That's a good story of how crazy the world can be told in an entertaining way. I enjoyed reading that but I feel sorry for the poor guy. Is it true that there's really a law that disallows leaving a cruise ship in a different port? You can't get one way cruises to somewhere? I assume if that's how that law works, that it's US only?

I can see both sides here, but did the OP call ahead to make sure that he could do this? If he did and was informed that there wouldn't be any problem, then we have a problem.

And Reason #31 why I won't ever take a cruise. The first 30 reasons have also been explained here previously by Consumerist posters.

It's interesting the law was so easily ignored after he paid 200 dollars. I just hope he used a credit card.

Was Don Henley the captain perchance?

You can check out any time you like but you can never leave....

What a strange, messed up law. Although, depending on the size of the fine, I could see the cruise line's point. I wonder if it was just the $200 the liner fined him, or if the line had to pay the government more than that and took the hit?

I'm glad it worked out for the poster-I doubt I'd have fared as well staring down the face of mind-numbing red tape like that.

Yes, it is called the Passenger Services act, and it has been in place for much longer than 2006 in fact 1886, yes 1886.

Foreign flagged ships are not allowed to transport passengers between 2 different US ports, unless there is an intervening distant foreign port. No ports in either Canada or Mexico qualify as a distant foreign port. If you choose to disembark there is a fine, and you were charged.

A little Googling finds that The Jones-Shafroth Act (the Jones Act as it is known) was signed into law on March 2, 1917, by President Woodrow Wilson.
and
"Does the Jones Act apply to passengers? The Act, no; the principle, yes. What is known as the Passenger Vessel Act (PSA) of 1886 (46 U.S.C. 289) states that "no foreign vessel shall transport passengers between ports or places in the United States, under penalty of $200 for each passenger so transported or landed." "

This is not a case of the Cruise line doing something inappropriate, they are following US law. The law was not created as a security measure, it was to protect US shipping companies from foreign shipping companies from moving freight from one US port to another. I do agree that it would totally suck to find out about the law in the way this passenger did.

The reader should have asked about it and got details on what it would take to leave the ship early and not just assume it would be OK.

I don't blame the ship since they have rules and laws they need to follow.... did they need to be rude.... probable not.... but I would guess time at port is also time for some of the crew to also relax while many passengers are away, so the poor planning of this customer had probable messed up plans of others so I can see why some might be unhappy and rude... since the poor planning on the customer's part could also be seen as being rude.... and if someone is rude to me, chance are I will be rude right back.

@shufflemoomin: Even if there is a law, I don't see why they just didnt say "you can pay this fine and get off" from the beginning.

FYI: The US is tracking citizens at border crossings

"The U.S. government has been using its border checkpoints to collect information on citizens that will be stored for 15 years, raising concern among privacy advocates, the Washington Post reported on Wednesday."

[www.reuters.com]

We Have Met the Enemy and He Is Us

Didn't step foot on foreign soil? I don't believe that. Alaska cruises all originate or at least stop in Vancouver to get around the Jones Act.

The Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (aka Jones Act) was intended to protect the U.S. shipbuilding industry and U.S. seamen. In point of fact today, it basically does the opposite.

In order to be flagged in the U.S., a ship has to be built in the U.S. Since it isn't economical to build cruise ships in the U.S. anymore, plus the U.S. labour requirements associated with being U.S. flagged, all cruise ships nowadays are flagged in foreign countries -- Generally the Bahamas, Liberia or Panama. These ships can't operate "domestic" service between U.S. points -- hence the Alaska cruise mega hub of Vancouver.

Not sure this law serves the U.S. so well in 2008.

Celebrity will not permit you to leave early on a voluntary basis, but you can be thrown off against your will. From Celebrity's website's FAQs:

Can Celebrity deny Bookings, Shore and Land Excursion or even Transfer?

Subject: General Guest Policies
Celebrity Cruises reserves the right to refuse to accept a booking request from an individual or group and reserve the right to cancel an existing reservation. Furthermore, a guest may be removed from the vessel where, in the opinion of the ship's captain, a guest is unfit for travel or a risk or danger to himself or herself or a disturbance or danger to others.

The idea that a company can hold me against my will is enough for me to never go on a cruise to begin with.

I'm not letting cruise ship goons tell me I don't have the basic human freedom of movement. This is nothing but imprisonment.

@shufflemoomin: They do one way cruises all the time, although maybe they're always from America to a foreign county or from a foreign country to Amercia.

@Grabraham: That law is so old I doubt it gets enforced on a regular basis. This guy can't be the first person to do this, but I've never heard of a cruise ship accusing someone of trying to escape.

