Compensation for Riviera Nurovirus Cruise

Thanks to those of you that corrected my misperception of Seabourn and Crystal. Despite what they do does not not change my opinion regarding not refunding port fees. My opinion about getting sick at sea also remains this same. We have had the experiences described on this thread and felt no need for compensation Different strokes for different folks.

Thanks to those of you that corrected my misperception of Seabourn and Crystal. Despite what they do does not not change my opinion regarding not refunding port fees. My opinion about getting sick at sea also remains this same. We have had the experiences described on this thread and felt no need for compensation Different strokes for different folks.

I'm sorry, but I think not refunding port taxes when port calls are missed is indefensible. The cruise line collects this money in anticipation of having pay the various port authorities for docking in their ports. If taxes are not paid they should be returned to the passengers who paid them. The cruise line should not be allowed to pad their bottom line with money that was intended to pay port taxes or fees.

It's downright sleazy to not give the passengers a refund of collected but unpaid taxes.

Celebrity also refunds port fees for missed ports.

You are correct - luxury cruise lines (or premium plus) do not itemize port fees. Most missed ports are due to weather (acts of God) or sick passengers (not usually caused by the cruise line). It sounds to me that some passengers want the cruise line to pay for anything that happens - whether it is their fault or not.

 

In terms of lack of communication or perceived reduced staff (Oceania has not reduced their staff - perhaps they were sick), it is truly unfortunate -- just as being sick on a cruise (for any reason) is sad.

 

After 20 years of international travel (before we began cruising in 2004), we understand that cruising is not for everyone. There are bound to be occasional missed ports, cruises (mainly during the winter) when many passengers are sick, etc. And, there are people who are upset with the ports they are visiting because they did not do research. For those of you upset with Oceania, perhaps cruising is not for you.

 

I just finished reading four reviews of the Nautica's Cape Town to Cape Town itinerary (same itinerary as Regent's Mariner did - on the same dates). The biggest complaint that I read was that the excursions took people to places where there was poverty. I was stunned. Why would anyone book a trip of any kind to Africa if they did not want too see how they really live? It is this kind of thinking that makes me scratch my head.

 

I really recommend that people read the fine print when they book a cruise (so that you are not surprised that missed ports are not refundable and being getting sick on board does not mean you should get money back). Once you understand the guidelines, your expectations will probably be much more realistic.

 

I'm bound to get flamed for this post but I do feel strongly on this subject.

I am a very seasoned traveller. This is only the second time in my life that I have filed a complaint against a cruise line. The last time was in very similar circumstances to this time when the cause of the illness on board could be placed unequivocally against the cruise line. Last time the line had served poisoned oysters brought on board locally from Thailand as opposed to importing from a safe haven. That brought down 40 customers and 60 yes sixty staff. In this case Oceania's protocols vs Norovirus were just totally inadequate allowing the virus to replicate to the extent that we were refused entry to Bermuda.

You are either a cruise company stooge or have never lived through 20 days out of 24 of over cooked food / hospital ward odours and untrained staff!

I'm sorry, but I think not refunding port taxes when port calls are missed is indefensible. The cruise line collects this money in anticipation of having pay the various port authorities for docking in their ports. If taxes are not paid they should be returned to the passengers who paid them. The cruise line should not be allowed to pad their bottom line with money that was intended to pay port taxes or fees.

 

It's downright sleazy to not give the passengers a refund of collected but unpaid taxes.

For sure it is the sleazy way of doing things and may very well be illegal. Be interesting to see what would happen if someone takes them back to court.

This is a bit off topic, but I wish that cruise lines would provide explanations to passengers when the original time-in-port schedules are revised. (It's bad enough when little advance notice is given.)

Harry

For sake of argument, let's take the word "compensation" out of the argument and substitute it with "good will".

I don't know about the rest of you, but normally when things go wrong, many organizations that care about service do things to "make it right" - a good will gesture of some sort. Take a look at Marriott, Hilton & even some cruise lines like Holland America. Even banks when I worked did it. If we did something that caused grief, we didn't just fix the problem - we did something as a good will gesture to try to "make it right".

Good will gestures are a smart move by companies. They can alleviate a lot of issues, if they are done expediently with empathy and have a great effect on many of their clients.

Oceania could not fix the problem (or chose not to take the steps that would) and made no gesture of good will at all on the TA portion and far too little too late on the B2B passengers.

Since nothing else was done, then, at the very least, H.Q. should have been contacting passengers who had issues on the survey to at least apologize. Their silence has been deafening.

