New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[DryerLintFan]

According to the article @DCBaker linked, 3700 people signed it. I am sure that number will jump exponentially, now that it has hit the media and everyone wants to jump on the bandwagon.

What do they hope to do? Like is this just to submit to Disney to show people are against it? Or are they gearing up for a law suit

 

[phillip9698]

No they’re saying when they’re in the DAS VQ for a longer wait ride, they can do on a shorter wait standby and effectively be in line for two rides at the same time

No, that is not what me and the other poster were discussing at all.

 

[Chi84]

According to the article @DCBaker linked, 3700 people signed it. I am sure that number will jump exponentially, now that it has hit the media and everyone wants to jump on the bandwagon.

It’s a change.org petition. Interesting bunch of petitions to be found there.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It’s a change.org petition. Interesting bunch of petitions to be found there.

Aka 100% useless

Except the one that wants Disney to reject they ever made Star Wars movies and start all over Again. Everyone should support that

 

[DryerLintFan]

Aka 100% useless

Except the one that wants Disney to reject they ever made Star Wars movies and start all over Again. Everyone should support that

It’s not useless. Even if it goes nowhere it’s making thousands of people feel like their frustration is heard. There’s value in that.

 

[monothingie]

Here is a shareable link about the DAS Defenders group:

'DAS Defenders' group hopes Disney reverses changes to its Disability Access Service policy

A newly formed group of people with disabilities and their allies is calling on Disney to reverse changes the company announced last week to its Disability Access Service.

www.fox35orlando.com

Has Disney officially released the criteria or details on the new system, or is it still just speculation?

 

[Figgy1]

Has Disney officially released the criteria or details on the new system, or is it still just speculation?

Speculation except for Autism/developmental

 

[nickys]

Several people have pointed out that part of accommodation is NOT separating a disabled person from their party.

When I asked if allowing a parent and child to skip the line and meet up with the rest of their party when they reach the attraction via standby, is an appropriate accommodation, I was told no. Even in a case where one parent could adequately supervise the one child.

So which is it?

People aren’t ever going to agree on this. And to be brutally honest it doesn’t matter because ultimately Disney will be the ones giving guidelines to CMs. And what you or I or anyone else on Disney fan forums think is irrelevant.

If a guest is offered an accommodation they don’t believe is appropriate, it will be up to them to explain why. They may be offered an alternative, they may not.

But I don’t think saying things like “it’s not fair” or “but I read that someone got the DAS for the exact same thing” will make a difference. A well reasoned explanation is more likely to get an alternative accommodation.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

It’s not useless. Even if it goes nowhere it’s making thousands of people feel like their frustration is heard. There’s value in that.

You’re right…

…winning the war of moral victories

 

[monothingie]

Aka 100% useless

Except the one that wants Disney to reject they ever made Star Wars movies and start all over Again. Everyone should support that

 

[nickys]

Is that the next marvel movie?

It should be Defenders Assemble!

 

[flynnibus]

It actually is hard to understand the way that DAS is described - as basically “the standby lane, waiting somewhere else”. In that case, you are making statements such as “The standby line is overwhelming wait times in the standby line!” or “Genie+ is clogged up because more people are waiting in the standby line!” That doesn’t make a lot of sense, obviously.

I think you are blurring different points and then creating new confusions.

I've described how DAS load impacts an attraction's wait times. That happens regardless of what DAS users are doing while 'waiting'.

This common thing you keep bringing up of "just moving someone from standby" is simply wrong - the queues are not equal impact.

The second topic of what impact a person not standing in standby has on the rest of the park, because they are free to move around and are not trapped in a queue is the same as every other person who has a return time instead of standing in a standby line. By being free to do 'something else' they are demand load on the park and attractions (bodies taking up space, bodies able to take ride capacity, etc). So you have a singular physical person able to create demand load greater than another singular person who only uses standby.

Or to think of it another way... a person standing in standby is only doing one thing in the park at that time. They can't consume capacity anywhere else, nor create additional wait for anyone else. A person with a return time can consume resources from places besides the line they are waiting to return to. The expected DAS load on a LL line also impacts how many G+ slots they can expect to sell on a day because some of the capacity of their line is always going to DAS.

