Smoking on Balconies

[orchestrapal]

No amount of compensation in any form can make up for the discomfort caused by prohibited smoking. That would almost be an insult; a statement by staff that your problem can be waved away by a bottle of champagne or some hors d'oeuvres -- that you could "enjoy" surrounded by smoke.

Moving to another cabin would not be a solution for me -- not only would someone else's rudeness cause me extra packing and unpacking (staff will move the big stuff, like clothing on hangers, but will not empty drawers, etc), but the problem of the smoker remains to bother others.

Smokers can always be detected and "caught" if onboard staff makes the effort.

 

WOW Don, your best post ever!

[Paulchili]

No amount of compensation in any form can make up for the discomfort caused by prohibited smoking. That would almost be an insult; a statement by staff that your problem can be waved away by a bottle of champagne or some hors d'oeuvres -- that you could "enjoy" surrounded by smoke.

 

Moving to another cabin would not be a solution for me -- not only would someone else's rudeness cause me extra packing and unpacking (staff will move the big stuff, like clothing on hangers, but will not empty drawers, etc), but the problem of the smoker remains to bother others.

 

Smokers can always be detected and "caught" if onboard staff makes the effort.

 

+1 - agree

[hypercafe]

I would expect the ship staff made a good effort to find the source of the smell before the OP was moved as moving them is lots of work. Could it be the smell was not from smoking? I, for one, have faith the staff did a good job trying to find the offender as clouds of smoke are hard to hide.

 

Sent from my XT1032 using Forums mobile app

[Pet Nit Noy]

No amount of compensation in any form can make up for the discomfort caused by prohibited smoking. That would almost be an insult; a statement by staff that your problem can be waved away by a bottle of champagne or some hors d'oeuvres -- that you could "enjoy" surrounded by smoke.

 

Personally, I'm closer to you in my feelings about smoking, but we're talking about the OP not ourselves. In post #19, the OP's own words refer to Oceania's lack of empathy. That's in the champagne and hors d'oeuvre category. However, he/she began the thread asking for compensation for the loss of the balcony for half the cruise (#3). That's a cold cash request. So what did the OP mean? Perhaps both. In injury law cases there's financial compensation for actual damages -- lost wages or medical bills -- and compensation for pain and suffering -- insomnia from an accident or persistent anxiety or diminished quality of life. Being denied use of one's balcony certainly falls into the loss of quality of life category.

 

Smokers can always be detected and "caught" if onboard staff makes the effort.

 

If the onboard staff makes the effort. Amen!

 

Sadly, there have been sporadic but persistent threads about situations where cruisers are inconvenienced when Oceania onboard staff does nothing about a problem. My husband and I switched to independent land travel exclusively for two years because of our extreme disappointment over the behavior of the Oceania staff on Marina's inaugural holiday cruise. (And we've sworn off all holiday cruises forever!)

 

I can only repeat that I've been disappointed by the disconnect between upper management and onboard management. Perhaps we all need to cruise with the email address for the folks in upper management in our contacts list.

[Toranut97]

After all the back-and-forth about e-cigs, I wonder if Oceania is soft on smoking? Does anybody know if the fabled FDR is a smoker?

 

Why do we have "hosts" who express disdain and sarcasm toward Oceania? This is not the first occasion that I have seen this. Calling Mr DelRio "fabled" is snarky and snide. Do we now have "hosts" whose purpose is to dissuade travelers from using the line?

 

Based on experience on other boards and forums, I expect some modicum of impartiality from moderators. Putting disclaimers on one's posts doesn't negate the bold attitudes being displayed by our "hosts" - hardly impartial!!!

 

If Cruise Critic now has a policy of placing anti-O moderators in the O forum, I hope they do the same to the mass market lines.

 

I hope I will not be banned but I expect this to be deleted,

 

Donna

[Travelcat2]

IMO, the smoker could have been warned one time. If they were caught smoking again, they should have been disembarked at the next port. In the early days of Regent's non-smoking in most areas policy, they did remove a passenger from the ship for continuing to smoke. I am very surprised to learn that anyone would assume they could smoke on the balcony on any Oceania ship. It would not be good for Oceania if other smokers read this thread and decided that they could get away with it. If anyone complained, the complainer would be moved and nothing would be done to the smoker.

