GAC to Become DAS

[sshindel]

Ok, what happens when those people whose daily life is a struggle is less magical at the parks because of the weasels?

Is there any limit to how many weasels you are comfortable ignoring?

It's simple really.. if everyone is in the 'special' line.. that line isn't so special anymore and suffers similar waits and setbacks.

It's not just the non-users that are impacted, but the needy are impacted as well.

That was what I was getting at with the part:

Would I like the system to be tightened up to limit the abuse while providing access to those in need, yes, and I think that this change is likely in the right direction.

I do not think abuse should be ignored fully, and it seems as though the DAS is a step to try and limit the abuse. But every single system can and will be abused by those that really want to try. Short of eliminating the system all together, abuse is going to happen. If the system was being abused to a degree where those in need were not gaining benefit ("everyone" is in the 'special' line, as you suggest), then less and less folks would be looking to use/abuse the system.

And to answer your question:

Is there any limit to how many weasels you are comfortable ignoring?

This is a personal opinion, but I would honestly be perfectly happy with a %50 rate of need vs. abuse. If 5 out of 10 people moving ahead of me in the line are truly in need, I'm ok with waiting the extra time brought on by those abusing the system. Again, this is me, not anyone else.

I do think that Disney is trying to address the issue and cut down on abuse. I still think abuse will happen. I think those people in need will have less than they had before because of the abuse. I wish there was a way that those in need could get everything they had before, while cutting down on abusers. I don't see a way that happens, so limiting the benefit, tightening up security around the usage, and trying to move in the right direction is their best alternative at this point.

 

[Witchy Chick]

well according to the latest census 1 in 5 Americans has some sort of long term disability. Now this does not mean that all those would or should use a GAC, but 1 in 6 in a FP line using a GAC is not as high as it sounds. Also that 1 in 6 is not all abusers. Lets take a theoretical 50% of all GAC users are abusing the system, which is pretty high, that means 1 in 12 people in the FP line should not be there.

Or 6 out of 12, if you figure in that the GAC/DAS abuser can bring in up to 5 "friends"/family. Therein, lies a large part of the problem.

 

[Fractal514]

And to answer your question:
This is a personal opinion, but I would honestly be perfectly happy with a %50 rate of need vs. abuse. If 5 out of 10 people moving ahead of me in the line are truly in need, I'm ok with waiting the extra time brought on by those abusing the system. Again, this is me, not anyone else.

And I disagree. If 50% of the people using the system are abusers, then something should be done, if for no other reason than to protect the system for those who do need it.

Also, I'm not OK with the extra time waiting for people who abuse the system to go through. I know I should be able to let it go, but when I'm down there are the stand-by line stops for 10 minutes while the FP line rushes past, it gets on my nerves. This is just my personal feeling of course and I don't expect Disney to do anything about it, but if this will help that, even in part, then I'm all for it.

 

[arko]

The problem is no one is entitled to do a "set" number of attractions per day. And while it is disappointing that a disability may prevent someone from experiencing the parks to their maximum enjoyment, it is unfortunately just a fact of life. Even people without disabilities have different limits that may restrict how much of the parks they experience in a day. Disney, just simply, cannot accomodate everyone's limitations. The DAS is about physical access to the attractions and how it can be accomplished reasonably for the guest in question. While Disney (and other businesses) must try to accomodate a guest with disabilities, it is not their responsibility to cater to them, and disabled people should know their limitations and adjust accordingly.


They can, but choose not to. The ADA doesn't explicitly restrict businesses from requiring proof. Employers and schools require proof all the time. By extension a business can technically require proof. Most businesses do not because most of the requested accomodations are relatively inexpensive and easy to provide. Plus for most businesses it's not worth the hassle to question people. There is also nothing in the law that prevents a business from inquiring as to the nature of a disability (a business needs to know how to make an accomodation), so Disney can technically tell guests with back problems that the DAS cannot be used on rides such as Space Mountain or BTMRR.

Disney's legal obligation is to accomodate physical access to boarding a ride (attraction). If a child or adult cannot physically stand in line because he may harm himself or others due to a mental disability, Disney's obligation is NOT to grant immediate boarding access, but merely accommodate the disability by allowing him/her to board without a wait in the confined queue. If a child or adult cannot physically stand in line for physical reasons, Disney is obligated to provide a method for them to be able to board the ride, either by wheelchair through the queue (or through an accessible entrance), but they aren't obligated to grant anyone immediate access.

It's clear to me that people most upset with the new policy are upset because they are losing an advantage they had. To me, the posts are coming across as entitled. That being disabled entitles them to a better experience than those without a disability, and to argue with them is met with a response of "live in my shoes".


No doubt. There's no way to completely eliminate abuse. And much of the abuse that it will eliminate is solely dependent on enforcement by CMs.

