Smoking - Did you Know?

[Conniemc]

I just had this confirmed this week and found it fascinating.

All crew can still smoke in their cabins, crew bar, wherever they want.

So, that begs a few questions about the policy.

1) Fire hazard? Sorry, hundreds of inside cabins with smoking cancel that one out.
2) Allergies - Health Hazards? - These cabins are on the same deck as passenger inside cabins. Perhaps that accounts for the "I smelled smoke" complaints I read elsewhere. I bet if you told vehement non-smokers this was going on, they wouldn't believe you. The mind is quite good at tricking itself.
3) Ethical issues - how it is fair to put all the cruise crew "at risk" and not us? On the flip side, how is it fair that crew get to smoke in their cabins and we can't?

Just find the whole contradiction very interesting. This information is current as of today on all Celebrity ships, incuding Solstice class.

Thoughts?

 

[Jeanie]

Very interesting, I do not smoke so I really don't care if we can smoke in our cabinets, But I do get the point

 

[Conniemc]

Hi Jeanie, thanks for getting the contradiction. I do smoke, never had a problem with separate areas of the ship, etc. but when they did the total ban (let's face it, a few tiny OUTDOOR pool areas hardly constitute accomodating smokers on large ship - especially on formal nights! LOL - that was it for me on Celebrity. I'm not going out onto a windy deck several decks up or down in a dress while I'm trying to enjoy myself and have a good time.

Which is my I'm hitting the Meditteranean on Princess in a few days. Less hassles.

So, all the reasons people give to applaud it kinda go out the window (excuse the pun) when crew is all smoking in comfort and peace. Just like they used to do with pax cabins, they are "Febrezed" and the new crew members taking the cabin don't notice at all.

I've made some great friends with the crew over the years, and we stay in touch. Obviously, Celebrity doesn't point this contradiction out to the public. Most officers smoke as well...in their cabins.

I could have even lived with the cabin ban (although I thought it was silly when they've allowed smoking for 50+ years), but no bars with smoking or relaxing indoor areas, this Elite had to book elsewhere. Burns me up...LOL

 

[Ted_D]

I recommend:

http://www.surgeongeneral.gov/library/secondhandsmoke/factsheet6.html

I for one am glad that guest smoking inside X ships has been eliminated, and I wish crew smoking was also eliminated. The CDC says that 21% of US adults over 18 are smokers (see http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/smoking.htm). Clearly there are nearly four times more of us who have chosen not to smoke, and do not want to inhale someone else's second hand smoke.

 

[Conniemc]

Ted, this thread wasn't intended to start a smoking debate. Just thought people would find the policies surprising and ironic.

 

[Calgon1]

I averaged a pack-a-day for 37 years (Yeah, just think how many cruises that could have paid for!). My take is that ...

1) Passengers can be very critical of cosmetic damage to the ship's interiors. If unrestricted smoking were allowed, how long would if be before we started seeing posts about burn marks on the taple/counter tops, holes in the carpeting, smoke stains on the curtains/walls, etc? If the crew messes up their home, that's one thing. But, today's passengers (rightly or wrongly) demand "perfection" in the ship's appearance. If additional crew were hired, solely to repair/replace damaged items, the cost of crusing would go up to compensate for the expense of salaries and materials.

2) Passengers can smoke (fairly) unrestrictedly ashore. Not all the crew has the optin of diembarking in every port.

 

[MisterD21]

I think we all know what Ted is smoking and it isn't tobacco....

For every study done to say second hand smoke is harmful there is one saying there is no correlation to seconhand smoke and medical ailments, or there is no health risk.

If he would like to complain about poor air quality via smoke, perhaps he should lobby his local governments to impose a environmental air quality fee for his local coal-fired power plant. One coal-fired power plant belches out more tons of carcinogens into our air than all the smokers combined. Or perhaps, they should do away with cars that emit noxious exhaust.. the exhaust from cars is as, or more harmful for you to inhale than the air of any bar filled with cigarette/cigar smoke.

No... it's far simpler for him to demonize smoking because it is already linked to carcinogenic compounds that have been suspected of causeing cancer(again there is no hard evidence to make a definite link between smoking and cancer). Having said that i must say there is no safe cigarette and smoking does indeed cause emphysema. Plain and simple... if you're susceptable to getting cancer, you are just as likely to get it from smoking as you are to living in an area which has a coal-fired power plant, or in a dense city where air can stagnate, and vehicle exhaust can linger.