 

In this situation, I would be in the General Manager's office before the person finished the cigarette!

[hondorner]

... However, he/she began the thread asking for compensation for the loss of the balcony for half the cruise (#3). That's a cold cash request. So what did the OP mean? Perhaps both. In injury law cases there's financial compensation for actual damages -- lost wages or medical bills -- and compensation for pain and suffering -- insomnia from an accident or persistent anxiety or diminished quality of life. Being denied use of one's balcony certainly falls into the loss of quality of life category...

Oceania did not deny the use of the balcony. That was a personal decision of the OP. I understand the rudeness of the smoker detracted from the OP's enjoyment, and I'm as disappointedas anyone in the staffs' apparent lack of effort (without hearing their side of the story), but I fail to see any reason for compensation.

[hondorner]

Donna, I too felt the comment expressed disdain and unbecoming sarcasm, not usually seen on the Oceania forum. However, she does post a disclaimer that her posts are only her own, not as a representative of Cruie Critic. In my opinion, that does not excuse her. Perhaps the forum she moderates is more inclined to such negativity and she knows no better.

Edited May 23, 2015 by hondorner

[Mura]

Hey, guys, might it be possible that Host Jazzbeau really meant "fabled" as a compliment? It's not out of the realm of possibility, after all. He IS fabled to those of us who know him, and we tend to refer to him in the most complimentary of terms.

 

Again, the problem with posting here (even if we used emoticons) is that our tone of voice simply is not heard. And I have occasionally been on the receiving end of readers having misinterpreted what I intended to say ...

 

Just another thought ... I don't know what Host Jazzbeau really meant but there is more than one possible interpretation ... or so it seems to me.

 

Mura

[Toranut97]

I will take your point Mura, and yes, I guess that is possible. My conclusion was not only based on this particular post, but other moderator posts (not all from Jazzbeau) which were critical of Oceania. Since I can not easily link to any of these right now, I will give our moderator the benefit of the doubt. But for me, this one was the straw that broke the camels back, so to speak.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Mura]

And I absolutely understand your position (and others') as well!

 

As I said, we don't know the writer's motives. But negative comments from a "host" should not happen, on that we can agree, I think?

 

Mura

[Toranut97]

Indeed!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TrulyBlonde]

Why do we have "hosts" who express disdain and sarcasm toward Oceania? This is not the first occasion that I have seen this. Calling Mr DelRio "fabled" is snarky and snide. Do we now have "hosts" whose purpose is to dissuade travelers from using the line?

 

Based on experience on other boards and forums, I expect some modicum of impartiality from moderators. Putting disclaimers on one's posts doesn't negate the bold attitudes being displayed by our "hosts" - hardly impartial!!!

 

If Cruise Critic now has a policy of placing anti-O moderators in the O forum, I hope they do the same to the mass market lines.

 

I hope I will not be banned but I expect this to be deleted,

 

Donna

 

+1 I have seen this one do it many other times..thanks for responding

[thebts]

There are two parts to the OP's problem: the smoker's behavior and the OP"s loss of enjoyment of their balcony.

 

You're right that nothing could be done about the mystery smoker. However, the list of what could be done for the OP is so long, I'm surprised by your post. At minimal cost, Oceania could have ...

... sent a bottle of champagne to their new stateroom or to dinner one or more nights.

... arranged for an extra one or two reservations in one of the specialty restaurants.

... included the OP's stateroom in the list of rooms that get nightly hors d'ouevres.

... if the OP purchased internet use, sweeten the deal or simply offer internet use.

 

Notice, everything I've listed has minimal impact on Oceania's bottom line. I purposely didn't mention spa treatments or excursions since Oceania is only an agent for the actual provider. I just looked at the Toscanna wine list. Schramsberg Mirabelle Brut costs about $35 retail and Montaudon Brut costs $38 retail. Even those numbers are probably more than Oceania has to pay for those bottles. So, for a cost of less than $50 -- or even less if we're talking about things like extra specialty reservations -- Oceania showed a remarkable lack of imagination and empathy.

