Federal judge threatens to temporarily block Carnival ships from docking at U.S. port

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, azbirdmom said:

 

In reading through the list of violations, I saw that several mentioned ground up foil wrappers from butter, coffee stirs, etc. with the food waste.  I was thinking that this was meant to address part of the problem.  I guess we will know more later today.

While that will have some effect, there is always non-food items mixed with food, and it merely takes training of the dishwash crew to properly sort things out.  And, yes, I remember seeing some of these things on the list, but they are only one of many different types of violations, many that go to the core of Carnival's commitment to the environment than just umbrellas and straws.  These are band-aid fixes, they need to do deep surgery to fix their corporate culture.  Aside from the bald list of violations, read the full report of the auditor team (not all 205 pages, but skim the first 80 or so) and you will find that the auditors found fundamental flaws in Carnival's implementation of their Environmental Compliance Plan.

[azbirdmom]

14 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

While that will have some effect, there is always non-food items mixed with food, and it merely takes training of the dishwash crew to properly sort things out.  And, yes, I remember seeing some of these things on the list, but they are only one of many different types of violations, many that go to the core of Carnival's commitment to the environment than just umbrellas and straws.  These are band-aid fixes, they need to do deep surgery to fix their corporate culture.  Aside from the bald list of violations, read the full report of the auditor team (not all 205 pages, but skim the first 80 or so) and you will find that the auditors found fundamental flaws in Carnival's implementation of their Environmental Compliance Plan.

 

Agree.  I have read a couple of the auditor's reports because I generally like to go to the source and not just trust the media's assessment of a situation.  I actually posted a link to the first report and full list of initial violations in the earlier thread.  There are far worse things mentioned than the food waste contamination problems, but these specific actions will mean a change in the customer experience which could be part of why they are publicizing it.  I guess we will learn more about other motivations behind this announcement later today.

[richsea]

That statement from Carnival is nothing more than public relations BS doing nothing more than paying lip service to the problem, while also implementing cost cutting (cut backs) to help their bottom line.

I doubt there will be a ban, due to the negative impact on the affected local economies. I think that the only way to change the company, or industry culture is much higher fines, and the harshest penalty allowed by law levied on the executives of the company.

MAKE IT HURT.

Edited June 3, 2019 by richsea

[JimmyVWine]

37 minutes ago, azbirdmom said:

 

In reading through the list of violations, I saw that several mentioned ground up foil wrappers from butter, coffee stirs, etc. with the food waste.  I was thinking that this was meant to address part of the problem.  I guess we will know more later today.

One would hope that eliminating single-use plastics would have been done irrespective of the violations that are being addressed in court.  Many businesses, towns, cities and even states are already moving in this direction without the threat of legal compulsion hanging over their heads.

 

One item that I did note in the Carnival letter is sure to have many clutching their pearls:

• Shampoo and body wash will be distributed in pumps in all staterooms, suites and spa facilities

If PCL follows suit, we are sure to hear from those who will bemoan the installation of pumps in their suite tubs and showers.

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, azbirdmom said:

 

Agree.  I have read a couple of the auditor's reports because I generally like to go to the source and not just trust the media's assessment of a situation.  I actually posted a link to the first report and full list of initial violations in the earlier thread.  There are far worse things mentioned than the food waste contamination problems, but these specific actions will mean a change in the customer experience which could be part of why they are publicizing it.  I guess we will learn more about other motivations behind this announcement later today.

Here are some quotes from my posts on the Carnival thread where Heald's "notice" was shown as well:

 

This is like they are saying, "if you'll put up without these items, and the other things we will be discontinuing" we will be in full compliance, when in fact their violations run from Oil Record Book falsifications to venting ozone depleting refrigerants to the atmosphere and just a host of violations that cover every single Annex of MARPOL (each annex of MARPOL (Marine Pollution Convention) covers a different type of pollution:  oil, air emissions, refrigerants, garbage, sewage, etc).

 

 

This is like Oz saying "pay no attention to the pollution we are doing behind the curtain".  This just goes to show, to me, that they still don't get it.  They should come completely clean and admit to things that passengers would never see, and get ahead of what could be a defining moment for the corporation.

 

I find this statement to be insulting.

[JimmyVWine]

5 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I find this statement to be insulting.

