Has HAL's smoking policy changed?

[LizB1]

For those of you just off the Noordam...was there smoking on port side of the Lido by the mid-ship bar or are they sticking with non-smoking in that area on the Noordam??

 

Thanks for your info.

[pattie623]

I was sitting at the bar on the Lido which is port side with some friends that I made and they were smoking. I always saw people there smoking when I was walking to the Lido restaurant.

 

Pattie, NJ

[jessemon]

Just off the Noordam... No smoking ANYTIME in the casino. Adjacent Sports Bar allows smoking.

I GUESS the Veendam has different rules....

Will let you know when I get back in two weeks.....;)

 

wait...Noordam goes out of PC- NYC...silly me...

 

Believe me...no smoking in the casino won't last. It is just experiment for a few weeks.

Wait til their profits fall off. They'll be supplying smokes.

[Cruishappy@aol.com]

Well here I am again --- and of course I am getting ready ready to be bashed - this smoking policy has for sure gotten too far --- Yes - I am a smoker and a Polite Smoker --- however things are getting on the ridiculous side --- we have been alloted less and less space --- for sure there are enough areas for the smokers and for sure they can avoid the littles space allocated for us smokers --- unfortunately it has become an obsession with the non-smokers --- I appreciate that there are non-smokers that are allergic to the smoke --- but for goodness sake they certainly have the option of many many many other areas that they can go to and enjoy - without harrassing a passenger who is trying to have their own pleasure --- with limited space to do so --- I am extremely allergic to frangrances - but do not request to have Frangrance Free Areas - I merely avoid them - the only thing that smokers are requesting is more respect --- we are not second rate seconds - and have never witnessed a smoker in a Non Smoking area ---- if so - I agree with you --- but I also request that the non-smoking passenger does not go into a smoking waving their arms and rolling their eyes --- and passing degrading remarks ---- just give us some space and do not deny us the space that we have ---- hopefully I did not offend anyone for this was not my intention--- it so I apoligize.

[michmike]

One thing I wish HAL would do is to make the balcony cabins on one side of the ship, non-smoking. We were subjected to a cigar smoker nearby on our October Westerdam cruise and had to come in off the balcony when this guy was out there puffing, often as early as 6:30 am. Have read on the boards any number of times about folks who had similar experiences with smokers on adjacent balconies.

 

I don't see how this would really be all that difficult. For those of us who see it as a priority, we could book early enough to be assured of getting a cabin on that side of the ship. Those who book once all those cabins are gone would simply need to be warned that they could encounter problems with smoke on their balconies.

 

I'm sure there are some who will argue that a certain side of the ship is preferable depending on itinerary, but in most cases I can't see where port or starboard makes a difference. And such a change would certainly be a blessing for those of us who want to use our balcony withouit being subjected to smokers.

[kryos]

Believe me...no smoking in the casino won't last. It is just experiment for a few weeks.

Wait til their profits fall off. They'll be supplying smokes.

I hate to say this ... but I am getting more and more worried that within a year or so there will be no smoking on any cruise ship plying U.S. waters. I saw a piece on the news the other night ... the family of that gentleman who died of a heart attack during the Princess fire ... specifically his daughter ... are working with various legislators and other such people for tougher safety measures and regulations on cruise ships. Since the investigation apparently did determine that a carelessly disgarded cigarette caused the Princess fire, I guess I can't blame this woman for her anger. She lost her dad ... an innocent victim ... in that fire ... and she wants to make sure no one else goes through that.

 

My guess is that at some point either the Coast Guard or whatever agency regulates cruise ships in U.S. waters will put such stringent requirements on cruise ships that allow smoking ... all sorts of fire-retardant materials, special early smoke warning systems that will function on balconies ... and who knows what else, that the cruise lines will just get together and decide to ban smoking on all ships. It'll be a lot cheaper to ban smoking than to institute all the strict requirements that will be imposed on ships that permit smoking. And ... if you can't smoke on any ship, then no one cruise line will be at a disadvantage when they announce that there will be no more smoking on their vessels.

