Carnival needs Judge approval to Sail

[jetsfan58]

If we were all held in "solitude" for our past historical issues; there would not be enough room to accommodate us all. As long as the Carnival Corporation learned a valued lesson from past incidents I would hope that a Judge would not hold that against them.

 

Who among us can cast that first stone?  Certainly not the presiding Judge. 

[chengkp75]

4 minutes ago, jetsfan58 said:

If we were all held in "solitude" for our past historical issues; there would not be enough room to accommodate us all. As long as the Carnival Corporation learned a valued lesson from past incidents I would hope that a Judge would not hold that against them.

 

Who among us can cast that first stone?  Certainly not the presiding Judge. 

That's the point.  Carnival has not learned a valuable lesson, since they continued to violate regulations while under probation, and according to the latest auditor report to the judge, they still have not learned that the "learning culture", where blame for an infraction is not placed on anyone, but rather the incident is used as a "learning tool" to find better ways to prevent it happening again in the future, is far more effective than the "blame culture", where someone who makes a mistake hides it or covers it up to prevent blame and punishment.  Sorry, repeat offenders get no breaks as far as I'm concerned.  This has been going on for over 12 years.  Also, according to the judge's statements, and Donald's statement about the status of compliance, two years after being required to come into compliance, they are still obviously a long way away.

[beerman2]

27 minutes ago, jetsfan58 said:

If we were all held in "solitude" for our past historical issues; there would not be enough room to accommodate us all. As long as the Carnival Corporation learned a valued lesson from past incidents I would hope that a Judge would not hold that against them.

 

Who among us can cast that first stone?  Certainly not the presiding Judge. 

There is no comparison to what Carnival did and what they were therefore " required" to do to correct it.

Sure most people have had  some past historical issue, but they pale in comparison to what Carnival has blatantly done and now side stepping the problem/probation.

 

Is the timing of this bad, yes. However had Carnival fulfilled their probation it wouldn't be a story.

Edited October 20, 2020 by beerman2

[bury me at sea]

24 minutes ago, jetsfan58 said:

If we were all held in "solitude" for our past historical issues; there would not be enough room to accommodate us all. As long as the Carnival Corporation learned a valued lesson from past incidents I would hope that a Judge would not hold that against them.

 

Who among us can cast that first stone?  Certainly not the presiding Judge. 

 

As of the last hearing it was obvious that Carnival had learned nothing and as a consequence was assessed a hefty fine.  They have yet to satisfy the court's order.

 

 

[Arizona Wildcat]

1 hour ago, jetsfan58 said:

If we were all held in "solitude" for our past historical issues; there would not be enough room to accommodate us all. As long as the Carnival Corporation learned a valued lesson from past incidents I would hope that a Judge would not hold that against them.

 

Who among us can cast that first stone?  Certainly not the presiding Judge. 

Carnival pled guilty in 2002.  Again in 2006.  Contested 2016 charges and pled guilty to charges including INTENTIONALLY dumping waste and sewage into the ocean and falsifying records .  In 2019 paid another fine and the President of Carnival agreed to a 5 year probation.  Carnival since has willfully not complied with what they agreed to 

If you or had this history we would be in jail.

[Arizona Wildcat]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

That's the point.  Carnival has not learned a valuable lesson, since they continued to violate regulations while under probation, and according to the latest auditor report to the judge, they still have not learned that the "learning culture", where blame for an infraction is not placed on anyone, but rather the incident is used as a "learning tool" to find better ways to prevent it happening again in the future, is far more effective than the "blame culture", where someone who makes a mistake hides it or covers it up to prevent blame and punishment.  Sorry, repeat offenders get no breaks as far as I'm concerned.  This has been going on for over 12 years.  Also, according to the judge's statements, and Donald's statement about the status of compliance, two years after being required to come into compliance, they are still obviously a long way away.

