Not a good sign......

[Host Jazzbeau]

I don't think that would stand up to a court challenge.  Recent cases have been very strong against governmental prior restraint.

[SusieQft]

2 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

I don't think that would stand up to a court challenge.  Recent cases have been very strong against governmental prior restraint.

That could well be true.  I certainly don't claim any legal expertise.  I was just quoting what is in the CDC order.  IMO, the whole process outlined there sort of reads more like a preliminary draft than the final word on the subject, anyway.

 

I think the only real teeth they have is whether or not to grant Conditional Sailing Approval, anyway.  I don't think they are threatening any other sanctions against cruise lines that don't follow their rules.

Edited November 21, 2020 by SusieQft

[Rivercruisevirgin]

Seeing the news from Princess (No US cruises till November `21) and HAL (All suspended till Mar 31), makes me really worried about the future of cruise lines....full stop.

I have a Splendor Caribbean cruise booked for Feb 5th, which for a number of reasons is clearly not gonna happen.

First up, its out of Miami, its longer than 7 days, further, we are flying from the UK (cant do that at moment), wont be able to renew ESTA and finally at the moment it would appear from our government that if we are to enjoy a more relaxed Christmas (families getting together) then the downside "may" be a 25 day lockdown!!

Also, for some reason, i cant even get into my manage account detail and wouldn't allow me to make dining reservations when i could - Strange??

 

I absolutely love Regent Cruises (and Oceania, which i have a lifted & shifted cruise booked in summer 2022) and i have so much sympathy for them, the industry and all of the fantastic crew, but once my cruise in February is cancelled, i shall this time request a refund, because in my opinion, sadly out of all the big cruise line holding companies, somebody is going to bite the dust and it could well be NCLH.

[rallydave]

8 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

I don't think that would stand up to a court challenge.  Recent cases have been very strong against governmental prior restraint.

Strongly disagree that the CDC order is not valid for two reasons. First as required by law the order states the USC (US code) which gives them the authority to issue the order. And second should any cruise line take the CDC to court win or lose the CDC would probably make life miserable with other issues the CDC does have the authority to control plus the time dragging thru appeals would be a disaster. 
 

To coin a phrase win a battle but lose the war. 

 

[loriva]

 

8 minutes ago, rallydave said:

And second should any cruise line take the CDC to court win or lose the CDC would probably make life miserable with other issues the CDC does have the authority to control plus the time dragging thru appeals would be a disaster. 

 

While I appreciate all the great insight I've gained from reading posts about Regent from rallydave, as a former U.S. Government employee I have to take exception to the above supposition.  USG employees swear an oath to the U.S. Constitution to serve the U.S. public.  While there are some bad apples in any group of people, the overwhelming majority of my former fellow Feds took their responsibilities very seriously.  Our job is never to undermine the work of individual U.S. citizens, including corporations.  Even if an individual employee wanted to try to make things miserable for a cruise line, oversight from the legislative branch would reveal such actions very quickly in my experience.

 

[rallydave]

8 minutes ago, loriva said:

 

 

While I appreciate all the great insight I've gained from reading posts about Regent from rallydave, as a former U.S. Government employee I have to take exception to the above supposition.  USG employees swear an oath to the U.S. Constitution to serve the U.S. public.  While there are some bad apples in any group of people, the overwhelming majority of my former fellow Feds took their responsibilities very seriously.  Our job is never to undermine the work of individual U.S. citizens, including corporations.  Even if an individual employee wanted to try to make things miserable for a cruise line, oversight from the legislative branch would reveal such actions very quickly in my experience.

 

Thanks for your insight. Was probably too strong in saying make thing miserable   As a former employee of Prime Contractor to NASA and Air Force have a lot of respect fir all the government employees do. Still believe the order is valid and subject to change to support the cruise lines and public. Right now it appears the order is lawful as written. 

[Pcardad]

I called Regent yesterday ands asked if I could book a 7 day and they said yes.

 

Try it.

 

Apparently, there is a lot of back-channel communications going on between the CDC and the cruise lines.

 

I expect the final resolution to be a required vaccine prior to sailing.

[rallydave]

8 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

I called Regent yesterday ands asked if I could book a 7 day and they said yes.

 

Try it.

 

Apparently, there is a lot of back-channel communications going on between the CDC and the cruise lines.

 

I expect the final resolution to be a required vaccine prior to sailing.

