New Bahamas Vax Requirements

[dswallow]

7 minutes ago, atgood said:

So before Bahamas’ new requirement, 20 unvax’d passengers go on a RCI cruise, 10 who chose not to be vax’d and 10 who can’t be b/c of medical issues.  
 

With Bahamas’ new requirement, 20 unvax’d passengers go on a RCI cruise, all who qualify under the medical exemption.  How is the new scenario going to be any safer?  
 

 

Probably because those holding a medical exemption actually still are concerned about their own health and are being cautious themselves. And the likelihood of spread of an infection from a vaccinated person simply is lower than the likelihood of spread from an unvaccinated person. It doesn't mean it doesn't still happen, but if it does still happen, the likelihood is less severe, or spreading to fewer people, is there. And you've also created a scenario that in practice isn't really that likely either. But even if it were. It'd still very likely be better for everyone for those reason, and it is even more likely it wouldn't be worse.

[atgood]

What would be the harm in letting an unvax’d person sail, but not get off the ship in Nassau?

[jrapps]

1 minute ago, atgood said:

What would be the harm in letting an unvax’d person sail, but not get off the ship in Nassau?

You can't control who does and does not get off the ship. What if there is an emergency and someone who isn't cleared to get off needs to get off.

 

These rules are almost always all-encompassing. All or nothing, to cover unknown scenarios.

[dswallow]

2 minutes ago, atgood said:

What would be the harm in letting an unvax’d person sail, but not get off the ship in Nassau?

 

Higher chance (aka better than 0, if still not all that likely) of spread sometime during the sailing to a vaccinated person who potentially could then spread it to others ashore? You could perhaps actually just send a tweet asking the Prime Minister about the thought process of that choice. 🙂

[atgood]

4 minutes ago, dswallow said:

 

Probably because those holding a medical exemption actually still are concerned about their own health and are being cautious themselves. And the likelihood of spread of an infection from a vaccinated person simply is lower than the likelihood of spread from an unvaccinated person. It doesn't mean it doesn't still happen, but if it does still happen, the likelihood is less severe, or spreading to fewer people, is there. And you've also created a scenario that in practice isn't really that likely either. But even if it were. It'd still very likely be better for everyone for those reason, and it is even more likely it wouldn't be worse.

I see what you are saying, but still though, an unvax’d passenger would have to provide two negative tests just to get on the ship to begin with, plus a test mid-cruise too on cruises 6 nts or longer.

[ADunk]

57 minutes ago, Espn said:

I am curious what this means for the on ship protocols like masking and vaccinated only lounges and if there will be changes coming. This just seems kind of pointless now. I know RC still has to account for unvaccinated kids but all lounges and some venues should now be vaccinated which would be most adults. 

My thoughts too. I know for the first Eastern sailing on Allure, they still required masks indoors. But now that Allure will be 100% (12 and up of course) if this changes. I hope it does or becomes more lax before our sailing on 9/12.

 

It seems a bit redundant honestly. But in our email with September protocols, they still have the indoor mask requirement. Who knows.

[Iamcruzin]

2 hours ago, zekekelso said:

Let’s see... no Bahamas, no USVI, no Hati, no Mexican Caribbean. Somebody (a lot of somebody’s) in corporate headquarters is having a really bad day. 

Well this was bound to happen and they should have been preparing for it. Maybe the were. If all are vaccinated there is not problem. With all of the pent up desire to cruise which I read about on every board I follow there should be no problem filling the empty berths of those under 12 or the few who refuse to vaccinate. 

[Thenagers]

2 hours ago, dswallow said:

 

The Preliminary Injunction preventing Florida from enforcing the state law regarding requiring proof of vaccination only applies to the NCL brands that are plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

Florida is free to try to pursue anything they think is a violation of that law against any other party.

Florida has not stopped airlines from asking if the destination requires it. This has been since the beginnig. Why would they stop a ship with a destination that requires?

[ReneeFLL]

5 hours ago, Threedrones said:

Not necessarily, though it would be nice. The last I looked, Florida was not subject to Bahama’s laws. It does present an intriguing problem for Florida though, as well as RCL. Can’t wait to see how it plays out since I’m on Freedom in late September.