Cheng - Some years ago I long lined out of Sitka.  If I failed an inspection the consequences were really simple.  I either repaired or replaced the item cited - Immediately. - or I was not allowed to leave the dock.  Seems Carnival hoped this would go away.  They made a big problem huge when COVID started.  

 

[chengkp75]

17 minutes ago, Arizona Wildcat said:

Cheng - Some years ago I long lined out of Sitka.  If I failed an inspection the consequences were really simple.  I either repaired or replaced the item cited - Immediately. - or I was not allowed to leave the dock.  Seems Carnival hoped this would go away.  They made a big problem huge when COVID started.  

 

Carnival's had nothing but time the last 6 months, to complete all the items required.  As I've said before, I've worked for two companies that were on DOJ probation like this, and the one common thread between the two was the statement "there is no budget cap for environmental compliance".  Obviously, Carnival hasn't learned this lesson yet.

[BlerkOne]

I think Disney is the only cruise line with a passing grade on environmental issues. IMO, judgement day is coming for NCL and Royal. Just a matter of time.

[tidecat]

4 hours ago, BlerkOne said:

I think Disney is the only cruise line with a passing grade on environmental issues. IMO, judgement day is coming for NCL and Royal. Just a matter of time.

I believe you're referring to the Friends of the Earth scorecard, which carries no legal weight. I'm sure other lines are probably taking notice of Carnival's situation, though.

 

Disney, at least in Florida, would have capacity to manage some of their waste streams through the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which provides many "municipal" services to the parks.

[BlerkOne]

30 minutes ago, tidecat said:

I believe you're referring to the Friends of the Earth scorecard, which carries no legal weight. I'm sure other lines are probably taking notice of Carnival's situation, though.

 

Disney, at least in Florida, would have capacity to manage some of their waste streams through the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which provides many "municipal" services to the parks.

I think that is true. The other cruise lines certainly have been guilty of disrespecting the environment in the past - there are no innocents. It will be interesting to see how the precedent applies to future violators.

[PhillyFan33579]

8 hours ago, jetsfan58 said:

If we were all held in "solitude" for our past historical issues; there would not be enough room to accommodate us all. As long as the Carnival Corporation learned a valued lesson from past incidents I would hope that a Judge would not hold that against them.

 

Who among us can cast that first stone?  Certainly not the presiding Judge. 

Are you kidding me or are you just on some really good drugs? So judges should not be allowed to punish someone if they have done something wrong in their past? Police officers shouldn’t be allowed to arrest someone if they have done something wrong in their past? If I killed someone in your family but learned a valuable lesson and won’t do it again, I shouldn’t be held accountable for killing someone?

[jetsfan58]

My strong belief remains that if an individual or company commits a crime against humanity or another entity they should be adequately punished. However, that does not means that we should banish them from existence. Through the years, Carnival has been nothing but stellar in providing me and my family with a great sailing vacation. I am not on the Board of Directors so I really can't concern myself with "how and when" they get "reprimanded" for inappropriate activities. That will be left up to the Powers That Be.   

 

I truly believe in total redemption and forgiveness. This is what I was taught and I still value humans as "flesh" creatures capable of mistakes. Those mistakes should not "condemn" as it is not our right to "Judge". We were not Blessed with that power. I am concerning myself with eventually getting back to family fun Cruising; I will leave the "Technical Rules" stuff to Carnival.  

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, jetsfan58 said:

My strong belief remains that if an individual or company commits a crime against humanity or another entity they should be adequately punished. However, that does not means that we should banish them from existence. Through the years, Carnival has been nothing but stellar in providing me and my family with a great sailing vacation. I am not on the Board of Directors so I really can't concern myself with "how and when" they get "reprimanded" for inappropriate activities. That will be left up to the Powers That Be.   

 

I truly believe in total redemption and forgiveness. This is what I was taught and I still value humans as "flesh" creatures capable of mistakes. Those mistakes should not "condemn" as it is not our right to "Judge". We were not Blessed with that power. I am concerning myself with eventually getting back to family fun Cruising; I will leave the "Technical Rules" stuff to Carnival.  

