Any updates on excursion only shore-leave?

[Oulton Jim]

8 hours ago, CruiserBruce said:

Agree, no one knows...it could vary by cruise line, or perhaps by sailing area...Alaska might allow freedom to roam off the ship, vs Europe might not, for example. You don't mention where you are asking about, or what cruise line, so even if we had specifics, we couldn't give them to you.

I feel certain that in the next coming months those passengers like myself who have always gone independently ashore will not be able to do so.  Perhaps accredited independent shore tour operators may be given some opportunity but again I cannot see how that could be done -IF the only passengers allowed ashore are accompanied by a ships representative......

[GrJ Berkshire]

2 hours ago, Oulton Jim said:

I feel certain that in the next coming months those passengers like myself who have always gone independently ashore will not be able to do so.  Perhaps accredited independent shore tour operators may be given some opportunity but again I cannot see how that could be done -IF the only passengers allowed ashore are accompanied by a ships representative......

Think this is the only way forward if Cruising is to restart. This will be the way until you have a vaccine and a certificate to say you have this up to date at each port. No vaccine, no boarding and no disembarking on your own in ports ( the new lepers of the 21st century I am afraid)

[ontheweb]

14 hours ago, mewanttocruise said:

Will you be required to book a shore excursion if you want to get off in port?

So far that is what has been happening in Europe. But as for the future, no one at this point really knows. I do fear that the cruise lines would like to keep it this way to enhance their revenue from shore excursions.

[jtwind]

This is interesting.  When Cuba opened up to cruise ships from the US, they had rules against leaving the ship without proof of certain types of tours.  The people who were dominating TripAdvisor's Cuba forum at the time were telling folks that the cruise lines 'could not hold the passengers hostage' according to some passenger agreement rules.  They convinced people to just walk off the ship and cause a big scene if the ship tried to stop them.  The cruise ships relented, the people making the rules got wind of passengers not following shore excursion rules, and cruising from the US to Cuba was cancelled.

[Oulton Jim]

3 hours ago, GrJ Berkshire said:

Think this is the only way forward if Cruising is to restart. This will be the way until you have a vaccine and a certificate to say you have this up to date at each port. No vaccine, no boarding and no disembarking on your own in ports ( the new lepers of the 21st century I am afraid)

I agree with what you say - it will not be long before some of the leading vaccine triallists will be posting their results.

[jtwind]

I want to bump this up a little.  Per my post #54, why were those people able to get off the ships in Cuba without approved tours?  Is there really a rule saying that the ship has to allow passengers off?

[cruisemom42]

On 10/19/2020 at 10:02 AM, jtwind said:

This is interesting.  When Cuba opened up to cruise ships from the US, they had rules against leaving the ship without proof of certain types of tours.  The people who were dominating TripAdvisor's Cuba forum at the time were telling folks that the cruise lines 'could not hold the passengers hostage' according to some passenger agreement rules.  They convinced people to just walk off the ship and cause a big scene if the ship tried to stop them.  The cruise ships relented, the people making the rules got wind of passengers not following shore excursion rules, and cruising from the US to Cuba was cancelled.

 

59 minutes ago, jtwind said:

Per my post #54, why were those people able to get off the ships in Cuba without approved tours?  Is there really a rule saying that the ship has to allow passengers off?

 

I'm not sure that your understanding of events is exactly correct, or maybe different ships handled this in different ways. I was on one of the early sailings to Cuba on Azamara.

 

I think the confusion was regarding what the US restrictions actually require in Cuba. Some cruise lines tried to insist that passengers HAD to take a tour with them in order to fulfill the requirement of not spending money to support the Cuban regime. However, the truth of the matter is that the onus is on the individual and not on the cruise line to ensure this. If, as an individual, you wish to research and book a private tour in Cuba and you can ascertain that it fits within the "People to People" initiative (and I think there is one other category but my memory is hazy on that), you should theoretically be able to advise the cruise line of your plans and they should let you go ashore.

 

To this end, Azamara actually gave us a form at check-in, and we could indicate whether we would fulfill the requirement by taking ship tours (strongly encouraged, of course, by the line) or we could mark that we had made our own arrangements and could check which box applied (e.g., "People to People" initiative).  IF you choose to do this, then it is up to you to keep records of what you did and how you ensured that your tour fell within the required boundaries, if you were ever to be questioned about it.

 

Also, by the way, the change that ended sailings to Cuba had nothing to do with cruises from the US being canceled -- it had everything to do with President Trump's agenda.

 

Not related to Cuba, but there have also been sometimes heated discussions regarding what ships can and cannot do regarding allowing passengers off ship. As a cruiser who prefers sightseeing independently, I believe the cruise line should not be able to compel you to take a ship tour PROVIDED you meet all requirements for entry into a specific country -- for example, when visiting St. Petersburg you have a Russian visa or have contracted with a private company that extends a temporary visa to you.

