NCL is Suing the State of Florida over the State's Covid Policy

[JamieLogical]

Just now, ricksurf said:

You choose who's more reliable: Science and the facts around the new Covid variant and vaccines, NCL and their attention to Caution to sailing on their ships, or the State of Florida with 16000 new Covid variant cases today.

Sorry Florida, I chose Science and NCl.

 

 

@ricksurf Please keep personal opinion about COVID and politics out of this. We are trying to keep this thread from being locked like the last one.

[jrapps]

Can anyone who is versed in the legal aspects of this comment on how long this court typically takes before taking the case and ruling on preliminary injunctions? My guess is we wont see a peep on this for 2-3 months, right?

[ColeThornton]

2 hours ago, ColeThornton said:

It would probably be a good idea if the moderators restored the banner they had up a few weeks ago regarding their Covid discussion warning.  It was only up for a few days.   Some posters probably don't even know it existed.

 

Just a thought.

 

 

 

 

That was quick.  Banner restored.  Thanks Mods!

[Joebucks]

25 minutes ago, ricksurf said:

You choose who's more reliable: Science and the facts around the new Covid variant and vaccines, NCL and their attention to Caution to sailing on their ships, or the State of Florida with 16000 new Covid variant cases today.

Sorry Florida, I chose Science and NCl.

 

 

The judge ruled on the CSO that the fact is there was no science to require vaccinations on cruises alone.

[jimbo5544]

I am confused as to why they are bringing suit, why can’t they do like Royal does?  

[wally4ever]

Like I said in the last topic... as a first-time cruiser hoping to bring my 9 year old on a Christmas cruise, I wish there were allowances for children who can't get vaccinated yet... but I understand and respect NCL's stance.  I just wish they'd make it a requirement for anybody 12+, and shift it down as vaccines get approved.

[ALWAYS CRUZIN]

3 hours ago, IrieBajan54 said:

A business has a right to set conditions to be served. Since vaccinated status is not a protected class, NCL should be able to do what is best for their business. Florida's governor is anti-business.

He is NOT anti business at all. He is for the rights of the citizens. You may not like him but saying things that are totally incorrect is just radicicolous. He has done a lot for ALL business in Florida. You must not be a business owner and have no idea of the help he has done for us. He has done his very best to protect Florida citizens and its businesses. 

[At Sea At Peace]

3 hours ago, IrieBajan54 said:

A business has a right to set conditions to be served. Since vaccinated status is not a protected class, NCL should be able to do what is best for their business. Florida's governor is anti-business.

 

Please, dig down deep, and TRY to keep POLITICS out of what will likely be the 20th or 21st thread to be locked.

[HuliHuli]

4 hours ago, JamieLogical said:

 

But it's not their right to do so according to the FL law... that's the whole problem.

Ergo, NCL is challenging the the legality of the law, essentially who has jurisdiction - Florida or Federal Govt.

[Turtles06]

45 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

I am confused as to why they are bringing suit, why can’t they do like Royal does?  

Because they want to have everyone aboard vaccinated. 

[jimbo5544]

2 minutes ago, Turtles06 said:

Because they want to have everyone aboard vaccinated. 

Carnival has done that without bringing suit

[jimbo5544]

Simple:  two prices, current price if they volunteer vac record, current price times 10 if they do not.

[ChiefMateJRK]

1 hour ago, jimbo5544 said:

I am confused as to why they are bringing suit, why can’t they do like Royal does?  

Because the customer is always right and the NCL customer demands 100% vaccinated cruising.  For those who want to dance in a circle of light and not see a show because only 10% of the seats are being used, they should just book RCL et al.  Perhaps they would be happier there (but I highly doubt it).

 

I guess to answer your question, they certainly could "do like Royal does," but are likely smarter than that.

[ChiefMateJRK]

15 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Simple:  two prices, current price if they volunteer vac record, current price times 10 if they do not.

Yeah, that sounds a whole lot smarter than trying to resolve things through a proper legal process...

[jimbo5544]

1 minute ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

Yeah, that sounds a whole lot smarter than trying to resolve things through a proper legal process...

Actually it does.  Want to bet which would get cruisers on an NCL ship first?  Frank can pull the macho stuff all he wants.  They are in deep financial dudu, makes a ton more sense to pick your battles and get people sailing.  