So, who's right is it to "Judge" Carnival?  You seem to be chastising the judge for doing her appointed job, and ensuring that a probation period, where it is determined whether the individual, or corporation, has actually learned the lesson, is completed.  And, the judge is not banishing Carnival from existence, she is merely forcing Carnival to meet the same restrictions as every other ship afloat on the oceans today.  It's very simple, pay the money, fix the problems, and the judge will let you get back to operations.  If they show they can actually follow the rules, then that is redemption.  Redemption should be earned, not merely granted.  But, if they go back and do it all over again, then there should not be any forgiveness.

Edited October 21, 2020 by chengkp75

[jetsfan58]

4 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

So, who's right is it to "Judge" Carnival?  You seem to be chastising the judge for doing her appointed job, and ensuring that a probation period, where it is determined whether the individual, or corporation, has actually learned the lesson, is completed.  And, the judge is not banishing Carnival from existence, she is merely forcing Carnival to meet the same restrictions as every other ship afloat on the oceans today.  It's very simple, pay the money, fix the problems, and the judge will let you get back to operations.  If they show they can actually follow the rules, then that is redemption.  Redemption should be earned, not merely granted.  But, if they go back and do it all over again, then there should not be any forgiveness.

Maybe my heart is a forgiving "heart" that was implanted at my birth. I personally know individuals that have "intentionally and/or unintentionally" committed crimes, paid for those crimes many times and are still "held" in judgement by our society. Some of the individuals still can't find "honest" work even though they have "Paid" our society by serving time in an institution. Many employers look the other way when an individual speaks of a past "record". Should we continue to allow those employers to judge them? If so, they may never be "totally" free.

 

My point is that Carnival has to "atone" for their "own" actions. Carnival has to Judge Carnival first. There have to be directives and actions from those in charge. I am not asking the judge to "look the other way" in any means. I am asking that "fairness" be exemplified as it pertains to these incidents.  Do we know if the judge is a Cruise enthusiast? She may dislike the thought of Cruising? There are too many variables in this to make a sound decision. Should this be treated like a "criminal" court matter? Should this be treated as a "Civil" court matter? Who knows. 

 

Many of the discussion points that I am reading appear to want to "get" Carnival? Again it is not about "getting" carnival as much as it is about Carnival learning and doing better.  

[Radiioman46]

Is it possible that the ships that have been salvaged help address the judge's concerns?

[chengkp75]

40 minutes ago, jetsfan58 said:

My point is that Carnival has to "atone" for their "own" actions. Carnival has to Judge Carnival first. There have to be directives and actions from those in charge

And here's the crux of the matter.  Carnival, and "those in charge" have been found guilty of these violations again and again.  The judge wants those "directives and actions", and Carnival is not producing them.

 

40 minutes ago, jetsfan58 said:

I am asking that "fairness" be exemplified as it pertains to these incidents.  

In my opinion, the judge has been overly lenient with Carnival.  The second fine was less than the first.  When the two shipping companies I've worked for were under DOJ probation, like Carnival, we were threatened with a ten-fold increase in fine for a violation of probation.

 

40 minutes ago, jetsfan58 said:

Do we know if the judge is a Cruise enthusiast? She may dislike the thought of Cruising? There are too many variables in this to make a sound decision. Should this be treated like a "criminal" court matter? Should this be treated as a "Civil" court matter? Who knows. 

While I am not a pollyanna by any means, I hold to the hope that petty thoughts like "do I like cruising?" by the judge would not be applied to her decisions.  As for civil vs. criminal, that is already written into the statutes that enabled MARPOL in the US, and they are criminal actions, and many, many people have been held to the same standards when violating these statutes.

 

40 minutes ago, jetsfan58 said:

Many of the discussion points that I am reading appear to want to "get" Carnival? Again it is not about "getting" carnival as much as it is about Carnival learning and doing better.  

