Facing South Florida - Carnival Pollution

[BNBR]

7 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

I am not disputing what you or the video is saying. However, this is not something new that Carnival has been charged with. They have been charged with similar actions over the years, have paid fines, placed on probation, and have been threatened with more severe sanctions numerous times including as recent as last year. However, until something actually happens like banning Carnival ships from US ports, this is just the media spinning people up like you who actually seem to believe some serious sanctions will actually occur as a result of this.  History has proven over and over again that this never happens. 

 

Please provide a reference to similar historical actions taking by this judge against Carnival.  You are downplaying just how serious it is and simply incorrect in your assessment.  

 

Carnival certainly believes serious sanctions may occur.

Edited January 13, 2020 by BNBR

[PhillyFan33579]

1 hour ago, BNBR said:

 

Please provide a reference to similar historical actions taking by this judge against Carnival.  You are downplaying just how serious it is and simply incorrect in your assessment.  

 

Carnival certainly believes serious sanctions may occur.

If/when Carnival is hit with serious sanctions, I will concede your opinion and the video is correct. But anything short of restricting them from using US ports is not going to hurt them. Carnival can easily handle a fine no matter how large it is or deal with any kind of probation. You are naive if you think a judge is going to implement sanctions so severe that they would jeopardize the future survival of Carnival. 

[FSHLOT]

3 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

If/when Carnival is hit with serious sanctions, I will concede your opinion and the video is correct. But anything short of restricting them from using US ports is not going to hurt them. Carnival can easily handle a fine no matter how large it is or deal with any kind of probation. You are naive if you think a judge is going to implement sanctions so severe that they would jeopardize the future survival of Carnival. 

Sorry, but i think CCL would be responsible for their own future. 

No matter how many try and defend this company they are still on a list of repeat offenders, thats a fact. Not sure if this judge has that kind of power but CCL better make sure they are compliant. Sure CCL can pay the fines, and your ok with just paying fines? 

Also, any kind of sanction is serious. But as long as they can pay the fine, all is well? hmmm

[PhillyFan33579]

13 minutes ago, FSHLOT said:

Sorry, but i think CCL would be responsible for their own future. 

No matter how many try and defend this company they are still on a list of repeat offenders, thats a fact. Not sure if this judge has that kind of power but CCL better make sure they are compliant. Sure CCL can pay the fines, and your ok with just paying fines? 

Also, any kind of sanction is serious. But as long as they can pay the fine, all is well? hmmm

Just to clarify, I do not agree with Carnival’s actions and I am not supporting Carnival’s actions in any way. I just don’t think anything significant is going to happen to Carnival as a result of this. I think most people in this country would agree the rules are not the same for everyone, whether you are talking about rich corporations or rich individuals. 

[SERK]

I think at the very most they could restrict Princess Cruise (Carnival Corp Subsidiary) from ports since they were the culprit. 

[BNBR]

22 minutes ago, FSHLOT said:

Sorry, but i think CCL would be responsible for their own future. 

No matter how many try and defend this company they are still on a list of repeat offenders, thats a fact. Not sure if this judge has that kind of power but CCL better make sure they are compliant. Sure CCL can pay the fines, and your ok with just paying fines? 

Also, any kind of sanction is serious. But as long as they can pay the fine, all is well? hmmm

 

31 minutes ago, PhillyFan33579 said:

If/when Carnival is hit with serious sanctions, I will concede your opinion and the video is correct. But anything short of restricting them from using US ports is not going to hurt them. Carnival can easily handle a fine no matter how large it is or deal with any kind of probation. You are naive if you think a judge is going to implement sanctions so severe that they would jeopardize the future survival of Carnival. 

 

 

The suggestion that Carnival can just continue paying fines and avoid real punishment is simply ignorant of what is going on.  The sanctions and being banned from US ports was a very real threat.  To the point where the CEO and Chairman are now required to be at every court hearing, which is rather unheard of.  They were forced to hire a chief compliance officer and implement substantial changes, with a major issue being the culture within the company.