Shoulda just jumped overboard! :-D

Um... we're mad at Celebrity Cruises because they were following the law?

Another lovely Consumerist story where the OP sounds a little confused.

The idea that a company can hold me against my will is enough for me to never go on a cruise to begin with.

Well said. I've always avoided cruises because of their questionable sanitation and predatory employment system, but holding passengers captive at ports is quite a big strike against them. I hope word about this kind of standard procedure spreads far and wide.

@drgmobile: Well, on the cruise I was on last year to Alaska, the Vancouver stop was the last one, and we were there for (at most) 5 hours... Since he was leaving early, they probably hadn't stopped at the mandatory "foreign" stop yet.

I am not sure that you can say Celebrity was following the law. They let someone off and they have to pay a fine not they let someone off and they go to jail. Celebrity should have just paid the fine. Even with the Jones Act it may be a case of false imprisonment.

I'll have to agree that the OP, while justifiably angry, is angry at the wrong party. This is another case of US law making it difficult for Americans to travel. The fact that the law is close to 100 years old doesn't change anything. By US federal law, you are not allowed to permanently disembark anywhere except your originating port of call. Sorry guy, that's the law. Write your congressman.

Also, has no one noticed how incredibly rude he was for simply sneaking off the ship? By corporate policy (and the aforementioned federal law) the ship staff would have to wait for him and/or search the city for him. He could have delayed the vacation for thousands of people and we'd be reading "Celebrity Cruises delayed my family's vacation by 2 days because they claim a passenger never returned to the ship"

It's the reason why I don't fly, float or pay anyone to haul my ass and my gear anywhere anymore.

I get on my motorcycle and go. I'm free to go where I want, and most of the time it's faster than bus or airplane.

It's called cabotage. [en.wikipedia.org]

Wikipedia writes:

As another example, a passenger would not be able to buy a ticket on Air Canada for a flight from Boston to Toronto, connecting in Toronto to another flight to Seattle. Even though each of the legs would be legal individually, together they effectively offer a domestic service in the U.S.

So, say he boarded in San Francisco, and stopped in Victoria, Canada, and then proceeded to Alaska. That would constitute two points within the United States, and would fall under general cabotage rules. The Department of Homeland Security has been working hard to revise these rules for the 21st century, but has faced opposition (see [www.businessweek.com]).

The cruise line could have handled this better, though.

Rule #1. Never Assume

@Reeve: So it's false imprisonment when they're following the law? I hardly thinking telling a passenger he can't leave because of a law is false imprisonment. This is simply a case of the cruise line following the law. Blame the government of 1917.

@Balentius -- Yeah, I was thinking about that afterward and that's probably what happened. They hadn't been to Vancouver yet, so they hadn't yet fulfilled their obligations under the Jones Act. Good catch.

@Dobernala: Airlines do it all the time when they just park outside a gate for hours, and hours, and hours...

@twophrasebark: Celebrity wasn't following the law, they were following their pocketbook. If they had just stated at the start "we get fined if you leave; you owe us the fine money." then everything would be cool.

"Be quiet!" "Eat Waffles!". That just made my day. I was considering a Cruise, but this is making me wonder. Love the picture, btw.

Man, this is why I will never own a buisness. Once the Director told me that I was a pleasure prisoner I would have slipped him a $20 and called my boss.

"Yeah dude, it's totally illigal for me to get off this ship here. Yeah, either stay on the ship or its sraight to gitmo. See ya in a week."

See, they'll never interview me for those the ## habits of wealthy, succesful people bookerviews.

I don't care if its the law or not. The idea that I'm a prisoner once I get on a cruise, especially if its one of those long ones, is not acceptable.

Blame whoever you want, but I certainly will not tolerate it.

I'm with the, why didn't he call ahead?, crowd. At the very least, to let the crew know at the beginning of the trip that he would be leaving at one port stop instead of taking the whole cruise would have been respectful.

What would have happened if he didn't take his luggage?

All you need to know about the Jones Act:

[www.cruiseco.com]

Explains it very well IMO.

I always knew about this law because it always seems rather bizarre to me - they don't want you to leave the ship voluntarily because of the fine, yet they reserve the right to A) maroon you if you commit various offenses on the ship and B) leave you behind in a port-of-call if you don't make it back to ship in time for the scheduled departure.

The true absurdity comes into play when you consider that the effective result is that you actually can depart from the ship at will...you just can't bring your suitcase with you.

I wonder what would have happened if he told them he was planning on buying a lot of stuffed penguin souvenirs in Juneau and wanted the suitcase to transport them back to the ship?

Maybe you just can't leave the ship with any suitcase large enough to fit one of those fancy-pants waffle irons. I hear if you get caught stealing a waffle iron they actually hang you from the yard-arm!