 

Cruise lines of course will do many things to make their tours appear preferable. For example, limiting access to tenders to those who have booked ship tours upon arrival in port. Or providing misinformation about private tours. Or saying that they will keep you safe in a COVID bubble. 

[jtwind]

21 minutes ago, cruisemom42 said:

Not related to Cuba, but there have also been sometimes heated discussions regarding what ships can and cannot do regarding allowing passengers off ship.

 

OK.  Let's not get into the Cuba thing specifically.  I'm very well informed on the situation.  The Tripadvisor forum was just a nasty place with folks encouraging others to break rules.  When folks would ask questions about how to comply with rules, the forum bullies would make fun of them.

 

Anywho, were these people correct in saying that there is a clause somewhere that prevents a cruise ship from telling you that the only way to get off the ship is to be on a cruise line excursion?

[Oulton Jim]

I fully subscribe to your last two paragraphs cruisemom42.

[cruisemom42]

25 minutes ago, fyree39 said:

 @cruisemom42 "I believe the cruise line should not be able to compel you to take a ship tour PROVIDED you meet all requirements for entry into a specific country -- for example, when visiting St. Petersburg you have a Russian visa or have contracted with a private company that extends a temporary visa to you."

 

A country can compel you to take a ship tour.  'Muricans are a bit self-centered when it comes to complying with requests/requirements they don't agree with or find to be too much trouble. We're special that way.

 

I would think that would fall into my mention of "provided you meet all requirements of entry into a specific country" -- yes?  In other words, if the country requires that you take a ship tour, then you must meet the requirement.

 

At any rate, do you know of any examples of this?  I've never encountered it, but I certainly haven't cruised everywhere....

 

And no, I don't regard myself as 'special' in any way. Definitely a rule follower. However, I think the rules should be clear, and often with cruise lines, they aren't very transparent.

Edited October 21, 2020 by cruisemom42

[jtwind]

Yes.  There was at least one cruise line that at one point very clearly spelled out that they would only let passengers off in Cuba if they were on cruise line tour.  People made a bunch of noise in Cuba stating having rights, and the ship let them go.  This was repeated on the Tripadvisor forum, and forum members encouraged others to follow suit.

 

I wonder if the current rules for cruise line only tours is dictated by the cruise line or the country/locale being visited?  Both parties should be concerned.

[Oulton Jim]

I would shudder to be on the logistical side of ship's tours team organiser! Just as a simple example -on a 3000 passenger ship -say 1500 want to get ashore -therefore they look for an organised excursion. Each 30 seater coach takes 15 [I assume] under present protocol -meaning the port has to provide for 100 coaches if my maths are correct.......can you imagine that in some of the less well organised ports. 

[cruisemom42]

1 hour ago, Oulton Jim said:

I would shudder to be on the logistical side of ship's tours team organiser! Just as a simple example -on a 3000 passenger ship -say 1500 want to get ashore -therefore they look for an organised excursion. Each 30 seater coach takes 15 [I assume] under present protocol -meaning the port has to provide for 100 coaches if my maths are correct.......can you imagine that in some of the less well organised ports. 

 

Keep in mind that at start-up of operations, those 3,000 passenger ships will probably only be at 50-60% occupancy. 

 

But still, I get what you are saying. It works in some of the European stops on these early cruises due to extensive tourism infrastructure. Not so sure how well it would work on a small Caribbean island...

[GrJ Berkshire]

2 hours ago, Oulton Jim said:

I would shudder to be on the logistical side of ship's tours team organiser! Just as a simple example -on a 3000 passenger ship -say 1500 want to get ashore -therefore they look for an organised excursion. Each 30 seater coach takes 15 [I assume] under present protocol -meaning the port has to provide for 100 coaches if my maths are correct.......can you imagine that in some of the less well organised ports. 

I can't see 3000 passenger ships surviving covid-19, I think the mega ships unless its cruises to nowhere have had their day?

[ontheweb]

12 hours ago, GrJ Berkshire said:

I can't see 3000 passenger ships surviving covid-19, I think the mega ships unless its cruises to nowhere have had their day?

But the major cruise lines are scrapping or selling off their smallest ships.

[sanger727]

13 hours ago, GrJ Berkshire said:

I can't see 3000 passenger ships surviving covid-19, I think the mega ships unless its cruises to nowhere have had their day?

 

Eh, in the near term I think the mega ships will be far better. If their goal is to top capacity at 50%, then they can get more people on these than the smaller ships. 

[Oulton Jim]

In the short term the mega-ships could carry more passengers - but the smaller ships should have more access to the ports