 

This judge can absolutely bar Carnival from using US ports.  Would it actually get to that point?   Heck no.  Because Carnival isn't going to continue flaunting the law and the judges orders at this point.  They didn't take it serious enough, and as of this last year, Carnival is VERY serious about it, because the punishment will be catastrophic.  This is federal court, and the judge has made it clear she isn't messing around.  It was also suggested that these are criminal charges and Mickey is being looked at accordingly.

 

 

[SERK]

That’s not gonna happen. Why? MONEY.  In the end, they will get scolded with hefty fines and that’s it. There will be behind the scenes deals made between lawyers and judge and that will be the end.  The cruise ships are still gonna be sailing. 

[BNBR]

8 minutes ago, SERK said:

That’s not gonna happen. Why? MONEY.  In the end, they will get scolded with hefty fines and that’s it. There will be behind the scenes deals made between lawyers and judge and that will be the end.  The cruise ships are still gonna be sailing. 

 

Still sailing, of course, and they will have resolved their environmental crimes as well.  It's a win/win and how its supposed to be.

[sanmarcosman]

I watched it in its entirety and I am not impressed by the reporting. 

[BNBR]

13 minutes ago, sanmarcosman said:

I watched it in its entirety and I am not impressed by the reporting. 

 

Very enlightening commentary.  Maybe you would like to expand on your thoughts just a tad?

[chengkp75]

21 hours ago, FSHLOT said:

That video shows a lot more then any discussions with our professionals here on CC.

 

Some of the cover-ups they are talking about is crazy!!

I personally didn't see anything new in the video that hasn't been discussed by me here on CC.  I did see a few minor points that were incorrect, but not enough to get into a further discussion about.

[chengkp75]

21 hours ago, BNBR said:

 

It's not old news.  They were just back in court.  Try watching the segment....

 

This was a story from this morning I posted, because it's relevant.  Jim's first show of the new year.

Actually, it is old news, in that everything they reference is to the June hearing, and in the December hearing the judge was more satisfied with Carnival's performance than at any previous time.

[chengkp75]

20 hours ago, BNBR said:

 

It's ok, it's a long segment so I don't blame you for not watching.  Go watch the last minute or two.  This is addressed in the segment.  Carnival is the worst and repeatedly offending, while doing the least to clean it up.

 

There is a reason Carnival is going through this and not other companies.

 

It was a top down corporate policy of environmental destruction, then a cover-up, etc.  It's quite appalling how bad this was, and I didn't get that from previous stories about it.  

Having been involved with two shipping companies that were placed on environmental probation by the DOJ, in cases very similar to Carnival's, I can say that in both instances, and in every other case of environmental pollution by a shipping company that I have read about, that it is always a case of corporate culture.  The only difference is that Carnival continued to "not get the message" after being placed on probation.  And, anyone who read the court documents from the 2016 hearing, or the June hearing, or many of the articles written about them at the time, would have heard about the judge's contempt for the corporate culture.  It is plainly described in the Court Appointed Monitor's report that triggered the June hearing.

[chengkp75]

20 hours ago, BNBR said:

They talk about how the fine isn't adequate and could get worse, too...  And it may not be that simple.

Yet, what the judge makes apparent in the June hearing, and why the second fine was less than the first, which is a new and unusual outcome of a violated probation in one of these environmental cases, is that she is trying to bring Carnival into the ISM (International Safety Management) culture that all shipowners are supposed to follow in all aspects of their operations, which places emphasis on "the process", and learning from the mistakes and not on a "blame culture" (as the print reporter mentioned).  

[chengkp75]

5 hours ago, CdrescherRBL152 said:

So this piece leaves me with a question. If all of the "dumpings" since they pleaded guilty have been accidental, how does that show any wrong doing?  Next question, seeing as the original event was only found because of a whistle blower, How many like events have other cruise lines committed?  And finally, they claim that it is wrong for Carnival to clean up a ship prior to an inspection. I will only say this, I have been in the transportation industry for over 30 years. Every company I have ever worked for has brought every vehicle due for an inspection of any kind, into the shop a few days before hand to make sure that it will pass. That is simply good business, how is what Carnival is accused of any different?

