Carnival CEO Admits: “I Don’t Know When We’ll Sail Again”

[Paula_MacFan]

https://cruising.org/news-and-research/press-room/2020/june/clia-announces-voluntary-suspension-of-cruise-operations-from-us-ports

 

WASHINGTON, DC (19 June 2020)—Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA) issued the following statement today to announce that the association’s ocean-going cruise line members will voluntarily extend the suspension of cruise operations from U.S. ports until 15 September 2020.

“Due to the ongoing situation within the U.S. related to COVID-19, CLIA member cruise lines have decided to voluntarily extend the period of suspended passenger operations.  The current No Sail Order issued by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will expire on 24 July, and although we had hoped that cruise activity could resume as soon as possible after that date, it is increasingly clear that more time will be needed to resolve barriers to resumption in the United States.

“Although we are confident that future cruises will be healthy and safe, and will fully reflect the latest protective measures, we also feel that it is appropriate to err on the side of caution to help ensure the best interests of our passengers and crewmembers.  We have therefore decided to further extend our suspension of operations from U.S. ports until 15 September.  The additional time will also allow us to consult with the CDC on measures that will be appropriate for the eventual resumption of cruise operations. 

“This voluntary suspension applies to all CLIA members to which the No Sail Order applied (vessels with capacity to carry 250 persons or more). CLIA member cruise lines will continually evaluate the evolving situation and make a determination as to whether a further extension is necessary.”

In 2018, the cruise industry supported over 421,000 jobs in the United States, with every 30 cruisers from U.S. ports supporting one American job. Each day of the suspension of cruise operations in the U.S. results in a total loss of approximately $110 million in economic activity and up to 800 American jobs. For more information about the economic impact of the cruise industry in the United States, including the top ten states benefitting from cruise activity, please visit: CLIA 2018 Economic Analysis.

[npcl]

17 hours ago, cscurlock said:

The courts.  As long as the CDC doesn't provide guidelines for reopening cruising.  Then the courts could provide a rule in their favor.  You cant really tell Disney they can open with guidelines but then tell another company I'm sorry we don't have any plan for you.  That starts to look very unfair.   If they do provide very difficult standards to allow them to resume cruising then at least there is something to discuss.  Right now its all smoke until the CDC comes up with guidelines for this its pointless to talk of resuming in the US.  They can only delay guidelines for so long or legal action I am sure will be taken.  I am sure the CDC is struggling coming up with fair rules for this because ships are one of the worst places to catch covid due to the enclosed space.

Disney and anything inside of a state is outside of CDC control. CDC only can control at the us borders or state lines. No control inside of a state. There it can advise but no enforcement authority.

[nho9504]

Well, with FL is shaping up to be the next epic center of the new wave of outbreaks, with over 3000 daily new cases reported the previous 2 days, my gut feeling is people can forget about sailing out of the FL ports thru the rest of the year unless the upsurging get suppressed.  Note - the previous hot spots are SE FL but now the Central FL is quickly catching up, in a scary speed.

 

True, DeSantis has been trying to defend this as the avg age of new cases are in the 30's almost across state except Dade where it is over 40, but the ICU bed capacity has gone from over 60% available in Apr/May to now down to only 25% available since the state reopen.

 

CLIA and the cruise lines KNEW they would not be able to resume sails by July, even before this 2nd wave of infection but they want to get as many dump people to book ahead as possible and pray for their lucky stars would line up in time to make that happen...  Nice try but a predictable failure nonetheless.

[rkacruiser]

7 hours ago, Hlitner said:

I think there needs to be some recognition that the term "science" has been completely bastardized by both scientists and politicians.  It is now used as a political hammer to justify personal agendas.  One great example is the entire mask thing where "science" originally told us NOT to wear masks and that they were dangerous.  Tony Fauci, when recently asked about this had a typical Fauci response which was that "circumstances changed."   That is not true science which means you develop a theory and then must prove it (scientifically).  These days many of the so-called scientists simply implement their theories prior to proving anything and then later "revise" their advice.  As I have posted (elsewhere on CC) in the early days of the HIV/AIDS epidemic I was at a conference where Tony Fauci and several other esteemed scientists told us, we have many Aids vaccines under development and should have a vaccine in the near future.  Or course that was 35 years ago and it was true that there were many vaccines in testing...including some that made it to Phase 3 trials (similar to several COVID-19 candidates).  None of these vaccines cleared Phase 3 and to this day we still have no HIV/Aids vaccine.

