CM Attacked at ToT

[RobWDW1971]

We are all lucky that its not your place to decide the fate of others.

If you don't think people who punch cast members in the face (which has not been disputed by anybody) should go to jail, then yes, you are very lucky.

Or perhaps you'd like to submit a scenario where punching this girl in the face while she's working TOT should NOT warrant imprisonment. We are all waiting...

 

[wannabeBelle]

What a beautiful young lady!! Marie

 

[John park hopper]

The definition is pretty easy...

assault is a misdomeaner. Aggravated assault is a felony, but is:
(1) An “aggravated assault” is an assault:
(a) With a deadly weapon without intent to kill; or
(b) With an intent to commit a felony.

Clearly that doesn't apply here. battery can be a felony if they are a repeat offender for assault or battery.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

www.leg.state.fl.us

I would make a bet this is not the first assault this POS was been involved in.

 

[Disney Lover Addie]

Disgusting. Absolutely disgusting. I’m glad the woman who punched was given a lifetime ban.

 

[Oddysey]

Has any video come out? Surprised I have not seen anything. Virtually anything unusual is filmed these days.

 

[LAKid53]

A legit company would actually allow their employees to be ON THE CLOCK while defending themselves in the duty of the company. And would provide them legal support for defending themselves in the duty of the company. The employee shouldn't have to do anything except meet their responsibilities and do their job.

But Disney doesn't do this.

Hypothetical here.

Say, after interviewing the victim, eye witnesses and all video evidence, the SA decides to press criminal charges against the alleged perpetrator. If the prosecutor felt that the victim's employer was hindering the victim's assistance with the case or appearance in court, that employer would be getting a phone call from said prosecutor.

Legal assistance provided by Disney could apply if it was determined the CM contributed, rather than defended, themselves. And in that case, it could be argued that the CM was acting as an agent of Disney, thus Disney could bear some liability.

 

[Disney Lover Addie]

Has any video come out? Surprised I have not seen anything. Virtually anything unusual is filmed these days.

Nothing has come out yet, which is very surprising! Especially after the toontown fight which was filmed from start to end.

 

[flynnibus]

Hypothetical here.

Say, after interviewing the victim, eye witnesses and all video evidence, the SA decides to press criminal charges against the alleged perpetrator. If the prosecutor felt that the victim's employer was hindering the victim's assistance with the case or appearance in court, that employer would be getting a phone call from said prosecutor.

Ergo the problem, how do you prove that? When Disney distances themselves from it, they distance their responsibility as well. "hindering" is an active thing.. they can achieve the same result easily passively without being liable. If Disney isn't obligated to pay the employee for that time... NOT paying for their time is not 'hindering' them.

When the CM can't get enough hours to afford to pass up shifts... Disney isn't 'hindering' them from assisting the police, but passively they are because the CM literally can't afford to not work.

If Disney prevented the police from reaching the employee.. ok. If Disney would not give the employee allowed time off to deal with the police.. ok. But Disney doesn't have to go that far to passively influence behavior. For instance, noting the incident on the employee's record and handling it in a negative light.

Even when you have specific whistleblower laws in place protecting people - its incredibly hard to qualify and pursue action against an employers for retaliation, etc.

Legal assistance provided by Disney could apply if it was determined the CM contributed, rather than defended, themselves. And in that case, it could be argued that the CM was acting as an agent of Disney, thus Disney could bear some liability.

What does the 'cm contributed' have anything to do with this hypothetical or the real case? If the CM did it, Disney would try to further themselves from it even more. What does this have to do with the case at hand? Or how Disney stands BEHIND it's CMs?

 

[LAKid53]

Ergo the problem, how do you prove that? When Disney distances themselves from it, they distance their responsibility as well. "hindering" is an active thing.. they can achieve the same result easily passively without being liable. If Disney isn't obligated to pay the employee for that time... NOT paying for their time is not 'hindering' them.

When the CM can't get enough hours to afford to pass up shifts... Disney isn't 'hindering' them from assisting the police, but passively they are because the CM literally can't afford to not work.

If Disney prevented the police from reaching the employee.. ok. If Disney would not give the employee allowed time off to deal with the police.. ok. But Disney doesn't have to go that far to passively influence behavior. For instance, noting the incident on the employee's record and handling it in a negative light.

Even when you have specific whistleblower laws in place protecting people - its incredibly hard to qualify and pursue action against an employers for retaliation, etc.



What does the 'cm contributed' have anything to do with this hypothetical or the real case? If the CM did it, Disney would try to further themselves from it even more. What does this have to do with the case at hand? Or how Disney stands BEHIND it's CMs?

I'm referring to how the prosecutor looks at the incident. If it is determined someone was acting as an agent of a 3rd party, that can open the 3rd party up to some liability.

