Having your docs in hand

[navybankerteacher]

No, young people are not a protected class (yet). Age discrimination applies to those over a certain age.

 

Young people certainly are a protected class - ever hear of child abuse being a prosecutable offense?

 

Age discrimination applies to treating people differently BECAUSE of their age - regardless of their age. Unless you are trying to claim that juveniles are incapable of practicing discrimination.

[ldubs]

While your #1 is a lovely thought ... there are 2,500 passengers to assist, direct, hand hold, etc. It just isn't possible. The couple should have asked and asked and asked for updates.

 

OK, then we disagree. You think it is acceptable treatment and I think it isn't.

 

With just a little, and I really mean a little, extra hand holding NCL could have avoiding this whole thing.

[myfuzzy]

OK....Here's my idea.

 

To prevent further situations like this. The cruise terminals would need to be "reset" up to check in passengers like the airlines. Enter the terminal WITH all your luggage, go though security, having your documents in your hand to show upon entering building, this way if you DONT have your ID, you can't even enter the building, getting into a line, corresponding to the area of the ship you are in. Checking in, getting key card, THEN proceed to area to hand your luggage over to the porters to take onto the ship, Instead of at the curb before entering the front of the building, they should have a place at the backside of the building to hand over your luggage, Its been scanned and everyone has been checked in.

Edited January 31, 2018 by myfuzzy

[navybankerteacher]

OK, then we disagree. You think it is acceptable treatment and I think it isn't.

 

With just a little, and I really mean a little, extra hand holding NCL could have avoiding this whole thing.

 

"This whole thing" consisted in large part of the elderly couple missing their sailing - because they failed to have the required documentation.

 

No amount of "extra hand holding" would have changed that.

[royalsfan110]

It’s not sad at all. FOLLOW THE RULES

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Forums

[ldubs]

"This whole thing" consisted in large part of the elderly couple missing their sailing - because they failed to have the required documentation.

 

No amount of "extra hand holding" would have changed that.

 

My comments were about how NCL could have done better handling the customer. If they had they just might have avoided the bad press. That is what I meant by "the whole thing".

[sparks1093]

Young people certainly are a protected class - ever hear of child abuse being a prosecutable offense?

 

Age discrimination applies to treating people differently BECAUSE of their age - regardless of their age. Unless you are trying to claim that juveniles are incapable of practicing discrimination.

 

You aren't going to be charged with age discrimination for not giving a 16 year old a job, whereas you very well might be if you deny a job to a 50 year old. And yes, our society has laws that protect the very young and the very old because they can't always take care of themselves (gasp, our society is ageist;)). (And actually you bring up a good point about abuse-many states have statutes that specifically prevent abusing an elderly person, including financially, so maybe the couple had a claim along those lines:confused:).

 

In any event any passenger(s) in this exact situation should receive the same consideration. If the cruise line assures the passenger that the luggage would be found in time then they have an obligation to 1) find the dang luggage or 2) make the passenger whole for failing.

Edited January 31, 2018 by sparks1093

[sparks1093]

While your #1 is a lovely thought ... there are 2,500 passengers to assist, direct, hand hold, etc. It just isn't possible. The couple should have asked and asked and asked for updates.

 

But that is what customer service is all about, taking care of all 2,500 passengers.

[sparks1093]

"This whole thing" consisted in large part of the elderly couple missing their sailing - because they failed to have the required documentation.

 

No amount of "extra hand holding" would have changed that.

 

Yes, it all started with the passengers screwing up, I think we all can agree on that. I'm sure that is exactly how it was reasoned out in corporate- they didn't follow the rules, our contract allows us to deny them anything, hey presto, done. But that overlooks NCL's role in what took place- the NCL rep sat the couple down and assured them that there was ample time to find their luggage. That interchange changes the landscape drastically because NCL was obligated to fulfill that assurance from a customer service standpoint. It's too bad that the folks in corporate think too much like too many on these boards because NCL got a black eye as a result of their decision. If they had said "well, gee, the law is on our side, but our rep did assure this couple that the luggage would be found and if the couple takes this to the press we won't look too good, maybe we should offer a future cruise credit in the amount of their fare." Customer goodwill.

[dsrdsrdsr]

So you do not believe that older people should not be held to normal standards? What is the cut -off age for no longer being expected to act like a grown up?

