Jump to content
Royal Caribbean Blog

There actually is an update to the CSO


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, UNCFanatik said:

Unfortunately science has left the building a long time ago and replaced by politics when it comes to the restart of cruising. "Never let a crisis go to waste" is the motto of many in government these days on both sides of the aisle. As long as there is a health crisis, the more legislation and spending that can be passed. CDC is just waiting on the green light from the White House I believe as we have seen at least twice now the CDC Director make proclamations regarding Covid that later have to be walked back by the administration. 

I think the more framing the cruise industry stoppage is causing economic harm to Port Cities will play better in court of public opinion rather than the general public just perceiving that entitled people are mad they cant go on a cruise. They fail to see how many people have lost jobs and are struggling because of the shutdown. 

 

 

Sadly you are correct.

Although I'm not sure it's solely the WH.  In politics it often the issue of lobbying (aka bribing) the right combination of politicians.  Side of the aisle is irrelevant, they are all eager to be "lobbied".  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'm glad you mentioned this, because this is the source of the problem with the CDC. The CDC is still looking at cruises through the prism of March 2020. That is like saying airplanes and ai

Ever flown through the LaGuardia airport?  Pretty much a prison.  Small confined spaces, low ceiling, hot, smelly, packed with zero chance of social distancing.  Marked safe by CDC standards.  

An additional comment on my post above ......... Most of us, including myself, have little understanding of the complexity of various US government regulations. I'm working from distant memory he

We're talking about leverage here. For the cruise industry to get back to business, they have to have it. There are two options we seem to be framing here:

(1) Let the court of public opinion and lobbied politicians be the leverage that moves HHS to tell the CDC to cancel the CSO.

(2) Let the courts TELL DHS that they are enjoining the provisions of the CSO that denies cruise ship operations from US ports.

I prefer the later. If it can be mounted, and I'm not sure it can be, a claim that the the provisions of the CSO are unconstitutional (violation of 14A) could be filed in short order and an injunction issued. That does not mean that the US Justice Department acting on behalf of HHS could not challenge the injunction but I'm also not certain that they would. Can you imagine even good government lawyers trying to argue in defense of the laugher that is the CSO? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think one complicating factor is the few yards between the ship and the other side of the terminal.  There is no doubt that the Federal Government has control over the border, and different rules apply to that area than anywhere else.  Add the fact that Maritime law also applies and the fact that the CDC will have endless experts that will support it's views (because they work for the CDC) and you have the makings of a legal mess.  So I think that while we would all like a quick, simple answer or process, we will most likely not get it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, cruisellama said:

Since cruise ships are considered like prisons by the CDC, I volunteer to do some time on one.  (Never mind hotels aren't in the same category)

Ever flown through the LaGuardia airport?  Pretty much a prison.  Small confined spaces, low ceiling, hot, smelly, packed with zero chance of social distancing.  Marked safe by CDC standards.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, cruisellama said:

Since cruise ships are considered like prisons by the CDC, I volunteer to do some time on one.  (Never mind hotels aren't in the same category)

I wonder what you have to do to be "sentenced" to a cruise ship ... is that like the old "white collar" country club prisons or something different ?

Maybe if we denigrate the CDC enough we get sentenced to cruise for life ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, twangster said:

Ever flown through the LaGuardia airport?  Pretty much a prison.  Small confined spaces, low ceiling, hot, smelly, packed with zero chance of social distancing.  Marked safe by CDC standards.  

We’ll pay more to avoid LGA

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, teddy said:

We’ll pay more to avoid LGA

It might surprise you to see what new new LGA looks like I've provided a link below.  The new terminal is now open even though they have a few construction projects to finish up.  LGA has come a long way over the past few years.

https://thepointsguy.com/news/first-look-laguardia-terminal-b/

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

If anyone missed it, the CDC already tweaked the new technical guidance to drop the prehistoric requirement that embarking and disembarking passengers don't share the same gangway within 12 hours.

I wouldn't say they dropped it, they added the caveat "to the extent practicable". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, smokeybandit said:

But there's no longer a mention of 12 hours. Just "try not to do it as best you can" which is much more reasonable.

True. It seems they made 2 updates. First they added the caveat, and now it looks like 12 hours has been dropped.

The whole line is ridiculous because of what CDC has said about surface contamination being extremely unlikely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Matt said:

True. It seems they made 2 updates. First they added the caveat, and now it looks like 12 hours has been dropped.

The whole line is ridiculous because of what CDC has said about surface contamination being extremely unlikely.

So they made amendments, but only to this one item?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vancity Cruiser said:

So they made amendments, but only to this one item?

I ran a text difference check on the original versus what's there today. Here's the differences....

1. "For the purpose of these technical instructions only, “U.S. port authorities” refers to officials responsible for exercising oversight..."

became

"For the purpose of these technical instructions only, “U.S. port authorities” refers to the local officials responsible for exercising oversight..."

 

2. "to ensure disembarking and embarking passengers do not occupy the same enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (e.g., gangways, terminal waiting spaces, check-in areas) within the same 12-hour period, and    
to ensure disembarking and embarking travelers from different ships do not occupy the same enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (e.g., gangways, terminal waiting spaces, check-in areas) within the same 12-hour period."

became

"to ensure disembarking and embarking passengers do not occupy the same enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (e.g., gangways, terminal waiting spaces, check-in areas), to the extent practicable, and
to ensure disembarking and embarking travelers from different ships do not occupy the same enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (e.g., gangways, terminal waiting spaces, check-in areas), to the extent practicable."

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Matt said:

I ran a text difference check on the original versus what's there today. Here's the differences....

1. "For the purpose of these technical instructions only, “U.S. port authorities” refers to officials responsible for exercising oversight..."

became

"For the purpose of these technical instructions only, “U.S. port authorities” refers to the local officials responsible for exercising oversight..."

 

2. "to ensure disembarking and embarking passengers do not occupy the same enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (e.g., gangways, terminal waiting spaces, check-in areas) within the same 12-hour period, and    
to ensure disembarking and embarking travelers from different ships do not occupy the same enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (e.g., gangways, terminal waiting spaces, check-in areas) within the same 12-hour period."

became

"to ensure disembarking and embarking passengers do not occupy the same enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (e.g., gangways, terminal waiting spaces, check-in areas), to the extent practicable, and
to ensure disembarking and embarking travelers from different ships do not occupy the same enclosed or semi-enclosed areas (e.g., gangways, terminal waiting spaces, check-in areas), to the extent practicable."

sounds like about two weeks of work for a bureaurcracy ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...