Jump to content

Silver Wind fails CDC inspection March 2018


Tarwood3
 Share

Recommended Posts

was just looking through the past years inspections from CDC out of curiosity. Score of 84 needed to pass, the Wind scored 79. Looks like it keeps having trouble even after getting some bad press a few years ago about a failed CDC inspection. The rest of the fleet did quite well...wonder whats’ going on with that ship?

 

https://wwwn.cdc.gov/InspectionQueryTool/InspectionDetailReport.aspx?ColI=MTkzMDA0NzY%3d-txsn%2fx4Y9gs%3d

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s not good at all and somewhat embarrassing. I often praise the staff of the Silver Wind for attention to detail of the “little things” that make the cruise more enjoyable on board. It would appear having read the report that this attention is certainly lacking in other areas. A few of the criticisms seemed a little petty but several were certainly worrying.

 

I wonder if there will be an announcement on what they intend to do about it? Looking though the results for other lines and ships, the score was particularly poor.

 

It seems there is only two vessels that scored less than the Wind with 78% which really puts it into perspective. “Worst ship on the seas” was not that far off and it really makes me sad to see this about my favourite ship.

 

I shall be watching with interest and possibly reconsidering next years paid in full cruise on the Wind.

Edited by les37b
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most detail and information can be obtained reading the corrective action report, not just the inspection report. In the CAR, you find the number of points taken for the violations, as these can be "scaled" from the maximum deduction for the group of inspection points, to zero for a minor infraction. I didn't see anything that was really an egregious violation, unlike the Shadow a couple years ago. I noted that they received the full 5 point deduction for not having the proper warnings at buffet and on menus regarding eating undercooked and raw foods, and I was a bit surprised over this, until I remembered that there were a couple of instances of food being found outside temperature control, and outside of safe temperature (all of these "food safety" items fall under one 5 point category, so the cumulative nature led to the full deduction) The other 5 point deduction was for potable water chlorination problems, both with dosing, monitoring and recording chlorination of water bunkered from shore, and for water produced onboard. The repeat nature of these violations found led to the full 5 points being deducted. Very few ships can obtain a passing score with two 5 point deductions right off the top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were on the Wind 12 days after the inspection and had no idea that they had received such a low score. I thought the CDC report was a little harsh. Anyone who read my voyage report will realise that there were other, far more significant events impacting guests that took place on the voyage.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think they were particularly harsh....no more so than on any other ship. Just like a home inspection , sometimes things seem to be petty, but point is that the same criteria is measured on all the other ships and they got it right. These inspections are certainly no mystery, the ships have been through them many times and so they know what the CDC is looking for. I have been on many Silversea cruises (not the Wind however) and at least to the eye, everything was tip top...so was pretty surprised that they were one of the worst. Potable water is obviously hugely important on the ship..used for drinking, ice, cleaning and prepping food etc...so no wonder it is worth a 5 point deduction. Hopefully the officers in charge of this ship have been disciplined..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is especially interesting is that the ship went from a score of 93 in January, to a score of 79 in March. One of the key factors I look for in a ship's scores are consistency over a long period, which indicates an adherence to a "sanitation culture" where the requirements become part of daily routine, and not something trotted out for an inspection. This "muscle memory" is something the inspectors look for, and why they require a meal service during the inspection to add another level of stress to the crew to see how they react.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is especially interesting is that the ship went from a score of 93 in January, to a score of 79 in March. One of the key factors I look for in a ship's scores are consistency over a long period, which indicates an adherence to a "sanitation culture" where the requirements become part of daily routine, and not something trotted out for an inspection. This "muscle memory" is something the inspectors look for, and why they require a meal service during the inspection to add another level of stress to the crew to see how they react.

 

 

Excellent point!!! Especially since the Wind was covered by CNN back in 2013 i think it was, for hiding carts of food etc in crew’s quarters from the inspectors. I’m sure because of this ship’s history, the inspectors are definitely looking at her closely...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent point!!! Especially since the Wind was covered by CNN back in 2013 i think it was, for hiding carts of food etc in crew’s quarters from the inspectors. I’m sure because of this ship’s history, the inspectors are definitely looking at her closely...

 

That was the Shadow, if I remember correctly. The scores for the Wind, since about 2011, when she started regularly calling at the US, have been in the 90's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was the Shadow, if I remember correctly. The scores for the Wind, since about 2011, when she started regularly calling at the US, have been in the 90's.

 

 

Whoops, yep, yoiu’re correct. My mistake...it was the Shadow...guess it’s time for another cup of coffee....I’m not firing on all cylinders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoops, yep, yoiu’re correct. My mistake...it was the Shadow...guess it’s time for another cup of coffee....I’m not firing on all cylinders.

 

That was perhaps the most egregious and disgusting report I have read over the years. The fact that the inspector took the initiative to personally destroy food to prevent it being put back into service was shocking to me in my experience with the USPH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was perhaps the most egregious and disgusting report I have read over the years. The fact that the inspector took the initiative to personally destroy food to prevent it being put back into service was shocking to me in my experience with the USPH.

 

I assume that you are referring to the report on Shadow some years ago and not the current report on Wind. Right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who has ultimate responsibility in this situation, the HD or the Captain?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

 

Doesn't the Master have ultimate responsibility for everything that goes on on his/her ship? I am fairly certain that on another luxury line I frequent (with ships much larger than Wind) there is a sanitation officer. If Wind does not have such a dedicated officer, I would think that sanitation falls within some other officer's portfolio.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is the CEO who basically tells senior management the criteria he sets for hiring and firing senior people entrusted with these very basic “daily walking management” issues and who cause damage to the products reputation by placing passengers’ “well being” at risk whilst at sea. There are no secrets with these inspections. What they look for is on-line and available to anyone. If the Master entrusts it to the `HD” and the HD fails then the Master/Captain and HD has failed. The HD goes on the first infringement and the Master is allowed one more life imho.