It seems as if this thread has gone on for weeks and I understand both sides.

All of this arguing and bickering is quite tiresome. Can we put this thing to rest.

Happy Holidays to all and hoping everyone has a better New Year.

For sake of argument, let's take the word "compensation" out of the argument and substitute it with "good will".

 

I don't know about the rest of you, but normally when things go wrong, many organizations that care about service do things to "make it right" - a good will gesture of some sort. Take a look at Marriott, Hilton & even some cruise lines like Holland America. Even banks when I worked did it. If we did something that caused grief, we didn't just fix the problem - we did something as a good will gesture to try to "make it right".

 

Good will gestures are a smart move by companies. They can alleviate a lot of issues, if they are done expediently with empathy and have a great effect on many of their clients.

 

Oceania could not fix the problem (or chose not to take the steps that would) and made no gesture of good will at all on the TA portion and far too little too late on the B2B passengers.

 

Since nothing else was done, then, at the very least, H.Q. should have been contacting passengers who had issues on the survey to at least apologize. Their silence has been deafening.

 

Jacqui,

At last someone has hit the nail on the head !! this the most honest and true statement that I have seen in weeks on this board.

All we have heard is the telling of in's and out's of Norovirus ,the red herrings of the few dollars of port taxes that we might be entitled to.

Right or wrong O made some fundelmental errors in handleing the outbreak, and treated the B2B passengers with complete distain as they had to endure an extra 10 days under the lock down of certain sevices.

Any careing company would at least make some recognition of the distressing time spent aboard.

Kazu & Roger - You both hit the nail with your heads! For those who submitted negative assessments on the final cruise survey, O has our names, cabin numbers, email and mailing addresses on file. Has anyone heard a peep from Miami? Thought not.

Forget the anonymity of the Internet with posters here. O has information on file to respond in a prompt, responsible and concerned manner to the many who were asked to share their opinion and subsequently wrote extensively of their displeasure.

That's called customer service - acknowledge Riviera in Nov & Dec was not representative of the product O prides itself on. Tell us corrective steps are being undertaken to address the problems and the expectation is those problems will not recur.

I believe the biggest room in the world is room for improvement. But O's silence today (weeks after our cruises concluded) and the widespread indifference onboard telegraph a company that either could care less or has sadly lost its way.

I received a letter yesterday but my survey was mailed to headquarters. Makes me wonder what happened to the negative surveys that were handed in on board .

It seems as if this thread has gone on for weeks and I understand both sides.

All of this arguing and bickering is quite tiresome. Can we put this thing to rest.

Happy Holidays to all and hoping everyone has a better New Year.

At some point this thread will peter out on its own. We will find something better or worse to discuss. Happy Holidays to all. :):)

Kazu & Roger - You both hit the nail with your heads! For those who submitted negative assessments on the final cruise survey, O has our names, cabin numbers, email and mailing addresses on file. Has anyone heard a peep from Miami? Thought not.

 

Forget the anonymity of the Internet with posters here. O has information on file to respond in a prompt, responsible and concerned manner to the many who were asked to share their opinion and subsequently wrote extensively of their displeasure.

 

That's called customer service - acknowledge Riviera in Nov & Dec was not representative of the product O prides itself on. Tell us corrective steps are being undertaken to address the problems and the expectation is those problems will not recur.

 

I believe the biggest room in the world is room for improvement. But O's silence today (weeks after our cruises concluded) and the widespread indifference onboard telegraph a company that either could care less or has sadly lost its way.

We have just booked our first O cruise and I have been looking at the many topics about O. They are now under the NCL group and I hope they have not fallen into the "customer is in the way" mode of guest service. I am going to check with my TA to see if this could be a new business model for them. Please let me hear someone say they came to their senses and did something positive for their many passengers.

Being someone whose job it is to analyze companies, and someone who is looking at taking a Oceania cruise, I have a comment.

What happened during the November & December is not very unusual. Many companies are having trouble hiring quality employees, and my guess is this is true with Oceania. Many of the crew were likely new, and probably many or most were not well trained on how to handle something like Noro. They know how to contain it, but not how to correctly handle customers during an event like this. It was simply never conveyed to them.

We'll there are surveys and Oceania will act appropriately afterwards, right? This is the second problem that plagues MANY companies. No doubt the survey's were entered into a spreadsheet by an intern, but then what? The reality is, as companies leaner, customer service/customer retention departments are the first to go. These jobs are seen as overhead at least the people that would proactively respond to these types of problems. My guess is its likely nobody that can address the problems identified in the surveys actually READ the surveys.

