Fairness

[nol4am]

Why is it when something bad happens with Carnival it is all over the internet and news stations, yet with the latest with Royal Carribbean, nothing is being said. Not that I want the cruise industry hurt with bad happenings just seems when its another cruise line you don't hear much about it.

[jmcancruise]

So what happened?

[Cruiseboy06]

RCL handled all this wrong. They should have cancelled the cruise altogether... http://www.wdsu.com/news/local-news/new-orleans/royal-caribbean-cruise-line-cancels-hundreds-of-trips/30904846

[20somethingguy]

Wait, so a pipe bursts, causing power outages to ~200 rooms, water damage also, and there's no power to the main theatre, medical clinic or gym.

 

But they are still going through with the cruise for those people whose cabins weren't affected? Yep...They set sail 24 hours later than originally scheduled with the passengers who had functioning cabins.

 

The people who were cancelled are receiving a full refund but people who were allowed to board get no compensation.

 

I wouldn't want to go on a cruise where portions of the ship didn't have electricity.

 

I would not board the ship and demand a refund. If you pay for a ticket expecting a ship that is safe and mechanically sound, I would think that the passengers would have a good case for a lawsuit if they refused to issue refunds to all passengers who refused to board.

 

By boarding and going on the trip, other passengers are de facto accepting the state of the ship and saying it's okay for the cruise line to set sail without a fully operational ship.

 

The medical bay has no power... That would be a deal breaker for me. What a poor choice of the captain/cruise line to set sail...

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited January 28, 2015 by 20somethingguy

[20somethingguy]

I read today that Carnival has 50% market share of the mid-range leisure passenger cruise market.

 

Couple that with the Truimph and Splendor having engine room fires and not having adequate power generators to operate basic sanitation/water several years ago, they are an easy target for criticism.

 

Carnival is also fairly well-known with people who have never cruised before.

 

Big fish+recent incidents ppl remember+recognizable company=easy target for negative news report and higher ratings

 

 

 

This is just my theory. It could very well be wrong.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Pixelate]

There isn't as much clickbait when it comes to competitors as we see with news involving Carnival Cruise Line.

[Pixelate]

So what happened?

 

Seeing as you're a member on Cruise Critic, it shows that you have a certain minimum level of knowledge and care for the cruise industry. The fact you weren't aware of this only exemplifies the point OP was trying to make. When a service or product failure occurs with competitors, the information doesn't stream down to the average person as information regarding Carnival does.

[Tapi]

I would not board the ship and demand a refund. If you pay for a ticket expecting a ship that is safe and mechanically sound, I would think that the passengers would have a good case for a lawsuit...

 

By boarding and going on the trip, other passengers are de facto accepting the state of the ship and saying it's okay for the cruise line to set sail without a fully operational ship.

 

I seriously doubt that this is grounds for a lawsuit. Every single day, passengers board airplanes that are not fully operational, but that are safe and mechanically sound. Airplanes are dispatched with electrical generators that are not operating, or with air conditioning packs that are not working, limiting the airplane's capability to pressurize and climb to a higher altitude. Lavatories, galleys, WIFI and video often fly inoperative limiting passenger comfort and entertainment, and some passengers are denied boarding when their seats are broken and the flight is full with no other seats available.

 

Yet, all of these airplanes are still considered safe and mechanically sound, operating well inside strict regulations established by the FAA, and not worthy of making the news. The way that I see this Royal Caribbean incident is no different than any of these flights affected by mechanical issues but still dispatched while not fully operational. It's not newsworthy.

 

With all of that said, I do think that Carnival news are more ratings worthy, not because the media made Carnival a target, but because Carnival made THEMSELVES a target. You don't strand a couple of thousand passengers at sea for days after a fire (more than once) and expect the media not to take notice and slaughter you. That's newsworthy. A burst water pipe with some blocked cabins and services on another cruise line is NOT newsworthy.

 

So the passengers had to "endure" a delayed departure after boarding the ship 24 hours earlier due to mechanical issues? BIG deal. I had the same thing happen on our last Princess cruise. We didn't make the news then and this story will probably not go much farther either.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

Edited January 28, 2015 by Tapi

[20somethingguy]

I seriously doubt that this is grounds for a lawsuit. Every single day, passengers board airplanes that are not fully operational, but that are safe and mechanically sound. Airplanes are dispatched with electrical generators that are not operating, or with air conditioning packs that are not working, limiting the airplane's capability to pressurize and climb to a higher altitude. Lavatories, galleys, WIFI and video often fly inoperative limiting passenger comfort and entertainment, and some passengers are denied boarding when their seats are broken and the flight is full with no other seats available.