Whether an environmental discharge is intentional or accidental, the shipowner and the licensed officers onboard are still responsible for the discharge, and it is still illegal.  While I won't say that all the other cruise lines are completely innocent of these kinds of violations, both NCL and RCI have been found guilty of them, the cruise industry as a whole is probably the best segment of the maritime industry, sadly, in environmental compliance, which is important when you figure that cruise ships account for only 5% of world shipping.  Both of those cruise lines have embraced the environmental compliance, and have worked compliance into their corporate culture, and while accidental discharges may still happen, what differentiates them from Carnival is that it gets reported, and not covered up.

 

What differentiates what Carnival did from what your experience in transportation was, is that I doubt that your mechanics would cover up for a driver who had taken a vehicle to an outside mechanic and converted the vehicle in an illegal manner in order to save fuel or whatever.  And, your company did not tell the drivers that they needed to improve fuel consumption, however they could, and corporate didn't want to know how, and then send out teams to tell the company's mechanics to look for specific possible violations and to correct those and not tell anyone that they happened.  Doing normal maintenance in advance of an inspection is, as you say, normal, but covering up illegal activities is not.  Carnival's actions are similar to Volkswagen's purposely programming their diesel engined car computers to change settings when connected to an emissions testing device.

[BNBR]

11 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Yet, what the judge makes apparent in the June hearing, and why the second fine was less than the first, which is a new and unusual outcome of a violated probation in one of these environmental cases, is that she is trying to bring Carnival into the ISM (International Safety Management) culture that all shipowners are supposed to follow in all aspects of their operations, which places emphasis on "the process", and learning from the mistakes and not on a "blame culture" (as the print reporter mentioned).  

 

Right, and if they don't make the changes to their culture, then Carnival risks $10M per day in fines, which is a substantial increase.

[chengkp75]

4 hours ago, BNBR said:

 

You couldn't be more wrong.  Jump to 8 minutes in to the video.  It's incredibly serious.  They are under threat to be barred from ports.  The founder has been requested to be in court for all hearings, threats of criminal charges, etc.

The threat of barring all Carnival brand ships from the US is and was merely a threat to wake up Carnival's management, it was never really going to happen.  The most that would have happened would have been for the worst offending ships on the monitor's list to be barred for a year or two.

[BNBR]

9 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Carnival's actions are similar to Volkswagen's purposely programming their diesel engined car computers to change settings when connected to an emissions testing device.

 

And VW got absolutely slaughtered for that, as they should.  I'm glad Carnival seems to be making the right changes.  VW got hit for $2B.

Edited January 13, 2020 by BNBR

[BNBR]

3 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

The threat of barring all Carnival brand ships from the US is and was merely a threat to wake up Carnival's management, it was never really going to happen.  The most that would have happened would have been for the worst offending ships on the monitor's list to be barred for a year or two.

 

That's pretty much what I said in another post.  It was never going to happen, and that's because Carnival recognized that the judge is not playing games and they were going to make the changes necessary.  There was no way Carnival wouldn't comply at that point.  The judge ordered the CEO and Chairman in to the courtroom for this.  I think June is when it really hit home.

Edited January 13, 2020 by BNBR

[chengkp75]

4 hours ago, BNBR said:

 

Please provide a reference to similar historical actions taking by this judge against Carnival.  You are downplaying just how serious it is and simply incorrect in your assessment.  

 

Carnival certainly believes serious sanctions may occur.

Heck, Princess was fined for dumping plastic back in 2006 or 2008 (can't remember which), and this was pointed out by the judge in June, that after more than a decade, they are still dumping plastic.  The fine back then was the largest environmental fine for a vessel at the time, just as the 2016 fine was the largest at that time.  What may have gotten to Carnival finally was the threat of daily fines of $1 million, increasing to $10 million if certain milestones were not met.

