I would find it hard to beleive that Princess would merely change the duties of whomever they deemed responsible for this error. estimations range from 5 to 16 million dollar cost of this indicent to the cruiseline. I cannot see a corporate entity not taking a rather harsh position both on the culprit and probably his superior. Ultimately the Master of the ship holds all authroity and subsequently all responsibility. I would be shocked if this was not a career breaker for two or more people.
There's also an issue as to whether the individual acted reasonably and responsibly based on what the staff aboard the ship new at the time. If so, dismissal is not appropriate. This might have been one of "those" incidents from which all of the officers on the ship learned some nuance about the steering system that should have been included in their training but, for whatever reason, was not.
About a decade ago, there was an incident in which RMS Queen Elizabeth 2 ran aground off Cape Cod. The pilot recommended following a channel for coastal vessels but the master, considering the deep draft of that vessel, asked the pilot if it might be better to go a bit further from the coast where the navigation chart (published by the U. S. Coast Guard, by the way...) clearly showed deeper water. Unfortunately, the ship's hull found a shallow rock that did not appear on the chart. Yes, the master is in command, but he really was not at fault. Indeed, he did the responsible thing by taking the ship where the chart showed a safer situation (though he did elect to resign his command in observance of British maritime tradition). The ship went out of service for over a month, first receiving for temporary repairs in Boston so she could make it across the poind for permanent repairs.
BTW, this incident occurred before Carnival Corporation acquired Cunard so Carnival Corporation had nothing to do with it.