Again, in theory, DAS is essentially like letting more standby users through.

No - it's not. DAS usage is not like a standby user. A DAS user is more like 10 or more standby users because so much more of the attraction's capacity is given to the high priority queue.

DAS is not “unlimited LL’s”, although many people in this thread are confused on that point and refer to it as such. Letting more standby users through should not impact the LL. Hence my confusion.

No - it's not. Letting more standby users through vs LL would lower the amount of LL usages you get per hour - effectively reducing it's capacity. So that means longer LL wait time for the same amount of LL uses.

It's been said to you multiple times - the attraction capacity is the shared resource. It doesn't change in these conversations about what line someone is in. The lines are not equal to each other because the lines are not given equal access to this finite shared ride capacity.

That said, on reflection, I can see how the “window” element of DAS, combined with imprecise return times, could result in issues. (Again, however, that takes further analysis than simply saying that “standby users in a different location” would obviously delay Genie users - because that isn’t an obvious conclusion.)

DAS users delay Genie users because DAS users clog up the line a G+ user must pass through. It shouldn't dynamically change the G+ slots sold... but impacts the time spend in line by the G+ user, thus impacting their free time to do other things.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Several people have pointed out that part of accommodation is NOT separating a disabled person from their party.

I would say that’s about convenience to the party…not providing equal “access”. That isn’t necessarily the same thing

When I asked if allowing a parent and child to skip the line and meet up with the rest of their party when they reach the attraction via standby, is an appropriate accommodation, I was told no. Even in a case where one parent could adequately supervise the one child.

I would guess because it would throw the line calculations off…which is what’s behind this whole change

So which is it?

It’s up to the owner/operate of the park…and unfortunately they don’t have to justify their reasons and can change them at any time

 

[lazyboy97o]

People aren’t ever going to agree on this. And to be brutally honest it doesn’t matter because ultimately Disney will be the ones giving guidelines to CMs. And what you or I or anyone else on Disney fan forums think is irrelevant.

If a guest is offered an accommodation they don’t believe is appropriate, it will be up to them to explain why. They may be offered an alternative, they may not.

But I don’t think saying things like “it’s not fair” or “but I read that someone got the DAS for the first exact same thing” will make a difference. A well reasoned explanation is more likely to get an alternative accommodation.

This is a scenario where people can do something to facilitate change. People can file complaints with the Department of a Justice and/or file a suit.

 

[Figgy1]

This is a scenario where people can do something to facilitate change. People can file complaints with the Department of a Justice and/or file a suit.

Which nobody can do until somebody has been affected.

 

[flynnibus]

This need issue is often confused in this context. “I’ve become accustomed to DAS and I ‘need’ it because I have IBS and can’t wait in line long.” ADA isn’t concerned with subjective need - it’s whether the company is reasonable in an accommodation it offers.

I think you had a reasonable idea - but managled it in your delivery.

The ADA is concerned with the need - it's just the consumer doesn't get to unilaterally decide what the accommodation they get for that need is... the accommodations are limited to reasonable ones.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Which nobody can do until somebody has been affected.

There will be medical issues in the queue from legitimate disabled folks who previously qualified for DAS and were rejected under the new system.

 

[Jrb1979]

There will be medical issues in the queue from legitimate disabled folks who previously qualified for DAS and were rejected under the new system.

It's possible that happens but we also don't know how the return to line is going to work.

 

[Chi84]

There will be medical issues in the queue from legitimate disabled folks who previously qualified for DAS and were rejected under the new system.

This is true but denial of DAS is not a basis for complaint. They have to be denied a reasonable accommodation for their medical issue.

 

[Tha Realest]

I think you had a reasonable idea - but managled it in your delivery.

The ADA is concerned with the need - it's just the consumer doesn't get to unilaterally decide what the accommodation they get for that need is... the accommodations are limited to reasonable ones.

That’s fair. I often mangle my deliveries.

Put another way, a guest’s “need” (or desired/preferred accommodation) may be valid from their perspective, but unreasonable from a more neutral, objective sense.