This is a cruise oriented forum, with a parochial viewpoint, and many see anything that accuses the cruise industry of wrong doing as "out to get them".  As an industry insider, I see nothing in Judge Seitz's rulings that singles out Carnival, other than pointing out their apparent contempt for the court, both by continued violations while on probation, and by the corporate executives not deeming it important enough to attend court, unless ordered to do so.

 

Yes, it is about Carnival learning, and using that knowledge to get better.  However, over the past 12 years, Carnival has shown no inclination to learn anything from these incidents, and one of their top executives, the Chief Maritime Officer is accused of continuing to merely blame underlings and conduct root-cause investigations without all the interested parties contributing, which leads directly away from a corporate "learning" culture, and that is what Carnival needs a massive dose of, and it needs to come directly from the boardroom, and the Chairman on down to the lowest crew member. 

 

Carnival has been saying "I'm sorry, and we'll do better" for over a decade, and nothing has improved.  That obviously isn't working, so stronger measures are needed.

Edited October 21, 2020 by chengkp75

[chengkp75]

10 minutes ago, Radiioman46 said:

Is it possible that the ships that have been salvaged help address the judge's concerns?

Not much, it just means those ships will not be subject to audit any more.  The violations in the first year's auditor report went across every line in the corporation, and applied to the vast majority of the ships.

[jetsfan58]

6 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

And here's the crux of the matter.  Carnival, and "those in charge" have been found guilty of these violations again and again.  The judge wants those "directives and actions", and Carnival is not producing them.

 

In my opinion, the judge has been overly lenient with Carnival.  The second fine was less than the first.  When the two shipping companies I've worked for were under DOJ probation, like Carnival, we were threatened with a ten-fold increase in fine for a violation of probation.

 

While I am not a pollyanna by any means, I hold to the hope that petty thoughts like "do I like cruising?" by the judge would not be applied to her decisions.  As for civil vs. criminal, that is already written into the statutes that enabled MARPOL in the US, and they are criminal actions, and many, many people have been held to the same standards when violating these statutes.

 

This is a cruise oriented forum, with a parochial viewpoint, and many see anything that accuses the cruise industry of wrong doing as "out to get them".  As an industry insider, I see nothing in Judge Seitz's rulings that singles out Carnival, other than pointing out their apparent contempt for the court, both by continued violations while on probation, and by the corporate executives not deeming it important enough to attend court, unless ordered to do so.

 

Yes, it is about Carnival learning, and using that knowledge to get better.  However, over the past 12 years, Carnival has shown no inclination to learn anything from these incidents, and one of their top executives, the Chief Maritime Officer is accused of continuing to merely blame underlings and conduct root-cause investigations without all the interested parties contributing, which leads directly away from a corporate "learning" culture, and that is what Carnival needs a massive dose of, and it needs to come directly from the boardroom, and the Chairman on down to the lowest crew member. 

 

Carnival has been saying "I'm sorry, and we'll do better" for over a decade, and nothing has improved.  That obviously isn't working, so stronger measures are needed.

As an insider I really appreciate the knowledge that you are supplying. My daily goals always include learning something new. As a leader we can't just only want to lead during "good" times. We also must learn to be accountable for the "challenging" times. My concern is that Carnival realizes the serious nature of their actions. Can we be certain or do we know that the competition has not followed suit? I just don't want these episodes to be solely about "Carnival" only but more about "Industry" learnings for all organizations. I really hope this is not a means or an indication of "let's teach a lesson" to Carnival. If the judge chooses to make an "example" of Carnival that's certainly her prerogative. If that is the case then Carnival may need to appeal for another Judge to hear their issues.       

[Radiioman46]

I hope not to start a controversy, but do we know what all the allegations are against Carnival, and if any of them are totally unreasonable? Just asking...