 

I was really hoping that Princess fire was as a result of something other than smoking, but since the announcement came out that a carelessly disgarded cigarette was determined to be the cause, I began getting the very distinct feeling that my cruising future is very limited ... and it's enough to make me cry.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[lkmamom]

Before all of this gets to be a non-smoker vs smoker debate, I think that it is crucial to remember that the stated cause of the Star Princess fire was a careless smoker's cigarette.

 

I know that there are many that hate the remnants of smoking. I am sure that it is hard to understand the feelings of a non-smoker, if you are a smoker.

 

If things are changed with the smoking rules on cruise ships, it is my feeling that it is because of those that do not care enough about disposing their cigarettes. Unfortunately, those that are responsible and considerate smokers will suffer the consequences (if things are changed).

 

I have absolutely no problems with those that smoke. I am sure those that smoke are well aware of the health problems that are associated with smoking, and it is their choice. I do though get annoyed in particular with those that throw cigarette butts wherever, instead of using an ashtray or other designated receptacle.We cruised on Princess one spring break to the Mexican Riviera and were awakened every single morning to a balcony full of cigarette butts and empty plastic bar glasses and fruit.At sailaway, our son was hit on the arm with a discarded cigarette from above. No, it did not cause serious harm, but it certainly did not feel good either, and it was totally not necessary. Our neighbors had the same. It was reported, but of course, Princess could not do anything unless it was witnessed.This was after the Star fire. There were multiple warnings posted and expressed in the safety videos. The ignorance of the warnings was unbelievable.

 

I have the feeling that things are not going to be changed. There are far too many that enjoy smoking. Actually, one of the things that we thought was so wonderful about our first HAL cruise was the respect of smokers for non-smokers on HAL. It was truly one of the things that has made us take a second look at HAL. I hope that we never encounter an experiance again like our spring break cruise. I hope that those that smoke can remember that it is not all non-smokers that just "do not like smoking in general" a lot of it is those that share your habit and cannot do so responsibly.

 

Sorry about the soap-box;)

Linda

[Nasmas]

The fire was caused by a careless cigarette. I am truly for sorry that, but what worries me more, is why isn't the deck on the ship be more fire resistant? I would think it should be made of materials that wouldn't burn that easily. I have tried to imagine how even if you tried, on a HAL ship you could set your verandah on fire. Cigarettes usually burn themselves out unless they get near something flamable. That should be the ship's concern, I would think.

[Nasmas]

I hate to say this ... but I am getting more and more worried that within a year or so there will be no smoking on any cruise ship plying U.S. waters.

 

If that happens, I'll sail out elsewhere. I think the cruise lines will fight that. Remember the Carnival ship that was non-smoking? Didn't last long. I'm sure some island off the US would be happy to take all the ships from Ft. Lauderdale. Money talks.

[CrazyforCruisin]

My DH and I are smokers. When we took our first cruise on HAL, I was amazed we were allowed to smoke anywhere! I try very hard to be a careful and polite smoker. I apoligize as a smoker to lkmamom for the disgusting things that happened on her cruise due to a smoker. I would be upset also. I also agree with cruishappy, just give me my little piece of space to indulge in my habit peacefully and I will try not to intrude into the non smoking spaces. I usually only smoke in our cabin or our verandah and maybe out on deck when no one else is around. I try to keep the smoke from blowing over to the next verandah to a minimum and make sure the ashes and butts go in an astray and not on the deck or floor. I certainly do not drop the butts over the side of the railing! How rude! I am just so used to most places being non smoking that it would be strange to me to smoke in the public places on the ship so I do not normally carry my cigarettes with me. I consider it a privilege to be able to smoke in my cabin and sure hope it is not taken away because of one "bad apple".

Is it February yet!?

[sail7seas]

The fire was caused by a careless cigarette. I am truly for sorry that, but what worries me more, is why isn't the deck on the ship be more fire resistant? I would think it should be made of materials that wouldn't burn that easily. I have tried to imagine how even if you tried, on a HAL ship you could set your verandah on fire. Cigarettes usually burn themselves out unless they get near something flamable. That should be the ship's concern, I would think.

 

Flamable materials on the verandas most certainly concern HAL. In fact, it concerned them enough they were replacing flamable materials contained in the dividers between the verandas on Maasdam. While we were aboard in August, we watched as they replaced the dividers on either side of our veranda ....and all the rest of them.

