Mandate the vaccine and establish a realistic start date

[leisuretraveler223]

55 minutes ago, Suncoastsailors said:

They are allowing vaccinated local nursing staff to attend the Super Bowl. Approved or emergency use is not the issue. 

 

This is a little bit of obfuscation on your part.  The NFL has opted to GIVE tickets to an event to front line workers.  They are not selling a product or conducting routine business.  The comparison would be if the NFL were requiring anyone attempting to buy a ticket and attend the event to first be vaccinated.  They are not, and they will not.

[chengkp75]

47 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

You get 74 pounds per week or something very close to that to live on unless you claim your housing benefit on top of that. And that housing benefit goes to your landlord directly.

 

There are different type the 182 is not so called means tested. After that you move onto income based JSA which is like the same 73 per week etc etc.

Yes, I saw that a single person gets 73 pounds/week, and a couple gets 112 pounds/week.  This is $400 USD (single) or $600 USD (couple) per month.  The mandatory minimum wage for a seafarer is $625/month, for a 40 hour work week, and any hours worked above 40/week are paid at 125% of the minimum.  So, a crew member getting the minimum, and working the usual 14 hour day, gets about $1200/month, or three times what they would get on the "dole".  The US average unemployment would be $1500/month, so just under what a minimum wage foreign crew job pays (and many states are much lower than this).  Using the average US minimum wage (each state varies) of $11.80, and an overtime rate of 125%, you get a minimum of over $5000/month.  Both figures show that they could earn more working on a ship than staying on the dole, but there is no mad rush for these jobs.

[Iamcruzin]

3 minutes ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

Masks have been approved for universal use. The Covid-19 vaccine is not approved.

Here in the States for the last year there has been a war between the maskers and the anti maskers. Anti maskers were throwing around their constitutional rights. Business was able to mandate their own rules in terms of mandatory masks while in the establishment.

[leisuretraveler223]

1 minute ago, Iamcruzin said:

Here in the States for the last year there has been a war between the maskers and the anti maskers. Anti maskers were throwing around their constitutional rights. Business was able to mandate their own rules in terms of mandatory masks while in the establishment.

 

There hasn't been a war.  There have been people that understand and accept masks are a long established reasonable public health tool.  And there are entitled idiots who can't handle having their "freedumbz" hurt.

[llawrence]

There are still many problems CDC is looking at...I have a friend that tested positive for covid after both doses.....she has no symptoms....went in for hand surgery and ended up at home in 7 day isolation....even if everyone on the ship was vaccinated and one person tested positive.....would that be as big of deal as it was a year ago?  I understand a congressman just tested positive after both doses. May not be that uncommon.  

 

[chengkp75]

1 hour ago, Suncoastsailors said:

Staff could be vaccinated,

Again, who coordinates the staff getting vaccinated, when they come from various countries, so how could the cruise line set a date without knowing how every country that crew comes from will deal with the vaccine?

31 minutes ago, Suncoastsailors said:

Every comment is so negative. What about a life time cruising ban if you get caught? 

And, who would enforce this ban?  It might work on each line, but do you really think that other cruise lines will ban someone just because the competition has done so?

 

1 hour ago, Suncoastsailors said:

Set a sail date based on data.

What data?  US vaccinations?  Indonesian vaccinations?  Whose government approvals?  Countries the ship sails to?  Countries the crew have to travel through to get to the ship?  Again, you are applying a simplistic approach to a complex problem.

[cured]

22 minutes ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

Really?  Literally NO ONE was thinking "hey, cruise lines should just mandate everyone get a vaccine even if they're not planning on cruising".  That is utterly nonsensical.

 

But for a cruise line, or any private entity to require someone to do something that is in fact NOT approved is opening themselves up to potential liability that no underwrite would touch with a ten foot pole.  The problem would come up not in those who refused, but in those that got it and then could argue culpability on the part of the cruise line for any impact the immunization might have.  No entity, government, public or private is going to require something not approved.

There are work arounds. I work for a government entity. Our group has all been vaccinated with their first doses. While the company is not going as far as mandating the vaccine, they are making work difficult for those that choose not to vaccinate.  Those vaccinated only have to quarantine for a few days, always paid, if they are directly exposed.  Those not vaccinated are required to quarantine for 14 days, unpaid, anytime they are directly or indirectly exposed.  That could add up to a lot of unpaid days.

Edited January 30, 2021 by cured

[orville99]

1 hour ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

I don't think there is a big focus on official approval right now. The concentration is on more emergency authorization use for other vaccines, as well as expanding availability, while also conducting studies to expand eligibility (kids).

 

Official approval might not come for a year or more.

Considering that we are all now in the middle of the largest clinical drug trial in history (more than 30 million participants and counting in the U.S. alone), with virtually no statistically significant adverse reactions, the FDA could easily make the decision to formally approve either or both vaccines by this spring.

[leisuretraveler223]

3 minutes ago, orville99 said:

Considering that we are all now in the middle of the largest clinical drug trial in history (more than 30 million participants and counting in the U.S. alone), with virtually no statistically significant adverse reactions, the FDA could easily make the decision to formally approve either or both vaccines by this spring.

Perhaps, but formal approval has alway involved more than the CDC simply making the declaration. All I'm saying is that there is no substantive need for it, and both the CDC and manufacturers are primarily focused on other related issues currently.

 

[orville99]

2 minutes ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

Perhaps, but formal approval has alway involved more than the CDC simply making the declaration. All I'm saying is that there is no substantive need for it, and both the CDC and manufacturers are primarily focused on other related issues currently.

