missing the Inside Passage? Pretty generous.

That makes more sense otherwise I would have serious doubts of the Captain and the story would be all over the media - like a commercial airliner landing on the wrong runway or airport - rare but happens and pilots/captain relieved of duty!

[sfaaa]

2 hours ago, Khlela said:

I honestly was not impressed with the inside passage. I prefer coming back on the outside. I know it feels upsetting but I do feel this is fair compensation. I missed my absolute favorite port last time, Sitka, and came the inside passage home. I was so upset and disappointed. I LOVE sitka and the inside passage was really disappointing. 

 

 Missing Sitka notwithstanding, inside passage is a lot calmer as it is sheltered by Vancouver Island. Sea can get pretty rough if the ship takes the open ocean route on the outside.

[Blackduck59]

It is unfortunate that you missed the Canadian inside passage. It is very scenic. That being said, on our cruise (on another line) most of that passage was done in darkness. It was also before the speed restrictions were implemented to minimize the effect on sea life in the area. Time and tide are critical for successful transit of at least 2 passages on that route. Did you get your full day port stop in Victoria? Even though it is mandatory due to US protectionist laws, it really is a great port stop, even though I am a little biased. 

[peajay]

1 hour ago, CruiserBruce said:

The letter DOESN'T say they crew made a wrong turn. It says, in essence, the home office plotted the Inside Passage (but apparently didn't book the pilot). The crew plotted the Pacific route west of Vancouver.

 

The offer is pretty generous. 10% of a 15 or 20 day cruise? For missing the Inside Passage? Pretty generous.

My understanding from many cruises is that the captain contacts the pilot to confirm the required timing. The captain told us that when they realised their error they tried to arrange for a pilot, and in fact cruised slowly around the end of the island waiting to see if one was available. The guest speaker was in the Crows nest as advertised in the daily news sheet and on the microphone said he was a little confused about which route we were taking and said they will contact the bridge. After about 15 minutes he said that the cruise director was discussing the course with the captain. At that point it seemed like a strange situation, and I think it was only at that time that the bridge realised the error. The letter states error.

[pghflyer]

I am shocked they actually admitted fault, still rubbing my eyes on that one!!  I feel bad you missed a part of your cruise you were really looking forward to, that stinks regardless. The cruise industry does take advantage of their liberal contract terms and we all have learned to accept it, but it doesn't make it a customer friendly practice.  

 

That said, I think the 10% offer is very fair and generous, relative to the industry.  I mean it isn't exactly the same - but United airlines doesn't issue flight credits when they skip flying over the Grand Canyon from LA - NYC, even if it is their normal flight path and everyone looks forward to it. 

 

Anyhow, sorry it happened, but the most productive thing will be to be thankful is that your only travel mishap and look forward to new adventures (at a 10% discount!).

[bennybear]

I’m sorry you missed the inside passage, it would be disappointing.  But almost all the ships I’ve seen that stop in Victoria route outside Vancouver island.   So I can understand the confusion.  It seems yours was to be a one off.   Many cruise lines advertise the inside passage but only do the part by Alaska rather than by Canada.  
IMO it is very healthy compensation.  Probably nearly enough to pay for an Alaska cruise.  So perhaps a way to find a silver lining. 

[pmjnh]

Thank you for posting the letter. Of course it is disappointing that you missed the inside passage but you made all your ports, apparently . I would be quite content with the compensation they offered and move on. As mentioned, you will have to come back and do an inside passage cruise. The compensation will probably pay for it!

[LAFFNVEGAS]

I agree the compensations is very good and I probably would not have expected anything other than a glass of champagne but the OP mentioned they came from Europe and most likely will not travel back (assuming meaning North America) Unfortunately many are saying that he could pay for another cruise with the 10% but those Trans pacific sailings depending on the category he booked was actually quite low in price. That cruise cost for 2 weeks was probably far less than an Alaska Cruise in the same category so 10% credit probably is not very high.It is sad that while they came this far they did not go ahead and also add on an Alaska cruise but since the last week of this Trans pacific was basically an Alaska cruise they probably thought they were hitting two birds with one stone.

This kind of stuff happens and one need to expect that it can happen.

I actually give credit to HAL for stating the truth in what happened and offering any compensation.. 