ETA: If the CM decided to press charges and Disney noted it on the employee's personnel record in a negative light, that opens Disney up to litigation on behalf of the CM.

I know employees who have been retailated against by their employers, solely because they provided testimony in a lawsuit brought by another employee. The employer was threatened with both a civil fine and jail time by the federal agency conducting the investigation.

 

[s8film40]

Nothing has come out yet, which is very surprising! Especially after the toontown fight which was filmed from start to end.

I think there would of only been a handful of people with a good line of sight. The line leading up to that point is fairly short once you enter the building and turns. The guests waiting by the library door would have a very clear view and likely weren’t paying attention.

 

[flynnibus]

I'm referring to how the prosecutor looks at the incident. If it is determined someone was acting as an agent of a 3rd party, that can open the 3rd party up to some liability.

ETA: If the CM decided to press charges and Disney noted it on the employee's personnel record in a negative light, that opens Disney up to litigation on behalf of the CM.

I know employees who have been retailated against by their employers, solely because they provided testimony in a lawsuit brought by another employee. The employer was threatened with both a civil fine and jail time by the federal agency conducting the investigation.

Well.. let's just say... history is on Disney's side here.

As it's been pointed out time and time again... proving retaliation is difficult... and certainly someone needs a heck of a lot more motivation than a simple battery charge to start a long drawn out case against the mouse.

Note you also switched between a civil case.. and the criminal case by the DA in your discussion. Big deltas there...

 

[LAKid53]

Well.. let's just say... history is on Disney's side here.

As it's been pointed out time and time again... proving retaliation is difficult... and certainly someone needs a heck of a lot more motivation than a simple battery charge to start a long drawn out case against the mouse.

I've been involved in similar cases with regards to whistleblowers. It's not as difficult as you'd imagine. Especially when the arrogant idiot puts it in an email....and HR and the IG has dozens of prior complaints.

 

[DisneyGigi]

If you don't think people who punch cast members in the face (which has not been disputed by anybody) should go to jail, then yes, you are very lucky.

Or perhaps you'd like to submit a scenario where punching this girl in the face while she's working TOT should NOT warrant imprisonment. We are all waiting...

View attachment 392521

I would like to see a photo of the person that punched her....

 

[LAKid53]

Note you also switched between a civil case.. and the criminal case by the DA in your discussion. Big deltas there...

I see you added this comment after I addressed your statement.

Both can result from this incident:

1. Criminal prosecution, on behalf of the victim, by the state attorney.
2. Civil lawsuit filed by the victim to collect damages from the individual who hit them.


You brought up the issue of whistleblowers, not me. I was mearly addressing that.

 

[s8film40]

I’d really like to see OSHA get more involved with these incidents. Issue some fines and make reporting of incidents mandatory and Disney might change their approach.

 

[LAKid53]

I’d really like to see OSHA get more involved with these incidents. Issue some fines and make reporting of incidents mandatory and Disney might change their approach.

The problem with that is you want incidents that fall under state criminal statutes to be reported as such and not through OSHA. No federal agency is going to adopt rules that force employers, under penalty of fines, to report incidents of criminal violence against its employees by a 3rd party. That's outside the perview of OSHA.

 

[s8film40]

The problem with that is you want incidents that fall under state criminal statutes to be reported as such and not through OSHA. No federal agency is going to adopt rules that force employers, under penalty of fines, to report incidents of criminal violence against its employees by a 3rd party. That's outside the perview of OSHA.

Workplace violence is definitely within OSHA’s perview. The point is many CM’s are afraid to press charges. If OSHA implemented some rules to take the burden off the CM and mandated reporting of incidents where employees were injured noting wether charges were pressed I think a very specific pattern would become apparent.

Obviously what I’m saying is hypothetical, I would like to see some changes to better protect employees. I don’t expect to see it though.

 

[fngoofy]

That's the point - it's not a ride control board It's just the park FP kiosk system.

I thought it took place in the lobby at the podium where the two lines merge and you are sent to one of the libraries.

 

[LAKid53]

Workplace violence is definitely within OSHA’s perview. The point is many CM’s are afraid to press charges. If OSHA implemented some rules to take the burden off the CM and mandated reporting of incidents where employees were injured noting wether charges were pressed I think a very specific pattern would become apparent.

Obviously what I’m saying is hypothetical, I would like to see some changes to better protect employees. I don’t expect to see it though.

Only if that violence is a recognized HAZARD of that place of employment or occupation.

 

[s8film40]

Only if that violence is a recognized HAZARD of that place of employment or occupation.

It’s something that OSHA will investigate if requested. All I’m saying is a more proactive approach would take some of the pressure off the employee. I’m not talking about OSHA’s current rules and policies I’m saying they should change to better protect employees.