 

I would also take you back a few decades ago when "science" told us that we were entering an Ice Age (it was actually a cover on Time Magazine) before they told us we were in a Global Warming trend before they finally decided to just tell us we are suffering from "Climate Change."  My scientific response was that we have had "Climate Change" since the earth was formed and will always have "Climate Change."  So now you hear the term "scientific consensus" which is actually not science at all since real science is about absolute proof..not "consensus, I think the proper response is to say "prove it.".   Personally, I will believe that we have a COVID-19 vaccine when a candidate clears Phase 3 Trials, with good results.  That might happen in 2021 or it may never happen.

 

Can cruise ships operate in this COVID-19 world while giving some reasonable guarantee of safety to passengers/crew?  I have no clue and neither does anyone else.  But there are sure a lot of theories and wishful thinking.

 

Hank

 

An excellent post; thank you for writing it.  

 

 

[ontheweb]

4 hours ago, mnocket said:

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but only political appointees can be fired at will.  The majority of CDC workers are career employees and are difficult to fire due to union affiliation. 

He is a department head. That would make him a political appointee, not a civil servant. Also his spot on the task force for the  virus would also be a political appointment which would allow the President that option of replacing him.

[capriccio]

1 hour ago, ontheweb said:

He is a department head. That would make him a political appointee, not a civil servant. Also his spot on the task force for the  virus would also be a political appointment which would allow the President that option of replacing him.

 

According to a March 13th article in The Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2020/03/time-capsule-2-exceptional-dr-fauci/607957/) the president wouldn't have the ability to replace him at NIH but I think you are correct about his spot on the task force (which wasn't addressed in the article).

 

To the best of my knowledge, though, directors of NIH institutes, like Fauci, serve “at the pleasure of the president” and so could be removed. If I’m wrong on that, will update. Update: Several NIH veterans have written in to say that Fauci’s position is officially different from that of the NIH director, and is not directly a presidential-political appointment.

 

A MotherJones article last month (https://www.motherjones.com/coronavirus-updates/2020/04/trump-fauci-coronavirus/) stated that removing Dr. Fauci from the task force is within Trump's purview but removing him from NIH would be a more complicated process.

 

Fauci, according to the NIAID, is a “Title 42” employee. That’s a special federal employment category for scientists and specialized consultants who work mostly in the Health and Human Services Department or the Environmental Protection Agency. While they don’t have normal civil service protections, they can only be fired through a specific process.

 

“There would have to be cause,” said William Wiley, a former chief counsel to the chair of the Merit Systems Protection Board, a quasi-judicial federal agency that hears federal employment disputes. “He would have to be fired for a valid reason.”

 

Federal workplace law experts also noted that Trump himself can’t fire Fauci, who is not a presidential appointee.

 

Katz said Trump would need to instruct one of Fauci’s nominal bosses, HHS Secretary Alex Azar or National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins, to remove him. At least in theory, they could refuse.

 

[Daniel A]

12 minutes ago, capriccio said:

 

According to a March 13th article in The Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2020/03/time-capsule-2-exceptional-dr-fauci/607957/) the president wouldn't have the ability to replace him at NIH but I think you are correct about his spot on the task force (which wasn't addressed in the article).

 

To the best of my knowledge, though, directors of NIH institutes, like Fauci, serve “at the pleasure of the president” and so could be removed. If I’m wrong on that, will update. Update: Several NIH veterans have written in to say that Fauci’s position is officially different from that of the NIH director, and is not directly a presidential-political appointment.

 

A MotherJones article last month (https://www.motherjones.com/coronavirus-updates/2020/04/trump-fauci-coronavirus/) stated that removing Dr. Fauci from the task force is within Trump's purview but removing him from NIH would be a more complicated process.

 

Fauci, according to the NIAID, is a “Title 42” employee. That’s a special federal employment category for scientists and specialized consultants who work mostly in the Health and Human Services Department or the Environmental Protection Agency. While they don’t have normal civil service protections, they can only be fired through a specific process.

 

“There would have to be cause,” said William Wiley, a former chief counsel to the chair of the Merit Systems Protection Board, a quasi-judicial federal agency that hears federal employment disputes. “He would have to be fired for a valid reason.”

