New DAS System at Walt Disney World 2024

[ditzee]

Disney could have avoided this mess by using technology to intelligently assign return times for people with DAS. The return time could have been based on the current stand-by time, the number of people who purchased Genie+ and individual LL's, and the number of people with DAS currently using it. There is no law that requires to Disney to assign return times based on the current stand-by wait time. If you want quicker return times, then you can purchase Genie+.

I have had a DAS pass and I often go to the parks with people who still have them. I am not against DAS in any way. I just think that Disney didn't need to get the black eye on this. They could have kept the current system and simply increased the length of DAS return times to avoid affecting people who paid for Genie+. They are legally entitled to do this.

Now, Disney is doing something that is not ADA compliant. Disney is arbritarily denying equal access to people with disabilities. This is clear, and Disney won't prevail. The problem is that it will take years for the challenges to work their way through the courts.

Asking someone to wear a diaper, or to wear headphones, or to practice standing in line is not equal access. Requiring someone to go to a cast member at every attraction and ask for a return time after explaining their disability is not equal access. It's nothing but cruel, and it's totally unneccessary.

I agree with this. Whoever was in charge of the DAS rules basically said, "Throw it all out except for the ones who sued and won. It will take yrs to straighten out." In the meantime, hopefully, they'll grow a brain cell and figure it out. Dang I mean you'd think Disney could hire a team that could figure this out. If the parks begin losing money, Disney will be in bad shape because these are the company's cash cows. Maybe the company needs to lose money in order to wake up.

 

[Kingoglow]

I agree with this. Whoever was in charge of the DAS rules basically said, "Throw it all out except for the ones who sued and won. It will take yrs to straighten out." In the meantime, hopefully, they'll grow a brain cell and figure it out. Dang I mean you'd think Disney could hire a team that could figure this out. If the parks begin losing money, Disney will be in bad shape because these are the company's cash cows. Maybe the company needs to lose money in order to wake up.

I doubt that this issue (changing the old DAS program) will cause the parks to lose enough money at scale to force anything. If Disney does manage to clean up the Genie+/ILL/RTQ situation then it will benefit the company.

 

[mysto]

The worst part of this is that these entitled abusers can result in young children being split up from a parent, since they board before family boarding. The risk of this is one of the reasons I don’t fly Southwest. You used to be able to rely on family boarding to ensure you could sit with your children (even if it’s at the back of the plane), but now that seems like less of a guarantee. I’m sure there are other parents like me who only fly on an airline where we can select seats out of a fear of being separated from our children, so that’s definitely impacting their business.

There are some similarities between being able to reserve your plane seat in advance and reserving your Disney ride time in advance. At least we know what to expect causing much less stress.

 

[lazyboy97o]

First I have no idea if guests tend to re-ride headliners or not, I don’t think either one of us has data on that. Second it would depend on if the courts look at equality of outcome or equality of opportunity in regard to access, and I think we’d have to ask someone with a legal background there.

We’re discussing access and accessibility. The answer is kind of there in the subject name. The whole purpose is having offerings available and generally not having others dictating to those with disabilities what activities are suitable for their participation.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

First I have no idea if guests tend to re-ride headliners or not, I don’t think either one of us has data on that. Second it would depend on if the courts look at equality of outcome or equality of opportunity in regard to access, and I think we’d have to ask someone with a legal background there.

My post was only that "it's not a given." It's not. People talk about the ADA and it's requirements at theme parks like it's settled law. It's not. And I am an attorney.

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

I agree with this. Whoever was in charge of the DAS rules basically said, "Throw it all out except for the ones who sued and won. It will take yrs to straighten out." In the meantime, hopefully, they'll grow a brain cell and figure it out. Dang I mean you'd think Disney could hire a team that could figure this out. If the parks begin losing money, Disney will be in bad shape because these are the company's cash cows. Maybe the company needs to lose money in order to wake up.

Nobody sued Disney and won over ADA accommodations. In fact, the people who have sued Disney over this have lost. Disney's legal team has lots of brain cells. They're also not going to lose money over this.

 

[Purduevian]

Will standby queue times increase with less people being given DAS?

There is a lot of ways this can play out, but the ultimate answer is that either G+ users, never had DAS standby users, or a combination of the two should get more ride capacity than they previously did. However, we will have to make some assumptions:

• Disney's goal for each merge ratio was 4LL to 1 standby guest
• Some guests will balk at a line that is too long and go somewhere else
• Legacy DAS was taking 3/4 of the LL capacity on a theoretical ride (3/5 of total ride capacity
• Legacy Das , Disney limited G+ availability to 1/4 LL capacity (1/5 of total ride capacity
• With new DAS Disney has reduced that number to 1/2 of the LL capacity (2/5 of total ride capacity)

So, Disney now has 2 options.
1) They do not change the amount of G+ capacity given:

• G+ continues to take 1/5 of total ride capacity
• New DAS now takes 2/5 of ride capacity.
• Standby capacity now doubles to 2/5 of ride capacity.
• Some previously Legacy DAS (but that do not qualify for new DAS) now attempt to ride the ride standby, but a certain % of them will balk at the ride.
  • So the Standby line will physically grow, but wait time will be shorter than the old system (depending on the amount of people that balk)
• Some previously Legacy DAS users (but that do not qualify for new DAS) will buy G+ and attempt to ride the ride via G+
  • This will make more users fighting for the same number of spots and G+ will run out earlier for this ride

2) Disney provides more G+ availability for the ride to fully cover the DAS loss in capacity:

• G+ now takes 2/5 of total ride capacity
• New DAS now takes 2/5 of ride capacity.
• Standby capacity still takes 1/5 of ride capacity.
• Some previously Legacy DAS users (but that do not qualify for new DAS) now attempt to ride the ride standby, but a certain % of them will balk at the ride.
  • So the Standby line will grow both physically and in wait time, but it will not double (actual standby length growth dependent on % of people that balk)
• Some previously Legacy DAS (but that do not qualify for new DAS) will buy G+ and attempt to ride the ride via G+
  • However, G+ availability has now doubled and users attempting to ride this ride via G+ will not have doubled (not all legacy DAS will buy G+, or didn't have it before the change), thus G+ availability will last longer than the previous system

Of course there is an infinite amount of options between these 2 with the benefits swinging either toward G+ or Standby

 

[Club Cooloholic]

I doubt that this issue (changing the old DAS program) will cause the parks to lose enough money at scale to force anything. If Disney does manage to clean up the Genie+/ILL/RTQ situation then it will benefit the company.

They will make more money. The LLs were selling out because a large percentage were being allocated for DAS, now they have more to sell. It's probably one of their arguments with the "reasonable" accomodations. It's impacting their business negatively to have that be the accommodation, coupled with the idea that they are not responsible for making sure a guest doesn't have a melt down.

I know this isn't always talked about, but I am going to use common sense, and I am speaking to this mainly for adults that have these issues, not children, because the kids don't have the autonomy to decide what situations they are in. But adults do. If someone were to have a fear of heights, we aren't doing mountain hikes or bungee jumping. Similarly, if I have issues with claustrophobia, or crowds or heat. I'm sorry but choosing to go to a theme park sounds like hell, short lines or not. Having to fly there, wait in lines at the gates, for food just the crowds on the main Street. If the condition is that bad, I can't see how the payoff of riding peter pan is worth it to my physical and mental health, and I can't see how a business should be responsible for that as well.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

The worst part of this is that these entitled abusers can result in young children being split up from a parent, since they board before family boarding. The risk of this is one of the reasons I don’t fly Southwest. You used to be able to rely on family boarding to ensure you could sit with your children (even if it’s at the back of the plane), but now that seems like less of a guarantee. I’m sure there are other parents like me who only fly on an airline where we can select seats out of a fear of being separated from our children, so that’s definitely impacting their business.

I feel if you are getting pre boarding with more than one party member due to conditions, a requirement should be they have to sit together. I have also seen one member of a party pay for priority seating then try to "hold" seats. This annoys me when people do it at school plays for their kids, and it annoys me on SW. I have told stewardess that people are doing this(as I can see it after I have my seat) and they often do nothing about it., which is why I also avoid Southwest

 

[Kingoglow]

[Snip]
I know this isn't always talked about, but I am going to use common sense, and I am speaking to this mainly for adults that have these issues, not children, because the kids don't have the autonomy to decide what situations they are in. But adults do. If someone were to have a fear of heights, we aren't doing mountain hikes or bungee jumping. Similarly, if I have issues with claustrophobia, or crowds. I'm sorry but choosing to go to a theme park sounds like hell, short lines or not. Having to fly there, wait in lines at the gates, for food just the crowds on the main Street. If the condition is that bad, I can't see how the payoff of riding peter pan is worth it to my physical and mental health, and I can't see how a business should be responsible for that as well.

For what it is worth, I agree with you; I think many in this thread do. If the new accommodations are not enough to make someone comfortable, then they will remove themselves from the scenario.

 

[jaklgreen]

The reason why it’s not a given is because the ADA only requires an equivalent experience, and I’m confident if challenged Disney would have reams of data showing that the vast majority of guests do not reride headliners that have 90 minute waits, because that’s not really tolerable for the non-disabled either. In any event, this is academic because Disney has not introduced that limit.

It has nothing to do with what the majority of guests actually do, it is about what they CAN do.

 

[Kingoglow]

I feel if you are getting pre boarding with more than one party member due to conditions, a requirement should be they have to sit together. I have also sent one member of a party pay for priority seating then try to "hold" seats. This annoys me when people do it at school plays for their kids, and it annoys me on SW. I have told stewardess that people are doing this(as I can see it after I have my seat) and they often do nothing about it., which is why I also avoid Southwest

That's a big problem on Southwest. I have to remind people on every flight, that there is no saving seats on Southwest. It is a situation where accommodations went too far and haven't (yet) changed to keep up with what people feel is acceptable public behavior.