 

Yet, all of these airplanes are still considered safe and mechanically sound, operating well inside strict regulations established by the FAA, and not worthy of making the news. The way that I see this Royal Caribbean incident is no different than any of these flights affected by mechanical issues but still dispatched while not fully operational. It's not newsworthy.

 

With all of that said, I do think that Carnival news are more ratings worthy, not because the media made Carnival a target, but because Carnival made THEMSELVES a target. You don't strand a couple of thousand passengers at sea for days after a fire (more than once) and expect the media not to take notice and slaughter you. That's newsworthy. A burst water pipe with some blocked cabins and services on another cruise line is NOT newsworthy.

 

So the passengers had to "endure" a delayed departure after boarding the ship 24 hours earlier due to mechanical issues? BIG deal. I had the same thing happen on our last Princess cruise. We didn't make the news then and this story will probably not go much farther either.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

 

 

I think you misunderstood the jist of what I'm saying.

 

The people who are on the cruise have no grounds for a lawsuit just because they were delayed. A delayed departure is no big deal (as long as passengers can be on the ship and are able to use its services).

 

A major difference I see between an airline and cruise line is what the company is selling a ticket for and what the company has set as its main responsibility to fulfill its contract.

 

For an airline, the ticket is specifically for travel from point A to point B. The customer buys the ticket, forming an agreement with the airline to get him/her to point B. If in-flight entertainment isn't working or the flight is delayed, that isn't taking away from the airline's chief responsibility.

 

A leisure cruise line, though, doesn't sell a ticket to a passenger for the sole responsibility for travel. It sells a ticket to a passenger with the implied and explicit responsibility to provide a vacation experience. A safe ship operating within safety guidelines is a benchmark, not the only goal. Large amounts of amenities not being available (theater, fitness center) and not having a functioning medical center is a huge disservice to those paying a full price for only 1/2 to 3/4 of a cruise. The large production shows are a huge selling point for leisure cruise lines! To not have that available most certainly affects the line's ability to fulfill the agreement set between passenger and cruise line.

 

The non-functioning medical clinic on board is a huge safety risk also. This situation opens up the company to a lawsuit if someone is injured/becomes ill and the medical staff cannot diagnose the issue. Seemingly small issues that would only require a short visit to the clinic may end up costing a person thousands for a med-evac due to the staff's inability to operate the medical equipment (x-ray and EKG come to mind).

 

Again, I am not blaming the cruise line for the pipe burst. Things happen. Choosing to sail with large sections of the ship without power is a poor judgment call though.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Tapi]

A major difference I see between an airline and cruise line is what the company is selling a ticket for and what the company has set as its main responsibility to fulfill its contract.

 

For an airline, the ticket is specifically for travel from point A to point B.

 

A leisure cruise line, though, doesn't sell a ticket to a passenger for the sole responsibility for travel. It sells a ticket to a passenger with the implied and explicit responsibility to provide a vacation experience...

 

 

All great, valid points and very well laid out. I can't disagree much with what you wrote. But I still don't think that there are grounds for a lawsuit unless there are contractual or maritime law violations (and I don't know if medical services are mandated by law). What I do think is that with reduced services and entertainment, the cruise line SHOULD at a miminum offer some sort of compensation to those passengers who did sail. Maybe OBC or a future cruise discount or credit. Not because they are obligated, but because it's the right thing to do since the expected product isn't what's being delivered.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

Edited January 28, 2015 by Tapi

[TeresaJ]

I agree with OP, if this had happened to a Carnival ship, the news would have been all over.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Forums mobile app

[cruizinisthebest]

I only heard about it on social media. Not even a blip on any news outlet to my knowledge. I didn't even see the old trick where they report stories like this about other lines but then use a pic of a Carnival ship!

 

Whether there are legitimate grounds for a lawsuit doesn't matter, some will be filed. You can be sure of that.

[cruise_girl2002]

i really liked when royal Caribbean had their fire on the ship, yet our local news showed a carnival ship. morons!

[CJinFLA00]

The article was on on Yahoo's front page. It wasn't one of the TOP headlines but was on the first page and is still there today. If it was Carnival, it would have been at the TOP.