 

Federal workplace law experts also noted that Trump himself can’t fire Fauci, who is not a presidential appointee.

 

Katz said Trump would need to instruct one of Fauci’s nominal bosses, HHS Secretary Alex Azar or National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins, to remove him. At least in theory, they could refuse.

 

As long as he retains a title and salary, he could be placed in charge of the mail room or motor pool though.

[Roberto256]

6 hours ago, mnocket said:

 Correct me if I'm wrong, but only political appointees can be fired at will.  The majority of CDC workers are career employees and are difficult to fire due to union affiliation. 

 

Sure, but the Director of the CDC is nominated by the president.

 

Then, (s)he makes a bad statement ... fired by the president.

 

Rinse, lather, repeat...

 

However, I haven't read anything that suggests anyone in the administration objects to the CDC's no sail order,

so there is nothing to precipitate this.

 

 

Also, after reading more posts in this thread...

 

The CDC has issued the no sail order.

It seems like it would be rather punative to try and fire the director of the National Institutes of Health over a CDC action.

 

Edited June 19, 2020 by Roberto256

[PrincessLuver]

The CEO said it best.... he does not know when they will cruise again and neither does anyone else as COVID - 19 is accelerating world wide with 150,000 cases alone today. Cruise Critic has become COVID Critic, 😁

[nbsjcruiser]

On 6/17/2020 at 11:48 AM, caribill said:

 

I agree 100%. With a cloth mask you are protecting others.

 

But with a N95 mask you are protecting yourself as well as others.

Agreed

[ALWAYS CRUZIN]

Well now its September 15 MAYBE longer.

[Sunwanabe]

When they don't know when, this is probably the most truthful statement yet. Sept is wishful thinking. Can the cruise companies hold out financially until mid 2021? This is more realistic expectation for cruising again. So many obstacles to overcome.

[chipmaster]

On 6/19/2020 at 1:31 PM, nho9504 said:

Well, with FL is shaping up to be the next epic center of the new wave of outbreaks, with over 3000 daily new cases reported the previous 2 days, my gut feeling is people can forget about sailing out of the FL ports thru the rest of the year unless the upsurging get suppressed.  Note - the previous hot spots are SE FL but now the Central FL is quickly catching up, in a scary speed.

 

True, DeSantis has been trying to defend this as the avg age of new cases are in the 30's almost across state except Dade where it is over 40, but the ICU bed capacity has gone from over 60% available in Apr/May to now down to only 25% available since the state reopen.

 

CLIA and the cruise lines KNEW they would not be able to resume sails by July, even before this 2nd wave of infection but they want to get as many dump people to book ahead as possible and pray for their lucky stars would line up in time to make that happen...  Nice try but a predictable failure nonetheless.

 

Didn't I hear at a press conference that once summer arrived and it was warm the virus would just go away, it would be a miracle!

 

 

[chipmaster]

On 6/19/2020 at 6:31 AM, Hlitner said:

I think there needs to be some recognition that the term "science" has been completely bastardized by both scientists and politicians.  It is now used as a political hammer to justify personal agendas.  One great example is the entire mask thing where "science" originally told us NOT to wear masks and that they were dangerous.  Tony Fauci, when recently asked about this had a typical Fauci response which was that "circumstances changed."   That is not true science which means you develop a theory and then must prove it (scientifically).  These days many of the so-called scientists simply implement their theories prior to proving anything and then later "revise" their advice.  As I have posted (elsewhere on CC) in the early days of the HIV/AIDS epidemic I was at a conference where Tony Fauci and several other esteemed scientists told us, we have many Aids vaccines under development and should have a vaccine in the near future.  Or course that was 35 years ago and it was true that there were many vaccines in testing...including some that made it to Phase 3 trials (similar to several COVID-19 candidates).  None of these vaccines cleared Phase 3 and to this day we still have no HIV/Aids vaccine.

 

I would also take you back a few decades ago when "science" told us that we were entering an Ice Age (it was actually a cover on Time Magazine) before they told us we were in a Global Warming trend before they finally decided to just tell us we are suffering from "Climate Change."  My scientific response was that we have had "Climate Change" since the earth was formed and will always have "Climate Change."  So now you hear the term "scientific consensus" which is actually not science at all since real science is about absolute proof..not "consensus, I think the proper response is to say "prove it.".   Personally, I will believe that we have a COVID-19 vaccine when a candidate clears Phase 3 Trials, with good results.  That might happen in 2021 or it may never happen.