Is NCL to blame? Maybe, because when companies merge, functions are combined and streamlined again. This is the way of the world. Avoid duplication and save money.

So should Oceania be avoided? As many people have said, it can be a great cruise as long as everything goes as expected. Rather it sounds like EXCEPTIONS are not handled as good as they could be, not due to any policy, but simply due to lack of training. Welcome to the world of Business 2016.

We have just booked our first O cruise and I have been looking at the many topics about O. They are now under the NCL group and I hope they have not fallen into the "customer is in the way" mode of guest service. I am going to check with my TA to see if this could be a new business model for them. Please let me hear someone say they came to their senses and did something positive for their many passengers.

Being someone whose job it is to analyze companies, and someone who is looking at taking a Oceania cruise, I have a comment.

 

What happened during the November & December is not very unusual. Many companies are having trouble hiring quality employees, and my guess is this is true with Oceania. Many of the crew were likely new, and probably many or most were not well trained on how to handle something like Noro. They know how to contain it, but not how to correctly handle customers during an event like this. It was simply never conveyed to them.

 

We'll there are surveys and Oceania will act appropriately afterwards, right? This is the second problem that plagues MANY companies. No doubt the survey's were entered into a spreadsheet by an intern, but then what? The reality is, as companies leaner, customer service/customer retention departments are the first to go. These jobs are seen as overhead at least the people that would proactively respond to these types of problems. My guess is its likely nobody that can address the problems identified in the surveys actually READ the surveys.

 

Is NCL to blame? Maybe, because when companies merge, functions are combined and streamlined again. This is the way of the world. Avoid duplication and save money.

 

So should Oceania be avoided? As many people have said, it can be a great cruise as long as everything goes as expected. Rather it sounds like EXCEPTIONS are not handled as good as they could be, not due to any policy, but simply due to lack of training. Welcome to the world of Business 2016.

Don't blame NCL. The CEO of the corporation is Oceania's founder, Frank Del Rio. If you read the NCL board you'll see how negative!y many of the changes he's made to that company are viewed by NCL's customers.

Being someone whose job it is to analyze companies, and someone who is looking at taking a Oceania cruise, I have a comment.

 

What happened during the November & December is not very unusual. Many companies are having trouble hiring quality employees, and my guess is this is true with Oceania. Many of the crew were likely new, and probably many or most were not well trained on how to handle something like Noro. They know how to contain it, but not how to correctly handle customers during an event like this. It was simply never conveyed to them.

 

We'll there are surveys and Oceania will act appropriately afterwards, right? This is the second problem that plagues MANY companies. No doubt the survey's were entered into a spreadsheet by an intern, but then what? The reality is, as companies leaner, customer service/customer retention departments are the first to go. These jobs are seen as overhead at least the people that would proactively respond to these types of problems. My guess is its likely nobody that can address the problems identified in the surveys actually READ the surveys.

 

Is NCL to blame? Maybe, because when companies merge, functions are combined and streamlined again. This is the way of the world. Avoid duplication and save money.

 

So should Oceania be avoided? As many people have said, it can be a great cruise as long as everything goes as expected. Rather it sounds like EXCEPTIONS are not handled as good as they could be, not due to any policy, but simply due to lack of training. Welcome to the world of Business 2016.

You have made an extremely valid and new observation regarding reducing staff, especially in the home office. Absolutely correct that in many companies the first to go are those in the "overhead" functions when reducing costs. In the purchase of Prestige (Oceania and Regent), one of the reasons given was combined savings and for sure that meant reduced staff from the announced merging of several departments. These savings also included a $50M bonus based on the savings during 2015 that would go to previous Prestige stock holders which includes many current NCLH and Prestige executives.

Now that 2015 is over, it remains to be seen how much of that $50M will actually be paid out and since NCLH is a public company, it most likely will be included in the year end financials that will be available in about 2 months.

Cannot absolutely tie the lack of response to the recent issues on Riviera however, it is at least a contributing factor and perhaps, bringing back some of the staff left go would be a good idea as good communications thru a proactive customer service department are real positives when people decide how to spend their vacation dollars.

Conspiracy theories: Did they reduce personnel to save money? They might have done this. I don't know if they did, but if they did, that's the reason. I don't know. It could be; that's horrible. Horrible! That's disgusting. They shouldn't do this. I don't know if they did or not, but it's disgusting. Horrible. I don't want to hear about it. Companies shouldn't do this. I like them, they're good people, but they shouldn't treat us this way.

