Dawn Jan.18-28 -Children Run Wild

[mikeythemars]

Shoreguy and many other CCers will be on the February school vacation week were there are sure to be many, many kids. I believe many in the group sailed the same week previously. I wonder if the issue on the January Dawn cruise is really the number of kids or the more typical "groups" that take over a ship.

 

No, the issue on this thread is 100% a particular Brooklyn segment. They were on the Spirit at the same time last year - and caused precisely the same problems on that vessel.

 

We are cruising on the Spirit during the President's Day week this year, and I have few concerns - we've cruised at that time before, and yes, while are are lots of families with kids cruising that week, we have never experienced anything like the problems just seen on the Dawn.

[smeyer418]

The worst group of kids I ever saw was on a overnight Ferry between Helsinki and Stockholm. It was senior week and by taking the over night ferry you could buy duty free alcohol. For $19.00 you got on the boat(we had a cabin) most of the kids just got drunk got into fights, threw up etc. So its can happen anyplace at any time. I don't condone what happen on NCl and there are some reports that people were thrown off...but that still would ruin my trip....

[Shark Bait]

NCL is accountable for the safety and well being of passengers on their ships.

 

NCL staff members on more than one occasion acknowledged a problem to my friends and myself. One staff member told us that management was aware of the problem but refused to address it with resolve. He tried to speak with many of the children but was concerned about the parents sending negative letters about him to corporate.

 

Running unaccompanied children endangering the safety of other passengers is unacceptable. Children running down the hall past your cabin at midnight screaming fight is unacceptable. Children screaming at the performers on stage at the late show is unacceptable. Children at the Spinnaker for a late night adult show is unacceptable. Children running at the pool is unacceptable. Children laying in the halls with pillows is unacceptable. Children roaming through Cagneys is unacceptable. A child with a plate on her head at Impressions is unacceptable. I could go on but this gives you an idea of what was happening.

NCL was either not prepared or unwilling to enforce rules and have a security plan to protect passengers.

 

[KeystoneCruiser]

While the kids running wild are enough to make me not want to cruise, I believe this is just one example of a much larger problem. The Cruiseline industry in general and NCL in particular, do not appear to enforce any rules.

 

Jeans in the restaurants

Smoking in the wrong areas

Diapers in the pool

Chair hogging

Cutting tender lines

Must be an adult in every room

Drunkeness

Not paying to get into the spa pool area

 

So it is easy to be outraged about the kids, but drunks and inconsiderate smokers make me just as mad. Why bother posting any rules if the cruise ships are not going to enforce any of them?

 

I have always quite agreed about enforcing rules. If you aren't going to enforce the rule, then the rule is not needed because it is meaningless.

 

I will say however, that I see the children running wild as more of a problem than most of the ones you listed above. (with exceptions of Adult in every room and smoking in dangerous areas). The rest are inconveinences. Someone wearing jeans to the dining room is not going to cause a serious injury while kids running wild could.

 

NCL: ENFORCE THE RULES! Stop being scared of whiny, bad parents, negative reviews and bad comments. Your #1 obligation is the safety of all passengers and you are failing miserably by allowing kids to run wild.

 

First, the remark about NCL being a private company and therefore able to do as they wish concerning exclusion of certain individuals from buying future cruises. NCL is a common carrier, and as such comes under all sorts of regulations concerning how they may conduct business. In fact, denying the sale of cabins to a specific group might be a thorny issue. .

 

I hate to disagree, but anyone can exclude a specific group if they present a safety issue or danger to others. There is a situation developing in my area where a high school is closing their basketball games to all but parents of the players and faculty members because of the unruly behavior of other spectators. (adults and students) People threatened to sue, but the response was that the safety of the players and the facility outweighs everything else.

 

So NCL can ban any group from sailing by showing how they present a danger to others.

Second, I have to wonder what would happen if several thousand cruisers organized themselves and demanded in unison that the captain control the unruly parents. For example, suppose they all show up at the captain's dinner seating, and several spokespersons address the captain while the bulk of the passengers stand there. At the very least, it would be dramatic (and the sort of thing newspapers might love to write about), and that might get NCL to order security to do their jobs. Come to think of it, I'd definitely volunteer to be one of the spokespersons.

 

What a great idea but I think it would be hard to organize a group of passengers onboard the ship. You would have to use word of mouth to spread the word for it since I doubt the ship would allow you to use the PA system or print it in the Freestyle Daily.