[Rudyard]

Tapi makes a great point about Carnival putting themselves in the media's sights.

 

What I don't think is right is when something happens involving another line and the media uses a stock picture of a Carnival ship, or somehow manages to bring up the Triumph fire at some point in their report even though it's not even close to being related to the current incident.

[KatieCharlotte]

The media likes to focus on "trends" -- the summer of the shark, kids left in hot cars, etc. -- and other simplistic ways to grab and keep people's attention. If it fits in the story that has already been created by past news articles, it's going to be given more focus, because human nature means more people will read those articles. The media has already created the story that Bad Things Happen on Carnival Ships so new articles about bad things happening on Carnival ships will be more likely to grab readers'/listeners' attention.

 

People don't notice or don't retain info that doesn't fit their pre-set ideas. My MIL insisted that Carnival often had norovirus and that her favorite cruiseline had never had it. Just a few weeks before she made that comment, I had read about her favorite cruiseline having two cases of norovirus.

 

Carnival is also a name that most people my age and older have long been familiar with (thanks Kathie Lee), one that is easy to remember and, frankly, one that sounds cheaper than Royal Caribbean, Princess, or Norwegian.

[luddite]

Fairness?

If life were fair we wouldn't need handicap parking spaces.

Move on.

[20somethingguy]

All great, valid points and very well laid out. I can't disagree much with what you wrote. But I still don't think that there are grounds for a lawsuit unless there are contractual or maritime law violations (and I don't know if medical services are mandated by law). What I do think is that with reduced services and entertainment, the cruise line SHOULD at a miminum offer some sort of compensation to those passengers who did sail. Maybe OBC or a future cruise discount or credit. Not because they are obligated, but because it's the right thing to do since the expected product isn't what's being delivered.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums mobile app

 

 

Thank you, Tapi.

 

You know, as you mention it, I'm thinking that the fine print terms and conditions of the ticket probably releases them of most liability.

 

Nothing in maritime law says a ship must give a 'fun' time while sailing LOL

 

I agree with you.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

Edited January 28, 2015 by 20somethingguy

[John Reid]

Why is it when something bad happens with Carnival it is all over the internet and news stations, yet with the latest with Royal Carribbean, nothing is being said. Not that I want the cruise industry hurt with bad happenings just seems when its another cruise line you don't hear much about it.

 

How this could possibly bother anyone astounds me.

The report is on Yahoo's home page. Feel better?

[oceanmom62]

This is copied from the Cruise Ticket Contract on my upcoming cruise page.

“Cruise Fare” or “Fare” means the amount paid for the cruise which includes full board, ordinary ship’s food during the voyage, but not gratuities, spirits, wine, beer, soft drinks or mineral waters, shore excursions, salon and spa services, Carnival LIVE concerts, or any other incidental charge or expense. The cruise fare shall be deemed to be earned when paid and not refundable except as stated in Carnival’s brochure applicable to the voyage and as provided in Clauses 7 and 8, herein.

Read it carefully (or not) and it boils down to you get a room to sleep in, food and that's all that you are guaranteed. Yes, a cruise without the other stuff isn't much fun but that is not what Carnival sold you. I don't think that many people read their cruise contract. Carnival doesn't legally have to take you to any ports- they can just sail around the ocean and fulfill the cruise contract.

[nidaco]

Hello everyone,

My family and I will be on the Breeze in April. My understanding the menus are changing to the American Table. If that is true, does anyone have recent copies from the past six month are less that you would be willing to share?

 

 

Thanks,

Nicole

[Miller_KC]

Somebody is paying attention. RCL stocks are down $2.76 a share.

[20somethingguy]

Hello everyone,

 

My family and I will be on the Breeze in April. My understanding the menus are changing to the American Table. If that is true, does anyone have recent copies from the past six month are less that you would be willing to share?

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks,

 

Nicole

 

 

Hi Nicole,

 

Your post would be better seen and answered on a new thread. This thread is about the original poster's post about the RCL not getting the same media attention as Carnival.

 

Not meaning to get down on you, but your post is a completely different topic.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[MarcelLucSell]

I read about those issues about that ship earlier this week.

 

If I was to be sailing on that cruise, I'd be so happy if my cabin wasn't part of the problems and was allowed to board.

 

But, during the cruise I'd be hoping that there would be some OBC credit and some sort of discount on future sailing if the ship isn't fully functional.

Edited January 28, 2015 by MarcelLucSell