 

[Minnie93]

Even at 90 min. That is your wait. Once. In a day. Maybe you wait another few minutes at the plane. Possibly seated or getting a snack. You don't get out of that security line and immediate get in another 30-90 min line. Then another. Even with das, most people who need it are not spending an entire day in the park. The tolerance for it just isn't there. Whether physical or not.

TSA does provide accommodations:

TSA Cares | Transportation Security Administration

www.tsa.gov

 

[jaklgreen]

Lol, I’d never heard that phrase before. This is strikingly similar to, for example, the poster earlier in this thread who used DAS “numerous times” to get FOTL access to skip a 10 minute peoplemover line but miraculously has no problem waiting 20 minutes in the Soarin Lightning Lane.

Who said that? As far as I can remember, I am the only one that has brought up The People Mover. And I also said that I use it only if the line is over 20 minutes. I also said that I can't even go on Soarin because the line is too long after the merge. If you saw someone else post what you are saying, I have not seen it.

 

[Minnie93]

Nobody sued Disney and won over ADA accommodations. In fact, the people who have sued Disney over this have lost. Disney's legal team has lots of brain cells. They're also not going to lose money over this.

True this, but if I remember correctly, there is wording in the autism court ruling that states something to the effect of “DAS is an appropriate accommodation for those with this level of autism.” This is nowhere near the exact words but you get the idea. Those filing suit were asking for the old GAC to stay in place and were denied, but now there is precedent that DAS is appropriate. So maybe that would stand in court for future cases where Disney decides to take DAS away from guests with provable high-support autism?

 

[Chip Chipperson]

True this, but if I remember correctly, there is wording in the autism court ruling that states something to the effect of “DAS is an appropriate accommodation for those with this level of autism.” This is nowhere near the exact words but you get the idea. Those filing suit were asking for the old GAC to stay in place and were denied, but now there is precedent that DAS is appropriate. So maybe that would stand in court for future cases where Disney decides to take DAS away from guests with provable high-support autism?

There's a difference between saying DAS is an appropriate/sufficient accomodation and saying that anything less than or different from DAS would not be appropriate/sufficient. The court only ruled that the change from GAC to DAS was not inappropriate or insufficient. It's not Luke there were 3 or 4 accomodations presented and the court ruled that DAS is what needs to be offered.

 

[April2248]

I’m 99% sure the answer is no as that would be legally problematic. Accommodations are supposed to provide access that is closer to what a non disabled customer has. At Disney, non disabled guests can re-ride the same thing over and over, so DAS also has to allow for re-rides.

But then offering genie as a substitute would be wrong then right? Example my kids hyperfixate on certain rides and if genie only allows it once then it would not be an appropriate accommodation.

 

[DisneyHead123]

My post was only that "it's not a given." It's not. People talk about the ADA and it's requirements at theme parks like it's settled law. It's not. And I am an attorney.

Sure, I've always said that a lot of this is unknown territory and I think Disney's strategy is to do their thing first and see how it plays out in court later.

 

[Chi84]

Really? That one actually seems pretty fundamental to me. If a non disabled guest wants to stand in line for Space Mountain over and over and over they are totally allowed to do that. Ergo a DAS user can do the same. I feel like limiting it would be similar to making handicapped parking spots 30 minutes only in a parking lot where everyone else can park all day.

Your comment shows the problem with line-skip accommodations at a business where standing in line is fundamental to its nature and there are no ADA regulations.

You park once at a business, then go inside and shop or whatever. If the required number of parking spots is filled, a disabled person is out of luck. They can't go inside and tell the business to create another one for them, nor can they sue the business.

Think of how that applies to Disney where disabled persons (even without abuse) can ask for unlimited line-skips on all the rides. Disney is faced with an aging population and an expanding definition of disability. I can understand why people want to blame either the business or the disabled for a system that doesn’t work for everyone but it doesn’t seem productive.

 

[photomatt]

? Disney already gave people wait times approximate to the same wait as others. To artificially inflate their wait times as some sort of discouragment of using DAS would be discriminatory.

The advantage of DAS is largely exactly what the accomodation provided.. the escape from the queue. The 'advantage' was that freedom could also be used to double dip. It's not good customer service to try to put customers in a 'time out' where they can't do anything... even if you think it's for some abuse prevention. That's a no-win situation.

I don't think it's discriminatory to adjust wait times for people with DAS in order to lessen wait times for people with paid access to LL. The problem is that Disney is sending DAS guests through the LL, and that increases the wait times for people who paid to be there.

Consider the steps in front of City Hall at the Magic Kingdom in WDW. If I can walk up the steps, I can be at the front entrance in a few seconds. If I can't walk up the steps, I have to use the ramp. The ramp requires more physical effort, requires me to travel a longer distance, and it takes more time, but it's still considered equal access because the ramp gets me inside the building.

There's no law that says Disney can't make people with DAS wait longer than people who paid to use the LL. There's no law that says Disney has to give DAS return times that are equal to the standby wait times. If there is a law, I have not been able to find it.