 

I can see it now in the Freestyle Daily:

10:00 a.m. - Spinnaker Lounge: Come join your Cruise Director's Staff and other disgruntled Passengers at a meeting of those upset with the children running wild over the ship. Help us prepare our list and plan for our meeting with the Captain. The bar will be open for your conveinence.:D

 

NCL is accountable for the safety and well being of passengers on their ships.

 

NCL staff members on more than one occasion acknowledged a problem to my friends and myself. One staff member told us that management was aware of the problem but refused to address it with resolve. He tried to speak with many of the children but was concerned about the parents sending negative letters about him to corporate.

 

 

NCL was either not prepared or unwilling to enforce rules and have a security plan to protect passengers.

 

This sounds like the normal response for NCL. I have been told that on many complaints. They don't want the negative report on the cards.

 

That is why I proposed one other time that certain staff members on board each ship be "exempt" from the comment cards. These staff members would be the ones who would confront rule violators and be the ones to enforce the rules. That way, even minor infractions could be handled without fear of the employee losing their job or not getting a promotion.

 

The correction to this problem has to come from NCL corportate in a directive to the ships: enforce the rules, especially those pertaining to the safety of the passengers, regardless of the complaint level. Knowing NCL corporate, I doubt that will happen.

[newmexicoNita]

I have been on many cruises and seen young children actually sitting at bars at all hours, sneaking money into machines at the casino, etc. with no parents in sight. Is it too much to ask why a bartender or casino manager can't simply say "I'm sorry, you are under 21 and you cannot be here". Maybe it's just my wishful thinking....

TracyE

I have seen kids asked to leave the casino and seen crew members tell the parents the kids are not allowed: Both times it happened to be on NCL. Now last April on the Sun there were some highschool boys that were playing penny machines a couple mornings at sea. No one seemed to care. Except for being against the cruise line policy they were doing anything that caused trouble and were getting a kick out of winner a buck or two. I thought the were pretty funny. We too have seen kids, at all hours of the day and night in bars, at the shows etc, some sleeping in the pathways, some crying, etc. I really don't know what the answer is; yes, a crew member should be able to tell the kids to leave even if a parent is around and I think many times they do, but kids like the ones on the January cruise sound like kids that will do whatever they want with parents doing the same. This is sad as most kids are great. NMnnita

[rlr120]

We are booked on the jan 16th sailing of the Gem and now I am worried about this group be on the ship. It there anyway to find out? I can't change my date. I am taking my kids who are 10 and 6 and I would never let my kids act out like that. Plus I don't want my kids to deal with that. YIKES.

[billie5]

Sorry, Keystone. On this I am afraid you are wrong. Excluding a non-discriminatory class (all non-parent spectators, or, for that matter, all spectators) is a lot more possible than a targeted group: anyone living in Bedford-Stuyvesant, anyone attending Clifton Avenue Public School, anyone with a Japanese auto, etc. What constitutes a targeted group is why these issues end up in court. But targeting kids from one particular school (mind you, ALL the children from that school, not just those who can be documented to have caused trouble in the past) is an easy call. You can't do it.

 

Incidentally, it is not just common carriers. Most businesses open to the public, whether they need a business license or not, are restricted from discriminatory practices. Private clubs have a lot more leeway, though they too can end up in court.

 

In general, common sense is not a good guide as to what the law says or requires, which is one reason our society is so litigious. Here is one for the cruise ship crowd. You buy an insurance policy specifically for accidental death while on a public conveyance (airline, train, etc.). You go on a Caribbean cruise, and while in the port of Cozumel, you disembark and go snorkeling -- completely independent of anything having to do with the cruise ship company. Unfortunately, you drown while snorkeling. Does the insurance company have to pay your heirs for your accidental death while on a public conveyance.

 

Several different state supreme courts have ruled on this one. Yes, the insurance company must pay. Go figure.

 

Bill

[billie5]

Sorry, Keystone. On this I am afraid you are wrong. Excluding a non-discriminatory class (all non-parent spectators, or, for that matter, all spectators) is a lot more possible than a targeted group: anyone living in Bedford-Stuyvesant, anyone attending Clifton Avenue Public School, anyone with a Japanese auto, etc. What constitutes a targeted group is why these issues end up in court. But targeting kids from one particular school (mind you, ALL the children from that school, not just those who can be documented to have caused trouble in the past) is an easy call. You can't do it.

 

Incidentally, it is not just common carriers. Most businesses open to the public, whether they need a business license or not, are restricted from discriminatory practices. Private clubs have a lot more leeway, though they too can end up in court.

