Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
We can split hairs on words, but I call that powerful.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024
- Thread starter AEfx
- Start date
And it’s not necessarily what the disabled person thinks is reasonable either…. There is also the whole “it would cause undue hardship to do so” claim Disney could make.
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
I do think Disney swung the pendulum too far the other way and there are some people no longer getting it who truly do need DAS (or a close approximation of it) to reasonably enjoy the parks.
But I also think there are people that got very used to visiting the parks with DAS and what that enabled them that would be able to visit at a comparable level to other guests with other accomodations that can be provided but are pushing back b/c it would be lesser than what they had in the past
It isn't a typo, it's a mistake. The funniest part is they spelled out the name of the act and still got the acronym wrong.
Exactly. If one were to make a judgement regarding the validity of this case based on the initial filing, I would put it right up there with that slip & fall lawyer from Florida hired by the people unhappy about the GAC to DAS change back in 2013.
Last edited:
And in this case, powerful is a good thing. I want Disney to have good, powerful attorneys because I want them to win this case, just as they won the last one.
Disney has lost a disability accommodations case? I wasn't aware of that, thanks!
Which they do; reasonable doesn't always equate to preferred.
Purduevian
Well-Known Member
Outside of Disney not being force to provide GAC, I don't think the courts have decided what a "reasonable accommodation" is for a theme park attraction/line.
It's entirely possible that other than making the line wheelchair accessible, there is nothing else required by law.
I've often wondered if at some point a judge simply says that in a park the size of Disney or Universal, with so many guests, there simply is no way to accommodate those who can't wait in line without causing an unreasonable hardship on park operations.
I would hope it never gets to that, and I doubt it would, but I can see it getting to the point that DAS is eliminated and the only things left are rider swap, return to queue, or splitting parties while the disabled person waits outside the line and then meets up with the rest of their party.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
Building a ramp or adding elevators to a historic building could be seen as an unreasonable hardship as well.
Just depends on where people in power want to draw the line.
Tigger&Pooh
Active Member
I think you are talking about costs which is a different hardship, not an operational hardship. The cost of the renovation must be taken into consideration when deciding how to accommodate. It doesn't negate the need to accommodate.
Some older buildings may be exempt from upgrading accessibility until such a time as there are renovations and then they must do what's possible. If unable to make all parts of the building accessible, the business/organization still needs to accommodate by making those services generally provided in the inaccessible part of the building available on the first floor (or whatever level can be made accessible).
Building a ramp or adding an elevator, while initially expensive, doesn't continuously negatively impact business operations the way the DAS free for all did.
And "people in power" will (and should) draw the line at doing what the law requires while minimizing the impact to the rest of their customers, thus maximizing profit. That's what they're there for.
Chi84
Premium Member
Thank you!
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
I meant the people in power legally.
Fair enough. I would hope that the people in power legally never come to the conclusion that companies be required to damage their own businesses.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
In 574 pages nobody can agree where the line should be. It’s not a simple black and white issue. I can see the case going in either direction.
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
IMO they should do a boarding pass type system like most parks do. You can enter any attraction whenever you want with up to 4 guests including the DAS user. After the first attraction you can't ride another one til the time the standby wait is.
True enough, but if the previous case is any indication, then Disney will (hopefully) win.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
One of the arguments that Disney had at the time was a free reservation system for front of the line access was available. They no longer have that argument.
Now that may or may not matter depending on other factors.
photomatt
Well-Known Member
Remove Disney from the discussion and I think you would have much more agreement. The emotional connection to Disney clouds many people's judgement, and they vote against their own, and other's, best interests.