Actually no the language is quite clear as detailed in section 36.302 section c

A public accommodation shall not ask about the nature or extent of a person´s disability, but may make two inquiries to determine whether an animal qualifies as a service animal. A public accommodation may ask if the animal is required because of a disability and what work or task the animal has been trained to perform. A public accommodation shall not require documentation, such as proof that the animal has been certified, trained, or licensed as a service animal

Trust me I am sure there was a legal review to see if they could indeed ask, and I am sure Disney has access to some pretty good lawyers. The fact that even after the changes they are not asking means they determined based on current ADA regulations they can't.

edit found another example

36.311 section c

Inquiry about disability. A public accommodation shall not ask an individual using a wheelchair or other power-driven mobility device questions about the nature and extent of the individual´s disability.

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Therein, lies a large part of the problem.

This, that and the 6 maximum rule was not always enforced, making groups even larger.

 

[arko]

Or 6 out of 12, if you figure in that the GAC/DAS abuser can bring in up to 5 "friends"/family. Therein, lies a large part of the problem.

Well the numbers quoted were 1 in 6 were were getting in using a GAC, that would cover anyone using a GAC to gain entrance not number of GAC's.

 

[arko]

I wish people could get beyond the "rights" thing, it's not about what Disney is legally required to do. They have always gone leaps and bounds beyond what's required. They presumably did so because it was either good for business or just the right thing to do for their guests (I suspect the former).

Now it's been pointed out that there has been rampant abuse and they're trying to fix it to stop the abuse. I'm pretty sure it's still good for business to go above and beyond what's legally required, the question remains the "how".

I'm convinced what's been proposed is not a good choice to deal with the abuse while continuing to go above and beyond, but that's just my opinion. I've already posted a suggested solution that would leverage the new MagicBands to maintain the current good aspects of the GACs for legitimately disabled users while removing much of the incentive to cheat. Hopefully Disney will evolve their plans going forward.

I think you would find the vast majority of us who use a GAC legitimately know this was above and beyond. The frustration lies in the fact that Disney has to change it not because of abuse by its intended audience but by people who had no business getting one.

 

[misterID]

@arko Who's numbers were quoted?

I'll say this, it never ceases to amaze me the "not expense of my kids, they get hot and sweaty too" and "they're getting a better vacation than me" crowd. Your compassion and tolerance really makes me go warm and fuzzy. Same crowd, same crap.

Other than that, I'm glad they're addressing this issue. I think it's flawed. I don't understand the kiosks. And most legit users are severly limited on the rides they can ride and will repeat several attractions to make up for it. Eh, hopefully they can work that out.

Personally, put the ADA incharge of the GAC. They can ask for criteria.If you belong to, let's for example the National Kidney Foundation, you have to show your membership. If they're adding employees to carry this out, bring in some reps from the ADA to handle the GAC service. That way there is no abuse. Problem solved.

 

[Tom Morrow]

While I can't speak for every attraction, I know the numbers for a certain attraction which I will not name here. People riding using a GAC to go through the Fastpass line accounted for an average of 10-15% of everyone riding per hour, and during peak periods as high as 20%.

The problem is that it increases the demand for the Fastpass line exponentially, which means:
- longer wait time for Fastpass holders.
- longer waiting for people who actually need the assistance
- even longer and slower moving standby lines than the system is intended to artificially inflate them to.

So it means the card holders that don't actually need it (the accommodation is supposed to be "I can't wait in long lines" - NOT "I need immediate unlimited access to every ride!") are riding more while causing everyone else to ride less. Often the same family will ride over and over and over with a card while everyone else has to wait for their Fastpass time or wait an hour. The cards are supposed to be limited to six people, but the solution people have come up with is "just get more cards!" so families will whip out 3 or 4 cards so their party of 14 can ride multiple times while you ride once.

Bottom line is, the abuse of the current system hurts EVERYONE.

 

[arko]

@arko Who's numbers were quoted?

I'll say this, it never ceases to amaze me the "not expense of my kids, they get hot and sweaty too" and "they're getting a better vacation than me" crowd. Your compassion and tolerance really makes me go warm and fuzzy. Same crowd, same crap.

Other than that, I'm glad they're addressing this issue. I think it's flawed. I don't understand the kiosks. And most legit users are severly limited on the rides they can ride and will repeat several attractions to make up for it. Eh, hopefully they can work that out.

Personally, put the ADA incharge of the GAC. They can ask for criteria.If you belong to, let's for example the National Kidney Foundation, you have to show your membership. If they're adding employees to carry this out, bring in some reps from the ADA to handle the GAC service. That way there is no abuse. Problem solved.