 

Someone else mentioned they were doing it on a ship they had recently sailed so it seems they are replacing these dividers with non-flamable materials fleetwide.

 

 

 

[sirarthur]

As a reformed former smoker --- 28 years ago, 3 packs a day... I don't have any problem sharing my ship with smokers. As long as we non-smokers can enjoy ALL the activities on the ship without being subjected to your smoke. I believe there should be areas or designated times when smoking is permitted. For example, I believe smokers should be able to smoke at dinner or in a nightclub and a designated time and area be given to them to do so. Also, I should be able to enjoy the casino in smoke free environment.

[kryos]

If that happens, I'll sail out elsewhere. I think the cruise lines will fight that. Remember the Carnival ship that was non-smoking? Didn't last long. I'm sure some island off the US would be happy to take all the ships from Ft. Lauderdale. Money talks.

I agree money talks, but how many people will now be willing to fly to an island in order to board a cruise ship. Remember, the airfares to some of these islands are pricey, whereas many people live within driving distance of U.S. ports. Especially if you are traveling with a large group of family and friends ... departing from some Caribbean island could be a major difference in the cash outlay required to take the cruise. And don't forget ... we're talking the Caribbean here. What about Alaska and Hawaii cruises that visit a lot of U.S. ports? You're not going to be able to get around a smoking ban on those cruises.

 

True, Carnival's non-smoking ship didn't last long, but I think that was more as a result of Carnival positioning another ship elsewhere that used to sail from Florida. They had to make the Paradise smoking after that because the Paradise was the only Carnival ship sailing the Caribbean from Florida. Before they moved the other ship, passengers had a choice. They could sail that ship if they wanted to be allowed to smoke.

 

I agree that a cruise line would not be likely to prohibit smoking throughout their fleet on their own. But if they were forced to do it as a result of regulation, then they wouldn't be at so much of a disadvantage because every other cruise line would be under the same regulations. You could smoke on NO ships plying U.S. waters ... so no one cruise line would lose customers to another.

 

Of course, some of us smokers would be willing to do whatever it takes to be able to smoke onboard ship. But I'd bet a lot of others would just learn to live with the new regulations. After all, they really would have no choice, now would they?

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[GmaPajama]

OK - I've been reading these Smoking Threads for ever so long now, and am finally ready to put in my two cents. I've spent plenty of time as a smoker, as well as a non-smoker - and know that it all boils down to being considerate of each other's life styles. I don't see that as much of a problem for people of HAL caliber.

 

We don't attract the "party crowds" that drink too much, smoke too much, and carelessly toss their trash about. We don't attract the "fanatics" who want to impose their personal preferences upon everybody and everything. What we DO attract is an educated, well traveled, tolerant, group - where people actually respect each other and get along.

 

My experience has been that smokers are careful about where they smoke, and non-smokers are easily able to avoid those areas. I see it as a non-problem on Holland America, unless you are determined that it WILL be a problem.

 

Donna

[GmaPajama]

Oops - I just discovered what that dreaded White Screen does. I had to add this note to get my post to "click".

 

Donna

[Randyk47]

OK....my wife and I smoke....shouldn't but we do. Now that's said, and we've discussed this, if it comes to cruise lines going non-smoking then we'll simply not cruise.

[Cottager]

I have avoided posting (and I'm a smoker) but this really seems to be a bone of contention for everyone. If they stop smoking on cruise ships the non smokers had better be ready to pay more for their trips. It is the simple law of supply and demand. Non smokers can't fill the ships, smokers will stay home or take some other type of vacation. For example I was a loyal Marriott customer for years and years. They have recently stopped smoking in all of their hotels in the US and Canada. Therefore I'm no longer a Marriott customer. I have switched my business to other hotels until I find one that I want to become a loyal customer of. The non smokers that really really hate smokers could try Oceania. They have a very restrictive smoking policy. According to the Gov't of Cda statistics since they banned smoking in our casinos (May of '06 I think) they have lost 1.5 billion dollars in revenue. How much are the cruise ships willing to lose? We just need to learn to get along. I won't smoke where I'm not allowed. But please don't invade my smoking space, there's very little of it left.