I don't think your standards are normal - this is where we disagree. I think that it is normal to give extra consideration to those who, for whatever reason are less physically or mentally able to cope. You apparently don't.

 

If someone has a minor mental or physical handicap, so the same standards apply? The "you're a less than perfect human being, tough, stay at home" standard?

[BlueRiband]

I don't think your standards are normal - this is where we disagree. I think that it is normal to give extra consideration to those who, for whatever reason are less physically or mentally able to cope. You apparently don't.

 

If someone has a minor mental or physical handicap, so the same standards apply? The "you're a less than perfect human being, tough, stay at home" standard?

 

If somebody's physical or cognative state doesn't allow them to travel independently then yes, they need to stay home or travel with a capable companion. Years ago the world voyages of the old QE2 had a number of elderly women in various stages of dimentia. Their families sent them on to be rid of them for a few months. Today however cruise lines are much more demanding of a passenger's ability to take care of themselves and will not let their cabin stewards act as personal care assistants.

 

 

To get back to the original topic - the majority of the posts here rightly or wrongly express sympathy for the couple. (Perhaps they see themselves as doing the same bone-headed thing in the future.) Since public media pressure resulted in NCL reversing their decision, look for more stories where an "evil, heartless, and cruel" company had "no compassion" for somebody screwing up and missing their dream vacation.

[navybankerteacher]

 

...But that overlooks NCL's role in what took place- the NCL rep sat the couple down and assured them that there was ample time to find their luggage. That interchange changes the landscape drastically because NCL was obligated to fulfill that assurance from a customer service standpoint.

 

...

 

l.

Do we know what really took place - or are we relying on a slanted story from a sympathetic reporter?

 

Given the situation caused by the couple, the only course was to try to locate the luggage. Was there really any "assurance" given? What else could be done other than to try to intercept the luggage?

 

Sure, it is too bad that the luggage was not recoverable in time --- but what other suggestion could have been given: just go home and forget about your luggage?

 

Just because a rep probably told the couple that the only course of action was to see if they could try to locate the luggage, that is hardly grounds for turning it into an unfulfilled "assurance".

[sparks1093]

Do we know what really took place - or are we relying on a slanted story from a sympathetic reporter?

 

Given the situation caused by the couple, the only course was to try to locate the luggage. Was there really any "assurance" given? What else could be done other than to try to intercept the luggage?

 

Sure, it is too bad that the luggage was not recoverable in time --- but what other suggestion could have been given: just go home and forget about your luggage?

 

Just because a rep probably told the couple that the only course of action was to see if they could try to locate the luggage, that is hardly grounds for turning it into an unfulfilled "assurance".

 

We don't know what took place and neither did corporate when they received this couple's letter. It's unlikely that anyone at the port would have been able to have enough detailed recollection to tell corporate what really happened. In any event, NCL did provide a refund along with a free cruise, at least a tacit admission that part of the story was true (or NCL is a bunch of weenies without the backbone to stand by a correctly made decision). As I've said a couple of times one suggestion that could have been made was "hey, we might not find your luggage, you should try to get copies of your birth certificates" (and I know that you hate it when I talk about that, but it would have saved this couples' cruise had they been able to obtain them and we wouldn't be having this discussion). My guess as to why that suggestion wasn't made is because the cruise line rep fully expected the bags to be found. I'm sure in the history of cruising this isn't the first passenger to do such a boneheaded thing.

[mjkacmom]

Yes, it all started with the passengers screwing up, I think we all can agree on that. I'm sure that is exactly how it was reasoned out in corporate- they didn't follow the rules, our contract allows us to deny them anything, hey presto, done. But that overlooks NCL's role in what took place- the NCL rep sat the couple down and assured them that there was ample time to find their luggage. That interchange changes the landscape drastically because NCL was obligated to fulfill that assurance from a customer service standpoint. It's too bad that the folks in corporate think too much like too many on these boards because NCL got a black eye as a result of their decision. If they had said "well, gee, the law is on our side, but our rep did assure this couple that the luggage would be found and if the couple takes this to the press we won't look too good, maybe we should offer a future cruise credit in the amount of their fare." Customer goodwill.

Were you there? Is that exactly what the rep said? My husband is only 50, but wears rose colored glasses on his ears. He hears what he wants to hear, and his 91 year old dad is the same (although can get confused). There is no way that promise was true (if it was actually said) no one could guarantee that the luggage would be found in a couple of hours, heck, sometimes the luggage never even turns up!

