I heard a couple got kicked off The Edge for disobeying Covid rules. Is it true?

[wrk2cruise]

One of the captains announcements said the delay was due to waiting for a PCR test result with no other explanation.   I suspect it was St. Maarten who was requiring the PCR test to determine how they would be handled.  If they happened to be positive it would have been even more expensive for them to have to quarantine on their own dime.

[NutsAboutGolf]

6 minutes ago, cruisingator2 said:

This was not a normal “put passengers off the ship”. I’m sure that this delay was due to the Covid situation. You can’t just put passengers off of the ship without the local authorities being involved and depending on when the ship found out, reached out to both local authorities and X HQ to gain approval to remove it added extra time to the situation. I expect that the ship had to work with local St. Maarten officials to make sure that the passengers were going to be handled correctly due to the situation. The fact that the ship wasn’t held up longer is a good thing. 

 

A ship leaving 2 hours late probably costs $10K+ in fuel (was reported they were going 21 knots after), possible port expenses due to port employee overtime and can screw up other ships scheduling. No X HQ permission should be needed, policies are most likely already in place.

One call to X: "Pax ABC and XYZ have violated the port protocol, ban them for life"

One call to the port: "Pax ABC and XYZ have violated the port protocol, please send your representatives"

 

Regardless, WHEN this happens again we'll see if it takes two hours again.

[Dolebludger]

Going one step further, I can’t see why unvaccinated people are allowed on a cruise ship in the first place. 

[helen haywood]

9 minutes ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

A ship leaving 2 hours late probably costs $10K+ in fuel (was reported they were going 21 knots after), possible port expenses due to port employee overtime and can screw up other ships scheduling. No X HQ permission should be needed, policies are most likely already in place.

One call to X: "Pax ABC and XYZ have violated the port protocol, ban them for life"

One call to the port: "Pax ABC and XYZ have violated the port protocol, please send your representatives"

 

Regardless, WHEN this happens again we'll see if it takes two hours again.

As stated previously, the delay was St.M wanted to know their test results before allowing them to be left there.

[Lastdance]

They got exactly what they deserved!

[davekathy]

31 minutes ago, Dolebludger said:

Going one step further, I can’t see why unvaccinated people are allowed on a cruise ship in the first place. 

Agree. No matter their age or medical (excuses) condition. 

Edited July 11, 2021 by davekathy

[Fouremco]

8 minutes ago, NutsAboutGolf said:

 

A ship leaving 2 hours late probably costs $10K+ in fuel (was reported they were going 21 knots after), possible port expenses due to port employee overtime and can screw up other ships scheduling. No X HQ permission should be needed, policies are most likely already in place.

One call to X: "Pax ABC and XYZ have violated the port protocol, ban them for life"

One call to the port: "Pax ABC and XYZ have violated the port protocol, please send your representatives"

 

Regardless, WHEN this happens again we'll see if it takes two hours again.

Cruise passengers entering a foreign country for the day during a port call do so under a different set of entry protocols than a visitor arriving, for example, by plane. When my DW had a medical issue and we needed to fly home from St. Lucia mid cruise, we had to be processed as visitors by their immigration officers and our passports stamped. 

 

Sint Maarten was under no obligation to accept the two passengers as visitors, and had they tested positive, it's quite possible that they would have been refused entry. Thus the delay, at least in part, was created by the wait for test results. Additionally, given the fact that Sint Maarten is allowing cruise passengers entry on excursions under strict conditions that were not met by by the pair, and by extension, by Celebrity, you can be sure that discussions between the ship and local officials were necessary. While Celebrity has rules that allow them to disembark passengers for a number of reasons, it is always with the understanding that the country that the ship is visiting is amenable to their entry. No captain can simply dump the passengers and their baggage on the pier and tell local authorities to come and get them.

[hawkesbaynz]

Good on Celebrity. Celebrity has been forced to allow unvaccinated cruisers on their ships due to the pig headedness of local politicians. Running a 'hostile environment' for the unvaccinated or those who choose not to provide info. will allow Celebrity to continue safely with a maximum number of vaccinated cruisers (children excluded). Overlooking being late, this is a great example of a hostile environment. Well done!

 

 

[dogs4fun]

Doesn't surprise me that this occurred - pleased that X handled it wisely.