 

In general, common sense is not a good guide as to what the law says or requires, which is one reason our society is so litigious. Here is one for the cruise ship crowd. You buy an insurance policy specifically for accidental death while on a public conveyance (airline, train, etc.). You go on a Caribbean cruise, and while in the port of Cozumel, you disembark and go snorkeling -- completely independent of anything having to do with the cruise ship company. Unfortunately, you drown while snorkeling. Does the insurance company have to pay your heirs for your accidental death while on a public conveyance.

 

Several different state supreme courts have ruled on this one. Yes, the insurance company must pay. Go figure.

 

Bill

[shoreguy]

We are booked on the jan 16th sailing of the Gem and now I am worried about this group be on the ship. It there anyway to find out? I can't change my date. I am taking my kids who are 10 and 6 and I would never let my kids act out like that. Plus I don't want my kids to deal with that. YIKES.

 

I think it all depends on your sensitivity to kids misbehaving. I have read other reviews online and not quite as dramatic as here.

 

From the newsgroups

 

There were 300+ kids on this cruise. One group of about 10 of them were allowed by their parents to pretty much run wild. They were noisy and constantly running around the ship. On at least two occasions, they

disrupted the entertainment, ruining one of the magician's acts one time, and disturbing the piano lounge act on another......

 

Another group of four boys were pushing each other around during dinner in the Aqua dining room ......

 

Hooting and hollering at school kids on Virgin Gorda as our bus went by

the school yard was embarrassing......

 

As far as the kid situation went, the captain eventually had to threaten

debarkation. Things calmed down a little after that.....

 

The performers worked this into their acts, so it became a running gag after awhile.......

 

Anyway, we felt that NCL did a good job this time around. Some passengers, not so good......

 

I sure this sub group that was a small percentage of the 300 kids onboard made life miserable for some folks. It all depends how you react to others kids that are not well managed by heir parents.

[Dolphins]

We are booked on the jan 16th sailing of the Gem and now I am worried about this group be on the ship. It there anyway to find out? I can't change my date. I am taking my kids who are 10 and 6 and I would never let my kids act out like that. Plus I don't want my kids to deal with that. YIKES.

 

rlr120- We are also on the Jan. 16, 2008 Gem sailing. We have started a roll call, why not join us to discuss this problem.

[njkate]

Last year this same private school in Last year no families were disembarked by NCL. This year several families were disembarked. I read the behavior of some of these school kids was better after the disembarkment.

 

I do remember the thread on this last year.....no families were disembarked but a few passengers bailed as soon as the ship docked in St Thomas..that's how bad it was

[KeystoneCruiser]

Sorry, Keystone. On this I am afraid you are wrong. Excluding a non-discriminatory class (all non-parent spectators, or, for that matter, all spectators) is a lot more possible than a targeted group: anyone living in Bedford-Stuyvesant, anyone attending Clifton Avenue Public School, anyone with a Japanese auto, etc. What constitutes a targeted group is why these issues end up in court. But targeting kids from one particular school (mind you, ALL the children from that school, not just those who can be documented to have caused trouble in the past) is an easy call. You can't do it.

 

 

During football season, another local suburban high school banned all students from the neighboring large city school district. No one from another suburb was banned if they could show an i.d. Only those from this one school district. The district actually received praise for this policy.

[kelster42]

The biggest concern to me is...

 

WHERE ARE THE PARENTS?

 

My family cruises quite a bit and my children 7, 10 are well behaved. If they weren't they would not cruise again.

[billie5]

Keystone:

Your example is interesting. A school banning residents of another town. I am sure this must have had some lawyers up late, unless such a policy is well tested already by school districts. I would guess it is. Most of these issues are decided by case law, which is why lawyers make a good living.

 

Of course, NCL is not a public school. In fact, as a common carrier, they have

the most restrictive anti-discrimination rules to follow. Here is the typical description of a common carrier: "a transportation company that is required by law to accept all paying passengers and freight. That is, as long as you pay the fare a common carrier cannot refuse to transport you to your destination. If a common carrier transportation company is capable of transporting you or your goods, it must do so. It cannot discriminate on any basis."

 

I took that quotation directly with no changes from a layman source. This, like everything else in the law, has exceptions, which is why the lawyers get involved, but I think it gives a good idea of why blacklisting a particular school is not a practical course for a cruise line.

