Federal Judge considers sanctions affecting Carnival that could affect cruises

[broberts]

4 hours ago, Aplmac said:

.

And I'm sure they try their best, fleet-wide.

 

But fleet-wide consists of thousands of employees (individuals, like me n you)

and all it takes is one or two malcontents (on separate ships at difrnt times)

having a bad day/night -and at 0250 hrs. takes the easy way out

and dumps the un-mentionable.

He's probably done it once or twice in the past, and even got away with it!

 

CCL and/or Carnival Corporation big shot CEO/CFO/COO's have little actual control

over the entire giant organism(CCL/Corp.)

consisting of thousands of individual cells, whether functioning or malfunctioning.

 

We live in an imperfect world.

 

The difficulty with this argument is that the company did not report these transgressions and, it is claimed, even went to the extent of falsifying documents in an attempt to hide the these actions. This suggests that more than the odd malcontent or idiot are involved in wrongdoing. If the big shots are not involved and don't have sufficient skills to run an organization that does not tolerate this behavior should they be allowed to keep their jobs?

 

We may live in an imperfect world but that is no excuse for corporations repeatedly violating laws and regulations. Consider, if the described avoidance behavior exists for environmental laws is there any doubt that the behavior may exist or creep into other areas? How honest is the company's reporting in areas like engineering?

[BirdTravels]

7 hours ago, MicCanberra said:

If a company cannot be held accountable when breaking the laws and regulations, then who can. I think they will be fined heavily and cruising practices improved.

Being fined and put on probation didn't seem to make a difference last time. Why would it this time?

[jbethel11]

35 minutes ago, BirdTravels said:

Being fined and put on probation didn't seem to make a difference last time. Why would it this time?

And it is not like they were also caught elsewhere. Just the U.S.? I really don't know what to say?

[CanWeGoYet?]

On 4/11/2019 at 5:06 PM, scoobikins said:

Hospitals do this on an almost yearly basis, in preparation for Joint Commission. The only thing I can think is that they are saying they are 'scrubbing' their records in order to avoid getting cited.

This is the reality.   Institutions do prepare for inspections, and it would be wonderful if operations before the audit were identical to the week after, when JCAHO  was done, gone & the audit complete.  In a perfect world.  

[MicCanberra]

3 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

Being fined and put on probation didn't seem to make a difference last time. Why would it this time?

Because they will also be held much more accountable, they will have independent (from the cruise line) auditors making sure the cruise lines are doing as they should and another breach would be devastating to the Carnival corporation.

[Earthworm Jim]

13 hours ago, coaster said:

So Carnival Corporation has grown so large that it is just too massive to be effectively managed?  Ok that probation terms have been violated due to just the enormous size of Carnival Corp? Hmmm... You think the federal justice system should just give them a break due to the magnitude of their operations?  Some things just slip through the cracks?

 

The fact is that it would hurt thousands of the innocent cruising public for the duration of a theoretical port ban. Would it get Carnival's attention, as the judge is hoping to do? Certainly. But at too much cost of collateral damage to the public. So it won't happen.

 

I suspect the mere threat of a US port ban was to get Carnival's attention, but the judge doesn't have any intention of going through with it.

[splintz]

15 minutes ago, Earthworm Jim said:

 

The fact is that it would hurt thousands of the innocent cruising public for the duration of a theoretical port ban. Would it get Carnival's attention, as the judge is hoping to do? Certainly. But at too much cost of collateral damage to the public. So it won't happen.

 

I suspect the mere threat of a US port ban was to get Carnival's attention, but the judge doesn't have any intention of going through with it.

exactly!  how many employees in these ports would be out of work?  how much lost revenue would occur in each city that houses the US ports?  how much would each state and each city in which these ports  reside lose in tax income from the cruise line?  not to mention how much money would citizens of the US and the world lose because their cruise has been cancelled?  because of all these underlying factors this is exactly what it is a threat that will never happen.  you want to punish the corporation then punish the corporation with heavy fines, but don't punish people who have nothing to do with it.

 

[sanmarcosman]

9 hours ago, BirdTravels said:

Being fined and put on probation didn't seem to make a difference last time. Why would it this time?

Continued failure to comply with court ordered probation instructions could result in a bench warrant being issued and Arnold Donald being frog marched out of the corporate offices in handcuffs. 

[jimbo5544]

1 hour ago, Earthworm Jim said:

 

The fact is that it would hurt thousands of the innocent cruising public for the duration of a theoretical port ban. Would it get Carnival's attention, as the judge is hoping to do? Certainly. But at too much cost of collateral damage to the public. So it won't happen.