[DaveOKC]

Seems like a very fair compensation to me.  I have done both routes several times each and while the Inside one has better scenery and calmer waters, to me it is not worth 10% of the fare.

 

[ski ww]

That is a pretty big mistake for the navigator to mistake going around the west side instead of the east side of Vancouver Island, wonder if he still has a job.

[Mary229]

Please note the cruise was not an inside passage cruise, it was a transpacific focusing on Japan

"Westerdam transpacific cruise from Tokyo via Alaska to Seattle."  This cruise often misses the inside passage due to how early in the season it is in Alaska.  A simple search of reviews would show last year's same cruise missed the inside passage.    I know it is disappointing but we all are often disappointed by missed ports and at least HAL refunds the port fees.  As I said they are fortunate to be offered any compensation besides port fees

 

I am curious why the navigation error was not discovered until the cruise was underway.  

[MikeD4134]

5 hours ago, peajay said:

We have just returned home from the Westerdam transpacific cruise from Tokyo via Alaska to Seattle. A very nice enjoyable cruise despite some rough seas and mediocre weather. However after  visiting three Alaskan ports and on the way to Victoria, the itinerary was to cruise through the inner passage. This was widely advertised as one of the cruise highlights and the best opportunity to see marine wildlife, we bought two souvenir mugs that were special for the cruise showing the cruise map and ports visited and  quoting the inside passage specifically

Unfortunately the crew  made an error and sailed west of Vancouver island, so no inner passage cruise for us. The captain announced that they made a mistake and tried to get a pilot at the last minute but none were available. He told us we would get a letter delivered to our cabin detailing the compensation. We did not get the letter and after persisting, guest services reluctantly gave us one. The offer is 10 % of the cruise cost given as FCC. Many people were really frustrated and angry and several that we talked to were very unhappy with the offer, for them, like us, they did not receive one of the highlights of the cruise. This is the first HA cruise we have taken, so I am interested to see opinions. For me this isn't compensation, because we get nothing if we don't buy another cruise, so this is basically a marketing inducement to buy another cruise. On other lines where ports have been missed that were no fault of the cruise line (unlike this one) we received OBC as immediate compensation. We travelled from Europe and at our time of life, we are unlikely to ever cruise Alaska again.  People that had done the inner passage previously, sadly told us that we missed the most picturesque part.

 

We have been through there twice, nothing special, calmer water.

[peajay]

29 minutes ago, Mary229 said:

Please note the cruise was not an inside passage cruise, it was a transpacific focusing on Japan

"Westerdam transpacific cruise from Tokyo via Alaska to Seattle."  This cruise often misses the inside passage due to how early in the season it is in Alaska.  A simple search of reviews would show last year's same cruise missed the inside passage.    I know it is disappointing but we all are often disappointed by missed ports and at least HAL refunds the port fees.  As I said they are fortunate to be offered any compensation besides port fees

 

I am curious why the navigation error was not discovered until the cruise was underway.  

Yes we spoke to two people that missed the inside passage last year for weather reasons, so imagine how disappointed they were to miss it again.

Because the weather had been poor for several days and it was predicted to be fine for the inside passage (it was finally a beautiful sunny day) they were building up the scenic vistas of the inside passage, and chances of seeing marine wildlife, for several days. This mafe it even more odd that they got it wrong 

[Mary229]

6 minutes ago, peajay said:

Yes we spoke to two people that missed the inside passage last year for weather reasons, so imagine how disappointed they were to miss it again.

Because the weather had been poor for several days and it was predicted to be fine for the inside passage (it was finally a beautiful sunny day) they were building up the scenic vistas of the inside passage, and chances of seeing marine wildlife, for several days. This mafe it even more odd that they got it wrong 

The weather can be sunny it was the sea ice that affected last year by all reports.  This year who knows?  It is very odd that Seattle programmed the wrong route

[crystalspin]

5 hours ago, peajay said:

However after  visiting three Alaskan ports and on the way to Victoria, the itinerary was to cruise through the inner passage. This was widely advertised as one of the cruise highlights and the best opportunity to see marine wildlife, we bought two souvenir mugs that were special for the cruise showing the cruise map and ports visited and  quoting the inside passage specifically

I think -- as BennyBear suggests -- you did cruise Alaska's inside passage. 