 

Some cruisers would have been satisfied simply to have the smoke problem go away with a change of cabin. But the OP communicated in real time that he/she was still unhappy. This detail is important. The timing should have allowed to Oceania to respond to customer dissatisfaction. Now, Oceania has a situation -- not the actual smoke but the aftermath of the cabin change -- where they allowed a customer to slip away and in a very public way.

 

In this day of the internet and social media, things that happen to one person get transmitted to a much, much larger audience than ever before.

 

One additional thing bothers me. Mr Jason Montague has been a role model for how management should handle problems. Our board was filled with distress over the new e-cigarette policy and he responded in a timely and ultimately satisfying way to many of us who wrote him. Between the OP's anecdote and the post about the 32-day Grand Voyage problem, there's a clear disconnect in the way upper management seems to want to handle problems and the way management on each ship seems to handle problems.

 

 

You make excellent points. The loss of the balcony for half the cruise and inconvenience associated with moving cabins should have been compensated at the time in the manner you suggested. It wasn't. I wrote a letter upon return home to Oceania requesting compensation, expecting perhaps a future cruise credit which is common in the industry. It was refused. And in their response they stated that they hoped we would return on a future sailing. Not a chance! I am still seething at their lack of customer focus and seeming indifference.

[kekilia]

Agree... actualy, I found, on my last cruise that the smoking areas where you could always go to meet and converse with some really wonderful , interesting and tolerant people.

 

On the other hand, I observed some from the "zealots" camp......they seemed a little to tightly wound....they delighted in finding problems with not only smoking, but every other aspect of life, on or off the ship.

 

ILL TAKE the company of smokers any day of the week.... and I do not smoke

 

Call me what you will, I am indeed a zealot when it comes to smokers breaking the rules. While they have every right to smoke within the set rules, guidelines and laws which are now commonplace in the USA and other developed countries, they DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to pollute my lungs. My mother had COPD, my children are asthmatic, and I am highly allergic to smoke, toxins and pollutants. I have a right to live and your addiction does not trump that. This is not political and I can be your friend. But YOU must respect my lungs!

 

If I choose to travel to a country that is predominantly a smoking culture, I must take my chances. But, when it is clearly a case of feeling that WE "non-smokers" are "zealots" who need a dose of " in your face," then I will fight you tooth and nail, relentlessly until MY rights to breathe fresh air are victorious. I would not have put up with a smoker anywhere in my vicinity, and I would have been so in the face of management, corporate or not, until they took responsibility for my comfort and safety that I would have to be dragged off the ship kicking and screaming for justice! And, then, I would sue!

 

Listen up, O, do not let your staff get away with so many instances of neglect to follow through with your own safety regulations! This is now in print and you make yourself liable for huge losses should there be one fire onboard due to a smoker who was reported and NOTHING was done!

[thebts]

Call me what you will, I am indeed a zealot when it comes to smokers breaking the rules. While they have every right to smoke within the set rules, guidelines and laws which are now commonplace in the USA and other developed countries, they DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to pollute my lungs. My mother had COPD, my children are asthmatic, and I am highly allergic to smoke, toxins and pollutants. I have a right to live and your addiction does not trump that. This is not political and I can be your friend. But YOU must respect my lungs!

 

If I choose to travel to a country that is predominantly a smoking culture, I must take my chances. But, when it is clearly a case of feeling that WE "non-smokers" are "zealots" who need a dose of " in your face," then I will fight you tooth and nail, relentlessly until MY rights to breathe fresh air are victorious. I would not have put up with a smoker anywhere in my vicinity, and I would have been so in the face of management, corporate or not, until they took responsibility for my comfort and safety that I would have to be dragged off the ship kicking and screaming for justice! And, then, I would sue!