 

Can cruise ships operate in this COVID-19 world while giving some reasonable guarantee of safety to passengers/crew?  I have no clue and neither does anyone else.  But there are sure a lot of theories and wishful thinking.

 

Hank

 

Hank, well summarized..

 

I think science needs to be start with a hypothesis / theory then backed with data.   As an engineer I am faced with impossible problems daily and we have theories / hypothesis that we must then craft careful experiments to prove or disprove.

 

What I find ludicrous is the positioning thought on masks.     All of them was made to make a convenient conclusion at the time.   But if you aren't logical and take experts at face value you'd have been hoodwinked.     

 

There never was any downside for masks, at the same time it is very difficult to craft a clean blind experiment.     But common sense suggest an obvious decision here.

 

I find humorous posts about N95 and people talking on and on about fitting, testing/training, again common sense about N95, versus surgical, versus cloth are obvious, but people like to focus on things that confirm their bias versus stepping back to focus on the obvious!    

 

[rkacruiser]

5 minutes ago, chipmaster said:

 

Didn't I hear at a press conference that once summer arrived and it was warm the virus would just go away, it would be a miracle!

 

 

 

The "miracle fairy" failed my biology class.  

[chipmaster]

On 6/19/2020 at 11:32 AM, Daniel A said:

 

Not to split hairs, but N95s are not masks - they are respirators.  They only provide protection when they are properly fitted to the wearer.  The only way to know if a N95 respirator is providing the intended respiratory protection is to undergo fit testing as mandated by OSHA and NIOSH standards when they are used in hospitals or other types of facilities.  Fit testing is a complex procedure and should only be performed by a person who has been properly trained and certified to administer fit tests.

 

People should not be deluded into thinking they are any more protected just because they bought a N95 on the internet and slapped it on in place of a surgical type mask.  (Plus, there are unscrupulous vendors out there selling dust masks as N95 respirators because they look alike.)

 

Having N95, a 3m respirator, now surgical, and also my Base Camp, ill fitted or not, or N95 using only the top strap as I have and many others they will be far more effective at protecting me from you and you from me than a surgical or a cloth.

 

So I disagree with you on level of protection.  I have no clear personal experience with the widely reports imitation N95 etc... but I suspect even there the knock off N95 will be better than the disposable surgical provided it isn't made with something far cheaper or worse, toxic, but personal inspection will tell you that!  

 

I've personally been curious as to the knock off Base Camp that I see, almost want to buy a few directly from China to see.    

[Daniel A]

1 hour ago, chipmaster said:

 

Having N95, a 3m respirator, now surgical, and also my Base Camp, ill fitted or not, or N95 using only the top strap as I have and many others they will be far more effective at protecting me from you and you from me than a surgical or a cloth.

 

So I disagree with you on level of protection.  I have no clear personal experience with the widely reports imitation N95 etc... but I suspect even there the knock off N95 will be better than the disposable surgical provided it isn't made with something far cheaper or worse, toxic, but personal inspection will tell you that!  

 

I've personally been curious as to the knock off Base Camp that I see, almost want to buy a few directly from China to see.    

 

@chipmaster  You are certainly able to choose your own beliefs about levels of protection but you aren't able to make your own facts.  Air, like water chooses the path of least resistance.  Because the N95 is a true respirator it provides increased resistance to particles in the air especially as it continues to filter out airborne particles which remain trapped in the filter.  Thus, air would like to bypass the resistance of the filter during inhalation.  The way it does this is to find voids between the edges of the mask and the face of the wearer.  When a N95 respirator has these voids in the seal with the wearers skin, the unfiltered air goes directly through those voids and introduces air from the environment into the wearers lungs during inhalation.  Even if the N95 fits snugly when first donned, speaking, turning the head, tilting the head and laughing or crying can cause voids that permit the contaminated air to enter the respiratory tract. Merely donning an N95 might provide a certain measure of protection, but it just might not and definitely won't if not properly fitted.  Humorous as you might find this topic, you are free to choose what you want to wear but it's probably ill advised to be suggesting to others information which isn't accurate.

