Cruise passengers threaten mutiny

[derf5585]

Some passengers on the Queen Mary 2 cruise ship are threatening not to get off the ship

from

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/01/22/cruise.anger.ap/index.html

 

The BBC reports that passengers have threatened mutiny

from

http://www.cruisejunkie.com/events.html

[EPFudbutter]

50% off on what looks like an expensive cruise? I'd take it and be satisfied. The passenegers are still using the ship's facilities (in fact, even more so given the loss of shore time). If the purpose of the cruise was simply to visit these ports, why not fly then?

[cheshyrkat]

I read that they're mad because they weren't given the option to get off in Ft. Lauderdale and get a full refund there. I don't know how I feel about all that. I'm glad it wasn't my cruise, and I'd be upset if all my ports were cancelled, but they have to know that stuff like that happens...right?

[familyplanner]

I understand them being upset, but sometimes you miss ports because of weather. Okay call me stupid but I don't get why refusing to get off the ship in Rio de Jenario and missing another port is going to solve anything. A 50% refund sounds very generous.:)

[cheshyrkat]

...I don't get why refusing to get off the ship in Rio de Jenario and missing another port is going to solve anything...

 

I totally agree...Who are they trying to hurt? I doubt Carnival Corp. cares if they get off the ship or not! :confused: They'll just deprive themselves of the port time...Unless they were supposed to end their cruise there and by refusing to get off are hoping they will be taken further than they originally were supposed to go...Does that even make sense?

[Mgetta]

I would be furious. Cunard knew the condition of the boat after they came back to port and had it checked out. Yet they told the passengers they would only miss 2 stops because they were 2 days late due to the accident. Now they tell them they aren't stopping anywhere. They paid 50% the cost of a cruise just to take a boat to Rio. That was an expensive cruise and once in a lifetime trip for many of the people. Even at 50% that's a lot of money. Yes, Cunard/Carnival should have given them the option of getting off and getting a full refund.

 

If they wanted to see the ports why didn't they just fly???? You've got to be kidding, right. That can't be a serious statement. A few people may take a cruise just to be on a ship, but most are very interested in visiting the ports and make their selection based on that. And I'm sure if you wanted to pay for their airfare, hotel, meals and entertainment they'd go for it. There's no doubt cruising is a bargain compared to flying to all those locations and paying for lodging and meals.

[Cruzin' Daddy]

I totally agree...Who are they trying to hurt? I doubt Carnival Corp. cares if they get off the ship or not! :confused: They'll just deprive themselves of the port time...Unless they were supposed to end their cruise there and by refusing to get off are hoping they will be taken further than they originally were supposed to go...Does that even make sense?

 

What you said is exactly what I had in mind. It just sounds like a bunch of stuckup-whiny-rich folks (trust me, I deal with those kinds of people alot...so I know one when I see one) are just giving the Captain grief. They have enjoyed the facilities thus far, why not accept the 50% of, sit back, relax, and shut-up!

 

--Buzz

[cheshyrkat]

Okay...upon further investigation I figured out that the people who are saying they won't get off the ship were scheduled to end their cruise in Rio. There are about 1,000 people who are supposed to board the ship there and the folks who are supposed to get off are threatening not to so that they can halt or delay the ship's progress after that port. Cunard has issued a statement that the 50% credit is the final offer.

 

I do feel bad for them, but the fare they paid is for a cruise, not for specific ports...or any ports for that matter. I don't see what recourse they truly have. They are lucky the cruiseline is offering the 50%. At least they are getting a cruise! Can you imagine how mad they would have been if they were informed the cruise was going to be terminated in Ft. Lauderdale? At this point it would be to their advantage if they could enjoy the time at sea and not completely waste what they do have.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4637240.stm

 

And if you're interested in how the folks on the Cunard boards are responding to all this, it is much the same as we've reacted...

 

http://boards.cruisecritic.com/showthread.php?t=284065

[glrounds]

Crew members mutiny.

Passengers that won't leave a ship when instructed to are TRESPASSERS, in my opinion. I would think ship security should and would treat them just as such. Did any of them think of how they are "screwing up" the plans of the passengers that are to embark at Rio ? :confused:

[big_duck]

Yes, Cunard/Carnival should have given them the option of getting off and getting a full refund.

 

Jones act be damned I guess. :rolleyes:

[derf5585]

Jones act be damned I guess. :rolleyes:

 

Does the Jones Act apply to passengers? The Act, no; the principle, yes. What is known as the Passenger Vessel Act (PSA) of 1886 (46 U.S.C. 289) states that “no foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, under penalty of $200 for each passenger so transported or landed.”

from

http://www.cruiseco.com/Resources/jones_act.htm

[futaba951]

Jones act be damned I guess. :rolleyes:

Could they have towed the ship out to sea, offloaded the pax onto a barge or another ship and sailed back into port to skirt the Jones Act? It couldn't possibly have made these folks any madder than they already were and would have been funny as hell to watch. :)

[cheshyrkat]

They could have limped the ship all the way to the nearest foreign island with an airstrip and let them off there to fend for themselves...boy oh boy what would we be reading about in the news tonight if THAT had happened??

[derf5585]

Cunard caves in over cruise mutiny

from

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/americas/01/27/cruise.anger/index.html

[flynrph]

Somebody did some World Class negotiating! I thought the first offer wasn't too bad, Cunard showed they meant business with customer service with the offer! How nice to see!;)

[Rayny]

I thought that if they were offered anything more, it should have been off the price of a future cruise.

