chengkp75

My experience working for NCL was that when a fire was reported, there were code announcements made (code bravo), sometimes in crew areas only, sometimes in all areas, depending on what time of day it was. There was no "fire alarm" sounded through passenger areas, and only those passengers who knew what a "code bravo" was would know there was a fire anywhere. Once the On-Scene Commander (me) reported to the Captain that the fire was of such a nature that he/she felt the passengers needed to be mustered, would the passenger muster alarm be sounded. In many cases, the fire never got above the "code bravo" level, and 80% of the crew, and all of the passengers had never deviated from activities or daily routines. I don't know of any cruise line that would automatically announce a fire throughout the passenger areas without it first being investigated for source and size, and being attacked initially by a fire team and then reporting to On Scene Command. The announcement through the passenger areas in this case, may have been because an odor of smoke was noticed in passenger areas, and the Captain was announcing it to alleviate some passengers' worries.

What, you think Congress would carve out a special section of the ADA that says they can do things that other businesses in the US cannot? I did not say that the cruise line cannot charge a fee for actual damages done by the animal, it just cannot be "simply as a precaution, or just because it is a dog". They already charge fees for damages that the human occupants make, so charging for damages caused by the occupant's dog would be legal. You just can't discriminate against the service dog. DOJ specifically states that just cleaning up after a dog has been in the room (hair, dander) is not allowed for a service animal, any more than if they had to clean up after a wheelchair.

Its not that HAL, or any cruise line, wants to "appeal to the pet dog sector", but that they want to avoid litigation over confrontation with a "service" dog owner. And, I don't know if you want the cleaning fee to be charged to service animal owners as well, but that is not legal either.

That's because it is not covered by the ADA, but by the CAA (Civil Aviation Act).

The laws in the UK and EU require training and documentation as a service animal, but that is not required by law, nor can it be requested by a business owner in the US.

Flying from Hawaii to New York is no different than flying between Bavaria and Brandenburg in Germany. Done it many times.

Even that is not allowed. Even if they charge a damage deposit for pets, they cannot for a service animal. A service animal is treated in law the same as a wheelchair, it is a medical device.

As I said. But, they cannot ask what the other poster wanted to know, "why do you need the dog to perform this task". This is the DOJ "code of conduct" that I've mentioned, and with a business in the US, violation of this code by the dog can result in the business owner having the dog removed. But, as I've said, in Spector, SCOTUS has said that "internal policies" like this code of conduct are up to the flag state's jurisdiction, not the US ADA. I don't know about medications for mental illness, but I have seen service animals (at the time, it was a Capuchin monkey) that reminded a woman to take medications (believe they were anti-seizure meds). The animal reacts to various stimuli from the owner that they are going into whatever state the medications are designed to prevent, and the dog will "alert" to the owner, reminding them to take the medication.

In the US, hotels cannot charge a fee for a service animal. They can charge the fee for a pet or an Emotional Support Animal. But, when the answer to the first question; "is that a service animal", is "yes", that is the end of the fee.

Again, you can say that the dog does not meet the DOJ's code of conduct for service animals, but that is an "internal policy" of the ship as to whether or not that code of conduct is applicable or not, so it falls to you to determine whether or not you agree with the business owner's policies as to whether or not you continue to use the business.

Yes, a "concerned passenger" can make an enquiry at Guest Services, but the cruise line is not required to tell you what the end result of their investigation is. It is up to the owner (cruise line) of the establishment (ship) to determine whether or not the dog meets the criteria of a service animal, and even then whether or not they want to discipline someone who has brought a non-service animal onboard. That is their prerogative as a business owner. It is your prerogative to decide whether or not you want to be a customer of that business, based on what the business owner's reaction to your inquiry is.

Again, not quite correct, though the vast gray area of "overlapping jurisdiction" is one that keeps admiralty lawyers busy for years. When in a US port, not all US laws apply to the ship. Generally, international maritime law says that things that affect the "safety and well being" of the port state (things external to the ship like customs duties, commerce (like gambling, store sales, and liquor laws), pollution, and safety of the ship) fall under the "port state's" (country where the ship is located) laws apply. But, things that are internal to the ship (like wages, labor laws, etc) fall under the jurisdiction of the "flag state". As the cruise ship offers "accommodation" (rooms and meals) to the public in the US when in a US port, then they have to follow the US' ADA laws with regards to accessibility for those with disabilities. Technically, once the ship leaves US waters, the ADA no longer applies, but cruise lines will continue to abide by the requirements since it is easier to accept the ADA requirements all the time, than to switch back and forth from accepting them to not adhering to them. This is why SCOTUS stated that unless Congress specifically mentions foreign flag cruise ships in the ADA, then the foreign flag cruise ships do not have to meet all of the requirements of the ADA. Further, SCOTUS ruled that international regulations like SOLAS can overrule the ADA in certain instances.