I see it as being completely disconnected from the legal proceeding.  It is a statement designed to let passengers know about upcoming changes resulting from the decision to cut back on single use plastics.  I doubt that the author intended this statement to be a reaction to or an apology for the conduct that gave rise to the violations.  Bad timing I would say, as some might try to draw a link between the two.  But the elimination of single use plastics is a front burner issue making the timing coincidental, even though it looks suspect.  In fact, my town is voting on a ban tomorrow and many towns, cities and states also have this issue up for consideration as I type.  So I'd like to think that the statement is in line with that sense of timing and not an insulting response to a much larger compliance issue.  But I suppose we'll never know.

[Ombud]

3 minutes ago, JimmyVWine said:

One would hope that eliminating single-use plastics would have been done irrespective of the violations that are being addressed in court.  Many businesses, towns, cities and even states are already moving in this direction without the threat of legal compulsion hanging over their heads.

 

One item that I did note in the Carnival letter is sure to have many clutching their pearls:

• Shampoo and body wash will be distributed in pumps in all staterooms, suites and spa facilities

If PCL follows suit, we are sure to hear from those who will bemoan the installation of pumps in their suite tubs and showers.

About time! That elite / suite upgraded bath amenities kit needs to be eliminated. Too much unneeded plastic waste. The little gold mesh bag is 'cute' but filled with single use plastics. Maybe nicer pen / paper instead for elites / suites? They'll want an 'extra'

[MissP22]

18 minutes ago, richsea said:

That statement from Carnival is nothing more than public relations BS doing nothing more than paying lip service to the problem, while also implementing cost cutting (cut backs) to help their bottom line.

I doubt there will be a ban, due to the negative impact on the affected local economies. I think that the only way to change the company, or industry culture is much higher fines, and the harshest penalty allowed by law levied on the executives of the company.

MAKE IT HURT.

Who do you think is going to pay for those fines?

[richsea]

12 minutes ago, MissP22 said:

Who do you think is going to pay for those fines?

Us, and the stockholders. But they’re in a catch 22 situation; larger increases could result in less bookings, with customers going to competition. And, as I said, executives have to personally fear the consequences of  non compliance. as chengkp75 says, they have to change the corporate culture.

i don’t know if the other cruise lines operate like Carnival, I suspect that many do, but just haven’t been caught yet. 

If in order to fully comply with environmental regulations, prices must increase, I don’t think most would complain, except possibly those who still have their heads in the sand over the state of our planet.

[Micahs Grandad]

2 hours ago, MissP22 said:

Who do you think is going to pay for those fines?

Stockholders and perhaps they will delay/postphone upgrades and repairs to their fleet.

 

They are always going to set pricing in order to maximize profits.

[donaldsc]

He is levied a fine of a measly 20 million dollars.  If they did not care about the initial fine of 40 million, why does anyone think that they will care about 20 million.  They should have thrown the book at them.  Ban them from from all American ports.  Fine them several hundred million.  Throw the executives in jail.

 

That might get their attention.  A 20 million fine is just round off error to them.

 

DON

[azbirdmom]

4 minutes ago, donaldsc said:

He is levied a fine of a measly 20 million dollars.  If they did not care about the initial fine of 40 million, why does anyone think that they will care about 20 million.  They should have thrown the book at them.  Ban them from from all American ports.  Fine them several hundred million.  Throw the executives in jail.

 

That might get their attention.  A 20 million fine is just round off error to them.

 

DON

 

Agree it seems meager for the violations reported but we don't know if the judge agreed yet https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-06-03/carnival-in-us-court-over-pollution-from-its-cruise-ships?fbclid=IwAR1tsOvpVRF9H1hni5RHKUp4vPgHeIa2BA1yQaYEU7QXJy0Ks4tWaLnLsnc

[pms4104]

14 minutes ago, donaldsc said:

He is levied a fine of a measly 20 million dollars.  If they did not care about the initial fine of 40 million, why does anyone think that they will care about 20 million.  They should have thrown the book at them.  Ban them from from all American ports.  Fine them several hundred million.  Throw the executives in jail.

 

That might get their attention.  A 20 million fine is just round off error to them.

 

DON

Pocket change for a foreign-based (Panamanian) corporation that pays less than 2% of its total profits in total taxes to local, federal and foreign entities.

Edited June 3, 2019 by pms4104

[JimmyVWine]

12 minutes ago, donaldsc said:

He levied a fine of a measly 20 million dollars. 

FWIW, Judge Seitz is a "she".