[big_duck]

Somebody did some World Class negotiating! I thought the first offer wasn't too bad, Cunard showed they meant business with customer service with the offer! How nice to see!;)

 

It wasn't negotiation it was extortion...

 

Interesting BLOG. Ever notice that when everything is peachy it is just Cunard, but as soon as there is an issue it quickly becomes Cunard/Carnival? :mad:

[derf5585]

Mutiny is the crime of conspiring to disobey an order that a group of similarly-situated individuals (typically members of the military; or the crew of any ship, even if they are civilians) is legally obligated to obey.

from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutiny

[sgriff17]

Threatening a Mutiny...gotta love those HIGHER CLASS cruise passengers.

[mbisson]

Somebody did some World Class negotiating! I thought the first offer wasn't too bad, Cunard showed they meant business with customer service with the offer! How nice to see!;)

 

They'll probably just cost average it and bump up the future ticket prices a few bucks each.

[derf5585]

They'll probably just cost average it and bump up the future ticket prices a few bucks each.

 

Maybe they have insurance

Maybe they will sue the azipod manufacturer

[derf5585]

----------- * Commentary by Editor Anne Campbell:

 

--------------- * Cunard Caves In

Unless you avoid the news, you know that a few passengers aboard Queen Mary 2 were up in arms about the ship skipping three ports on a 12-day New York to Rio de Janeiro voyage. They childishly threatened to "mutiny" by staging sit-ins and loudly complaining to the press. One of the ship's four propulsion pods malfunctioned, requiring the ship to cruise at slower speeds, and to bypass scheduled stops at St. Kitts, Barbados and Salvador in order to reach Rio on schedule. Unfortunately, Cunard Line caved in to the world-wide media frenzy and on Friday, Jan. 27 (the day QM2 arrived in Rio), increased its initial offer of a 50 percent refund to a full 100 percent refund, including airfare.

 

If it had happened on any other ship but Queen Mary 2, the media would have ignored the story. Malfunctioning pods and similar mechanical problems are nothing new in the cruise industry. Normally, passengers are given an apology and a small on-board credit ranging from $50 to $150. A fairly recent maritime invention, pods increase the ship's maneuverability, enabling the Captain to parallel-park at a pier and even turn the ship 360 degrees unaided by tugboats. Since they were first added to cruise ships in the late 1990s, malfunctioning pods have been the chief cause of mechanical breakdowns. The national media ignored these incidents until it happed to the Queen Mary 2, the most famous liner in the world.

 

Of course no one reads the small type on the passenger ticket, a contract you agree to when you board the ship. It clearly states that the Captain has the right to substitute or skip ports for any reason. In other words, you're not entitled to one penny of a refund. So even a small credit is a nice gesture. After all, you're still aboard the ship, staying in a cabin, eating the food and partaking in all the vessel's services. That's what you bought, and you still have it. A ship is floating resort, after all. Do you expect a refund from a resort if bad weather keeps you off the beach?

 

So, a handful of greedy passengers created enough drama aboard the world's most famous ship that Cunard Line caved in and gave money back that wasn't due. It's a bad precedent. If you happen to be sailing on any ship but QM 2 when weather or mechanical problems cause the ship to bypass a port, it's unwise to try the same theatrics. Be grateful for the on-board credit. If you're upset, use the onboard credit to chill out in the spa or test the waters at blackjack.

[Winchester]

WOW !! What a bitter bunch of folks you are.

 

I thought this was a pro PASSENGER site.

 

It is very sad y'all can't see the passenger's point of view. I am thrilled for the deal that appeared, in my opinion, too late in the game. The big giant was felled by individuals using all the power and media attention they could find.

 

GOOD FOR THEM !!

 

I think the passengers DID deserve to be given the option to leave the trip when it was decided that the prop couldn't be repaired.

 

And from all accounts I have heard the prop didn't malfunction. It was damaged in collision with something. Someone caused it to break.

 

I also speak from personal experience with an engine breadown. On the 12/27 trip, the Maasdam, lost a prop to electrical failure. The captain was very good at telling us they were working on the problem. We skipped St. Kitts and were late getting back to Norfolk. People who had their own air had to change their return flights 2x because the line couldn't decide when or if the ship would get into Norfolk. They failed to give us information on the port they were heading for and when we might be expected to get there. AND while he wasn't telling us these things the crew offered all sorts of comments about putting us off in some port or another along the way and drydocking the ship to fix the problem. So we got differing information about that, and could not plan several days of our trip. And for compensation $56. Many of the folks who had the air problems deserved MUCH more.

 

So I am here to celebrate the deal that finally emerged and hope y'all will give the passengers a break.

[wearytraveller]

I like it. I like it. More Winchester More!

[dtwtraveler]

derf5585S

a handful of greedy passengers created enough drama aboard the world's most famous ship that Cunard Line caved in and gave money back that wasn't due.

 

I felt as you do until I read that they lost their one day in Rio. This meant that most of the Brits and many others not only weren't able to make the three stops, but they wouldn't even see Rio! Many boarded in NYC and were shipbound (except for the brief FL stop) all the way to Rio! So it really was reduced to an "Atlantic Ocean Crossing to Rio" where many of them disembarked! I now suspect that if they hadn't raised hell in the early part of the "cruise", they would have received no compensation if they had just started complaining after they were told that they wouldn't even see Rio! At that point, they might have chained themselves to the beds, because Cunard wouldn't have had time to come up with any compensation - not even the 50%!