Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

greykitty

Members
  • Content Count

    344
  • Joined

About greykitty

  • Rank
    Cool Cruiser

About Me

  • Favorite Cruise Destination Or Port of Call
    IL

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks, @cerise638, for your thoughts. My neighbor is still waiting for refunds on his future cruises (on two separate lines), but is reluctant to book much until at least a few 'successful' voyages on several different lines have occurred. While he was always careful to carry substantial medical evacuation insurance, as well as knowing exactly the limits of other medical coverage, he also never really worried about quarantine-related costs. He and his wife said that at their ages (upper 70's) they'd rather have the cash in hand and either spend in our immediate area (just outside a major US metro area) or on land holidays until more is known. They did say they dearly miss sea days, though.
  2. In chatting with a neighbor who historically took several cruises a year, he pointed out that he wants to confirm how quarantine and medical care costs for guests would be assessed going forward. He said in the T&Cs it usually clearly says such costs are borne by the guest, and he thinks in the future guests will both have to clearly acknowledge the risks of COVID before boarding and agree that any medical/quarantine costs will be paid by the guest. The cruise lines may have taken care of these costs in the first flare-up, but it doesn't seem likely they'd want to use that as precedence to me, now that we know, at least partially, what the risks are, especially to certain demographics. He's also guessing that insurance carriers will not be lining up to provide COVID-related coverages, or that premiums will be very high for any such coverage. That sounded realistic to me, and in line with the CDC's apparent insistence that cruise ships cannot rely on land-based or tax-payer based facilities to provide care 'for free', so to speak. So question here - how do people feel about signing COVID waivers, and how would insurance coverage, or lack thereof, affect a decision to travel for non-essential reasons? All this is worst case, of course.
  3. Is this it? Looks like there's a video of one of the recipes. https://www.rssc.com/ships/seven_seas_splendor/cocktail_collection This link shows more cocktails but just ingredients, I think. https://www.rssc.com/experience/cuisine/pool-grill
  4. This May 29 article is the closest I could find to a current status report of how the big cruise lines and the CDC are working toward protocols. I believe it's been posted on other CC forums as well. Pretty interesting, I thought, including the quote from the CDC rep. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/business/tourism-cruises/article242945396.html
  5. Then why is there no reference to either the CDC or the USCG? I mean, if I had gained formal approval from those very important agencies, I'd be listing that in giant letters at the very top of my joyous announcement. At the very least, I'd have a citation stating that these protocols are approved by those agencies. Oddly as well - I can't seem to google any news stories about CDC/USCG approving any cruise ship protocols, as of today. I'd expect a cross reference somewhere.
  6. So, to be clear - nothing has been approved to date by the CDC/USCG, is that correct? I wonder why NCLH would post anything other than authoritative guidance at this time.
  7. Also didn't see anything that says the CDC & USCCG actually approved these protocols, or is this the draft or an overview of what NCLH submitted? My understanding was that the no sail order included developing plans - which need to be approved. Develop plans with limited reliance on government support The CDC's new order requires cruise ships within US waters to develop a comprehensive, detailed operational plan approved by CDC and USCG to address the pandemic 'through maritime-focused solutions, including a fully implementable response plan with limited reliance on state, local and federal government support.'
  8. Just a comment from a potential buyer of Regent services, who has worked at home - no reputable employer will set up employees to work at home without ensuring a secure computer network and without ensuring some sort of management control, among other factors. Many employers implemented work at home protocols under huge time constraints when they realized the extent of the virus, and needed to protected their employees. If nothing else, people can look up the Chase Bank stress test when they sent a huge number of their employees home just so they could test to see if their essential, and of course necessarily secure, network would hold up. And, of course, employers maintained recording protocols for outward facing client service employees. All these things require both financial investment and a forward thinking management. From what I've read (and this includes reviewing years of CC posts - such interesting hours seeing how different loyalty bases evolve), a lot of major cruise lines do not appear great at utilizing technology to serve their clients, or themselves. And now it comes back to bite them big time. So if NCLH is reduced to three people working at home, apparently using 10-keys, emailing files back and forth rather than utilizing secure computer networking, not having administrative protocols written into easy to use software systems.....goes back to management choices and where they'd rather invest their customer service money in my book.