[SRF]

OK, I'll give it a shot.

 

#1

There are many possible approaches that would have been better. For example, explain there is a good chance that the luggage can be found, but it is not a certainty. Explain what will happen if the luggage is not found. Offer that perhaps in the meantime other options should be explored like BC copies (OR explain that there are no other options if that is the case). Reach out to them occasionally with an update. Clearly communicate when it is known that the luggage is not found. Ask if they have a ride or someone they can contact. So maybe just about anything but walking away leaving them sitting there.

 

#2

Please go back and actually re-read my previous posts. I have not said NCL was at fault for denying boarding or that they should do a refund. I think I may have said the opposite. I do not like the way NCL treated these elderly people. I think NCL abandoned them. I'm sorry, but I think our elderly people deserve to be treated with care and kindness. Simple as that.

 

 

Good luck with your lawsuits. Enjoy cruising on NCL.

 

Thanks.

 

Also remember, we are only hearing one side of the story.

 

They may have been told all of this, but either do not remember or it did not get reported.

 

And you did say that they should be treated differently since they were old.

[SRF]

No, young people are not a protected class (yet). Age discrimination applies to those over a certain age.

 

Actually, giving older special privileges is a form of discrimination. Notice that US airlines no longer offer early boarding just based on age? Only on need to extra time in boarding.

[sparks1093]

Were you there? Is that exactly what the rep said? My husband is only 50, but wears rose colored glasses on his ears. He hears what he wants to hear, and his 91 year old dad is the same (although can get confused). There is no way that promise was true (if it was actually said) no one could guarantee that the luggage would be found in a couple of hours, heck, sometimes the luggage never even turns up!

 

Sheesh, why are we still discussing this? NCL ponied up. It's done. Yes, the couple may have heard what they wanted to hear, but that's what good customer care is all about- seeing it through the eyes of the customer and acting accordingly to secure customer goodwill. Yes, NCL had the contract on their side, but they still chose the wrong course of action and it cost them more in the long run than it would have had they made the right choice when the couple's letter reached corporate HQ.

[dsrdsrdsr]

If somebody's physical or cognative state doesn't allow them to travel independently then yes, they need to stay home or travel with a capable companion.

But who sets the mark? This isn't about people who were physically incapable to travel, this is about people who didn't cope as well as they might in a crisis. If you're young and active, it might be a nice idea that older, slower people should wait at home as soon as age starts to affect them; but will you still think that when it happens to you?

 

I don't see why it is so wrong to discriminate against people who are old and slow. It's the law that you have to discriminate in favour of the disabled; that's what the ADA is about. It's not permitted to build loads of steps and refuse to discriminate; it is permitted to add a small number of lifts (elevators) specifically for the use of the disabled. If you're willing to discriminate for the physically disabled, why is it so wrong to discriminate for the elderly?

 

In practice, as it happens, few people agree with the apparent majority on here. For example, when my mother boards an American bus or train, people will quickly stand to give her a seat - and not just the people in the specific seats for the elderly, either.

[myfuzzy]

In practice, as it happens, few people agree with the apparent majority on here. For example, when my mother boards an American bus or train, people will quickly stand to give her a seat - and not just the people in the specific seats for the elderly, either.

 

Too bad they don't enforce this at Disney. We just got back, we stayed on property to use the bus' to go from hotel to park, nine time out of ten, most of the seats were taken by kids, while us, two seniors in our late 60's had to stand the whole way. Parent's never even batted an eye to us, to offer us seats. I cannot stand well and my DH has had a stroke.....were we supposed to kick them out of the seat.....to let us sit?

[mjkacmom]

In practice, as it happens, few people agree with the apparent majority on here. For example, when my mother boards an American bus or train, people will quickly stand to give her a seat - and not just the people in the specific seats for the elderly, either.

 

Too bad they don't enforce this at Disney. We just got back, we stayed on property to use the bus' to go from hotel to park, nine time out of ten, most of the seats were taken by kids, while us, two seniors in our late 60's had to stand the whole way. Parent's never even batted an eye to us, to offer us seats. I cannot stand well and my DH has had a stroke.....were we supposed to kick them out of the seat.....to let us sit?

Wait for the next bus. My mom, before being diagnosed with cancer which killed her a few months later, walked 5 miles every morning, almost 70. She would not have been happy if someone offered up a seat! No one is obligated to give up a seat for anyone, although when we were there with young kids, they preferred to stand and hold onto the poles. My dad needed a seat, so if the bus was full, we’d wait for the next one (he rented a EVC at the parks).