Tom Morrow's number in this post
http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/gac-to-become-das.873666/page-13#post-5717356

The ADA does not provide staff only regulations, its not even an agency, ADA cases are handled by the department of Justice Civil Rights division.
Enforcement is basically through a complaint.
Companies like Disney don't get ADA certified, they hire consultants to advise them on how best to ensure they are compliant. As for rides etc the ADA provides the guidelines in the form of regulations and the imagineers design the ride to meet those requirements.

In fact the ADA is quite clear how it operates

The Department enforces the ADA through complaints, lawsuits, consent decrees, settlement agreements, and alternate dispute resolution (mediation).

The enforcement of state codes is the responsibility of state or local officials – usually through plan reviews and building inspections. The ADA relies on the traditional method of civil rights enforcement through litigation in federal courts. Local officials do not have the authority to enforce the ADA on behalf of the federal government.
In an effort both to facilitate compliance with all applicable laws and to mitigate the tension between federal and state enforcement processes, the ADA authorizes the Department of Justice, upon request of state or local officials, to certify that state or local accessibility laws meet or exceed the requirements of the ADA

 

[misterID]

Thanks @arko

*grain of salt*

While I can't speak for every attraction, I know the numbers for a certain attraction which I will not name here. People riding using a GAC to go through the Fastpass line accounted for an average of 10-15% of everyone riding per hour, and during peak periods as high as 20%.

The problem is that it increases the demand for the Fastpass line exponentially, which means:
- longer wait time for Fastpass holders.
- longer waiting for people who actually need the assistance
- even longer and slower moving standby lines than the system is intended to artificially inflate them to.

So it means the card holders that don't actually need it (the accommodation is supposed to be "I can't wait in long lines" - NOT "I need immediate unlimited access to every ride!") are riding more while causing everyone else to ride less. Often the same family will ride over and over and over with a card while everyone else has to wait for their Fastpass time or wait an hour. The cards are supposed to be limited to six people, but the solution people have come up with is "just get more cards!" so families will whip out 3 or 4 cards so their party of 14 can ride multiple times while you ride once.

Bottom line is, the abuse of the current system hurts EVERYONE.

No doubt people are abusing the system, but I don't think the parties of fifteen are any kind of normal statistic.

 

[Goofyernmost]

@arko Who's numbers were quoted?

I'll say this, it never ceases to amaze me the "not expense of my kids, they get hot and sweaty too" and "they're getting a better vacation than me" crowd. Your compassion and tolerance really makes me go warm and fuzzy. Same crowd, same crap.

Other than that, I'm glad they're addressing this issue. I think it's flawed. I don't understand the kiosks. And most legit users are severly limited on the rides they can ride and will repeat several attractions to make up for it. Eh, hopefully they can work that out.

Personally, put the ADA incharge of the GAC. They can ask for criteria.If you belong to, let's for example the National Kidney Foundation, you have to show your membership. If they're adding employees to carry this out, bring in some reps from the ADA to handle the GAC service. That way there is no abuse. Problem solved.

You cannot be from this country. If you were you would know that ADA personnel merely sit in their highly paid little governmental world and issue demands coupled with threats if you don't follow them. To be fair, there intent is good, but their logic leaves a lot to be desired. But I almost spit my ice tea on the screen when I read about having them come and "man the booths" more or less. Trust me they don't get within a hundred miles of real people. They just issue directives and then go home to spend the evening with the wife and kiddies and are in no way motivated to mingle with the disabled or let's make believe I'm disabled crowd.

 

[arko]

While I can't speak for every attraction, I know the numbers for a certain attraction which I will not name here. People riding using a GAC to go through the Fastpass line accounted for an average of 10-15% of everyone riding per hour, and during peak periods as high as 20%.

The problem is that it increases the demand for the Fastpass line exponentially, which means:
- longer wait time for Fastpass holders.
- longer waiting for people who actually need the assistance
- even longer and slower moving standby lines than the system is intended to artificially inflate them to.

So it means the card holders that don't actually need it (the accommodation is supposed to be "I can't wait in long lines" - NOT "I need immediate unlimited access to every ride!") are riding more while causing everyone else to ride less. Often the same family will ride over and over and over with a card while everyone else has to wait for their Fastpass time or wait an hour. The cards are supposed to be limited to six people, but the solution people have come up with is "just get more cards!" so families will whip out 3 or 4 cards so their party of 14 can ride multiple times while you ride once.

Bottom line is, the abuse of the current system hurts EVERYONE.

The new system will see just as much abuse, I think, its just that its effect will be limited by the virtue of the limit on how fast you can repeat rides.
It will be interesting to see just how many less people there will be in the FP lanes with both FP+ and the DAS combined, and just how much faster will the standby lines move.

 

[minninedaisy74]

I wish people could get beyond the "rights" thing, it's not about what Disney is legally required to do. They have always gone leaps and bounds beyond what's required. They presumably did so because it was either good for business or just the right thing to do for their guests (I suspect the former).

