Crew Drug Testing Outside Oosterdam Dining Room

Yes, the staff captain or whoever was in charge of this should have confined it to crew decks.

Reflects badly on leadership on the ship.

We were on the Oosterdam last month and were a bit disappointed (as compared to our 22 other HAL cruises). Embarkation and debarkation were quite disorganized, the onboard activities were inadequate for the number of sea days, and the crew seemed overworked thus service not up to the normal HAL level (perhaps they were shorthanded??). I know they had some computer problems (we had our cabin key reissued 3 times), so perhaps that was to blame.

... There is no documented evidence that mariners use drugs and alcohol in any higher percentage than the overall world population...

You may be interested in the following link from pubMed.gov (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25522703 ) which refutes your claim.

RESULTS:

63.1% (range 38.4-96.3%) of seafarers smoked tobacco. 14.5% (range 8.8-75%) of seafarers drank alcohol. 3.4% (range 9-45%) had used cannabis during the previous month. Few studies concerned other drugs; 3-10% of seafarers used drugs on board.

CONCLUSIONS:

The prevalence of tobacco and alcohol consumption amongst seafarers was higher than that in the general population. Further studies on the use of drugs at work would be valuable for this population who are subject to significant occupational risk.

 

...

 

I understand maintenance is ongoing. And the Oosterdam is really showing its’ age in some places, but the rooms around this work should have never been sold. Any hotel would have blocked them out.

While I agree that the drug testing should have been conducted away from passenger spaces, this contention is absurd. Maybe I do not restrict myself to six star hotels, but I have experienced construction and rehabbing of adjoining rooms many times - so certainly that “any hotel” contention is simply wrong.

If testing was done in a public area that location was chosen for a reason. While this may have had an impact on some passengers, the decision maker may well have been responding to exigencies that made that impact unavoidable.

There are any number of regulatory and safety requirements that take precedence over passengers' sensibilities.

You may be interested in the following link from pubMed.gov (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25522703 ) which refutes your claim.

The term seafarers is pretty vague. Those numbers are probably being skewed by the commercial fishing industry who sees high numbers of drug and alcohol addiction. I've been part of a maritime regulatory agency who conducts criminal investigations for 24 years. I've seen a dramatic rise in meth and heroin use on commercial fishing boats, but very little substance abuse issues on the heavily regulated big boys who are subject to random testing, like the cruise lines.

They weren't actually PEEING in public...they were in the bathroom. Perhaps they could have covered the test bottles with a sheet, so no one would be offended.....

They weren't actually PEEING in public...they were in the bathroom. Perhaps they could have covered the test bottles with a sheet, so no one would be offended.....

Or, you know, someone with half a functioning brain could have moved the testing to a crew only area.

I guess it’s because I’m a nurse, but I don’t think I would have even noticed a table full of urine samples!

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I'll be on the Oosterdam in 4 weeks, and I hope that I can get the urine table out of my mind before that time.

Slightly offtopic: Is the promenade deck being blocked off for(routine) maintenance REALLY that much of a deal breaker for people?

On topic:I'm sticking with my theory that it was something they had to do *immediately* thus the set up they had,whilst trying to keep it off passengers' radar(and failing.)

Slightly offtopic: Is the promenade deck being blocked off for(routine) maintenance REALLY that much of a deal breaker for people?

If I take your question literally, I think you mean blocked off for any amount of time at all. My answer to that would be no.

However, experiencing more extended promenade closure was indeed a factor in my decision to try other lines. It simply changed the equation for me. However, the HAL promenades will also bring me back, for some of my future cruising. They are too special to never enjoy again. Frankly, other than the ships and particularly the HAL promenades, I can't understand the "loyalty". To each his own.

The term seafarers is pretty vague. Those numbers are probably being skewed by the commercial fishing industry who sees high numbers of drug and alcohol addiction. I've been part of a maritime regulatory agency who conducts criminal investigations for 24 years. I've seen a dramatic rise in meth and heroin use on commercial fishing boats, but very little substance abuse issues on the heavily regulated big boys who are subject to random testing, like the cruise lines.

You are absolutely correct about the term "seafarers" being too vague to make any definitive conclusion about HAL's crew. Not only need one discriminate by industry, but, in my opinion, by nationality as well. HAL's crew is predominantly Southeast Asian. In my Navy experience, it was very rare that I had a sailor with this nationality brought up on charges of drug use/possession or alcohol abuse.

I was on this seven day cruise and did the walk for a cure, they recommended nine laps which would equal a 5k. My mom and I had a pretty good pace but on our six lap, maintenance workers blocked off partial access and we had to detour through the photos area. It was kinda tough getting through with all the people there, no huge deal, just wished those of us in the walk would have been notified so we didn't feel like a huge inconvenience during the middle of our walk. After that it kinda killed the momentum a bit.lol..overall enjoyed my walk.

I get not being told you have to detour during the Walk For A Cure being a problem.

The upset that people get(not anyone on this thread) about ships' promenade decks or lack of them in the case of the Koningsdam) is baffling though.to each his/her own.

I was on this seven day cruise and did the walk for a cure, they recommended nine laps which would equal a 5k. My mom and I had a pretty good pace but on our six lap, maintenance workers blocked off partial access and we had to detour through the photos area. It was kinda tough getting through with all the people there, no huge deal, just wished those of us in the walk would have been notified so we didn't feel like a huge inconvenience during the middle of our walk. After that it kinda killed the momentum a bit.lol..overall enjoyed my walk.

That's a good example of an experience which for me would reduce the value the promenade has when I'm choosing between cruises to book. As important as the promenade factor is when I'm comparing, each such experience shaves off a little more weight from this factor, and the scale naturally tips toward a cruise on another line.

As for the testing location, don't forget this was a turn over day. It would have been massively busy down below in the crew section of the ship. Why not do it in the quiet part of the passenger section? They could have blocked it off a little bit better maybe. I really don't understand what the fuss is all about.

With regards to the promenade thing, somebody said he/she would consider other cruiselines. But not every cruiseliner has a full 360 promenade and then you would have a permanent blockage!

Maintenance outside your stateroom for a long period of time is really anoying and should be avoided.

I can not believe they’d do drug testing in a Pax area. Surely there was a crew area available that could have been used. I understand that wasn’t the most used area of he ship at that time, but it wasn’t roped off or anything. Also, the connection of pee to the dining room turns my stomach. Seriously poor choice of placement!

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

I can not believe they’d do drug testing in a Pax area. Surely there was a crew area available that could have been used. I understand that wasn’t the most used area of he ship at that time, but it wasn’t roped off or anything. Also, the connection of pee to the dining room turns my stomach. Seriously poor choice of placement!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

The connection of "pee to the dining room" remains. It is and always has been a public restroom. OP never clarified the details of her observation - did she fully walk into this situation or did she observe it after being blocked from entering this area - she only said she was "chased away". Not sure this is a big deal if this was blocked and this activity was necessarily going on on that particular day.