Outdoor muster while raining?

[CruiseLee104]

I am sailing on the Valor this Saturday! We are over the moon excited for our trip despite the weather forecast. It is my understanding that the Valor still does muster out on the deck, does anyone know if this is still the case when raining?? With forecasted lightning? Should I pack a rain poncho in my carry on? (Probably will anyway)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[Djptcp]

Our 43rd cruise leaves this afternoon and it's only rained a couple of times on embarkation day. We were never made to go out to the lifeboats during the muster drill when it was raining. Enjoy your cruise - we loved the Valor.

[CruiseLee104]

Our 43rd cruise leaves this afternoon and it's only rained a couple of times on embarkation day. We were never made to go out to the lifeboats during the muster drill when it was raining. Enjoy your cruise - we loved the Valor.

 

 

 

Thank you for such a quick reply! Enjoy your cruise [emoji16]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[evandbob]

The outdoor muster on the Valor is usually under a covered area, and unless the wind is blowing sideways, I doubt anyone can get wet standing under the lifeboats and deck above. I know I didn't during a shower on one of my 7 Valor sailings. By the time that muster was held, I had already changed into a bathing suit and tee anyway.

 

If there are "dangerous" conditions, I think Carnival would reschedule the muster for a different time or place or both. Enjoy your cruise.

[JayDeeJay]

We mustered outside on the Lido (Sta. F) earlier this month and it was raining cats and dogs. Everybody was huddled under the covered area, and Carnival did NOT make everybody from other muster stations walk to their particular life boats. Took pity on us:o)

[banzaii]

I am sailing on the Valor this Saturday! We are over the moon excited for our trip despite the weather forecast. It is my understanding that the Valor still does muster out on the deck, does anyone know if this is still the case when raining?? With forecasted lightning? Should I pack a rain poncho in my carry on? (Probably will anyway)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

 

 

 

I think they should cancel the muster during bad weather. And if its raining during a real emergency, they should cancel the evacuation too! [emoji48]

[goofycruiser]

We did an outdoor Muster Drill on the Miracle out of New York. It was in March and it was snowing!

[LKYGSR]

If there are "dangerous" conditions, I think Carnival would reschedule the muster for a different time or place or both. Enjoy your cruise.

 

I think they should cancel the muster during bad weather. And if its raining during a real emergency, they should cancel the evacuation too! [emoji48]

 

I thought ship was not allowed to leave port until muster was completed per USCG rules? So if they postpone or cancel, aren't you pretty much stuck at port?

[chengkp75]

I thought ship was not allowed to leave port until muster was completed per USCG rules? So if they postpone or cancel, aren't you pretty much stuck at port?

 

While you are correct that the muster must be done prior to departure, it would be Panamanian Maritime Authority rules, not USCG. The USCG have no rules that apply to foreign flag ships.

[wo5m]

While you are correct that the muster must be done prior to departure, it would be Panamanian Maritime Authority rules, not USCG. The USCG have no rules that apply to foreign flag ships.

 

That is incorrect, any ship that originates in US waters have to follow US rules. Its the same reason the FBI investigates serious crimes on a ship and The FDA does health inspections.

 

The Panamanian registration is mainly a tax benefit

[chengkp75]

That is incorrect, any ship that originates in US waters have to follow US rules. Its the same reason the FBI investigates serious crimes on a ship and The FDA does health inspections.

 

The Panamanian registration is mainly a tax benefit

 

As someone who has been a merchant mariner for over 40 years, and several years on cruise ships, I am well acquainted with legal jurisdictions of flag states. FBI has acquired "extra jurisdiction" to apply US laws to foreign flag ships, while in international waters (not in territorial waters of any other nation) and only against US citizens. The "FDA" does not do health inspections, the USPH on behalf of the CDC does. However, the mandate is not to ensure sanitation on the ship, it is to prevent the introduction of infectious diseases into the US. So, their only concern is that illness is not brought into the US by ill passengers and crew.

 

As for the USCG, most cruisers do not understand their status on foreign flag cruise ships. Since the US is signatory to SOLAS (an international convention), the country must pass enabling legislation to include the language of SOLAS into US law. Therefore, as a port state (a nation where a foreign ship docks), the USCG is mandated to ensure that all foreign flag ships meet SOLAS, and SOLAS only, not the more stringent USCG regulations that are enforced on US flag ships.

 

Even the Supreme Court has ruled that US laws do not apply to foreign flag ships, as shown in the case of "Spector v NCL" where the SCOTUS ruled that the ADA did not fully apply to foreign flag cruise ships. The issues of accessibility and non-discrimination would apply (subject to overruling by SOLAS, an international law), however, "the internal policies and procedures pertaining to onboard operations do not fall within the purview of the ADA".

 

This is a fallacy that many US cruisers believe. Once you set foot on a foreign flag ship, the laws of the flag state (Panama and Bahamas for most cruise ships) apply, not US laws. In general, US law only applies when the foreign flag ship is in US waters, and the general principal of international maritime law is that the port state's (US) law only applies when the "safety or well being" of the port is threatened, in all other cases, the flag state's laws apply.