Now it's been pointed out that there has been rampant abuse and they're trying to fix it to stop the abuse. I'm pretty sure it's still good for business to go above and beyond what's legally required, the question remains the "how".

I'm convinced what's been proposed is not a good choice to deal with the abuse while continuing to go above and beyond, but that's just my opinion. I've already posted a suggested solution that would leverage the new MagicBands to maintain the current good aspects of the GACs for legitimately disabled users while removing much of the incentive to cheat. Hopefully Disney will evolve their plans going forward.

You are right Disney has always gone above and beyond for their guest and now it is constantly expected from many of their guest. I am not specifically talking about GAC users but your average guest. I read over at another board and you would not belie the things people complain about to get what they call a little "extra Pixie dust". I think that the abuse of the GAC and reigning that in is Disney's first step in cutting back on what they are willing to do for their guest. So many go there with these unrealistic expectations that they aren't happy unless things go perfectly.

 

[arko]

You cannot be from this country. If you were you would know that ADA personnel merely sit in their highly paid little governmental world and issue demands coupled with threats if you don't follow them. To be fair, there intent is good, but their logic leaves a lot to be desired. But I almost spit my ice tea on the screen when I read about having them come and "man the booths" more or less. Trust me they don't get within a hundred miles of real people. They just issue directives and then go home to spend the evening with the wife and kiddies and are in no way motivated to mingle with the disabled or let's make believe I'm disabled crowd.

Given that ADA personnel don't exist, it would be impossible

 

[khale1970]

Because Disney does not have ability to ask for verification, there is no real way to keep the current system and crack down on abusers.

Do you believe those with disabilities (or their families) would support an amendment to the ADA where verification or documentation of the disability could be required? I'm sure there is a reason the law prohibits such, but it seems that has led to where we are today. Because of abuse by those falsely claiming a disability, the baseline was redrawn to diminish the benefit to those with genuine need.

 

[khale1970]

Because Disney does not have ability to ask for verification, there is no real way to keep the current system and crack down on abusers.
Although the picture and license requirement even if added to the current system would at least ensure that the person pictured has to ride the ride. But even the new system will do nothing to stop someone from claiming an illness they don't have and getting a card and a few extra FP's.

As another thought, would it be permissible for Disney to use the DAS system as the general baseline, but if you bring in the equivalent of a doctor's note your DAS could be modified to suit your disability or condition? For example, if the note indicates the person can't handle lengthy stays in the park, you get an unlimited DAS that is restricted to 4 hours that day.

 

[mickeysaver]

One thing that has to be understood is that for those that legitimately deserve access to a GAC, the unknowns of the DAS cause them to worry, especially those that have trips planned that will be affected by the changes in ways that could potentially drastically change everything that they have spent months planning. We need to be mindful of the fear and frustration that these folks are feeling, like life isn't hard enough for them to begin with.

For those that claim that a GAC provided an advantage vs equality, I disagree. That GAC may have meant the difference in experiencing 6 attractions in a day instead of 3, 2, or none. Having traveled with folks with a legitimate GAC need, it was a vacation saver. Had there been no GAC, we might as well have never left the room. With the GAC, we got my then MIL in and out of attractions quickly and when her stamina pooped out after 3 hours of park time, or less, we had still managed to have given her experiences that she enjoyed and remembered fondly. Had we not had a GAC, we would have never managed to squeeze that much magic out of our experience, because her health was failing so badly. I am forever grateful that we had that time with her at Disney. We chose Disney because they did make things easier by offering the GAC. We chose Disney because it was a family destination. Honestly, if the clock was rolled back again to when we were in the Year of A Million Dreams and this DAS thing was happening, I would probably need a straight jacket right about now worrying about if we should cancel or if the DAS was going to work. It was bad enough trying to get my MIL to agree to getting the GAC, but I somehow doubt that she would have ever let her pride take the hit by submitting to a photo linked ID. Just thinking about it puts knots in my belly. Ugh.

 

[arko]

Do you believe those with disabilities (or their families) would support an amendment to the ADA where verification or documentation of the disability could be required? I'm sure there is a reason the law prohibits such, but it seems that has led to where we are today. Because of abuse by those falsely claiming a disability, the baseline was redrawn to diminish the benefit to those with genuine need.

My guess is the current regulations are in place for protection of privacy concerns, and in the United States those kinds of obstacles are hard to overcome. Just reading some of the internal commentary on how the hearings discussed how to define what a wheelchair or motorized vehicle is tells you how hard it is to get anything changed.

 

[arko]

As another thought, would it be permissible for Disney to use the DAS system as the general baseline, but if you bring in the equivalent of a doctor's note your DAS could be modified to suit your disability or condition? For example, if the note indicates the person can't handle lengthy stays in the park, you get an unlimited DAS that is restricted to 4 hours that day.

All it takes is one complaint from one person saying that they asked for proof and it would go away.