If a CM told a disabled guest they weren’t allowed to park in the handicap lot but they could pay for premium parking if they didn’t want to walk… that would certainly be an issue.
ADA policy is set out in the actual Act and supplemented by the Department of Justice regulations. There is nothing about line accommodations in either. The best way to get such accommodations would be groups lobbying lawmakers to do so.
In general maybe, but on the specific topic of telling someone to use Genie+ to manage a disability? There’s just no way. I don’t have a legal background but I know that much from being in the workplace. You never imply that something is both needed to manage a disability and that the disabled person is responsible for paying. Especially if it’s a product you’re actively selling. It’s not guaranteed a company would lose in court in that case, but as a preventative / risk management measure, I think any legal team would say just don’t go there. Say Genie+ is strictly for fun, period.
Oh I agree that Disney wouldn’t tell a person with a disability that they should buy Genie+ instead of offering a reasonable accommodation.
Sorry if that was unclear, I’m uncertain of the details in the situation ditzee mentioned. It sounded to me like the CM was saying to use Genie+ because only certain disabilities qualify for DAS. If the customer asked “Is there any way a person visiting Disney doesn’t have to wait in a physical line?” though, then in that case mentioning Genie+ would just be an honest answer to the question.
Only after trying to essentially make it an autism only pass.
I'm saying the CM suggesting Genie+ as an accommodation is a no no.
All im saying is if someone is denied DAS access & they suggest Genie which is no major secret i dont see any issues especially if they are offering this magical return to queue option… seriously tho i really dont see any major issues
But its already been established das is gonna be limited going forward…. Listen dont ge me wrong Disney completely botched this imo but suggesting other alternatives along with the ones they claim will be new versions to help those now denied is not a legal nightmare imo
I’m not sure why a CM would ever suggest Genie+ as an alternative to a reasonable accommodation.
The issue is that anyone with a disability is supposed to be offered reasonable accommodations at no cost. It is illegal to charge money for a reasonable accommodation.
Wouldn’t the result be exactly the same whether or not the CM tells the person to buy Genie+? It would be the denial of a reasonable accommodation that would violate the ADA.
Steering people towards paid services that act as accommodations is also problematic. It would be like if a theater had obstructed view basic level accessible seats and then made sure to point out that the premium accessible seats do not have an obstructed view.
Listen i get they cant charge and im on the side where i feel the % of people getting DAS is NOT high.. 8% especially when Disney is very generous in who they allow access to… the problem arises from how this group is taking up a huge proportion of capacity which i honestly dont believe the high high numbers reported but either way tthat lies in their policy of guest size pre books etc which they are addressing as well but by eliminating any group going forward with potentially no realistic alternative is going to be a nightmare all to make more money
That’s not at all comparable.
I think at a minimum park goers who paid for Genie+ could ask to be reimbursed for it, although as it's not that expensive maybe that's not a huge deal to Disney. But beyond that, I think it could look very bad in court - disabled theme park goers made to pay for their own accommodations. What the legal implications of that are I don't know, but I assume it's the type of scenario Disney would want to avoid.
What many have said is that when FastPass+ was free they could use that as an accommodation without needing an "official" accommodation. That was great so long as it lasted, but now that it's gone, people are reporting that it's created a need for accommodations. I say reporting because I don't claim to know how many of those people genuinely need accommodations and how many are the dreaded TikTok Fakers. It's almost certainly a mix of both. But for at least some percentage of people, the loss of FastPass+ genuinely created a need.
I was just responding to why CMs can't mention Genie+ as an alternative to DAS. In terms of the big picture of how Disney solves this in the long run - I don't know. In a perfect world, they ramp up capacity so much that it's not a big issue. In the real world, who knows?
This type of accommodation is different from most. In most cases, non-disabled guests are not paying extra for the accommodation given to a disabled guest. Systems that allow a person to avoid standing in a physical line have quite a bit of value. I can see why Disney wants to limit DAS to people whose disability by its very nature prevents them from standing in line.
What about planes? Would it bother you if because of your disability, your accommodation requires you to upgrade to Business Class or First Class or a hotel said you have to pay more money in order to have an accessible bathroom?