  9. One point on the WHO guidance - it's primarily for global distribution. I was able to find a good supply of masks at my local Ace Hardware yesterday. I wear them in public to protect others, as well as myself....and some of the WHO guidance reminds me of CDC guidance early on, when any type of mask was difficult to find, and there weren't enough for healthcare workers and first responders. Public health recommendations, I think, often have to incorporate practicality as well as absolute science. The answer may come down to practicality, according to Dr. William Schaffner, medical director of the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases. At this point in the United States' outbreak, nearly everyone can find a mask or make one, Schaffner explained, which may not be true in every country around the world, especially countries with fewer resources than the U.S. Advising universal mask wearing in a place where it's impossible to adhere to that guidance could hurt the WHO's reputation in those countries, he explained.
  10. Serious question - with all the layoffs, are the experienced and knowledgeable NCLH/Regent contacts that travel agents may have dealt with for years still there? In my opinion, the last people to have been furloughed, assigned shortened weeks, or just let go would have the refund area or most skilled contact representatives, but does anyone know for sure? And, from what I've read, a lot of travel agencies, in general, have closed up shop or had to furlough agents as well - perhaps that doesn't apply to those working so closely with Regent?
  11. Since the US just paid a billion dollars for 400 million doses of the "Oxford vaccin e", guess we're down with it, as Flossie mentioned. And, from what I've read, we're also down with investing in and developing several vaccines, to see which one(s) pan out. Oxford looks hot right now - but a lot of vaccines look great early and don't clear all the jumps. A lot of US developers are also in the hunt. And, it's not a competition, other than how to help the most people in the safest fashion. https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/astrazeneca-gets-dollar1-billion-from-us-to-make-oxford-vaccine/ar-BB14oNC8?li=BBnbfcN
  12. As someone who potentially might choose a cruise vacation, or any other vacation, I've been watching how other reputable companies that normally attract crowds are announcing their openings. For example, Disney - which is opening up Disney Springs in the US and did an opening of Disney Shanghai. I do have the feeling that some customers will not want to deal with Disney's restrictions either - and I did think the statement by Disney that ""By visiting Disney Springs you voluntarily assume all risks related to exposure to COVID-19." is both realistic and blunt. For me, I appreciate Disney's efforts to be safe while still being open. https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/disney-world-news-disney-springs-reopens/index.html https://news.yahoo.com/shanghai-disneyland-reopens-covid-19-011500232.html Then again, got an email from my hair salon, which hopes to start taking appointments in June - that will also be quite different for me and for the stylists, and maybe not as relaxing. But it's reality.
  13. It took me approximately a year to get my Shingrex shots. Granted, I didn't spend 24x7 trying to source them, but the first year the vaccine was available I was waitlisted at several places, as were many others. And the comparatively high price for the series was fortunately not a deterrent for me, but I know plenty of seniors who paused when told the cost. Last winter, far easier to get the series but still nowhere as prevalent as getting the last flu shot. So, yes, not just a question of finding the appropriate vaccine(s) but the logistics and costs of distributing it globally. I have read that Medicare will cover the vaccine(s) in the US, though, so that's a hopeful sign. And yes, US medical care pricing is a whole separate discussion. I personally think the vaccine should be 'free' at point of delivery, globally, with costs paid at a different level. I'm going with the idea that it'll be healthcare workers, first responders and other workers who necessarily deal with the public 24x7, then, probably, seniors, especially those with chronic conditions, and then the more or less general public. But pretty sure my healthcare practice will give me both the go-ahead and my standing on the wait list as we get there. Any of this could change. If we start seeing yet more children affected seriously by the virus, well, I bet they go way up the list to receive a proven vaccine- and IMO they should.
  14. There's good news on the old egg allergy/flu shot issue. Of course, check with your own health care provider if you have questions. That said, yes, there may be people legitimately unable to take a COVID vaccine, but that's a bridge to be crossed down the road IMO. Kind of the usual risk/reward issue for me. Your risk of having a serious adverse reaction to the egg protein in a flu vaccine is very low even if you have a severe egg allergy. A review published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical ImmunologyTrusted Source looked at over 4,000 people with egg allergies who were given the flu vaccine. They didn’t find evidence of a serious reaction from the flu shot among any of these individuals. https://www.healthline.com/health/allergies/egg-allergy-flu-shot#2
  15. Good news on the egg issue and flu shots - it's not an issue anymore, apparently. I get my flu shot religiously every year and noticed they don't ask about egg allergies anymore. Of course, always check with your own healthcare provider if you have concerns. https://www.aaaai.org/conditions-and-treatments/library/allergy-library/egg-allergy-and-the-flu-vaccine https://www.uspharmacist.com/article/pharmacists-dont-need-to-ask-about-egg-allergies-before-flu-shot
×
×
  • Create New...