[chengkp75]

50 minutes ago, jetsfan58 said:

As an insider I really appreciate the knowledge that you are supplying. My daily goals always include learning something new. As a leader we can't just only want to lead during "good" times. We also must learn to be accountable for the "challenging" times. My concern is that Carnival realizes the serious nature of their actions. Can we be certain or do we know that the competition has not followed suit? I just don't want these episodes to be solely about "Carnival" only but more about "Industry" learnings for all organizations. I really hope this is not a means or an indication of "let's teach a lesson" to Carnival. If the judge chooses to make an "example" of Carnival that's certainly her prerogative. If that is the case then Carnival may need to appeal for another Judge to hear their issues.       

Both of Carnival's main competitors, RCI and NCL have had convictions for environmental violations in the past.  I can't speak for RCI, but their last conviction was years ago.  I did work for NCL, at the time that the company was on DOJ probation for their environmental non-compliance, and I can tell you that it led to, as I say it, the "come to Jesus" moment, and a complete turn around in corporate thinking and culture with regards to not just environmental compliance, but regulatory compliance all together.  So, no, the judge is not trying to "make an example" of Carnival for having made violations in the past, she is, however, quite rightly, making an example of them for continuing to make violations and continuing to not create the corporate infrastructure needed to learn and abide by the environmental regulations.

[chengkp75]

38 minutes ago, Radiioman46 said:

I hope not to start a controversy, but do we know what all the allegations are against Carnival, and if any of them are totally unreasonable? Just asking...

The violations that Carnival pled guilty to are clear violations of the law, and every other ship in the world is expected to meet the exact same regulations.  These regulations are set out by the IMO in the MARPOL convention (MARine POLlution), and each signatory nation to the convention (which the US is one) passes "enabling legislation" that makes the terms and language of MARPOL into federal law.

 

Princess cruise lines was found by the USCG to have illegally discharged gray water that had overflowed into the ship's engine room bilges (and became "oily water" at this point, and should have been discharged as oily water, not gray water) in Alaska.  This led to investigations which found such practices as using "magic pipes", so called because they "magically" make oily water disapper overboard, without having gone through an oil content meter to determine if the oil content was within legal limits.  So, you have repeated discharges of potentially oily water without any monitoring or control, as mandated by MARPOL.  

 

Because of these violations, Carnival was brought to court by the DOJ, and found guilty and paid a $40 million fine, and placed on 5 years of probation, subject to auditing by a third party and a Court Appointed Monitor.  These auditors found hundreds of continued violations over the first two years of Carnival's probation, leading to them being hauled back into court to answer why they were not making any headway with compliance during probation.  This led to a second fine, this time of only $20 million, but with the proviso that certain benchmarks towards compliance would need to be met in a set timeframe, or the fines could start to accumulate at a rate of $1-2 million per day.  These daily fines have not been assessed to date.

 

The violations during probation run the gamut of environmental concerns, from water pollution (oil, sewage, garbage, plastics), to air pollution (refrigerant releases, burning improper fuels in emission control areas), to mishandling of toxic materials.  

 

You can read the CAM's report of the first two years of Carnival's probation, which goes into detail of the original violation and the court findings, as well as their findings during subsequent audits (warning 205 pages):

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/cz9pd8uwibtikar/First Annual Report of the Court Appointed Monitor - 2017-2018.pdf?dl=0

 

As part of the continuing probation, Carnival was asked to produce their "work list" of items still to be completed to bring the ships into full compliance, which they submitted a month or so ago, with their "priorities" for completing all the items (frankly, I can't believe that they still have not done all that is necessary, 3 years into the process, nor that the judge allowed this to drag out this long).  Based on this "work list", and the fact that the ships have been idle, a prime opportunity to get work done, the judge has said that everything has to be completed, and each ship in complete compliance before she will allow the ships to enter US waters.

[jetsfan58]

34 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

Both of Carnival's main competitors, RCI and NCL have had convictions for environmental violations in the past.  I can't speak for RCI, but their last conviction was years ago.  I did work for NCL, at the time that the company was on DOJ probation for their environmental non-compliance, and I can tell you that it led to, as I say it, the "come to Jesus" moment, and a complete turn around in corporate thinking and culture with regards to not just environmental compliance, but regulatory compliance all together.  So, no, the judge is not trying to "make an example" of Carnival for having made violations in the past, she is, however, quite rightly, making an example of them for continuing to make violations and continuing to not create the corporate infrastructure needed to learn and abide by the environmental regulations.