 

[Mbandy]

I used to smoke. I am not one of those militant ex or non smokers though

When I did smoke, I was always considerate of those who did not. I never smoked in my apartment or anyone else's home because while I enjoyed having a smoke, I hated the smell of stale cigarette smoke.

I think the big difference in the guest vs. employee smoking policy is the crew cabins are where they actually live, their "home" for the duration of their contract. So, if they are allowed to smoke in their "home" and choose to, I think it is OK. On the other hand the guest cabins are the guest's home for only a few days to a week or so then somebody else moves in. So, to me, the difference in policy is understandable.

 

[bob]

The issue here, as Connie re iterated is concerning crew being allowed to smoke in their cabins, crew lounge areas, and other crew areas of the ship vs. passengers are not given the same options or privileges of being allowed to smoke in their cabins or at best some lounge areas, or specific interior areas and are forced to go on deck. Is it right or wrong? is it fair from a passenger standpoint?

The issues that are not at hand in this thread are virtues, health, health risk, health risk by association, or the demise of human existence caused by the demon leaf.

If we keep this on track it can be an interesting discussion.

No pointing fingers MisterD.................

 

[BSeabob]

Sure it's fair they have to work on the ships and we don't have to go as passengers unless we want to.

I have recently enjoyed the =X= changes they have made about smoking.

 

[Calgon1]

No pointing fingers MisterD.................

I would think that it all depends on which finger is pointed. And, considering that this isn't "the other board", I don't think we have a problem with this aspect of the cussin' and discussin' ....

 

[Conniemc]

Well, I have to agree with Bob #1....

Many cruises are two weeks are longer, no one forces any crew to work there, and I've never heard of a single week go by where they don't get off the ship several ports. So isn't my cabin "my home" for two weeks? And aren't I paying for it be my home? Some crew (a lot) only take 3 month contracts. Some people take back to backs cruises for months. I don't see the difference.

I think the reality is they would never get enough crew to work the ships if they didn't allow it. I know the majority are pleased with the "near" ban, and I'm sure plenty of crew do not smoke, so it leaves me confused that a large segment who pay for their cabins are being punished, while the crew who are being paid, are accomodated.

Mister, I appreciate your thoughts, and agree the thread isn't about demonizing smoking. To me, that's a 'mind your own business' thing, like drinking, obesity, and many other bad habits people have. But I don't want to start that old, old debate. No one wins that one.

Now, I notice Princess ships are completely booked, and many open cabins on many X for the same sailings. Prices are identical within a few dollars. I don't know if there's a correlation or not, but again, I find the whole thing from the publicity point of view, makes Celebrity a total hypocrit. If many crew filled out surveys saying they don't like smoking (doubtful - since most aren't American or Canadian - wink to Bob) would they ban it there too, even if it meant not having enough staff?

 

[MisterD21]

The issue here, as Connie re iterated is concerning crew being allowed to smoke in their cabins, crew lounge areas, and other crew areas of the ship vs. passengers are not given the same options or privileges of being allowed to smoke in their cabins or at best some lounge areas, or specific interior areas and are forced to go on deck. Is it right or wrong? is it fair from a passenger standpoint?

The issues that are not at hand in this thread are virtues, health, health risk, health risk by association, or the demise of human existence caused by the demon leaf.

If we keep this on track it can be an interesting discussion.

No pointing fingers MisterD.................

It became a topic of health, and health risk when he posted the link to the surgeon general's link on second hand smoke. To which i simply retorted, that for every study to place blame on smoking there is an equal study proving there is no direct correlation to seconhand smoke and cancer.
If he can post a link which shows his position on smoking i can equally post regarding the existence of alternative studies which oppose his position.

Like i stated before, there is no safe cigarette. Any cigarette will cause emphysema, as will sustained breathing of power plant emissions, and car exhaust, coal dust.. all of which contain carcinogens which have been shown to increas the "risk" of health issues. Although not necessarily "cause" health issues..

Look i think smoking is a terrible thing.. and no one should take up the habit if they can avoid it. I just cannot stand by when someone espouses some information as the truth, while neglecting to tell the whole story because it conflicts with their beliefs/feelings. To date, all studies done to examine the health risks from secondhand smoke, have only made the answers more elusive. While there have been studies that say secondhand smoke causes asthma, emphysema, and lung,esophageal, mouth, throat cancers.... there have been studies that say there is no direct connection between secondhand smoke and any of those ailments. There are studies that have proven that breathing outdoor air in certain cities is actually more harmful than a heavily smoke filled bar. So i think the whole issue boils down to this.... smoking is a politically charged issue. Being such it will always have it's progenitors and detractors equally divided along partisan divides.