[sail7seas]

Each year, the percentage of the population that smokes becomes lower and lower. People finally quit; fewer start smoking.

 

As the numbers of smokers decreases, the issue will become mute.

At some point, we will become a smoke free society.

 

(I used to smoke and am so happy to now be a non-smoker. The most liberating thing I ever did for myself. )

 

Of all the comments I read/heard anywhere, an RN once posted a message on this board in one of the on-going smoking threads was the only one that really resonated for me. No one ever said it quite so simply or quite so succinctly that I had previously heard.

 

What she said was: "Everyone is going to have to quit at some point (for one reason or another) so you might as well do it now and get it over with." .....paraphrased but thanks to that RN if she is still reading this board and remembers posting that.

 

 

 

[kryos]

What she said was: "Everyone is going to have to quit at some point (for one reason or another) so you might as well do it now and get it over with." .....paraphrased but thanks to that RN if she is still reading this board and remembers posting that.

As much as I don't like it ... I actually enjoy smoking and find it relaxing ... I have to say that I agree with her. Our society is going so far in the direction of non-smokers that one day there will literally be nowhere you can smoke in public.

 

Philadelphia just went non-smoking in all restaurants and most bars. That means I can't even enjoy a cigarette after dinner at my favorite restaurant ... which happens to have several completely separate rooms for dining ... only one of which allowed smoking. I can certainly understand not permitting smoking in restaurants where there is no feasible way to effectively segregate smokers and non-smokers, but when a restaurant has a collection of actual rooms, and confines the smoking to only one of those rooms, I think it's a bit ridiculous.

 

Right now ... even though Philly is non-smoking, it's not too bad. The law only applies to Philadelphia County, and I could easily patronize a restaurant outside of the city limits ... and I often do. But, of course, one day that will change and the whole state will surely go non-smoking. At that point, I'll have no choice. If I want to dine out, I've gotta deal with going outside (sometimes in the freezing cold) if I want to enjoy a smoke after dinner.

 

But, that's the way things are going. The non-smokers in our society today have a very loud voice and they are not shy about making themselves heard. The politicians and other lawmakers are listening, and I'd be willing to bet in another ten years there will be absolutely no place other than your own home where you will be able to light up.

 

So, she's right. Might as well quit ... cause at some point you will almost be forced to give it up.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita

[mina]

We sure have a society that loves to regulate other's actions. I think I watched a movie like that when I was a kid -- but then it was science fiction.

 

Today, the City of New York is considering a proposal to ban the use of transfats in all restaurants in the city. transfats lead to heart disease and heart attacks -- wow another class action suit pending!!

Thank you folks! I appreciate others looking out for my welfare by forcing me to live by their guidelines for health. I am happy to go have my smoke in an isolated area -- are you willing to give up your twinkie???? Cause ......guess what folks -- that is what is next. I will keep my second hand smoke far away from you while you enjoy your organically grown sprouts with tofu. Self-rightous indignation and governance doesn't stop with the smoking issue -- thank god for the transfat police ----- how can we survive without such overlords insuring that no one is exposed to any health risks. Gosh -- better lock up your SUVs.

[jimmy2x]

"True, Carnival's non-smoking ship didn't last long, but I think that was more as a result of Carnival positioning another ship elsewhere that used to sail from Florida. They had to make the Paradise smoking after that because the Paradise was the only Carnival ship sailing the Caribbean from Florida. Before they moved the other ship, passengers had a choice. They could sail that ship if they wanted to be allowed to smoke.

 

As I recall the Paradise was built to be a non-smoking ship even throughout construction. For WHATEVER reason (surely a financial decision), Carnival decided to allow smoking when they moved it to California.

I agree that a cruise line would not be likely to prohibit smoking throughout their fleet on their own. But if they were forced to do it as a result of regulation, then they wouldn't be at so much of a disadvantage because every other cruise line would be under the same regulations. You could smoke on NO ships plying U.S. waters ... so no one cruise line would lose customers to another.

 

Of course, some of us smokers would be willing to do whatever it takes to be able to smoke onboard ship. But I'd bet a lot of others would just learn to live with the new regulations. After all, they really would have no choice, now would they?