 

The criteria shouldn’t be sneered at because it is intended to look at criteria that passengers cannot see or judge but are behind the scenes. They are those issues we take “on trust” and the score is a way of telling us that that “trust” has been breached by those that we “trusted”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While the Captain has ultimate legal responsibility for the vessel, this falls in a slightly different arena. As the "CEO" or "Mayor" of the ship, the Master has ultimate responsibility for the performance of his subordinates. It depends on the cruise line as to who is in overall "authority" for sanitation and USPH compliance. On NCL, it is the Staff Captain, since the requirements reach across all departments onboard, Hotel, Deck, and Engine. Most times, for a single failure like this, given a singular failure, there may not be any discipline other than warnings in their personnel files, and only if the performance is repeated would there be terminations.

 

Most ships have a "sanitation officer" or "sanitation supervisor", but this position, in my experience is as a supervisor of galley staff who do the dishes and clean the galley.

 

And, yes, my comments about a disgusting report was in reference to the Shadow incident a few years ago.

 

NCL takes a "holistic" approach to USPH compliance. Every week, all the supervisors onboard, even from areas not normally considered to be affected by USPH regulations gather for a "USPH inspection". Each and every area that falls under the USPH VSP is inspected by teams of inspectors. The teams consist of a normal supervisor for the area, and a supervisor from an unrelated area to provide "fresh eyes" to find things that the normal supervisors may go "blind" to. These team reports are sent to the Staff Captain, and corrective action reports are generated from these. This weekly inspection tends to reinforce the "muscle memory" of the crew following procedures without conscious thought. This also brings cross-training between operations crew (galley staff) and maintenance crew (engine staff) to better understand both sides of the equation, and better understanding of how either improper use can result in inaccurate calls for maintenance, and how poor maintenance can result in problem areas for operations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW ... when I was at sea, the Master, accompanied by the Catering Officer and the Chief Engineer, held a ship wide inspection every Sunday morning if we were at sea. All the accommodations, galleys, fridges etc were checked and if something was found then the Senior Officer of the appropriate department was there to issue the appropriate ‘advice’ to ensure there were no repetitions [emoji846]

One particular Master actually treat this as a semi-military occasion and wore white gloves to search for dirt. He would occasionally go ‘off piste’ and check the normally unchecked areas [emoji3]Heavy handed perhaps .... but it made the point and the ship was kept clean.

 

 

Sent from the magic box!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were on the Wind 12 days after the inspection and had no idea that they had received such a low score. I thought the CDC report was a little harsh. Anyone who read my voyage report will realise that there were other, far more significant events impacting guests that took place on the voyage.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

 

Please tell us what could be far more significant than bad water. We were on Wind at same time. Rule number one for me is to never let ship's water near my mouth. Any ship, but anything Silversea in particular. I would never trust this company regarding sanitation issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were on the Wind 12 days after the inspection and had no idea that they had received such a low score.

 

:confused: Do you expect them to make an announcement and tell the pax?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please tell us what could be far more significant than bad water. We were on Wind at same time. Rule number one for me is to never let ship's water near my mouth. Any ship, but anything Silversea in particular. I would never trust this company regarding sanitation issues.[/

 

Oh dear, I hope you never fly or stay in a hotel or ... or ...

 

I've been cruising for umpteen years on many different cruise lines and always drink the tap water, never had a problem.

Probably because I'm a critical care physician, I know there's no way of having everything 'sterile', just drink the water, eat the food in ports, and let your immune system deal with it. (OK, people with compromised immune systems have different issues, I know).

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always figured ship's water (even if bunkered from ashore) if properly treated was probably better than most bottled drinking water which originates in city water supplies (no matter how many snow-capped mountains are in the label). ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please tell us what could be far more significant than bad water. We were on Wind at same time. Rule number one for me is to never let ship's water near my mouth. Any ship, but anything Silversea in particular. I would never trust this company regarding sanitation issues.

 

There was never any "bad water". There were times when the levels of chlorination were not up to the required levels, but no time when there was no chlorine found in the water. There were also incidents of testing intervals falling a few minutes late on the required interval. Since this chlorination problem was found only with the bunkered water and the produced water, before it goes into the storage tanks, and because the water is chlorinated again when it is circulated around the ship, and there were no instances of the water in use being under chlorinated, there was never any danger in the water. Municipal water supplies chlorinate at the plant, and then the water is distributed, and sits in the underground pipes until someone uses it, and the chlorine naturally dissipates over time so there is never any guaranteed chlorine level to counteract a possible leak in the pipes, when it gets to your house. On the other hand, the ship's water is constantly circulated, from the tanks, around the ship, and back to the tanks. This allows for continual monitoring of chlorine level, and continual dosing of chlorine, so there is a guaranteed measurable residual chlorine level at the furthest point on the ship.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would they make an announcement?

Silver Explorer had an inspection on May 2nd-report not yet up.But we also know a lot of staff so we asked about the result and they passed.

So if no one actually asked about the inspection then as far as the passengers were concerned they would all be like Sgt.Schultz-"I know nothing."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would they make an announcement?

Silver Explorer had an inspection on May 2nd-report not yet up.But we also know a lot of staff so we asked about the result and they passed.

So if no one actually asked about the inspection then as far as the passengers were concerned they would all be like Sgt.Schultz-"I know nothing."

 

 

 

It came up in conversation that they were expecting an inspection in Key West in the 1st week of April, which didn’t happen. I assumed that they hadn’t had one for some time. My error.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Forums

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...