Florida isn’t subject to Bahamian laws but Royal is if they want to stop at Coco Cay.

[smplybcause]

14 minutes ago, ADunk said:

My thoughts too. I know for the first Eastern sailing on Allure, they still required masks indoors. But now that Allure will be 100% (12 and up of course) if this changes. I hope it does or becomes more lax before our sailing on 9/12.

 

It seems a bit redundant honestly. But in our email with September protocols, they still have the indoor mask requirement. Who knows.

 

Because there's no guarantee that those under 12 will be less than 5%. Royal doesn't want to turn them away (and based on Royals numbers and the fact that carnival has had to turn kids away to hit that %), so they sail under test cruise protocols, which means masks indoors. See: Royal Seattle cruises. 

 

My guess is it won't change until the CSO expires (they could extend it) or vaccines are approved for the younger set (I think then it'll be 5 and older and the under 5 would be less than 5% so Royal could change certification if the CSO is still in effect). I wouldn't be surprised if they kept the status quo until seeing if the CSO is extended.

Edited August 20, 2021 by smplybcause

[ADunk]

3 minutes ago, smplybcause said:

 

Because there's no guarantee that those under 12 will be less than 5%. Royal doesn't want to turn them away (and based on Royals numbers and the fact that carnival has had to turn kids away to hit that %), so they sail under test cruise protocols, which means masks indoors. See: Royal Seattle cruises. 

 

My guess is it won't change until the CSO expires (they could extend it) or vaccines are approved for the younger set (I think then it'll be 5 and older and the under 5 would be less than 5% so Royal could certification if the CSO is still in effect). I wouldn't be surprised if they kept the status quo until seeing if the CSO is extended.

Fair enough but isn't following the CSO in Florida voluntary? 

 

Regardless and like someone said, maybe it should be on a by sailing basis? Once schools are back in session, there will naturally be few children on board. Maybe idk just hopeful to an extent that doesn't matter too much 

[Nymich]

Squeeze play.

[dswallow]

10 minutes ago, ADunk said:

Fair enough but isn't following the CSO in Florida voluntary? 

 

Only to the extent you want to then face different treatment by the CDC for other things. And it isn't necessarily something you might even be able to call retaliatory treatment since some of the rules they've suggested could be enforced would be things required on other forms of transport. All told, I don't think any of the cruise lines are worried so much about meeting CDC requirements anymore. The CDC got the kick in the butt to get moving and seems to have done so.

[ReneeFLL]

2 hours ago, livingonthebeach said:

 

Yes, you're right, those with underlying medical conditions are probably not going to be cruising anyway.  I was thinking more of the people who use religious and philosophical reasons. 

I’m hoping they aren’t allowed for the time being.

[smplybcause]

26 minutes ago, ADunk said:

Fair enough but isn't following the CSO in Florida voluntary? 

 

Regardless and like someone said, maybe it should be on a by sailing basis? Once schools are back in session, there will naturally be few children on board. Maybe idk just hopeful to an extent that doesn't matter too much 

 

Legally, yes. But Royal has already stated that it is voluntarily following the CSO. They don't want to piss off the CDC because they'll still have to deal with them once the covid ***** settles. So as they are choosing to follow the CSO and the CSO says you're certified for 95% or test cruise and Royal chose test cruise... it's not going to change. (I'm pretty sure the cruise lines don't want the CDC all up their butt verifying the % before they could sail even if the CDC allowed it - and I don't think they do.)

 

It'll change when either the CSO changes or vaccination approval goes young enough that they won't have to turn families away. 

Edited August 20, 2021 by smplybcause

[ArthurUSCG]

2 hours ago, dswallow said:

 

Well, actually there are no September sailings from Florida ports that aren't affected by The Bahamas executive order. No sailings depart on 9/1 or 9/2 at all, and the couple at the end of August don't visit The Bahamas on or after September 3, and one that does get affected (but technically those aren't "September Sailings" either).