Edited June 20, 2020 by Daniel A

[chipmaster]

33 minutes ago, Daniel A said:

 

@chipmaster  You are certainly able to choose your own beliefs about levels of protection but you aren't able to make your own facts.  Air, like water chooses the path of least resistance.  Because the N95 is a true respirator it provides increased resistance to particles in the air especially as it continues to filter out airborne particles which remain trapped in the filter.  Thus, air would like to bypass the resistance of the filter during inhalation.  The way it does this is to find voids between the edges of the mask and the face of the wearer.  When a N95 respirator has these voids in the seal with the wearers skin, the unfiltered air goes directly through those voids and introduces air from the environment into the wearers lungs during inhalation.  Even if the N95 fits snugly when first donned, speaking, turning the head, tilting the head and laughing or crying can cause voids that permit the contaminated air to enter the respiratory tract. Merely donning an N95 might provide a certain measure of protection, but it just might not and definitely won't if not properly fitted.  Humorous as you might find this topic, you are free to choose what you want to wear but it's probably ill advised to be suggesting to others information which isn't accurate.

 

No disputing a thing you said, but sadly if you wear and observe a large majority of the air still will be filtered and redirected, more so than a NO mask, a loosely fitted surgical/cloth.    Yes air escapes around the side, actually have been wearing and observing what happens with them all.  At the gym most definitely air flow modified and dispersed with significant still filtered, also in inhalation also filtered with some bleed thru.

 

Having wore them for hours on end of various kind both in Shanghai, Beijing when the air PM2.5 was above 200+ just optically inspection of the mask tells me all I need to know.

 

Like debating a good and bad pair pair of rain gear whether it helps keep you total dry, partial dry or soaking wet.   

 

Infection is not just exposure it is total viral load that your lungs are exposed.   I guess I choose any and all means to reduce the load while trying to carry on a life and if I happen to be a carrier not infect my fellow human and hopefully some protection for me from those less considerate.   

 

Many seem to focus on everything why it is less than effective and why they don't

 

I could argue in the end we all die, so why wear a seat belt, eat health, exercise or whatever to live longer, LOL 

[nho9504]

5 hours ago, chipmaster said:

 

Didn't I hear at a press conference that once summer arrived and it was warm the virus would just go away, it would be a miracle!

 

 

 

Whoever said that and whoever believed in that need to brush up their geographic knowledge that there are countries only 5 degrees from the equator, and are very hot year round, still are suffering from the SARS-COV-2...

 

Anybody knows the country named Singapore? 

[d9704011]

5 minutes ago, nho9504 said:

 

Whoever said that and whoever believed in that need to brush up their geographic knowledge that there are countries only 5 degrees from the equator, and are very hot year round, still are suffering from the SARS-COV-2...

 

Anybody knows the country named Singapore? 

Although I view chipmaster as a troll we’re going to have to give this summer-time eradication theory a bit more time to prove false.  After all, the equinox was just today!

[brisalta]

45 minutes ago, d9704011 said:

Although I view chipmaster as a troll we’re going to have to give this summer-time eradication theory a bit more time to prove false.  After all, the equinox was just today!

 

There is a lot of trolling going on including the one that treated Time magazine as if it was a scientific journal.

[d9704011]

8 hours ago, brisalta said:

 

There is a lot of trolling going on including the one that treated Time magazine as if it was a scientific journal.

I’d likely agree with you.  Which post are you referring to?

[PrincessLuver]

18 hours ago, chipmaster said:

 

Didn't I hear at a press conference that once summer arrived and it was warm the virus would just go away, it would be a miracle!

 

 

 

Yes it is disappearing and we are the world's best at handling COVID-19.....everyone wishes they were the US because we have got out act together and are crushing COVID-19 like no one else.....I think that is the official party line?

[c-boy]

14 minutes ago, PrincessLuver said:

 

Yes it is disappearing and we are the world's best at handling COVID-19.....everyone wishes they were the US because we have got out act together and are crushing COVID-19 like no one else.....I think that is the official party line?

[chipmaster]

13 hours ago, d9704011 said:

Although I view chipmaster as a troll we’re going to have to give this summer-time eradication theory a bit more time to prove false.  After all, the equinox was just today!

 

Actually I didn't believe it one bit, but you can't read my sarcasm, LOL