 

I suspect the mere threat of a US port ban was to get Carnival's attention, but the judge doesn't have any intention of going through with it.

It already has had it's desired affect, it was all over the network news this morning, I expect there is lots of scrambling down in Southeast Florida.

[jimbo5544]

39 minutes ago, sanmarcosman said:

Continued failure to comply with court ordered probation instructions could result in a bench warrant being issued and Arnold Donald being frog marched out of the corporate offices in handcuffs. 

While that would truly make some happy here, I am sure that will not come to pass for many reasons.

[sanmarcosman]

1 minute ago, jimbo5544 said:

While that would truly make some happy here, I am sure that will not come to pass for many reasons.

Stay tuned.

[coevan]

10 hours ago, jbethel11 said:

And it is not like they were also caught elsewhere. Just the U.S.? I really don't know what to say?

 

 

probably because no one watches in the Caribbean, doubt if they have an EPA

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, coevan said:

 

 

probably because no one watches in the Caribbean, doubt if they have an EPA

The fact is that the US can prosecute a MARPOL violation no matter where the violation happened in the world.

[coevan]

thank you chengkp, are they as aggressive as their U.S. neighbors?

[Midwestgal]

 

Well shame on Carnival Corporations .....I hope they do get banned!

passengers will just turn their head because they don’t care as long as they are not affected by it and get their cruise......who cares about the ocean . 

My 2018 Glory Cruise was my last on on Carnival for a few reasons.

No need to wish me well 😘

 

Edited April 13, 2019 by Midwestgal

[AdGuyMG]

22 hours ago, grinningimm said:

You'd just form a new holding company.

 

22 hours ago, jimbo5544 said:

not quite sure it is all that easy....

 

 

Legal Zoom

[BirdTravels]

11 hours ago, MicCanberra said:

Because they will also be held much more accountable, they will have independent (from the cruise line) auditors making sure the cruise lines are doing as they should and another breach would be devastating to the Carnival corporation.

That is exactly why this is in the news. After being placed on probation, independent audits found continued non-compliance and falsification of records. This issue is not because of the original problem, it is because they were caught lying in subsequent “independent audits”.  

[Palmetto Pilot]

2 minutes ago, BirdTravels said:

That is exactly why this is in the news. After being placed on probation, independent audits found continued non-compliance and falsification of records. This issue is not because of the original problem, it is because they were caught lying in subsequent “independent audits”.  

Hopefully they get heavily fined and banned if necessary. 

[COCKYMARK]

Why in the world would you dump oil and trash in the ocean.....pathetic!

 

[ontheweb]

10 minutes ago, COCKYMARK said:

Why in the world would you dump oil and trash in the ocean.....pathetic!

 

Unfortunately, to save money. But, it looks like it is going to cost them big time instead, and deservedly so.

 

I wish I had not already voted my proxy. Voting them all out seems like something to consider.

[TubT]

I guess the first question I would ask is, "Is Volkswagen still in business in the U.S. and the rest of world?  Why?"

 

The second question I would ask is, "How willing is the judge to make a major financial hit on millions of stockholders?"

 

The third question I would ask is, "Is it legal for a public official to make radical threats just to make a point?"  (Before you answer that, check the news the last few days.)

[jimbo5544]

7 minutes ago, ontheweb said:

Unfortunately, to save money. But, it looks like it is going to cost them big time instead, and deservedly so.

 

I wish I had not already voted my proxy. Voting them all out seems like something to consider.

While I understand the intent and concept backing your statement, there is a reason that boards are in place in stock

companies, because THEY have the control (in terms of voting, not us lowly stock holders)   You can certainly vote anyway you want,  but trust me, those in control have the true power.  

[MicCanberra]

Carnival corporation encompasses many cruise lines Carnival, Costa, Cunard, Princess and HAL are just a few of them. It would affect many cruises and many people. I am sure the majority would want the company to be complying with the laws and regulations and would be aghast to find they were not.

[ontheweb]

14 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

While I understand the intent and concept backing your statement, there is a reason that boards are in place in stock

companies, because THEY have the control (in terms of voting, not us lowly stock holders)   You can certainly vote anyway you want,  but trust me, those in control have the true power.  

Yes, I realize that even if all the 100 share holders on cruise critic voted to "throw the rascals out", it would not be nearly enough votes to accomplish this. Nevertheless, I would now feel better about myself and my vote.

[jimbo5544]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

Unfortunately, to save money. But, it looks like it is going to cost them big time instead, and deservedly so.

 

I wish I had not already voted my proxy. Voting them all out seems like something to consider.

Dup post

Edited April 13, 2019 by jimbo5544