Ncl can't get act together re jones act

[njhorseman]

OK I did a bit more checking here because I can.....and the problem has nothing to do with Jones Act and or Passengers Services Act it is just that Norwegian is not allowing it plain and simple, they are the cruise line and they can make what ever decision they want as long as it does not violate any laws.

It appears they are not allowing bookings of any B2B cruises for voyage that include May 6th, May 13th, and May 20th. I have seen things like this pop up before stating it would violate Passengers Service Act but in this case it is simply NCL states they are not allowing this. I can tell you that it does not violate any act but NCL can make the choice of not selling B2B voyages. Why they would want to chose this I have no idea but it does appear it is their decision.

 

What you're overlooking is the fact that if you call NCL and ask to book theses itineraries, they tell you you can't because they violate the PVSA (sometimes incorrectly called the Jones Act). So they're not disallowing it because they've simply decided not to...they're disallowing it because the reservation staff is not properly trained and has been told it violates the PVSA, and the systems have been programmed to be consistent with that incorrect training. At the lower levels they actually think all these b2bs violate the PVSA...but when the question gets kicked upstairs, the reservations department decision is reversed by senior management.

[electricron]

You can't begin and end in DIFFERENT ports without an international stop in between. Basically you can't start in Miami and end in New York without a stop in between of a foreign port UNLESS your a US flagged vessel. It's a big issue with cruise lines because most of the cruise line ships are not flagged in the US (unless the hawaii cruises which kind of forces US flagged ships). basically the archaic low forbids foreign ships from carrying cargo or passengers to different US ports.

You're half correct. You can start in Miami and end in New York if you visit a REMOTE foreign port. Just about every repositioning cruise on the east coast does so legally, including the Norwegian Dawn repositioning between Boston and New Orleans. All US east coast to west coast repositioning cruises via the Panama Canal are legal too, including the Pearl from Miami to L.A.

 

The Remote Foreign Port that makes these cruises legal is usually a South American port in Columbia, Venezuela, or the ABC Islands of Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao just off the Venezuelan coast. A port visit in the Bahamas, Bermuda, Virgin Islands, Jamaica, Mexico, or even Panama will not be legal cruises because, although they are Foreign Ports, they aren't Remote Foreign Ports.

 

It's the Pacific Coast reposition cruises that cause the most problems with the Jones Act. A cruise from L.A. to Vancouver is always legal, but not one from L.A. to Seattle or to an Alaskan port with a Canadian port along the way because the Canadian port isn't on another continent, and therefore isn't a Remote Foreign Port. Remember what counts is where you first get on a ship and where you get off the SAME ship, not the individual legs of cruises you have booked. That Sun cruise is legal because the second leg to Alaska was a round trip back to Vancouver. Note the remaining Sun cruises start in Vancouver and end in Alaska or vice versa. If that first Sun Alaskan cruise had not been a round trip cruise back to Vancouver and had ended in Alaska, it would not have been legal as the final leg of a Pacific Coast repositioning cruise.

[punkincc]

There are bound to be new people at any agency every year who aren't familiar with the law whether it is a cruise line or a travel agency. While some consider the law a dinosaur, you wouldn't have that opinion if you worked for a US flagged shipping line at any capacity. Similar cabotage laws involve air cargo and truck transportation as well. The teamsters in the southwestern states bordering Mexico wouldn't take to kindly losing their jobs to foreigners to deliver goods from one US site to another US site.

 

I myself have only the vaguest understanding of this law, only having first heard of it when trying to book this b2b. When this law was written back in 1907 or whenever, the only cruise ships basically ferried passengers to and from Europe. I am not about to argue the fine points of the law, but I wonder if it can be fairly applied to today's cruise industry. Perhaps the law needs to be amended as far as the cruise industry is concerned.

[punkincc]

NCL has consistently had a problem over the years on this situation with the training of its front line reservations staff and programming of its reservation system. Every year the same problems come up, and every year they are eventually resolved in favor of those passengers who are persistent enough to pursue it up the line.

 

This is strictly an NCL management problem and once it's brought to the attention of the proper executive it gets resolved. It doesn't require any great depth of legal training to understand the PVSA. The OP has had this resolved by NCL senior management...a person on Cruise Critic just helped bring it to the attention of the right person...one of the people on Cruise Critic you keep calling "self appointed Internet legal experts". Guess what...there are people here who are lawyers, or who are deeply involved in the cruise industry...they're not "self appointed experts"...they are experts. Just because you're not doesn't mean others aren't.

 

I wish I had your confidence that my problem is resolved. Yes, it was brought to the attention of senior management and I was allowed to book. However, within 2 days, another traveler was denied this same booking, not once but a few times and some denials were from higher up the ladder.

 

What I am fearful of is that even though the senior management decision on this may be correct, some lower level person will at some point notice my b2b on the books and I will get an e-mail or call informing me that I must cancel one leg of my cruise and then this will start all over again.

 

At the time of the initial denial, my intent in posting was to solicit information and advise, and as you stated, i did get excellent advise and assistance from other very knowledgable CCers and was able to book.

 

Once I became aware that the problem was apparently ongoing, my intent in posting was to inform others who wish to book these b2bs of the situation.

 

It is a shame that you can't really have any assurance that what you are told by the front lines at NCL is correct without kicking it all the way up to senior management in each and every instance when trying to book a b2b.

 

As I have stated before, NCL does these repo cruises EVERY YEAR. They have got to know that the b2bers are out there, that they will want to book every conceivable combination.

 

IS IT TOO MUCH TO ASK, that they figure this all out beforehand, and the reservation system is set up correctly so that if you are denied, you can rest assured that this is correct info and do not have to waste time posting and calling and waiting for calls just to find out if you can book. As it stands now, regardless of what you are told, you really can't have any confidence in the answer, IMO.

[zqvol]

you are almost correct. It has to be a "DISTANT" foreign port when the port you end at in the U.S. is not the same U.S. port you left from.

 

They can use a near foreign port on a closed loop cruise but the OP's cruise is not a closed loop cruise.

 

Bill

 

 

OP is ending in a foreign port. Jones Act does not apply.

[Cruise_More_Often]

One of the reasons for the confusion this year is the addition of the Sun to NCL's itineraries. Hasn't it been years since NCL had a Vancouver to Vancouver cruise? In past years with the Pearl and Jewel headed to Seattle after Vancouver, most of these B2B itineraries were a violation.