[BNBR]

1 minute ago, chengkp75 said:

Heck, Princess was fined for dumping plastic back in 2006 or 2008 (can't remember which), and this was pointed out by the judge in June, that after more than a decade, they are still dumping plastic.  The fine back then was the largest environmental fine for a vessel at the time, just as the 2016 fine was the largest at that time.  What may have gotten to Carnival finally was the threat of daily fines of $1 million, increasing to $10 million if certain milestones were not met.

 

Yup, that was my point.  The other poster suggested Carnival will just continue paying the fines and nothing is really going to happen.  Which is not at all what is going on.

Edited January 13, 2020 by BNBR

[chengkp75]

2 hours ago, SERK said:

I think at the very most they could restrict Princess Cruise (Carnival Corp Subsidiary) from ports since they were the culprit. 

If you look at the court appointed monitor's report for the first two years of probation, there were 22 Carnival ships that had at least one environmental violation, spread over nearly every brand at Carnival.

[chengkp75]

2 minutes ago, BNBR said:

 

Yup, that was my point.  The other poster suggested Carnival will just continue paying the fines and nothing is really going to happen.  Which is not at all what is going on.

Not sure if you've seen the thread that discussed the June hearing:

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2668195-judges-june-3rd-decision-re-carnival-corp-sanctions/

 

and I've posted a lot of my opinions about Carnival's actions and how I perceive they are moving ahead both based on the June hearing, but also the December hearing.

 

I believe that Carnival is making moves in the right direction, and while the plastic straw and single use container program was mere window dressing for the June hearing, what I have seen based on the December hearing is that they are trying to change the culture (though Arison may not be fully onboard), but that they have a long way to go, and it is going to cost a lot more money than they have allocated for compliance.  Both of the companies that I've worked for that were under probation set a "no budget for compliance" policy, meaning that they would pay whatever it cost to make compliance a living and daily part of everyone's work onboard the ships, and in the corporate offices.

 

[BNBR]

8 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Not sure if you've seen the thread that discussed the June hearing:

 

https://boards.cruisecritic.com/topic/2668195-judges-june-3rd-decision-re-carnival-corp-sanctions/

 

and I've posted a lot of my opinions about Carnival's actions and how I perceive they are moving ahead both based on the June hearing, but also the December hearing.

 

I believe that Carnival is making moves in the right direction, and while the plastic straw and single use container program was mere window dressing for the June hearing, what I have seen based on the December hearing is that they are trying to change the culture (though Arison may not be fully onboard), but that they have a long way to go, and it is going to cost a lot more money than they have allocated for compliance.  Both of the companies that I've worked for that were under probation set a "no budget for compliance" policy, meaning that they would pay whatever it cost to make compliance a living and daily part of everyone's work onboard the ships, and in the corporate offices.

 

 

Something I find a bit ironic, is that Arison owns the Miami Heat.  And "Culture" is probably the most famous word around these parts when it comes to the team.  We are famous for "Culture."

 

Here is a good article about the new compliance officer just posted:

https://www.law.com/corpcounsel/2020/01/10/carnivals-first-compliance-officer-rushing-to-prove-value-of-new-centralized-system/?slreturn=20200013121625

 

Carnival absolutely seems to be going in the right direction. 

 

Their most recent court appearance, which Arison attended, was just this last Wednesday:

 

https://apnews.com/6faf000c46d194c6347ee56fc76b8851

Edited January 13, 2020 by BNBR

[chengkp75]

15 minutes ago, BNBR said:

Carnival absolutely seems to be going in the right direction.

It is way too early to tell whether this is correct or not.  They had a compliance officer before, who had the responsibility, but not the authority, to enforce compliance.  And, based on the January hearing, the judge is not convinced that the company is moving in the right direction, though I would say from personal experience, that this is going to take a long time (which is why the DOJ sets up a 5 year probation), and that violations will continue to happen, but the important thing is the process, whereby the company learns from its mistakes and writes improvements to policies and procedures to prevent them from happening again.

 

Arison and Donald were both at the previous hearing as well, which may have been in October and not December (memory fading), but that makes the TV segment that much more out of date.