There are 5 in October that aren't. Though one of those 5 is affected by the similar requirement of the US Virgin Islands. So coming up in October there could potentially be 4 sailings from Florida ports that will actually sail allowing some unvaccinated people 12 and over. At least until another country steps up with a similar requirement. 🙂

 

 

I suspect the Bahamas requirement, will give enough cover to the other islands to institute matching vaccine mandates. Which is that CARICOM has been pushing for.

[atgood]

Isn’t it hypocritical for Bahamas to disallow an unvaccinated cruiser to visit for a few hours, but allow to unvaccinated tourists to come and stay on the island?  It doesn’t make sense. 
 

Their country, their rules I guess.  

Edited August 20, 2021 by atgood

[ReneeFLL]

1 hour ago, jrapps said:

You can't control who does and does not get off the ship. 

Yes they can. They can tag their sea pass and when getting off the ship it will beep. We had this happen to us before with some people in front of us. End of cruise and their sea pass beeped and they wouldn’t let them off. Had something to do with their bill. I think they were trying to sneak off without paying it from what it sounded like.

[ReneeFLL]

2 hours ago, shipmate13 said:

Oh I was under the assumption that it said those 12 and older they highly recommend being vaccinated on our cruise.  I must of read that wrong for our August 29th cruise

It did for a while, but has since been changed.

[dswallow]

3 minutes ago, ReneeFLL said:

Yes they can. They can tag their sea pass and when getting off the ship it will beep. We had this happen to us before with some people in front of us. End of cruise and their sea pass beeped and they wouldn’t let them off. Had something to do with their bill. I think they were trying to sneak off without paying it from what it sounded like.

 

At the exit they need to install those trap doors they use to enter most of the water slides these days. Then when the machine goes bloop and refuses to allow you to exit it just drops you directly into the bowels of the ship and lets others keep moving.

[ReneeFLL]

2 minutes ago, dswallow said:

 

At the exit they need to install those trap doors they use to enter most of the water slides these days. Then when the machine goes bloop and refuses to allow you to exit it just drops you directly into the bowels of the ship and lets others keep moving.

I agree. We had to stand there and listen to this probably for over 5 minutes before they moved them out of the way.

[smplybcause]

23 minutes ago, ArthurUSCG said:

I suspect the Bahamas requirement, will give enough cover to the other islands to institute matching vaccine mandates. Which is that CARICOM has been pushing for.

 

That makes sense. Bahamas is the heavy weight when it comes to cruises. Most of the other islands have alternatives if their neighbors don't follow suit. But between the 3/4 night cruises and all the private islands there's no alternative to the Bahamas. 

[WrittenOnYourHeart]

9 hours ago, smplybcause said:

Several families didn't realize their kids needed negative tests to board and Disney gave them a refund, got them back to the airport, and then gave them a free cruise to make up for the misunderstanding. An account I heard was it was at least 10 families that it happened to. 

 

Didn't READ, you mean. The instructions are VERY clear in their Know Before You Go. Those families are VERY lucky that Disney is Disney and accepted their "We didn't realize..." whining and treated them so well as you DO have to check off that you have read the Know Before You Go section when you are checking in. So those families either lied that they "didn't know" or they lied that they had read KBYG.

[Ocean Boy]

8 hours ago, smplybcause said:

 

Nothing. Royal ships are still approved to sail under the test cruise protocols which includes masking inside. Considering it has the same on-ship protocols in ports that always were vax only - this will change nothing. Royal still doesn't want to turn away kids too young to be vaccinated so they can't (and don't want to) guarantee 95%+ vax.

It appears that RCI can't even fill reduced capacity ships and pricing is dropping. It might behoove them to worry about attracting adults. If they can't get adults then kids become a very moot point... at keast until RCI lets 10 year olds start booking on their own.

[Ocean Boy]

7 hours ago, atgood said:

I see what you are saying, but still though, an unvax’d passenger would have to provide two negative tests just to get on the ship to begin with, plus a test mid-cruise too on cruises 6 nts or longer.

The more complicated protocols become the higher the risk of something going wrong. Keep it simple... get vaxxed or don't get on the ship. No confusion.