And it bears noting that the parties reached an agreement that was submitted jointly to the court.  While a judge is not bound to enter the consent order, few judges would blow up such an agreement.  So while technically the judge levied a fine of $20 million, in reality, what she did was enter an order agreeing to the terms of the consent decree.  If the prosecution was satisfied with $20 million, why should the judge give the prosecution something it isn't asking for?

Edited June 3, 2019 by JimmyVWine

[JimmyVWine]

20 minutes ago, pms4104 said:

Pocket change for a foreign-based (Panamanian) corporation that pays less than 2% of its total profits in total taxes to local, federal and foreign entities.

There are compliance obligations with firm deadlines.  Failure to comply carry fines for certain violations of $1 million per day, and for other violations of $10 million per day.  If Princess doesn't play ball, those amounts are certainly not pocket change.

 

And surprisingly, the reduction of single use plastics referred to in the press release by Carnival is in fact accounted for in the agreement.

 

PCL Consent Order.pdf

Edited June 3, 2019 by JimmyVWine

[paradiselivin1]

I know they haven't learned a damn thing. Saw a wee bit of pump-out as we left Juneau last week...

[Expat Cruise]

I do not believe the judge will take this deal. But if the judge does take it the companies problems are far from over, three more years of probation and based upon the first two years I do not think they can complete without more issues.  

 

For real change to happen, the judge must come down very hard on the company. If this was a person with the same types of violations they would be going to jail.  Jail for the company would be to ban the ships from US Ports.

[neverbeenhere]

Let's see... 11 million passengers per year, $ 1.85 per passenger.  Seems fair. 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, paradiselivin1 said:

I know they haven't learned a damn thing. Saw a wee bit of pump-out as we left Juneau last week...

Really? What was the liquid being "pumped out"?  And how did you know it wasn't allowed?

[paradiselivin1]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

Really? What was the liquid being "pumped out"?  And how did you know it wasn't allowed?

It wasn't liquid and I have owned and operated plenty of boats with onboard heads....

[idahospud]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Really? What was the liquid being "pumped out"?  And how did you know it wasn't allowed?

I've been in Juneau with Princess twice in the last two weeks. The pollen is horrible right now, bad enough that the water has swirls of yellow in it. I could see where someone seeing it trailing the side of the ship might think it could be something else. Maybe that's what he's talking about?

 

Edit: sounds like he knows more about ships than I do. Sorry. 

Edited June 3, 2019 by idahospud

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, JimmyVWine said:

There are compliance obligations with firm deadlines.  Failure to comply carry fines for certain violations of $1 million per day, and for other violations of $10 million per day.  If Princess doesn't play ball, those amounts are certainly not pocket change.

 

And surprisingly, the reduction of single use plastics referred to in the press release by Carnival is in fact accounted for in the agreement.

 

PCL Consent Order.pdf 5.71 MB · 9 downloads

While this agreement does address much of the core issues with Carnival's compliance, and does include penalties for not meeting deadlines, I feel this is still a very moderate deal for them, and I'm not sure this judge will accept this.

 

And while the use of single use plastics is mentioned, it is merely one small part of the overall solid waste management plan that needs to be implemented.  And, the much more numerous and less visible types of violations are covered by the generic legalese of the "Restructuring of the Compliance Function" and "Unified Regulatory Reporting Policy" sections.

 

I also find that the "back channel" and "good old boys" attempt by the former USCG admiral now employed by Carnival to attempt to persuade the USCG to back Carnival's motion to change the terms of the probation, after having been turned down officially by the DOJ and USCG to be something that the judge may really take issue with.

[DrivesLikeMario]

Did you see this today?  Carnival Paying $20M

See, a fine and a reprimand.  Just like I figured. 

[JimmyVWine]

6 minutes ago, DrivesLikeMario said:

Did you see this today?  Carnival Paying $20M

See, a fine and a reprimand.  Just like I figured. 

1.  That is the jointly filed proposed settlement . The judge hasn’t approved it yet. 

 

2.  If you read the details of the proposal (link provided above) you will see that it is more detailed than a fine and a reprimand. 

[DrivesLikeMario]

I'd think the judge will approve it or modify it slightly.  So they have to implement some new programs.  What else would they offer than to do that to appease the court?  That's normal for any kind of litigation like this.  It's basically a hand slap and fines.  It happens all the time and I seriously doubt this will curtail the cruise industry's habits as a whole.  They might be a little more careful in how they do it, but they'll still do it.