... I will have to look into the Jones Act. I didn't even know it existed!

Awesome story though, made me chuckle :)

Simple solution, which could have saved him $200

"Oh, I didn't realize I couldn't leave. No biggie, but thanks for informing me" (brings luggage back to his room.)

Then disembarks for his Alaska "excursion" and flies home to his business meeting.

Family (who it seems remained aboard) brings his luggage home at the end of his cruise.

Simple.

I side with the cruise line. Could they have handled it better? Possibly. Am I willing to "blame the victim"? Possibly. There are procedures in place to be followed if a passenger voluntarily disembarks, and it sounds like this guy thought his ship was little different from a city bus, free to get off where he pleased.

Assuming he did it recently, the Infinity (a ship I sailed on to Alaska last year out of Vancouver) is sailing from Seattle, stopping in Sitka, Hubbard Glacier, Juneau, Ketchikan, Victoria, and returning to Seattle. He hadn't stopped in Victoria, thus under PSA the cruise line was liable for the $200 fine. They needed to make sure he paid it to them before they could release him.

Based on his description of events, I have to think this was planned. Perhaps, while booking a flight, researching port to airport transportation options, and all the other things that go with planning a trip, he should have taken a few moments to contact Celebrity and let them know he needed to disembark in Juneau.

Sorry...but this one falls under "bad consumer". It doesn't sound like this guy did any research on his travel plans...he just assumed that he would be able to disembark whenever and wherever he felt like it. Any attempt at researching this ahead of time would have saved him the aggravation.

With the world we live in it should be common sense knowledge that doing something out of the ordinary with your travel plans may cause problems.

He shouldn't need to ask permission. He is an American citizen who merly traveled to another state. The way he got to the state shouldn't mater as far as the citizen is concerned. As far as I know we haven't started asking for "papers" to go from one state to another. The rules of the cruise line are not the rules of his life. So it causes them inconveince and a fine, tough. The cruise line's arbitrary rules do not abrogate a persons civil rights. As far as I'm concerned rights trump rules.

I don't see why they just don't let people go and then tack on the $200.00 to their credit cards.

@ManiacDan:

By corporate policy (and the aforementioned federal law) the ship staff would have to wait for him and/or search the city for him.

I get on my motorcycle and go. I'm free to go where I want, and most of the time it's faster than bus or airplane.

Well we can't all afford such fancy motorcycles. Oh sure, amphibious motorcycles are a dime a dozen but only the wealthiest among us can afford the ones that can cross oceans.

@tedyc03: In a further example, you could not take a Lot flight from Orlando to New York, even though they do (or at least did at one time in the past) have a flight that goes there. If you get on in Orlando, you have to stay on until you reach Warsaw. You also can't board in New York for the flight to Orlando; if you are going to Orlando, you would have to have boarded in Warsaw.

@Hogan1:
Actually, this law would not constitute a defense to false imprisonment.

FI is defined as

i. an act or omission on the part of a defendant which confines or restrains a plaintiff;

ii. To a bound area

iii. intent; and

iv. causation

There are certain defenses to FI but having to pay a fine due to another law is NOT a defense unless the law specifically provides that it is a defense to FI.

I don't get it, what if it had been an actual life and death emergency? What if the reason he was on that cruise was as part of a business conference and his wife went into labor or something? I am all for obeying laws, but sometimes, leinincy (SP) and understanding must be shown. Oh, well, at least its not as bad as El Al lol.

@Reeve:
I will note in response to myself - consent is a defense to false imprisonment. The cruise line may have had in the contract a consent provision based on the Jones act which would provide a defense.

I dont want to blame the victim. This is a crappy experience. That said, the cruise line was simply following the rules set out for it by the US Government, albeit in 1917. As far as the rudeness goes, many employees on the cruise ships are not exactly well educated in US law. They likely didnt know he could just pay the fine and be on his way - they probably had to wait from someone in the Miami HQ to tell them this was an acceptable solution. Many of these people on the ships, are young, just out of high school, foreigners. There's no way they are going to know US law this in depth. They just follow the - "dont let them off the ship and bring them to guest relations" script.

By the way, you can' sue the cruise lines - its in the carriage contract - binding arbitration in Florida baby.

well, let me rephrase, in conjunction with an experience on one of their cruises.

Obviously the passenger DID NOT read the Cruise Contact that he HAD to sign before boarding the ship. It's in the contact about that, and it has to be there by law.

Sorry, but Blame the OP here... Ignorance IS NOT Bliss here...

good lord, ignorance of the law is no reason to be absolved of it. They were following the protocol - granted it seems silly but sometimes laws are.