Exactly 7 days is not the issue as the order currently allows a maximum of 7 days. . The current order limits sailing snd marketing greater than 7 day cruises calling on US ports. The question should have ben could you book a greater than 7 day cruise that called in a US port. 
 

Agree it is likely a vaccine requirement will be added to the requirements and depending on the vaccine how long before sailing the vaccine will have to be given as immunity takes some time after injection and some vaccines require multiple injections. For sure the injections won’t be last minute and as time good on more data will cause the requirements to be further revised. 

[Pcardad]

Regent will sell you any cruise as of yesterday if there is availability....even those over 7 days and those travel to or from US ports. There is no official word from up high stopping these sails. 

[rallydave]

1 hour ago, Pcardad said:

Regent will sell you any cruise as of yesterday if there is availability....even those over 7 days and those travel to or from US ports. There is no official word from up high stopping these sails. 

Your original response only said 7. Well then guess the executives are betting on the current requirements being revised before they apply for Conditional restricted sailing. 
 

Will be interesting to see if NCLH or Carnival Corp are correct in their approaches. 

[SusieQft]

They will have to revise or at least clarify the order before even any of the 7 NIGHT cruises can sail.  I just checked, and Regent is not currently listing any 7 DAY/6 NIGHT or shorter cruises.  Perhaps the CDC really meant 7 nights, but that is NOT what the order says.  It is very common in the tourism industry to say "7 days" and it really means "6 nights."  Without clarification from the CDC I would not assume they meant 7 nights.

 

The ultimate answer is to require all passengers and crew to be vaccinated before sailing.  The sooner we get to the point that can be done, the sooner cruising can resume in earnest.

[rallydave]

15 minutes ago, SusieQft said:

The ultimate answer is to require all passengers and crew to be vaccinated before sailing.  The sooner we get to the point that can be done, the sooner cruising can resume in earnest.

And even that is not a total solution at least until the COVOD is completely gone..  Say a Regent shp is half full at l75 passengers the efficacity at 95% means 18 of the passengers could have or get the virus.  And, that doesn't include the crew.   Take one of the monstrocities at 1/2 occupancy that would be about 2500 passengers and 125 of them could not be protected.

 

So, even with the vaccine, another Seadream type situation is highly possible. 

[Pcardad]

I have news for you...and I posted this months ago too....the world will go on with or without Covid and so will cruising. The CDC doesn't care if a few people get sick...the cruises will resume. You will be required to get a vacinne before sailing and if you get sick it will be no different than if you get sick last year.  Life goes on.

[SusieQft]

2 hours ago, rallydave said:

even with the vaccine, another Seadream type situation is highly possible.

Perhaps possible but not very likely, and probably much less likely than a norovirus outbreak.  And there would definitely not be a Diamond Princess type situation.  If 95% of the people on the ship are immune, some of the others might get sick but it will not be a ship-board pandemic. 

 

In order to infect all the 5%, they would all have to be in close contact with each other.  That is unlikely since they will mostly be interacting with people among the other 95%.  That is the whole point of herd immunity.

Edited November 22, 2020 by SusieQft

[SWFLAOK]

28 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

I have news for you...and I posted this months ago too....the world will go on with or without Covid and so will cruising. The CDC doesn't care if a few people get sick...the cruises will resume. You will be required to get a vacinne before sailing and if you get sick it will be no different than if you get sick last year.  Life goes on.

I agree with you 100 percent. We are looking forward to getting the vaccine, just as we always get any vaccine that's available, including yellow fever. 

We had so many extremely ill people on our Singapore to Sydney Regent cruises last December, that I would welcome more mask wearing requirements, the elimination of buffets, and more isolation rooms. People with viral pneumonia were allowed to eat in the dining room, despite uncontrollable coughing. We complained about it, but we don't know if they did anything about it.

We were already onboard for this cruise from the previous cruise from Singapore to Singapore. We were screened for MERS on our arrival in Singapore since our flight from FLL was through Dubai. And we were screened with temperature checks and health questions at a number of our stops on our first cruise.

We left the ship for an excursion in Singapore, between our cruises, and had to wait in line with those boarding for the first time. No health checks were done when we were reboarding, and it took so long to reboard that I would never leave the ship again on a back to back cruise. Breakfast the next morning in the dining room was slow, and while waiting, we heard nearby large tables complaining about how long they had to wait for dialysis. One woman had never had dialysis before. I wondered whether I was still on the luxury cruise that I expected, or had ended up on a floating nursing home.