Edited July 14, 2021 by jimbo5544

[Turtles06]

24 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Carnival has done that without bringing suit

 

Unless I’m mistaken, Carnival is only saying 95% vaxxed. 

[jimbo5544]

3 minutes ago, ChiefMateJRK said:

Because the customer is always right and the NCL customer demands 100% vaccinated cruising.  For those who want to dance in a circle of light and not see a show because only 10% of the seats are being used, they should just book RCL et al.  Perhaps they would be happier there (but I highly doubt it).

 

I guess to answer your question, they certainly could "do like Royal does," but are likely smarter than that.

Show me the data on what the NCL customer wants (unless there is just one), a ridiculous comment to presume that.  Let’s see what is smarter 60% occupancy and all the revenue that goes with it or macho Frank throwing down the gauntlet and getting zero revenue and hefty legal bills that the decision will be appealed no matter which way it goes (and I would be shocked to see the state lose, but it is immaterial) and your sailing delayed.

[jimbo5544]

2 minutes ago, Turtles06 said:

 

Unless I’m mistaken, Carnival is only saying 95% vaxxed. 

That is the requirement of the minimum.

[JamieLogical]

50 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Carnival has done that without bringing suit

 

No they haven't. The are allowing up to 5% unvaccinated.

[jimbo5544]

6 minutes ago, JamieLogical said:

 

No they haven't. The are allowing up to 5% unvaccinated.

Did Carnival bring suit?  No

Did Carnival work with the governor?  Yes

Does Carnival have to allow any unvaxers?  No

Sure sounds like they did to me.  

 

 

Edited July 14, 2021 by jimbo5544

[JamieLogical]

5 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Are you sure?

 

 

 

There were definitely children onboard the Carnival sailings that have happened so far... They are offering "vaccination exemptions":

 

"Vaccination exemptions must be pre-approved and are subject to capacity controls. Unvaccinated guests must adhere to specific protocols, testing, and insurance requirements (travel insurance is required on Florida based ships effective with 7/31/21 restart sailings) as communicated to them in advance, as a condition for travel."

[jimbo5544]

5 minutes ago, JamieLogical said:

 

There were definitely children onboard the Carnival sailings that have happened so far... They are offering "vaccination exemptions":

 

"Vaccination exemptions must be pre-approved and are subject to capacity controls. Unvaccinated guests must adhere to specific protocols, testing, and insurance requirements (travel insurance is required on Florida based ships effective with 7/31/21 restart sailings) as communicated to them in advance, as a condition for travel."

There were def not 5%, not even sure it was 1%.  Exemptions are for everyone not just kids.  That is why I changed the post.

[Rblum100]

Am I the only person who sees the similarities between this issue and Henrik Ibsen’s play “An Enemy of the People”? 

It is not a hard or view and applies to this situation.  You can even watch it on YouTube. 

 

[WarfRatWA]

 

51 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Show me the dat on what the NCL customer wants (unless there is just one), a ridiculous comment to presume that.  Let’s see what is smarter 60% occupancy and all the revenue that goes with it or macho Frank throwing down the gauntlet and getting zero revenue and hefty legal bills that the decision will be appealed no matter which way it goes (and I would be shocked to see the state lose, but it is immaterial) and your sailing delayed.

 

In their complaint, page 11

 

"A recent survey of more than 5,000 readers of Cruise Critic found that 80% of respondents preferred to sail on a ship with a vaccine requirement, and the industry is dealing with significant uncertainty as the summer sailing season proceeds."

Edited July 14, 2021 by WarfRatWA

[jimbo5544]

6 minutes ago, WarfRatWA said:

 

 

In their complaint, page 11

 

"A recent survey of more than 5,000 readers of Cruise Critic found that 80% of respondents preferred to sail on a ship with a vaccine requirement, and the industry is dealing with significant uncertainty as the summer sailing season proceeds."

Survey is such a subjective word.  Ask the right question get the expected answer.  I believe the poster said ALL at any rate.  All that being said, who would vote for cruising with people who MIGHT be positive vs those who MOST PROBABLY are not.  I know I would.  Does that prove Franks case, not even close.