Originally Posted by AshleeBelle
You know it might be nice to remember that once upon a time (not too terribly long ago) most people who went to sea knew and accept that there were risks involving foul or dangerous weather. John Maxtone Graham speaks extensively of it in his seminal tome The Only Way to Cross. The idea that cruise lines should be required to compensate their passengers for inconveniences caused by mother nature would have been completely laughable as little as 30 or 40 years ago.
I applaud RCI for their generous offer of compensation to their passengers. I question the wisdom of it as a precedent setting gesture however. I guess the real question is where does a company draw the line on this issue? Having lived near the ocean a significant portion of my life, and even in a resort community I can assure you that there are people out there who are perfectly willing to demand compensation when it does nothing more then rain the entire week they are on vacation at the beach. Granted these are normally the people who try to steal the dishes and linens from a rental cottage, but the fact remains that more and more people seem to have a sense of entitled grievance when things go even slightly wrong for them. There is a sense of, "you owe me" attitude that is becoming all too common in this country and elsewhere.
I suppose what comes to mind when I think of this is the old joke I used to see hanging in the backrooms of many retail establishments that went, "Would it satisfy you if we gave you double your money back, let you keep the item as well, closed the store down, and had the manager shot?!?"
You speak a lot of common sense. RCI are generous but I do not think compensation is due for an event they could not control.
I admit I don't understand the US market, but the RCI gesture does not increase the chances of me booking a cruise with them.
I searched the BBC website and the news report does not mention the incident.
BBC News - Stormy weather in Egypt kills at least 18