 

Bill

[clm101798]

I can understand NCL not being able to ban the entire school from their ships since there may have been some who behaved. I wonder if they were reluctant to enforce discipline because this was a Jewish group. Their religion should have nothing to do with the situation but some people might be hesitant to do something and be labeled anti-semantic.

 

NCL can't ban the school, but can they ban a individual family from future cruises if they have to be put off the ship in port? Then you are only punishing the ones who are causing the problem. Give them a warning that if the behavior keeps up they will be put off on the next port, and if they continue the family gets booted. Then they cannot cruise again with NCL. If enough families get booted maybe the school will stop cruising because too many of their families are not allowed back on.

 

This might work for the other annoying families (adults as well as children). Eventually we can weed out the annoying! :)

[goldmom]

I understand what the above poster is saying, but in the terms and condition section of NCL's brochure there is a section called "Refusal of Passage", which states

 

"NCL reserves the right to decline to accept or retain any person as a passenger on the cruise at any time. Each passenger-or if a minor, his/her parent or guardian-shall be liable to and reimburse NCL for all damamge to the ship and its furnishings, equipment and property caused by any willful or negligent act or omission on the part of the passenger. The ship's captain may refuse transportation to any passenger or may require any passenger to disembark who, in the sole discretion of the ship's captain, is believed to be dangerous to himself or herself,or others, or disturbs NCL's other passengers or crew."

 

It then goes on to say that the passenger may be left at any port and that NCL is not responsible for any costs.

 

This certainly makes it sound as if the Captain would have some say over who may have passage on his ship. Of course, the Captain doesn't do the bookings.

 

Could be this group books a different ship each year so as not to be refused passage!:p

 

Anyway, so sorry the recent cruisers had such a rough trip. Hope your next cruise is smooth sailing in every way possible.

[dwrist]

Keystone:

Your example is interesting. A school banning residents of another town. I am sure this must have had some lawyers up late, unless such a policy is well tested already by school districts. I would guess it is. Most of these issues are decided by case law, which is why lawyers make a good living.

 

Of course, NCL is not a public school. In fact, as a common carrier, they have

the most restrictive anti-discrimination rules to follow. Here is the typical description of a common carrier: "a transportation company that is required by law to accept all paying passengers and freight. That is, as long as you pay the fare a common carrier cannot refuse to transport you to your destination. If a common carrier transportation company is capable of transporting you or your goods, it must do so. It cannot discriminate on any basis."

 

I took that quotation directly with no changes from a layman source. This, like everything else in the law, has exceptions, which is why the lawyers get involved, but I think it gives a good idea of why blacklisting a particular school is not a practical course for a cruise line.

 

Bill

 

Homeland Security can and does override this "precept". The example-- a group of American Muslims tried to board a flight from MSP and were refused transportation on that flight. Seems the passengers and flight crew observed them talking, whispering and were worried, all of this awaiting boarding.:)

[mikeythemars]

I think it all depends on your sensitivity to kids misbehaving. I have read other reviews online and not quite as dramatic as here.

 

From the newsgroups

 

There were 300+ kids on this cruise. One group of about 10 of them were allowed by their parents to pretty much run wild etc.

 

Thank you for the reference, but given the feedback I've seen here and last year from this same sailing on the Spirit, it is bluntly clear that the issue here goes far beyond just a few "bad apples." Their is obviously a cultural -- yes, cultural element within the families of the 400+ kids that led to level of negative feedback that we have seen here (and please - that point is not meant as an attack on a religion).

 

Or put another way, it takes a lot more than 10 kids to create this much noise on CC. ;)

[billie5]

Of course, "NCL reserves the right to accept or deny..." is also layman's language. They can only do that within the limits of the law. As must the captain.

 

Hypothetical: a number of members of a group cause serious damage to a ship. Can the captain throw off the ship all members of the group? The captain is given a great deal of latitude to protect persons and property on the ship, and, no doubt, great discretion in punishing the trouble makers. But other innocent members of the group? I have no idea, although I would think there must be plenty of case law on the subject. On a common carrier, can a captain refuse to take any individuals of Arab descent, or Jewish descent, or Bulgarian descent, because he perceives all such individuals as a potential risk? Almost certainly not.

 

Now, Homeland Security is another issue altogether. What their limits are, or should be, is going to be determined over many years of litigation. And by public sentiment, which -- like it or not -- does affect legal outcomes.

 

Bill

[billie5]

Incidentally, I always wondered why there is so much double posting. Now I know. It would seem there is a large buffer at CC where posts get held up but not destroyed.

