Upper Age Limits on Shore Excursions

[Jim_Iain]

5 hours ago, gold1953 said:

not taking it personally at all and have yet to be turned away. 

I also try not to take it personal but, unfortunately even many Doctors and Medical offices have age related restrictions on both prescription meds and procedures.  It bothers me when they group all over 65 or 70 as a group regardless of the person.

 

[Turtles06]

2 hours ago, TheHawk1 said:

Or if I were lawyer, perhaps I'd start a class action law suit.  Sounds like age discrimination to me.

Or, if you were a lawyer, you’d realize you’d go nowhere fast with that lawsuit. 

[deliver42]

Most of the restrictions are because of their insurance carrier, not the vendor.

[TheHawk1]

2 hours ago, mom says said:

Who are you going to sue? The tour company or the insurance company? In what jurisdiction? Based on what data? Do you really think the insurance companies don't have the numbers to justify their limits on policies? They've got huge teams of actuaries behind them. 

A fellow Canadian with no sense of humour... big surprise.  It was tongue in cheek, so calm down.

[mom says]

33 minutes ago, TheHawk1 said:

A fellow Canadian with no sense of humour... big surprise.  It was tongue in cheek, so calm down.

Im perfectly calm, thank you. Your post doesnt merit anything else. Could not tell your intentions  from what you had written. Perhaps the next time you dont want your post to be taken at face value, you would consider using an emoji.

[MamaFej]

3 hours ago, Jim_Iain said:

I also try not to take it personal but, unfortunately even many Doctors and Medical offices have age related restrictions on both prescription meds and procedures.  It bothers me when they group all over 65 or 70 as a group regardless of the person.

 

Yup.

 

It happens on the other end, as well. An absolutely superb, safe driver under the age of 25, or with fewer than 9 years of driving experience, is going to pay higher insurance rates because that's what the numbers say should be the case.

 

Actuaries gonna actuary. 

 

Is it fair? Not necessarily, but it's probably, on the whole, more fair than unfair. That doen't make it suck any less. 

[carolina_yankee]

OK, so if it is insurance - let’s ponder why Celebrity has no upper age restrictions for excursions to Mayan pyramids that include hours of walking over uneven ground and the option to even climb up some of the pyramids (depends on the tour).  Yet, they offer an excursion with a 45 minute stroll through a level botanical garden and kick out the over ‘70s.  Maybe the answer is different countries.

 

Ok, then why does Celebrity offer excursions int he same country that include SCUBA, or bicycling, or snorkeling, or other more strenuous physical activities without an upper age limit?

 

And we’re talking about an excursion that doesn’t have the age limits on other cruise lines. And yes, I’m annoyed. And here’s why - the cost is similar whether it’s Celebrity or direct with the vendor, and it’s a tender port so I don’t get the coordinated tender privileges as those taking the Celebrity excursion do, so it’s more effort on my part with no cost savings. 

 

There is no *rational* reason for this, which is why it is annoying.  Will it ruin the cruise? No. Will it ruin the port? No. My suspicion is that going directly with the vendor will mean a much better experience over all. But does Celebrity get off the hook? No. When people do their internet research prior to booking cruises or planning trips, they should know that this is a possibility.

[Mark_K]

11 hours ago, carolina_yankee said:

OK, so if it is insurance - let’s ponder why Celebrity has no upper age restrictions for excursions to Mayan pyramids that include hours of walking over uneven ground and the option to even climb up some of the pyramids (depends on the tour).  Yet, they offer an excursion with a 45 minute stroll through a level botanical garden and kick out the over ‘70s.  Maybe the answer is different countries.

 

Ok, then why does Celebrity offer excursions int he same country that include SCUBA, or bicycling, or snorkeling, or other more strenuous physical activities without an upper age limit?

 

And we’re talking about an excursion that doesn’t have the age limits on other cruise lines. And yes, I’m annoyed. And here’s why - the cost is similar whether it’s Celebrity or direct with the vendor, and it’s a tender port so I don’t get the coordinated tender privileges as those taking the Celebrity excursion do, so it’s more effort on my part with no cost savings. 

 

There is no *rational* reason for this, which is why it is annoying.  Will it ruin the cruise? No. Will it ruin the port? No. My suspicion is that going directly with the vendor will mean a much better experience over all. But does Celebrity get off the hook? No. When people do their internet research prior to booking cruises or planning trips, they should know that this is a possibility.

I wouldn’t assume that it’s Celebrity’s insurance. It could be that Celebrity requires vendors to have a level of insurance which is beyond what they have for themselves.  And that in some cases this causes the vendor’s insurance company to add restrictions for Celebrity customers.