In the mean time i am going to enjoy my fat tasty nicaraguan/honduran cuban seed cigars and blow smoke at everyone who wrinkles their noses at it. A Rocky Patel vintage 90 robusto, or a Perdomo 10th aniversary champagne, or even a nice Ghurka Grand Age cigar is good for at least an hour or so worth of ruining some non smokers day.... then again i never said i wasn't an evil SOB....LOL

 

[MisterD21]

Also, nobody and i mean no one, should ever take me too seriously. While i may sound crass, and uncaring at times, i can also be funny and caring... while i am many things i am the court jester more than anything else...

Life is short, and being such as it is... to let life get you down and let something I, or anyone else for that matter, says get to you is truely a shame. For nothing robs oneself of longevity it is the inability to laugh at the lemons life throws at you... not second hand smoke, not excesses or indulgence, not even stress from your work.... will kill you faster than not being able to laugh at life.... so laugh everyone, for tomorrow you may die!!

OMG... and whatever you do, do NOT take me too seriously.... i'm being serious!!

 

[Conniemc]

Hi Mister, I guess it's just that some posters who have read this and other boards for years have grown sooooooooo tired of the arguing....smoking and tipping are ridiculous hot buttons no matter where they get posted, and always end up being "closed" or taken down when the zealots get out of hand.

You say "while neglecting to tell the whole story because it conflicts with their beliefs/feelings" - well that's just it. Most people can't get through the day without a good rationalization, including me. LOL

Which again, leads me back to this original topic. Unless you want to spin rationalizations, like crew being "forced" to work on board, etc. Celebrity clearly speaks with many tongues. The smoking hypocracy IMHO is just one of many reasons I feel Dan is running the brand into the ground. I get this vibe he's the root of the problem. Celebrity has tried so many changes, scattered themselves into so many directions the last few years, only to see those star ratings continue to slide...sometimes you should just leave a good thing ALONE.

I'm all about laughing at everything, am a very considerate moderate smoker, and just wanted the topic to be food for thought for those who can maintain an OPEN MIND and look at both sides from a corporate/profit and passenger viewpoint. If the vehement non-smokers balk so much, where will they go when Celebrity repeals its' policies? (I believe they will). Holland America? Princess? Nope. So unless some are prepared to pay for private yatchs, you're outta luck!! Even luxury lines have "lounges" indoors for their guests. So all that anger is going to get you nowhere. Why not try to "lighten up" (pun intended)?

So what did Celebrity have to gain by this smoke and mirrors policy? (tee hee). Fool the people into thinking the ship was 99.9% smoke free indoors, in hopes of capturing a larger audience. So far, that hasn't worked. What did they have to lose? Lots and lots of cruising share going elsewhere, like myself.

Finding out that THOUSANDS of cabins on each ship are smoking, is proof of hypocrisy. I believe my arguments show that. Thousands of transcient crew are happily smoking, and thousands of crew are happily partying at the crew bars with a cigarrette, while pax are foooled into thinking Celebrity cares about their health. It was just a premature marketing move. In 50 years, sure, most will go smoke free. Humans will find another vice to argue about and indulge in. Now? I think Dan cut off another toe.

Oh, and one day I must start a thread about The Fairytale that the poor, poor, beleaguered crew are rowing the boat, working 18 hour days, and underpaid. Another great hoax the crew very much wants to continue...it's works well in their favor. Unless you personally know many crew members, you ain't got a clue what's really going on.

 

[maw]

My only complaint is the Steward who smokes in my cabin as he is working on it-we don't smoke anymore and when we walk in it hits us.

 

[BSeabob]

My only complaint is the Steward who smokes in my cabin as he is working on it-we don't smoke anymore and when we walk in it hits us.

Hi. Maw..when was the last time you sailed on a Celebrity ship ?? where that happened.

 

[Conniemc]

Stewards have never been allowed to smoke in your cabin...I think Ma meant his clothes, etc. smelled of smoke?

 

[BSeabob]

Interesting. Someone just voted and brought this old thread to life again.

Problem seems to have faded on X with their policy working ok it seems.:clap:

 

[earl_m]

I am surprise that they are allow to smoke inside. In Quebec its against the law to smoke at work ,bars, restaurant and in any government building. Smoking on a ship is not a good thing,
I have no problem with anyone smoking on deck.