 

Listen up, O, do not let your staff get away with so many instances of neglect to follow through with your own safety regulations! This is now in print and you make yourself liable for huge losses should there be one fire onboard due to a smoker who was reported and NOTHING was done!

 

Excellent point. In fact we reported smoke wafting onto our balcony for 4 days before anything was done. Oh yes, they came to the cabin, smelled the smoke, made promises to find the culprit and get it stopped but they were just empty promises. By that point our vacation was ruined.

[kekilia]

Excellent point. In fact we reported smoke wafting onto our balcony for 4 days before anything was done. Oh yes, they came to the cabin, smelled the smoke, made promises to find the culprit and get it stopped but they were just empty promises. By that point our vacation was ruined.

Four days???

 

You see, they try to wait you out. I would be sitting in the GM's office, threatening to call the Coast Guard, I would be nagging, bitching, and refusing to leave until the culprit was identified. It is not an unsolvable mystery.

 

1. Go room to room, do you smoke?

2. May we come in?

3. There has been a complaint about smoking on the balcony? (So sorry, but we must check out every complaint due to fire regulations)

4. You understand that if this occurs (smoking on the balcony) you will be off the ship at the next port?

Also, if someone is smoking next door, I will bend around the barrier and get a photo of them!!! I will also try to get anyone else I can involved in getting the person who is putting an entire ship full of people at risk of their lives!

 

Do not put up with it! Yea, I am a zealot!!!!!!

[Mura]

Kekilia,

 

I am with you. I had the feeling I was being criticized (and maybe I was wrong) because I referred to people smoking on their veranda as being "rude and selfish". But they were.

 

I was NOT referring to smokers per se as being rude and selfish. It was just that those who break the rules are being "rude and selfish" when it is quite clear that smoking is NOT permitted.

 

I have friends who are (or were) smokers. They are still my friends. I don't like perfume any more than I like smoke these days. I don't have your problem with asthma, but the smell of smoke is truly offensive to me and when I'm on O, where smoking is very limited, I don't see why I should have to suffer.

 

As I've said before, it's been clear to me that smokers do NOT realize how the smell pervades everything. They are used to it. Those of us who do not smoke DO realize!

 

Beyond that, there is the safety issue. Several years ago Princess had a serious fire which as I recall was started by someone smoking on a veranda. At that time, the cruise lines became more severe in their restrictions.

 

Why is that so hard for smokers to realize?

 

If you are on a line that permits smoking everywhere, then smoke. And if you are on a line that does not ... DO NOT.

 

I don't judge people because they are smokers ... I just don't want them smoking around me! For those posters who go into the smoking area because you think they are great people -- FINE! Do so. I'm sure I'd like these people as well ... as long as they refrain from smoking around me ...

 

If that makes me an anti-smoking zealot, so be it.

 

BUT if you sail on a line that limits smoking, just abide by the rules. Then none of us have any complaints.

 

Mura

[frantic36]

You make excellent points. The loss of the balcony for half the cruise and inconvenience associated with moving cabins should have been compensated at the time in the manner you suggested. It wasn't. I wrote a letter upon return home to Oceania requesting compensation, expecting perhaps a future cruise credit which is common in the industry. It was refused. And in their response they stated that they hoped we would return on a future sailing. Not a chance! I am still seething at their lack of customer focus and seeming indifference.

 

I find this interesting in their lack of response. We had a problem on our last cruise with Seabourn cruise which was a back to back. We had an intermittent noise problem which would wake us early some mornings and a couple of times late at night. It took a while to identify the problem and they did a temporary fix till we got to Singapore. They couldn't move us as the first segment was fully booked. They did move us from an ocean view to a balcony on the second segment when a room freed up. They also were apparently able to fix the problem permanently as the second leg started in Singapore.

 

What really surprised us though was we also received a future credit for our inconvenience whilst on board. We had not asked or expected anything. As we had been thinking about a certain cruise next year we immediately used this credit to put down a hold on this cruise. We have since paid a full deposit. So it was a way of making us happy and Seabourn also gained as we already had a a cruise booked. This new cruise was an extension which we might not have done but for this compensation.