[howiefrommd]

On 11/20/2020 at 11:40 PM, Host Jazzbeau said:

I don't think that would stand up to a court challenge.  Recent cases have been very strong against governmental prior restraint.

Any regulation set forth during the "Rule Making Process" becomes law after being published in the CFR (after the final review process regarding comments received/reviewed).  In order to litigate this, the entity would have to file for remedy under the "Administrative Procedures Act (APA)."  They do not have the opportunity to enter Federal Court until they have exhausted all of the appeal process of the APA.  It is quite a lengthy and time consuming process.  Needless to say, it is also quite costly due to the byzantine process involved. 

[Bellaggio Cruisers]

According to the latest news reports, the vaccines will be available and people like me will be able to get it as early as February. Even if it’s in March or April, we will be able to sail again. 
We will wait for the vaccine before sailing again. There is light at the end of the tunnel!

sheila

[SusieQft]

20 hours ago, SWFLAOK said:

We left the ship for an excursion in Singapore, between our cruises, and had to wait in line with those boarding for the first time. No health checks were done when we were reboarding, and it took so long to reboard that I would never leave the ship again on a back to back cruise.

Is this a common occurrence on Regent?  In my experience so far on Crystal, they have had a separate line for continuing passengers to reboard.  I could not say if that is always the case, but for us it has been.  So I was very surprised to hear of Regent combining the lines for continuing and new passengers.  Does Regent sometimes or (hopefully) usually have a separate quicker line for reboarding?

[xrvlcruiser]

Karen,

 

No, it is not the usual way for returning passengers in most ports. Normally, continuing passengers go back on the ship with no issues.

 

Peggy

[snorkle lover]

Very curious to know others opinions about the vaccine and masks.

if we are able to get the vaccine prior to our cruise the end of September 

( London to Barcelona) .  Wondering if we will still need to wear a mask.

That is something I would not want to do. In my opinion it spoils the whole 

experience. Thoughts and I know these are just guesses. 

[Ladys Mom]

5 minutes ago, snorkle lover said:

Very curious to know others opinions about the vaccine and masks.

if we are able to get the vaccine prior to our cruise the end of September 

( London to Barcelona) .  Wondering if we will still need to wear a mask.

That is something I would not want to do. In my opinion it spoils the whole 

experience. Thoughts and I know these are just guesses. 

To me, it depends on how soon you are traveling.  Science can say the vaccine is 95% effective, what if I or my husband is in the 5% where it was not effective.  If we get vaccinated in February or March, and plan on cruising in the late Spring, I would still wear a mask and social distance as much as possible.  Although I am not a fan of the mask, at this point it is second nature to wear one as soon as I leave the house, even at the gym.  I guess it depends on your own comfort level.

[Pcardad]

If a vaccination is required, I seriously doubt a mask will be also.

[SusieQft]

So far most of the official recommendations say that masks will still be needed as the vaccine rolls out, even for those who have been vaccinated.  At some point after herd immunity kicks in, the majority of the medical pundits will probably stop saying that.  I will be very surprised if that happens much before the end of 2021, though.

 

Whether or not they will be required is another question.  They can be recommended but not required.  I do believe that properly worn proper masks would help, but the lack of common sense in formulating requirements and the ridiculously poor compliance even when they are required has worn me down to a state of total frustration.

 

If you are in a place where masks are required, and if they say unless you are vaccinated, everyone who does not want to wear a mask will just say they have been vaccinated.  If they want to require masks for anyone, it would almost have to be applied to everyone in order to be meaningful.

 

I am just hoping for the day that a certificate of vaccination will be the only COVID paperwork required to sail, and not a negative test within 3 days before sailing.  I do not want to risk being denied boarding due to a delay in getting my test results.

[Pcardad]

If Regent REQUIRES the vaccine to get on the ship, they won't require masks. There is no point if EVERYONE has the vaccine.

 

That would be like scotch taping yourself in the seat of your car if you have on a seatbelt.

 

And it has already begun.... https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/travel/1845598/qantas-airline-vaccine/

 

[mrlevin]

4 minutes ago, Pcardad said:

 

And it has already begun.... https://www.the-sun.com/lifestyle/travel/1845598/qantas-airline-vaccine/

 

 

Have any of the trials included pregnant women?  I wouldn't think the approvals forthcoming will include pregnant women or women who may become pregnant as there would be no way to identify potential for birth defects yet.

 

Also, if you have recovered from the virus (and have antibodies) would you still need to get vaccinated to travel?