I did not say that the cruise ships "do not come under the ADA". I said that the cruise ships do not fully have to comply with ADA. Spector v NCL showed that foreign flag cruise ships do need to meet certain aspects of the ADA. While I agree that there is abuse of the system in allowing dogs that are not true service animals to pose as such, unfortunately, until the ADA is changed, by Congress (and SCOTUS stated that if Congress changed the wording of the ADA to specifically mention foreign flag cruise ships, then all of the ADA would apply), then there is no way to guarantee that a service dog is a service dog. If you want to change this, talk to the US Congress, who can't get anything done at all, let alone change an existing law. A cruise line's hands are tied with regards to the questions that can be asked regarding a service animal. Should the cruise line ask you whether or not "you really need" your scooter? Part of my job when I worked for NCL was ADA compliance officer.

Yes, the cruise line asks this, but do they ask you why you need a scooter? Nope, and neither should they ask someone why they need a service dog. The scooter makes your life easier and better, so does the service dog. Service dogs are no different than your scooter or walker.

Yes, it is a question of "law or not law". Your state has a law about getting a doctor's letter for a handicap placard. That is the law. The law that governs service animals, the ADA, a federal law, specifically states that establishment owners can only ask two questions regarding service dogs; one, "is that a service animal", and two "what service is the dog trained to provide for the owner". That's it. That is the law, and asking any other questions is against the law. Now, SCOTUS has ruled, in Spector v NCL, that foreign flag cruise ships do not fall entirely under the ADA. Specifically, the cruise ship's "internal policies and procedures" are not subject to the ADA. So, while the ADA requires the cruise line to have accessible cabins, and to not charge more for accessible cabins, the policy of requiring documentation to obtain an accessible cabin is up to the cruise line. Their determination as to whether or not to allow you to book an accessible cabin (their internal policy) is different than their ability to not allow you onboard due to your disability (ADA requirement). Asking whether or not a person needs a service animal onboard is to question and possibly deny that person accommodation on the ship (illegal under the ADA, and not an "internal policy")

No, they don't, just like not all hotels (as you mention) have rooms set aside for dogs.

Really? You feel that people who need service animals should not be allowed in certain places? Or that they shouldn't have a service animal at all? And, it is not ADA "guidelines" that regulate whether or not service animals can be on cruise ships, it is law. So, in order to cruise with a service animal, you are saying that a doctor needs to prescribe the service animal, when the law does not require this? Why is a cruise any different than taking a service dog to Yellowstone, staying in a hotel there, and eating in a restaurant, all with the service dog, and all allowed under the law?

A true service animal meets the "code of conduct" that the DOJ has for service animals covered by the ADA. That includes being trained to only relieve themselves in designated areas, or on command.

The cruise lines are well aware of the ADA requirements. They are also well aware of the bad PR they can get from disallowing someone who claims to have a service animal that really isn't.

Most likely correct, but since there is no requirement for a service dog to have a harness, sign, or any other distinctive marking, there isn't really a distinction between a "legitimate" one and a non-legitimate one.

I agree, but your statement was "no dogs in food areas period". That statement precludes service dogs.

Sorry, but the ADA allows service dogs to be in food service areas like restaurants. Typically, they will lie under the table.

That is a corporate/hospitality question that's not really in my wheelhouse. A lot depends on how well off financially the company is, and how well the ship is being booked. If interest in the ship is dropping (less bookings), then they will look at what can be done to "refurbish" the image and improve the bookings. But, if the company is doing well financially, then around the 8-10 year mark they will look at revamping things.

May be fiscally ignorant, but how does depreciation come into play for a corporation that does not pay any corporate tax?

But, the ADA specifically states there are only two places a service dog should be, and a stroller is not one of them.