In your professional observation, would it be wise for Carnival also try and introduce the new "Covid" procedures into this latest conversation? I could envision them trying to "tie" together for future rationalization measures a plan for safe cruising as it pertains to Covid waste and proper disposal? At some vantage point the Safe Covid discussion is going to have to evolve. Would Carnival have a future "bargaining advantage" if they were the first to mention a full on plan of attack? If I were heading the Carnival organization, I would certainly want to attempt to "minimize" my return trip to a judge's court room.     

[bury me at sea]

1 hour ago, Radiioman46 said:

I hope not to start a controversy, but do we know what all the allegations are against Carnival, and if any of them are totally unreasonable? Just asking...

 

Apparently you have arrived at the party somewhat late.

 

We are way past the allegations stage, past the pled guilty stage, past the first probationary stage, past the found to be guilty of not meeting probationary terms and conditions stage.  

[BlerkOne]

1 hour ago, chengkp75 said:

Both of Carnival's main competitors, RCI and NCL have had convictions for environmental violations in the past.  I can't speak for RCI, but their last conviction was years ago.  I did work for NCL, at the time that the company was on DOJ probation for their environmental non-compliance, and I can tell you that it led to, as I say it, the "come to Jesus" moment, and a complete turn around in corporate thinking and culture with regards to not just environmental compliance, but regulatory compliance all together. 

 

Royal was banned from Glacier Bay for a while and in a curious and not that long ago move, declined to sign an agreement to sail in Glacier Bay after having been awarded a contract. Hmmmm.

 

Anyway, the judge has set a precedent, and if Royal or NCL screw up again, they should expect the hammer to come down.

[ProgRockCruiser]

3 hours ago, jetsfan58 said:

Maybe my heart is a forgiving "heart" that was implanted at my birth. I personally know individuals that have "intentionally and/or unintentionally" committed crimes, paid for those crimes many times and are still "held" in judgement by our society. Some of the individuals still can't find "honest" work even though they have "Paid" our society by serving time in an institution. Many employers look the other way when an individual speaks of a past "record". Should we continue to allow those employers to judge them? If so, they may never be "totally" free.

 

My point is that Carnival has to "atone" for their "own" actions. Carnival has to Judge Carnival first. There have to be directives and actions from those in charge. I am not asking the judge to "look the other way" in any means. I am asking that "fairness" be exemplified as it pertains to these incidents.  Do we know if the judge is a Cruise enthusiast? She may dislike the thought of Cruising? There are too many variables in this to make a sound decision. Should this be treated like a "criminal" court matter? Should this be treated as a "Civil" court matter? Who knows. 

 

Many of the discussion points that I am reading appear to want to "get" Carnival? Again it is not about "getting" carnival as much as it is about Carnival learning and doing better.  

Carnival Corp is not a single person with a soul (if you lean that way), but a corporation.  A corporation whose sole reason to exist is to make money doing what it does.  And until it becomes more more profitable to comply than to not, they will not comply.  It is like a built in tax.

 

They have seem to violated, repeatedly, so many conditions of the probation imposed as a result of being found or pleading guilty that they are like the thief who can't stop him/herself from stealing a car if the keys are left out, no matter how many times they've been busted for it. So maybe time for some more serious consequences.  I really don't like the idea of how it may impact my personal enjoyment of cruising in the future, but so be it if they deserve it.

 

So please don't paint them as a lost soul in need of redemption (despite my analogy to a human thief). They are a soulless corporation.

 

I make no judgements over the actions of the individuals supposedly in charge - the corporate game means they are just as much puppets to their shareholders as anyone - maybe they have to forego their souls to get into the game in the first place.  "Greed is good" isn't just a made up phrase by a made up character, it rules Wall Street.