 

The choice, as has been previously pointed out, would be to abandon cruising as a vacation. Smoking is an addiction (I ought to know). For me, it would not even have to be a complete ban. I can live with the restrictions as they presently exist without difficulty. When the day comes that I cannot find a bar, an outside area, or it is decided that I can no longer go out on my balcony for a smoke, that's the end of the road.

 

Blue skies ...

 

--rita"

[Cruishappy@aol.com]

Donna - In response to your most well said posting --- congratulations -- you have said it all and did an excellent job of it ---

[sail7seas]

I can certainly understand not permitting smoking in restaurants where there is no feasible way to effectively segregate smokers and non-smokers, but when a restaurant has a collection of actual rooms, and confines the smoking to only one of those rooms, I think it's a bit ridiculous.

 

 

What makes it NOT ridiculous is that a non-smoking wait person may be forced to work in the room where smoking is permitted and that non-smoking person is subjected the second hand smoke against their wishes. They want /need their job and may have no choice but to do as assigned.

 

In Massachusetts (and about 16 other states), there is no smoking permitted in any work place. Just about any where you go is a work place for someone.

 

No bars, no restaurants, no hotel lobbys and I think many hotels in the city are quietly enforcing non-smoking by not taking reservations for many people who request smoking rooms. They may have a few but the vast majority are non-smoking. Maybe if the hotel isn't full, they'll be more 'lenient' about accepting a smoking room request.

 

Non-smokers, of course, love the atmosphere this law has generated.

 

There is little to no adverse effect on business as they are all on an equal playing field. The only variable is that some cities/towns in the state permit smoking on outdoor patio areas but some do not.

[sail7seas]

We sure have a society that loves to regulate other's actions. I think I watched a movie like that when I was a kid -- but then it was science fiction.

 

Today, the City of New York is considering a proposal to ban the use of transfats in all restaurants in the city. transfats lead to heart disease and heart attacks -- wow another class action suit pending!!

Thank you folks! I appreciate others looking out for my welfare by forcing me to live by their guidelines for health. I am happy to go have my smoke in an isolated area -- are you willing to give up your twinkie???? Cause ......guess what folks -- that is what is next. I will keep my second hand smoke far away from you while you enjoy your organically grown sprouts with tofu. Self-rightous indignation and governance doesn't stop with the smoking issue -- thank god for the transfat police ----- how can we survive without such overlords insuring that no one is exposed to any health risks. Gosh -- better lock up your SUVs.

 

 

That law was enacted today. All food service venues in New York City must eliminate all trans fats.

[Sunshine91]

We don't attract the "party crowds" that drink too much, smoke too much, and carelessly toss their trash about. We don't attract the "fanatics" who want to impose their personal preferences upon everybody and everything. What we DO attract is an educated, well traveled, tolerant, group - where people actually respect each other and get along.

 

My experience has been that smokers are careful about where they smoke, and non-smokers are easily able to avoid those areas. I see it as a non-problem on Holland America, unless you are determined that it WILL be a problem.

 

This has been, I think, one of THE most polite, well-thought-out & respectful threads on one of the most heated topics we have for discussion. Thanks folks. But Donna, I have to politely disagree with you - if everyone did behave as you described, we would have no need for these discussions. :)

 

The problem with restricting smoking v. non-smoking cabins to one side of the ship is, I think "spoilage". The lines don't like to sail with empty cabins. It's why none are designated either way & the cabins are just (supposedly) thoroughly cleaned. If all of the non- were sold out & a large group wanted to book but only smoking were left, then the line wouldn't be able to sell to that group.

 

RE: Paradise - Wasn't she launched about 10 years ago & switched because of finances? Times have changed, haven't they? Perhaps in today's climate it would work - maybe not in Carnival's party-hearty atmosphere, but what about family friendly Disney?

 

And Sail's got it right - the cities & states that ban smoking use it as a measure to protect the workers, not for the comfort of the non-smokers. Here in DE you can't light up inside anywhere - not a bar, not a hotel room, not a casino - no where. Everyone just got used to it. And the bars on the border with MD - packed! No one's losing any business there. :)