New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[Chi84]

gotcha - was trying to understand your position.

I think my thinking on the ADA law is how it is being decided who gets accommodated and who doesn’t.

That’s where it gets tricky. If you provide the accommodation but tell someone with a disability they aren’t disabled enough where does that fall? And I don’t know - I’m not a lawyer thankfully! Haha

They aren’t saying you aren’t disabled enough. They’re saying your need for the service isn’t great enough.

ADA law suggests that businesses not inquire into the nature or extent of a disability. So Disney would not be able to determine who is more “disabled.”

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

They aren’t saying you aren’t disabled enough. They’re saying your need for the service isn’t great enough.

Yes, the point is, when asking for an accommodation that Disney DOES provide, they are being denied that accommodation.

Sorry for repeating but it’s equivalent of asking for an interpreter at a show and having to interview in order for Disney to establish that you are deaf enough to get an interpreter.

In the GAC case, they were asking for an accommodation that Disney doesn’t provide anyone, that’s different.

 

[NotTheOne]

Yes, the point is, when asking for an accommodation that Disney DOES provide, they are being denied that accommodation.

Sorry for repeating but it’s equivalent of asking for an interpreter at a show and having to interview in order for Disney to establish that you are deaf enough to get an interpreter.

In the GAC case, they were asking for an accommodation that Disney doesn’t provide anyone, that’s different.

Not even close to a valid comparison.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Not even close to a valid comparison.

How so?

 

[NotTheOne]

How so?

Because one (DAS) has a demonstrable negative impact on park operations and the other (sign language interpretation) doesn't.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Because one (DAS) has a demonstrable negative impact on park operations and the other (sign language interpretation) doesn't.

that doesn’t make them not comparable.

I don’t agree it has a “demonstrable negative impact on park operations” but I do see the issue with the advantage

 

[Chi84]

Yes, the point is, when asking for an accommodation that Disney DOES provide, they are being denied that accommodation.

Sorry for repeating but it’s equivalent of asking for an interpreter at a show and having to interview in order for Disney to establish that you are deaf enough to get an interpreter.

In the GAC case, they were asking for an accommodation that Disney doesn’t provide anyone, that’s different.

Why would Disney give anyone who asks an interpreter without an interview, yet interview people and limit DAS passes?

 

[NotTheOne]

that doesn’t make them not comparable.

I don’t agree it has a “demonstrable negative impact on park operations” but I do see the issue with the advantage

Like I said to someone previously, you should read the case that Disney won regarding taking away GAC and replacing it with DAS. The situation that caused them to get rid of GAC (too many people in the FP lines) is the same thing that caused them to cut back on DAS.

Same problem, different names.

 

[NotTheOne]

Why would Disney give anyone who asks an interpreter without an interview, yet interview people and limit DAS passes?

And it's not like Disney gives people an interpreter - they provide a list of show schedules where interpreters will be.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

The situation that caused them to get rid of GAC (too many people in the FP lines) is the same thing that caused them to cut back on DAS.

There is definitely more than just that listed in the case. Many of the issues were fixed by DAS.

 

[NotTheOne]

There is definitely more than just that listed in the case. Many of the issues were fixed by DAS.

That was the determining factor for whether or not the requested accommodation was reasonable. It's all in the case, linked further up in this thread.

As for being "fixed by DAS", that was only true so long as the number of people using DAS remained at a reasonable level, which it has exceeded for some time now.

There is no requirement that Disney provides the same accommodation (DAS) to everyone who asks for it. I'm glad that they're cracking down, and hope that they hold the line despite all of the howling.

 

[Chi84]

That was the determining factor for whether or not the requested accommodation was reasonable. It's all in the case, linked further up in this thread.

As for being "fixed by DAS", that was only true so long as the number of people using DAS remained at a reasonable level, which it has exceeded for some time now.

There is no requirement that Disney provides the same accommodation (DAS) to everyone who asks for it. I'm glad that they're cracking down, and hope that they hold the line despite all of the howling.

Their business model now literally includes selling line access.

 

[NotTheOne]

Their business model now literally includes selling line access.

Yes - and?

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

There is no requirement that Disney provides the same accommodation (DAS) to everyone who asks for it.

Eh… that’s the question. I do think between this and the 6 flags issue there will be some legal clarity just like there was for sports stadiums.

Personally, I believe the interview process is the equivalent of asking for details on a disability and would be considered that by the ADA and a court but again I’m thankfully not a lawyer!

 

[Chi84]

Eh… that’s the question. I do think between this and the 6 flags issue there will be some legal clarity just like there was for sports stadiums.

Legal clarity? Into oxymorons, are you?

 

[Chi84]

Yes - and?

It will be even easier to show a fundamental alteration.

 

[NotTheOne]

Eh… that’s the question. I do think between this and the 6 flags issue there will be some legal clarity just like there was for sports stadiums.

Personally, I believe the interview process is the equivalent of asking for details on a disability and would be considered that by the ADA and a court but again I’m thankfully not a lawyer!

The ADA calls for individual assessment of needs, so the interview is part of that requirement.

Not to mention that no one had any issues with the interviews while Disney was handing out DAS like candy. It's only now that Disney is correcting mistakes of the past that people are up in arms about it.

 

[NotTheOne]

It will be even easier to show a fundamental alteration.

Ah got it - yes, you are 100% correct. And as selling expedited access is pretty common across the theme park world, it's not like Disney could be seen as purposely doing it to cut out the disabled from the LLs.

 

[KrzyKtty]

The ADA calls for individual assessment of needs, so the interview is part of that requirement.

Not to mention that no one had any issues with the interviews while Disney was handing out DAS like candy. It's only now that Disney is correcting mistakes of the past that people are up in arms about it.

And lord help anybody that tries to point out that hypocrisy elsewhere on the net.

I really do have to commend most of the people on this thread, and the mods, For keeping the discussion very kind.

 

[NotTheOne]

And lord help anybody that tries to point out that hypocrisy elsewhere on the net.

I really do have to commend most of the people on this thread, and the mods, For keeping the discussion very kind.

Yes - I'm on a FB page where people are upset with people who post that they got the DAS and that the CM was kind and polite.

I lurk at the DIS, and it seems to be under control for the most part.