[Barrheadlass]

Too bad they don't enforce this at Disney. We just got back, we stayed on property to use the bus' to go from hotel to park, nine time out of ten, most of the seats were taken by kids, while us, two seniors in our late 60's had to stand the whole way. Parent's never even batted an eye to us, to offer us seats. I cannot stand well and my DH has had a stroke.....were we supposed to kick them out of the seat.....to let us sit?

Wait for the next bus. My mom, before being diagnosed with cancer which killed her a few months later, walked 5 miles every morning, almost 70. She would not have been happy if someone offered up a seat! No one is obligated to give up a seat for anyone, although when we were there with young kids, they preferred to stand and hold onto the poles. My dad needed a seat, so if the bus was full, we’d wait for the next one (he rented a EVC at the parks).

 

Oh, come on! You really think it ok for kids to sit while elderly folks who are apparently not in good shape stand? And wouldn’t the next bus be as crowded? I’m really flabbergasted. I recently spent a lot of time on the metro in Paris. I’m pushing 70, in excellent shape, but was offered seats many times. I always declined, with thanks. On the way to that trip I stood for 90 minutes waiting to check my luggage at the airport. There was not a single seat available...many taken by backpacks and carryons. Standing was not an issue for me, but...

 

Back to the NCL issue...

[ldubs]

Wait for the next bus. My mom, before being diagnosed with cancer which killed her a few months later, walked 5 miles every morning, almost 70. She would not have been happy if someone offered up a seat! No one is obligated to give up a seat for anyone, although when we were there with young kids, they preferred to stand and hold onto the poles. My dad needed a seat, so if the bus was full, we’d wait for the next one (he rented a EVC at the parks).

 

Oh, come on! You really think it ok for kids to sit while elderly folks who are apparently not in good shape stand? And wouldn’t the next bus be as crowded? I’m really flabbergasted. I recently spent a lot of time on the metro in Paris. I’m pushing 70, in excellent shape, but was offered seats many times. I always declined, with thanks. On the way to that trip I stood for 90 minutes waiting to check my luggage at the airport. There was not a single seat available...many taken by backpacks and carryons. Standing was not an issue for me, but...

 

Back to the NCL issue...

 

I guess flabbergasted is a good reaction. Sad that children are no longer taught proper behavior or common courtesy.

[myfuzzy]

Wait for the next bus. My mom, before being diagnosed with cancer which killed her a few months later, walked 5 miles every morning, almost 70. She would not have been happy if someone offered up a seat! No one is obligated to give up a seat for anyone, although when we were there with young kids, they preferred to stand and hold onto the poles. My dad needed a seat, so if the bus was full, we’d wait for the next one (he rented a EVC at the parks).

 

Oh, come on! You really think it ok for kids to sit while elderly folks who are apparently not in good shape stand? And wouldn’t the next bus be as crowded? I’m really flabbergasted. I recently spent a lot of time on the metro in Paris. I’m pushing 70, in excellent shape, but was offered seats many times. I always declined, with thanks. On the way to that trip I stood for 90 minutes waiting to check my luggage at the airport. There was not a single seat available...many taken by backpacks and carryons. Standing was not an issue for me, but...

 

Back to the NCL issue...

 

I know, I get it....but wouldn't it be nice to have that option to decline the offer

 

Back to NCL

[Computer Nerd]

As stated yes, the passengers did screw up, no doubt about it, yep and yep. But NCL did also when the CSR sat them in the terminal for three hours after assuring them that their luggage would be found. And on that basis alone NCL owed them something from at least a customer service standpoint. I, for one, am glad to read that they did step up.

 

I agree that NCL screwed up by telling them they would find their luggage and retrieve their passports (then again we are only hearing one side of the story so is that what was actually said or what the passengers think they heard). Personally, I don't believe NCL owned them anything. Actually, I don't think the passengers thought they were owed anything. I just don't understand why passengers run off to find a news crew when they admitted they made the mistake. It's not like there are reporters sitting in passenger terminals waiting for the next juicy story. The fact that they had to have sought out a news agency is what really gets my goat.

[Computer Nerd]

;

 

This proves the power of the crowd can make a difference. Excellent NCL!

 

Yes, a mob, whether correct or incorrect, can make a difference.