 

Interesting how different cruise lines handle a passengers inconvenience.

Edited May 24, 2015 by frantic36

[kekilia]

Kekilia,

 

I am with you. I had the feeling I was being criticized (and maybe I was wrong) because I referred to people smoking on their veranda as being "rude and selfish". But they were.

 

I was NOT referring to smokers per se as being rude and selfish. It was just that those who break the rules are being "rude and selfish" when it is quite clear that smoking is NOT permitted.

 

Beyond that, there is the safety issue. Several years ago Princess had a serious fire which as I recall was started by someone smoking on a veranda. At that time, the cruise lines became more severe in their restrictions.

 

Mura

 

Mura,

 

Do not apologize for the choice of words. I believe they are more than generous. These same people who are breaking the rules onboard ship would not dare to do so on an airline today. It would not be tolerated. In fact, they would be treated, appropriately, like criminals because they are. This is not just an issue of a foul smell. It is a safety issue and it is just as important on a ship as it is on an airplane. It is not safe to smoke! The fact that you are allowed to do so in a controlled space that can be sufficiently monitored does not mean that it is safe to do in your cabin! You are not allowed to iron, to bring onboard your own hairdryer or other heating element. Three people died due to fire on the Insignia! DIED! Chefs cannot use an open flame (and this is not their choice. I don't know any chef who prefers an electric range over a gas range!).

 

I am a bit claustrophobic, but the idea of 1250 people willy nilly deciding what rules are to be observed and which are not because they believe they can get away with whatever they want to do makes me cringe! Either Oceania needs to do some better training or intelligent passengers need to make themselves heard. SAFETY FIRST! Bring on stronger regulations or let the lawsuits fly!

[Ka Honu]

Oceania's smoking policy is fairly restrictive, not terribly unreasonable, and perfectly clear. It's my obligation as a smoking customer to obey the policy and shipboard management's obligation to enforce it. Safety issues aside, if they don't meet their obligation it's a bad business decision which alienates a substantial portion of their customer base (perhaps even smokers like me who might easily interpret their inability to enforce their own policies as a systemic weakness that could easily carry over into other, even more critical areas).

 

... if you sail on a line that limits smoking, just abide by the rules. Then none of us have any complaints.

 

Your zealot badge is hereby revoked. Zealots are, by definition, "fanatical and uncompromising." Aboard ship you can tell them by their constant complaints and rude behavior against even those smokers who stick to their designated smoking area(s).

[Pet Nit Noy]

Oceania's smoking policy is fairly restrictive, not terribly unreasonable, and perfectly clear. It's my obligation as a smoking customer to obey the policy and shipboard management's obligation to enforce it. Safety issues aside, if they don't meet their obligation it's a bad business decision which alienates a substantial portion of their customer base (perhaps even smokers like me who might easily interpret their inability to enforce their own policies as a systemic weakness that could easily carry over into other, even more critical areas).

 

Excellent post!

[Flatbush Flyer]

Re: post #21.

I hate smoking. But, I also hate ripoffs. You can find Schramsberg Mirabelle at BevMo and elsewhere for under $20.

[StolidCruiser]

I'm intrigued by the idea that compensation should be expected because of the bad behaviour of one passenger affecting the enjoyment of another.

 

Not minimizing the infraction of smoking where prohibited (which should not be tolerated and addressed with vigor), I am curious if I should have expected compensation for the loud boisterous people next to me who chortled and used course language for vast periods of time that prevented me from enjoying my balcony for quiet relaxation?

 

Although the underlying issue isnt the offending party was violating a policy, should one expect to be compensated if another guest negatively impacts their enjoyment?

[Pet Nit Noy]

Re: post #21.

I hate smoking. But, I also hate ripoffs. You can find Schramsberg Mirabelle at BevMo and elsewhere for under $20.

 

For a very minimal amount of money, Oceania could have done several things that communicated management was sorry conditions on the cruise were contrary to stated policy. Your information simply underscores the fact that the amount of money Oceania would have had to spend was less than even the minimal amount I used in my example.