 

This is why I laugh at that "lawyer" Jim Walker spouts stuff on his website about the rights of cruise ship mariners not being upheld per the "Jones Act", when in fact the Jones Act only applies to US flag ships, and US citizen crews. Our US mariners have far more legal rights than any of the cruise ship crews that call in the US, simply because our laws don't apply to foreign flag ships. If US laws applied to foreign flag ships, how is it that they get the "tax break" you mention?

[AmazedByCruising]

While you are correct that the muster must be done prior to departure, it would be Panamanian Maritime Authority rules, not USCG. The USCG have no rules that apply to foreign flag ships.

 

My understanding was that CLIA itself had its members have pre-departure drills, covering nearly the whole industry, whereas SOLAS just requires a drill within the first 24 hours. I would be surprised if individual countries would make stringent rules regarding a muster drill. It's not as if Panama, Malta or The Netherlands have voters who'd care, especially when the industry voluntarily decided to be more strict after the incident where the Master tripped and by pure coincidence ended up in a life boat.

[chengkp75]

My understanding was that CLIA itself had its members have pre-departure drills, covering nearly the whole industry, whereas SOLAS just requires a drill within the first 24 hours. I would be surprised if individual countries would make stringent rules regarding a muster drill. It's not as if Panama, Malta or The Netherlands have voters who'd care, especially when the industry voluntarily decided to be more strict after the incident where the Master tripped and by pure coincidence ended up in a life boat.

 

While CLIA did in fact start requiring its members to hold muster prior to departure, the IMO amended SOLAS to include this. Once a country is a signatory to an international convention like SOLAS, it must pass enabling legislation including the wording of the convention into the nation's laws. Then, as SOLAS is amended, the nation's laws are amended to comply. This requirement to amend is part of the initial enabling legislation, it does not require the input of the voters.

[AmazedByCruising]

While CLIA did in fact start requiring its members to hold muster prior to departure, the IMO amended SOLAS to include this. Once a country is a signatory to an international convention like SOLAS, it must pass enabling legislation including the wording of the convention into the nation's laws. Then, as SOLAS is amended, the nation's laws are amended to comply. This requirement to amend is part of the initial enabling legislation, it does not require the input of the voters.

 

After a few years bothering you with questions, I'm still learning :)

Are you saying that SOLAS is not implemented by flag countries by saying "you can fly our flag but do as SOLAS says", but each and every rule SOLAS adopts has to be rewritten into national laws? And, as SOLAS was OK the first time, our parliament can't do anything unless they decide to quit SOLAS altogether?

[chengkp75]

After a few years bothering you with questions, I'm still learning :)

Are you saying that SOLAS is not implemented by flag countries by saying "you can fly our flag but do as SOLAS says", but each and every rule SOLAS adopts has to be rewritten into national laws? And, as SOLAS was OK the first time, our parliament can't do anything unless they decide to quit SOLAS altogether?

 

International conventions created by UN organizations have no effect in law. It takes a certain number of member nations to ratify (pass matching legislation) the convention before it even enters into action, and as member nations of the UN and bodies like the IMO, they are bound to follow the actions of these bodies, particularly since each member nation can send representatives to the IMO to present their ideas or voice their concerns over proposed regulations. Ratification of international conventions are treated like treaties between nations.

 

Each nation is free to enact stricter maritime safety regulations than those required under SOLAS, but only on ships flying their flag. The US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and most of Western Europe have more or less of these flag state restrictions enacted.

 

I'm certainly not a politician, nor an international lawyer, so I don't know all of the specific mechanics of how each member nation ratifies or enables the convention, but this is the gist of it.

[chengkp75]

After a few years bothering you with questions, I'm still learning :)

Are you saying that SOLAS is not implemented by flag countries by saying "you can fly our flag but do as SOLAS says", but each and every rule SOLAS adopts has to be rewritten into national laws? And, as SOLAS was OK the first time, our parliament can't do anything unless they decide to quit SOLAS altogether?

 

International conventions created by UN organizations have no effect in law. It takes a certain number of member nations to ratify (pass matching legislation) the convention before it even enters into action, and as member nations of the UN and bodies like the IMO, they are bound to follow the actions of these bodies, particularly since each member nation can send representatives to the IMO to present their ideas or voice their concerns over proposed regulations. Ratification of international conventions are treated like treaties between nations.

 

Each nation is free to enact stricter maritime safety regulations than those required under SOLAS, but only on ships flying their flag. The US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and most of Western Europe have more or less of these flag state restrictions enacted.

 

I'm certainly not a politician, nor an international lawyer, so I don't know all of the specific mechanics of how each member nation ratifies or enables the convention, but this is the gist of it. In the US, much of the specific wording of the SOLAS code is in the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations), which is a compendium of the regulations that federal agencies adopt to meet the legislative law (USC or the code of all US legislative law) which enabled SOLAS in the US. So, no not every change to SOLAS is written into "legislative" law, but is written into "administrative" law (CFR) in the US.