Prince-1
Well-Known Member
Exactly. Disney put forth more rules on the subject and the Union wants those rules spelled out specifically in te contract.
I'm not sure why/how this got complicated.
Do you know the audience on here??
Exactly. Disney put forth more rules on the subject and the Union wants those rules spelled out specifically in te contract.
I'm not sure why/how this got complicated.
Do you know the audience on here??
Oh, believe me...well aware of that. I know a few folks who've been disciplined over it. Frankly, most of the time it's either silly or 'the reason given' but quite likely the employer was looking for a reason.It is when personnel decisions are made on the basis of social media activities.
Oh, believe me...well aware of that. I know a few folks who've been disciplined over it. Frankly, most of the time it's either silly or 'the reason given' but quite likely the employer was looking for a reason.
My former employer "strongly suggested" all employees take down pictures of themselves wearing the team logo and we weren't allowed to state that we worked for the team (a MLB franchise) on Facebook. So, I had to take down pics of myself wearing a ballcap while holding my newborn daughter from 25 years ago. Yeah, a little heavy handed. When asked about it and trying to reason with them..."It's policy." Some deep thinking and compassionate folks there.Sounds like typical Disney front line management.
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....
Ahhh. Now that, I imagine, is the real complaint. There are a lot of performers in parades that aren't any specific Disney character. They are just a Swan Court dancer or an Ice Man, etc. And in those cases, a lot of performers or their friends will directly refer to themselves not as characters, but performers in said parade. And that could be the real sticky spot.
If that's true, and I honestly do not know, then I would think that they would be smart enough to not make it so easy for management to find a reason. If you openly challenge the rules, then who do you have to blame when the axe comes down. Under those circumstances it seem a little foolish to test the waters. Don't do it and there is no reason to get terminated. If they are doing things otherwise OK, then they would still have a job. If they are doing things that prompt a manager to fire them... they could use whatever that reason is and wouldn't need any other.Sounds like typical Disney front line management.
If that's true, and I honestly do now know, then I would think that they would be smart enough to not make it so easy for management to find a reason. If you openly challenge the rules, then who do you have to blame when the axe comes down. Under those circumstances it seem a little foolish to test the waters. Don't do it and there is no reason to get terminated. If they are doing things otherwise OK, then they would still have a job. If they are doing things that prompt a manager to fire them... they could use whatever that reason is and wouldn't need any other.
Also, never friend your boss on fb kidsAhhh. Now that, I imagine, is the real complaint. There are a lot of performers in parades that aren't any specific Disney character. They are just a Swan Court dancer or an Ice Man, etc. And in those cases, a lot of performers or their friends will directly refer to themselves not as characters, but performers in said parade. And that could be the real sticky spot.
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
My former employer "strongly suggested" all employees take down pictures of themselves wearing the team logo and we weren't allowed to state that we worked for the team (a MLB franchise) on Facebook. So, I had to take down pics of myself wearing a ballcap while holding my newborn daughter from 25 years ago. Yeah, a little heavy handed. When asked about it and trying to reason with them..."It's policy." Some deep thinking and compassionate folks there.
Oh I'm with you.... But there's a percentage of the kids and CPs in entertainment that believe they are above that.
I think a lot of it boils down to lack of life experience too. So many of them are young and excitable. They've never been away from home before and are doing something so unique that most of their friends and family think is so cool that they kind of lose their heads about it. And then there are the diva wanna be celebrities but that's a whole nother kettle of fish.Oh I'm with you.... But there's a percentage of the kids and CPs in entertainment that believe they are above that.
It does suck for the people who follow the rules that a few simply don't care.
I agree. If you work for Disney you should "get" the magic, kids, tradition etc. But most social media policies are more than a little paranoid and heavy-handed.Now that's a bit different than Disney not wanting folks to reveal characters. I agree, it sounds stupid - especially since MLB can only benefit from that type of advertising. That's why it feels like an unreasonable thing in this case, because the folks who portray these characters should WANT to preserve the integrity of it in the first place.
Seems pretty simple doesn't it, not sure how its gotten so clouded. I really don't think that its at all unreasonable. You're not going to find a single performer at WDW that is worth their salt that is going to argue about the importance of character integrity and the show. Those that don't take that seriously as a matter of PRIDE and not just to avoid getting in trouble are in the minority in my experience.Exactly. Disney put forth more rules on the subject and the Union wants those rules spelled out specifically in te contract.
I'm not sure why/how this got complicated.
No, its about making sure the contract says what you can and cannot do. Cant have arbitrary rules.
I lve ya brother but really? What you are saying is that it needs to be spelled out....I am sure somebody has mentioned this in another post but we sometimes are just way to lazy to sit and read every single post. I have other things to do then to read every post in every thread.
I am absolutely sure that in their employment contract it speaks about IP and its uses. What you are saying is that it needs to be spelled out for a moron that hasn't a clue that it might not be wise to put out on social media that that person plays a character. You know what happens next....the idiot CM then puts on social media....." I play the princess that has scales and no legs and loses her voice" Not coming out with the exact name. pffffffftttttt idiots. I am with Disney on this one. I am not spelling out squat. He is the deal....the IP belongs to Disney. You use the IP with out permission you are fired. Noting vague.....no way to spell out every single possible instance how the IP can be used.
It needs to be spelled out so that it is enforced equally from one manager to the next as well. There is so much back and forth and misinformation from the people who are intended to be leaders that I think most people would be surprised. You can ask the same question about a policy to 6 different managers and get a different (yet confident) answer from each one- there needs to be consistency. If they are going to make a big push about enforcing a previously unwritten policy than I think its only fair they spell it out a bit more so that we all know where we stand.
I lve ya brother but really? What you are saying is that it needs to be spelled out....I am sure somebody has mentioned this in another post but we sometimes are just way to lazy to sit and read every single post. I have other things to do then to read every post in every thread.
I am absolutely sure that in their employment contract it speaks about IP and its uses. What you are saying is that it needs to be spelled out for a moron that hasn't a clue that it might not be wise to put out on social media that that person plays a character. You know what happens next....the idiot CM then puts on social media....." I play the princess that has scales and no legs and loses her voice" Not coming out with the exact name. pffffffftttttt idiots. I am with Disney on this one. I am not spelling out squat. He is the deal....the IP belongs to Disney. You use the IP with out permission you are fired. Noting vague.....no way to spell out every single possible instance how the IP can be used.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.