Yes. But I come from a country that is less litigious. People would think it crazy to sue a wedding venue if you hired a photographer, agreed to all their terms and conditions, and then tripped over their camera bag or ripped your wedding dress on a tripod. If a private chef gives you food poisoning during a holiday rental, you don't sue your AirBNB host.
How dare the lowly public peons sully my holy inner sanctum of Disney!!! I can't be expected to see PEASANTS on my vacation!!!
Now that is a really weird comment. Nobody vets anyone arriving on a bus from Disney Springs, wandering into a Disney hotel, getting into an elevator, walking down the hall. Can you somehow identify a service worker and differentiate them from a "regular guest"? Are they more sweaty? Do they wear cheaper shorts? Are they carrying bigger bags? Do they look less American touristy?
But Disney is locked in to a very nasty wrongful death case involving food allergens at Raglan Road’s Disney Springs location. I can totally see the liability issues for the private chefs guiding that decision.
Why would Disney get drawn into a law suit involving a third party supplier? Seems odd. Don't know the details, but might assume that Raglan Road's contract with Disney was defective in some way. Either that or there are some strange quirks to US law that don't apply elsewhere.
It’s not an uncommon sentiment and easier to understand when you realize many Americans have been absolutely gripped by a delusional “stranger danger” paranoia. And there is absolutely a socio-economic component.
The fact that it may not be an uncommon sentiment, doesn't make it less weird (to the rest of the world). However, if a widespread delusion, it may explain why international tourist numbers were down 6% last year. (Point of clarification: is "socio-economic component" code for something that we're not allowed to reference?)
It’s not code, it just means the anxiety regarding strangers is highly contextual and not consistent. As you note, there are hundreds of people freely moving about the resort grounds. The concern isn’t entirely that they are unknown persons but that they are unknown persons who would be considered socio-economically lower (people doing deliveries, driving others, etc.) than those who generally stay at Disney properties. How much the presence of such persons is a problem also varies by property tier, being less of an issue at Value Resorts and the greatest issue at DVC properties.
How does it seem odd? You clearly have no understanding of US jurisprudence, tort law, or Florida laws. Which seems really odd considering you are trying to comment on legal risks of a business..in the US. To not understand that plaintiff’s will look to the deep pockets of Disney as opposed to some solo operator means you don’t have the level of knowledge to be commenting on this topic.
To the rest of the world, the looking to "deep pockets" rather than the immediate parties for recompense is odd. I get that you are describing a risk you see as real, but to non-Americans it seems bizarre that your country would validate a legal paradigm that doesn't make much sense. In most parts of the world, if you experience harm you sue the people directly responsible. You don't try to get money from a richer entity that is tangentially linked.
It seems to be going in waves. I’m sure this is incoming. Also apparently the reason the DS AND GF BBB never reopened was the State changed some cosmetology regulations that made it more difficult to operate. Something with it being in the park it’s considered an experience whereas outside the park it would be considered a salon or something like that.
Anyone visiting the resort has to show ID, and were told in their C&D letters they would be trespassed if found operating on property
So it doesn't apply to any small business that hasn't been C&D'd then... good to know.
Well I mean the property rules state that unauthorized businesses cannot operate on property, it’s up to that business/customer to see how long they can go without being told (if ever) to stop.
Agreed, but without a contingent of private investigators to sniff out commercial relationships, there's not much Disney can do if I say that "Cousin Wolfgang" -- who's cooking a 5-course feast for my extended family of 6 in a rented DVC suite -- is just one of the many relatives I have in the Orlando area and is "treating us to a demonstration of his skills" while "Aunt Betty" dolls up my daughters to look like Anastasia and Drisella prior to a MNSSHP and "Uncle Sven" is folding my wife like a fitted sheet on a massage table in the master bedroom to work out her "concrete back spasms"...Well I mean the property rules state that unauthorized businesses cannot operate on property, it’s up to that business/customer to see how long they can go without being told (if ever) to stop.
No, you don't really get to have any opinion, non American or American, about facts that you know nothing about. Nor does it make any sense to have an opinion based upon how things are outside the bubble, when you are talking about what happens inside the bubble. It would be like if I started commenting about the risks/requirements of performing brain surgery in Europe when 1) i have no medical experience/training, and 2) I have no experience with med-mal laws in the particular country where the surgery is taking place. No one cares about what happens in the rest of the world, when what you are talking about isn't happening in the rest of the world. It's irrelevant, and its not a point of disagreement, you are just wrong, or at best uniformed about what you are trying to talk about.