 

I have cruised inside Vancouver Island twice (well really three times, one was north and then south) and saw NO marine wildlife; it is narrow and shallow! Lots of trees is what you see there. You did cruise one of the best places to see marine wildlife, and that is around Sitka. I also cruised outside Vancouver on the way to Victoria to Seattle, as that is the common route.

 

I think the captain was magnanimous in shouldering the blame, when the person who first pencil'ed the ship going east of Vancouver Island and then to Victoria was probably at fault!

 

I'm with the majority here, that 10% is more than fair when the contract gives the cruiseline all of the leeway to change route. At least you did see Alaska! Sitka is much more "authentic" Alaska than Juneau (where next year's itinerary goes, before ending in Vancouver).

[Liao]

1 hour ago, ski ww said:

That is a pretty big mistake for the navigator to mistake going around the west side instead of the east side of Vancouver Island, wonder if he still has a job.

Ridiculous!

[cbr663]

This incident was mentioned on another social site several days ago.  The Captain did indeed screw it up and the ship was off course.  The ship went around in circles for a while and when the Captain finally addressed the ship they admitted to the mistake and was told by Corporate that to readjust and sail the inside passage would make them late for Victoria.  That any ship Captain would make such a mistake is, for me anyway, beyond comprehension.

 

I think whenever compensation is offered by the cruise lines it should be offered as either an immediate, refundable OBC or a FCC.  Sometimes the incidents can be so off putting that a passenger will never sail again and to offer a FCC to those passengers is to effectively deny any real compensation.

 

Edited May 13 by cbr663
typo

[cbr663]

1 hour ago, ski ww said:

That is a pretty big mistake for the navigator to mistake going around the west side instead of the east side of Vancouver Island, wonder if he still has a job.

 

I agree and I have to wonder how no one else on the bridge questioned it.

[Khlela]

24 minutes ago, crystalspin said:

I think -- as BennyBear suggests -- you did cruise Alaska's inside passage. 

 

I have cruised inside Vancouver Island twice (well really three times, one was north and then south) and saw NO marine wildlife; it is narrow and shallow! Lots of trees is what you see there. You did cruise one of the best places to see marine wildlife, and that is around Sitka. I also cruised outside Vancouver on the way to Victoria to Seattle, as that is the common route.

 

I think the captain was magnanimous in shouldering the blame, when the person who first pencil'ed the ship going east of Vancouver Island and then to Victoria was probably at fault!

 

I'm with the majority here, that 10% is more than fair when the contract gives the cruiseline all of the leeway to change route. At least you did see Alaska! Sitka is much more "authentic" Alaska than Juneau (where next year's itinerary goes, before ending in Vancouver).

I agree with you completely. We saw SIGNIFICANTLY more wildlife going the other way. When I did the the inside passage we saw zero wildlife. The other direction was filled with wildlife. Plus I love the open sea. The inside passage made me feel like I was just on a river cruise. I feel like the only benefit is that it’s typically calmer waters. 

[SilvertoGold]

The Westerdam sails the Alaska season from Seattle (the Captain's "typically") and this particular repositioning cruise from Japan was apparently scheduled to sail the inside passage instead.  So who got this mixed up? Who orders the pilot (in advance by several days one would assume)?  Quite embarassing for HAL. The credit was a nice gesture.

 

Having sailed the inside passage more times than I can count I know the southbound sail is fantastic if the timing is right, so I can commiserate.

[crystalspin]

5 hours ago, peajay said:

HA is considered to be a premium cruise line and the prices certainly reflect that. I would say the way to judge a company is how they manage a bad situation, I am not too sure that their offer shows them in a good light ?

People who sail Premium Lines do not consider HAL one of them. Most would place it upper Mass Market having somewhat smaller ships and outstanding service. 10% FCC for 1 day's scenery on a 29-day cruise is fair if not more than fair. That time is about 3% only!

[Tennessee Titan]

6 hours ago, rafinmd said:

I'm not convinced the Captain made a mistake.  There is no way a cruise ship can go through the Canadian inside passage without a pilot, and I think if someone dropped the ball it was corporate marine operations. While a Captain is responsible for everything on the ship, sometimes that includes things outside his control.

 

Roy

This exactly what really happened. The captain tole me this himself...