asianway
Well-Known Member
Yeah greeters/attendants can and everyone else. Just not performers
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Sentinel: Disney policy requiring character confidentiality comes under fire
- Thread starter PhotoDave219
- Start date
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I used to take my company car home, that doesn't mean it wasn't still the property of the company that I worked for or could just do whatever I wanted with it. This is the same thing, so solve the problem, do an amendment to the contract, the union gets what it wants (clarity of expectations) and Disney goes on about it's business. If all they are looking for is that information in writing, then that should work. Anyone with an ounce of brain can realize that just because you are on your own time, does not mean that nothing you do can affect your job standing. However, once it is in writing, then warnings are not going to be necessary. It's just do it and you're gone.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Wouldn't it be quite different being a movie character (foam head) costume and one of a CM in a certain area. Those in places like HM or Jungle Cruise are face characters and even out of costume can be recognized. I'm thinking more of the foam head characters where it is essential that it not be shown that there is a person inside that suit. Those area CM's would not be shattering any illusions, they would just be "going home from work". A concept that can be grasped by everyone, even small children.
Exactly. Which is what this is all about, maintaining the integrity.
Its also about a culture of management that is just looking to fire people for anything, hence why they want the language actually in the contract.
GiveMeTheMusic
Well-Known Member
I had to stop reading the article when Disney was quoted on "character integrity." Bye Felicia
asianway
Well-Known Member
Fur or face even breaks integrity. There's better ways to put it
MaryJaneP
Well-Known Member
Hard to imagine the "contract" does not include some need to maintain character integrity on and off property and some language that allows "policies" to be updated as circumstances change. Our municipality has ordinances that specifically refer to "policies" that may be issued from time to time by the management, for example, the fees schedule for a variety of activities. Thus the ordinance, passed many years ago, is kept current by issuance of a new schedule of fees by policy, thereby obviating the need to consistently advertise, hold hearings on, and pass new ordinances.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
Well, the thing is that the policy goes all the way back to Walt himself, it isn't a new thing. It got complicated when they let CM's wear the costumes outside of the parks. That was a mistake and had obvious foreseeable consequences, but, this is something that has been an established requirement for so long, I doubt if it was even thought about, by either side, when the contracts were drawn up. You can be sure that Walt would have fired them on the spot and we liked Walt.
I am having a problem wrapping my head around the "fire people for anything" aspect. It was a long established rule so they couldn't have been fired if they didn't violate the "unwritten" policy. So write it! They are justified in doing so based solely on the fact that it has had almost 60 years of previous requirement. It sounds more like someone trying to jump through a loophole that has no external supports. It is very likely to collapse around them. I'm not saying they will, but, since costumes are the property of Disney, they could go back to the you cannot leave with them requirement like they used to do for many, many years. Disney doesn't have to let their property off the grounds. It's a possibility that this could screw it up for everybody.
Having been in management most of my adult life, I can assure you that it really isn't a problem to find a legitimate fire-able offense if you want someone gone.
There's a lot of management by fear on the front lines of the Walt Disney World resort…
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
There's a lot of management by fear, anyplace one works. If you don't fear for your job, then you are liable to do whatever you want. In this case I can just hear those youngun's thinking... Gosh, this is stupid, why can't I do whatever I want on my free time. Just like you cannot yell fire in a crowded theater, our freedoms do not allow us free reign on anything no matter what the consequences are to others. You take a job, it has rules. Some are written some are not. That doesn't stop them from being rules that have to be followed in order to maintain your position regardless of how low or how high that position might be. Mostly they are in place for a reason and usually, like this one, it is a good reason. The Fantasy business butts heads with reality quite often just by the nature of it.
So like I said... write it out. If a contract is rejected because of it (which I doubt) then everybody will lose. I think that the majority of CM's understand why the restrictions exist so I don't see it not being accepted. Unless we want to see the atmosphere of Disney decline even further this should be a solid requirement.
I might add that contracts do not list company policies, it does, however, refer to it under rules of conduct. All they have to do is include it in the written policy and I'll bet that it is written someplace.
Last edited:
Imagineerwannabe
Active Member
I'm not sure how closely the U.S. Labour/ employment laws are similar to those here in the UK. But I am certainly bound by specific restrictions by my employer For my actions outside of working hours which may cause damage or impact the company 'brand' and reputation. That includes social media of any kind, or any form of representation of the company outside of my permitted remit of my job role.
I'm having more of an issue with this mentality of finding reasons to fire everyone but maybe I'm too sceptical, with a global brand and reputation to protect, many of these requirements are born from mgmt trying to secure and keep this safe, Disney isn't any different to many other multinationals who would want similar controls on its employees in my opinion....regardless of if its a right or wrong thing to do...
The people I've talked to privately point to this being a problem that as a result of A handful of people.
Most entertainment people are sick and tired of the crap and keep their social media private.
Nobody is bigger than "the show" and it looks like a few people just don't get that. Shame that it has to come to this and some negative publicity for some cast members to completely get that.
Always reminds me of this video
mousehockey37
Well-Known Member
I'll say it again....blame the WDW of today. Where moms will flat out bribe CMs on social media to get their kid a "Random Encounter". Disney itself is part of the problem as they have put a few on a pedestal and given certain social media people special treatment, and now its so crazy out of control that there are more than a few copycats trying to be the "next big thing" on the Dis-internet. I mentioned how this was getting worse a few months ago in another thread and few believed me
*EDIT* here http://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads/is-entitlement-becoming-an-issue.897138/
You may not think these 2 threads are related..but I have a hunch they are
I remember that thread!!!
In this case, this sounds like a change was made to a union bargaining agreement without going through the proper channels.
Flip side though... We can't have nice things anymore because people don't know how to behave with them. I'm sure problems existed 20 years ago, but with people being able to "periscope" and such now where you can be in the parks with them (basically), anyone anywhere can record anything and there's not much you can do about it.
Imagineerwannabe
Active Member
I think there is perhaps a majority of entertainment staff who no doubt keep their character portrayals on the down low purely because they don't feel the need to flaunt it, and that small minority who want want to exploit or outwardly publicise it at every opportunity who are perhaps the reason for the reiteration of it.
I'm not certain why there is The need for any employee to be permitted to divulge the level of work detail to all and sundry...
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
How?
mm52200
Well-Known Member
I don't think so. This is a behind the scenes video of dancers learning and work shopping the choreography of the new parade. No where do they state these dancers are portraying specific characters. The lost boys are kind of ambiguous character in this parade so I don't really include them here. This is also a workshop setting where they can be learning and setting the choreography for the characters before they come to rehearsal
ItlngrlBella
Well-Known Member
I. AM. DYING.
"I wore my jazz shoes and stretched."
"I wore my pajamas and showed up drunk."
Last edited:
I believe it currently does but this language would expand it to cover Instagram and other social media rules.
Apparently this now covers dancers in the parade as well. Apparently some of them are not too happy about it and "whining loudly" about it according to one friend....
AEfx
Well-Known Member
(/picks that up where @PhotoDave219 left it, /puts on "I'm gay so it's OK for me to say this" cap -)
Dancers? Whining loudly? No way!