 

Earlier on, I tried to send a post and when I clicked the submit button, the internet link broke. I relinked, and checked the thread, and my post did not appear. So I sent it again, and checked, and there was only the one post by me, which was great. Unfortunately, an hour later when I checked again, there I was, looking like an idiot, with two copies of my post.

 

Next time I will give it an hour before I do anything more.

 

Bill

[socsthecat]

Their religion should have nothing to do with the situation but some people might be hesitant to do something and be labeled anti-semantic.

 

Since I'm not anti-semantic I'll point out that they could be accused of being anti-semetic. Oy vey :)

[LA_FadeAway]

Wow! I sure am sorry to hear about all the passengers who had to put up with this. I'd be pretty upset too. I remember spending a couple nights at a hotel during a kids soccer tournement and those kids were totally out of control. At least we had the option to check out of the hotel. That's not so easy on a cruise ship. Thank you so much for the warning too. Now I know something new to watch out for. I agree with those that say the parents need to step it up; however, the cruiseline needs to enforce some rules too.

[Snowrose]

I understand what the above poster is saying, but in the terms and condition section of NCL's brochure there is a section called "Refusal of Passage", which states

 

"NCL reserves the right to decline to accept or retain any person as a passenger on the cruise at any time. Each passenger-or if a minor, his/her parent or guardian-shall be liable to and reimburse NCL for all damamge to the ship and its furnishings, equipment and property caused by any willful or negligent act or omission on the part of the passenger. The ship's captain may refuse transportation to any passenger or may require any passenger to disembark who, in the sole discretion of the ship's captain, is believed to be dangerous to himself or herself,or others, or disturbs NCL's other passengers or crew."

 

It then goes on to say that the passenger may be left at any port and that NCL is not responsible for any costs.

 

This certainly makes it sound as if the Captain would have some say over who may have passage on his ship. Of course, the Captain doesn't do the bookings.

 

I could be wrong but I believe that while in international waters the captain has sole discression as to how disruptive passengers should be handled. Could discipline of offending passengers still result in a lawsuit upon returning to NY? Quite possibly, but the courts would have to decide who has actually been damaged. It's quite obvious from these postings alone that NCL has been damaged and will lose bookings in January due to the indiscriminate and uncontrolled behavior of some members of this school group.

 

Now, can NCL refuse the entire group? Of course not, but it is well within NCL's rights to refuse passage to past passengers who have proven themselves to be a danger to themselves and others.

 

I will state that when we sailed Spirit on January 23rd we were quite pleased with the demeanor of the children aboard. I think there were 3 times in 10 days that I heard a child running down the hall, and that was the extent of any 'unruliness' onboard. Also, we did periodically see NCL security in various areas of the ship.

 

Jeans in the restaurants

Smoking in the wrong areas

Diapers in the pool

Chair hogging

Cutting tender lines

Must be an adult in every room

Drunkeness

Not paying to get into the spa pool area

 

I can't speak to all of these but on the Spirit just the other week a man pushing a stroller and dressed in shorts and a t-shirt was refused entrance for dinner at Garden. There were a person or two over the 10 days who wore jeans, though. We didn't feel offended by that. We didn't witness any inappropriate smoking. We didn't even have any children in the main pool, they stayed in the Buccaneer kiddie pool. Chair hogging - I think people tend to misunderstand when towels are simply left behind when people get up from a chair. The offending person is often just leaving the towel behind thinking that crew members will pick it up, rather than saving a chair. Drunkeness - we only saw one display of drunkeness onboard - a young woman and her mother, both a bit tipsy for first thing in the morning but both very pleasant and concerned about being considerate of others.

 

Again we found both the adult and child passengers to be considerate and pleasant on our January 23rd trip - but I'm sure glad that we decided not to book on the 13th!

 

Teri

[rufusrex]

We were on the Dawn the cruise before this one and feel very lucky to have missed this. It's a shame that this kind of thing happens. We always vacation in January, but I think next year we will be skipping a cruise from NYC, just to be safe. One thing that peeves me is we travelled with our children, 5 & 8, and had to pay full 3rd and 4th person rates, yet they give this unruly group special fares.

[KeystoneCruiser]

The bottom line on all this is that the crew dropped the ball on this by not getting these kids somehow under control earlier in the cruise.

 

 

This brings up one more question for me: NCL's policy requires that at least one adult be in the cabin with children under 21. Was there an adult in all the cabins that these kids occupied??

 

If not, then NCL is further to blame for not enforcing that rule.