You have made an extremely valid and new observation regarding reducing staff, especially in the home office. Absolutely correct that in many companies the first to go are those in the "overhead" functions when reducing costs. In the purchase of Prestige (Oceania and Regent), one of the reasons given was combined savings and for sure that meant reduced staff from the announced merging of several departments. These savings also included a $50M bonus based on the savings during 2015 that would go to previous Prestige stock holders which includes many current NCLH and Prestige executives.

 

Now that 2015 is over, it remains to be seen how much of that $50M will actually be paid out and since NCLH is a public company, it most likely will be included in the year end financials that will be available in about 2 months.

 

Cannot absolutely tie the lack of response to the recent issues on Riviera however, it is at least a contributing factor and perhaps, bringing back some of the staff left go would be a good idea as good communications thru a proactive customer service department are real positives when people decide how to spend their vacation dollars.

What you say may well be true - I have no idea if it is.

What confuses me is that we were on the Marina during the entire month of November and didn't encounter any of the issues discussed about Riviera - no reduction in staff, service level, etc, etc. If this was happening as part of new policy from NCL, I would have expected the same on Marina as well as on the 3 R ships. Yet, we see no such reports here from any O ship other than Riviera.

This makes me think that this was a rather unique and isolated incident - the true nature of which I cannot explain.

We leave for the Nautica in a few days and I am anxious to see how things are there.

What you say may well be true - I have no idea if it is.

What confuses me is that we were on the Marina during the entire month of November and didn't encounter any of the issues discussed about Riviera - no reduction in staff, service level, etc, etc. If this was happening as part of new policy from NCL, I would have expected the same on Marina as well as on the 3 R ships. Yet, we see no such reports here from any O ship other than Riviera.

This makes me think that this was a rather unique and isolated incident - the true nature of which I cannot explain.

We leave for the Nautica in a few days and I am anxious to see how things are there.

Paul, while there may be cutbacks on board that are not obvious, the main point of my post was that it was stated at the time of the purchase that various departments mostly in the Miami offices would be merged as part of the cost savings that support the purchase and thus staff losses in Miami would occur as the previous poster mentioned and might be the cause of lack of responses to the issues on Riviera.

Also, the Riviera issues might just have been "The Perfect Storm" with the new employees, a possible decrease in onboard staff, and the Noro. Don't forget, small decreases in onboard staffing might not be noticeable if the actual staff is stepping up their game and working harder and if other issues don't lower the staffing even further. Also, from certain reports, it appears that some of the "privileged" people who are well known onboard may be better taken care of than the average passenger.

Not pointing at you Paul at all.

Firstly, I have it on good authority that there has been absolutely no staff cutbacks on either Oceania or Regent - not before NCHL or after. This rumor has gone on for years.... seems it will continue for years to come.

There is an issue with trying to hire trained staff and it sounds as if the training on Oceania (and Regent) needs to be stepped up. When we were on Regent last month, someone asked two people where the restroom was and two crew members did not know. This is not acceptable.

With both Oceania and Regent adding a new ship this year, they need at least 1,000 new crew members plus Captains, Cruise Directors, etc. Since Viking Ocean has been stealing crew from Regent (actually, to be fair, not stealing but offering incredible benefits), perhaps it is time for Oceania and Regent to "tempt" seasoned crew from Celebrity or Princess. While they would need some training, at least they have a background on a cruise ship. Anyway, regarding new staff, this is just my opinion - the lack of cut-backs is true.

I received a letter yesterday but my survey was mailed to headquarters. Makes me wonder what happened to the negative surveys that were handed in on board .

Just to add my voice. We have not yet received anything back from O. To be fair I felt that the Xmas and New Year holidays would cause some delay. But I do expect some correspondence back from them in the first week of January. If not I for one will be ensuring that my local world know how dismissive O are of their customers. I always thought that American company's really knew and understood their customers and cared for the goodwill they engender on their behalf. Fortunately I am not holding my breath!:(

Looks like we are back with this thread, but a little off topic. We started with refund for missed ports and the major noro problem. Does not seem to be much more to say unless people are posting that they got their refund from Oceania. Not much chance. Don't spend it yet. :(:(:(

HI. we were on the next cruise after your outbreak. there was talk on CC about the problem. when we got on board they were very explicit that there was a minor problem but that it was taken care of and it was most important that everyone at all times use the hand sanitizer and wash your hands ofton. they were continuously wiping down and washing everything that would be touched, railings, handles, panels, doors. I don't know about the menus but I would guess that too. I did my best by drinking all the alcohol that I could. no one got sick that I know of. alan