 

The CDC doesn't make those decisions. The FDA is the sole authorizing entity in the U.S.

[Ocean Boy]

6 minutes ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

Perhaps, but formal approval has alway involved more than the CDC simply making the declaration. All I'm saying is that there is no substantive need for it, and both the CDC and manufacturers are primarily focused on other related issues currently.

 

Since formal approval by the FDA could do a lot to win over skeptics, I don't know that I would relegate it to the back burner. I think it could do a lot to remove some of the political overtones of an energency authorization.

[leisuretraveler223]

1 minute ago, orville99 said:

The CDC doesn't make those decisions. The FDA is the sole authorizing entity in the U.S.

That is correct.  Typing without thinking.  My bad.

[Iamcruzin]

21 minutes ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

 

There hasn't been a war.  There have been people that understand and accept masks are a long established reasonable public health tool.  And there are entitled idiots who can't handle having their "freedumbz" hurt.

Trust me it has been an undeclared Civil War here.

[leisuretraveler223]

Just now, Iamcruzin said:

Trust me it has been an undeclared Civil War here.

Dude, I AM here.  Where do you think "New England" is?

[leisuretraveler223]

1 minute ago, Ocean Boy said:

Since formal approval by the FDA could do a lot to win over skeptics, I don't know that I would relegate it to the back burner. I think it could do a lot to remove some of the political overtones of an energency authorization.

 

True. But those skeptics keep moving the goal line. And if that happens, they'll just denounce the "rushing through" of the formal approval process to invalidate the whole process.

 

There is no material gain to approval unless you have the ability for universal vaccination, and we don't (it's still not even approved in kids).  There is no compelling reason to expedite that process right now.

[Iamcruzin]

1 minute ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

Dude, I AM here.  Where do you think "New England" is?

Sorry I only saw England...  Then you know what I'm talking about.

[Ocean Boy]

2 minutes ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

Dude, I AM here.  Where do you think "New England" is?

Not in New York.😇

[Ocean Boy]

2 minutes ago, Iamcruzin said:

Sorry I only saw England...  Then you know what I'm talking about.

Awesome to see @leisuretravelerresponse with a laughing emoji. I knew that with time we could break that shell.😉😇

[Iamcruzin]

4 minutes ago, Ocean Boy said:

Not in New York.😇

With that said, there is always a war or protest or something going on in NY.

[lr657]

44 minutes ago, Ocean Boy said:

So come up with a viable plan. I don't know how anyone can look at the Diamond Princess and then have any interest in getting on a non-vaccinated ship.

 

 

Even after we are vaccinated, we will not sail if we can't feel safe on a cruise and enjoy our experience. Having non-vaccinated people on a cruise will require restrictions to protect them which would not be needed if all passengers were vaccinated.  Royal is a private company and should be able to have certain requirements for those that cruise on their ships. It shouldn't matter if the vaccine was issued an emergency authorization or is approved, it's a requirement of the cruise line. It's the individuals choice to decide whether to meet that requirement, or not cruise. No one is being forced to get a vaccination, they are being given a choice.

[cured]

16 minutes ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

 

True. But those skeptics keep moving the goal line. And if that happens, they'll just denounce the "rushing through" of the formal approval process to invalidate the whole process.

 

There is no material gain to approval unless you have the ability for universal vaccination, and we don't (it's still not even approved in kids).  There is no compelling reason to expedite that process right now.

I disagree. There is a large economic component to approving the vaccine.  Restaurants and other businesses could start to open up fully to vaccinated customers.  Unvaccinated people can continue to dine outside or take advantage of curbside pickup (acceptable accommodations.)

 

There is some good evidence out there pointing out that customers would feel much more comfortable patronizing a business if they know their fellow customers are vaccinated. Just look at all the responses on this board that say they won't be comfortable sailing unless vaccines are mandated.

 

Edited January 30, 2021 by cured

[cured]

sorry, duplicate

Edited January 30, 2021 by cured
duplicate

[ace2542]

45 minutes ago, leisuretraveler223 said:

 

There hasn't been a war.  There have been people that understand and accept masks are a long established reasonable public health tool.  And there are entitled idiots who can't handle having their "freedumbz" hurt.

There has been a war there have been people murdered in America during confrontations about masks a couple of times.

[ace2542]

1 hour ago, cured said:

 

What about the Spanish Flu? 

It was a similar global pandemic. 103 years later we are not masking up to protect us from the Spanish Flu. 

 

Or the bubonic plague? While it killed millions during a global pandemic back in the middle ages, it is no longer a feared disease.

 

With proper medication and medical knowledge every pandemic has had an end.

 

The scientists in my family (one a biochem engineer directly working on one of the mRNA vaccines) are frustrated with those that choose not to mask up, social distance, vaccinate and let the virus run its course as they are prolonging the end of it. While the majority will survive without any incident, they are providing themselves as hosts to the virus to allow it to mutate to possible more dangerous strains.  If there are no hosts, there is no chance for the virus to spread and mutate and it will die out.

I seem to recall the plague at least in London was stamped out by the great fire of that destroyed however much of the city it destroyed or so they say.  And on any ocean going vessels  of the time I am sure the spanish flu ran rampant.

Edited January 30, 2021 by ace2542

[Ocean Boy]

2 minutes ago, ace2542 said:

I seem to recall the plague at least in London was stamped out by the great fire of that destroyed however much of the city it destroyed or so they say.  And on any ocean going vessels  of the time I am sure the spanish flu ran rampant.

England has a very interesting history of getting rid of various problems.😯☺😇