News The 'Disney Look' to be further relaxed at Walt Disney World

[lazyboy97o]

Ah you mean the "Six Flags One Park One Uniform" Method....

Think of the magic Disney could add! They could offer a variety of shirts with Disney, Pixar, Star Wars, Marvel* and Fox* characters so that Cast Members can share their favorite Disney characters with guests who are visiting their favorite Disney characters.

*Restrictions apply.

 

[_caleb]

Do please share the cultural and ethnic differences that are now being included by allowing a single bracelet or necklace.

I did a few pages back. Maybe you missed my post:

I’m pretty sure the change in policy is related to ongoing religious discrimination claims. You may remember the case back in 2013 when a Sikh employee successfully challenged the Disney Look policy regarding his beard and turban:

ACLU: Sikh employee at Disney wins right to wear turban, full beard

A Sikh worker at Walt Disney World has won the right to wear a turban and long, tied beard in view of theme park guests, the American Civil Liberties Union said this week. The ACLU announced that D…

www.orlandosentinel.com

Sikhs also do not cut their hair or trim their beards, and wear bracelets called “Kara.”

Disney’s effort to relate to and reflect a more diverse audience is not new. Consider the diversity seen on the Disney channel and in films. From a PR and customer service perspective, it makes sense that Disney would want Cast Members at the parks to retain their cultures.

 

[_caleb]

If this were truly an issue wouldn't it had been dealt with sooner instead of waiting 5 decades?

I'm also pretty sure being allowed to grow a beard doesn't change the Pirate costume.

This has been an ongoing question for some time now. On one hand, Disney wants to appeal to (and welcome) a broad and diverse audience. Having CMs, actors, and PR folks who represent and demonstrate that diversity is a good look for Disney.

On the other hand, I’m not sure Disney is making this particular policy change willingly. The threat of discrimination law suits is more likely the cause here. There have been claims of discrimination for a long time now, but the culture is shifting and companies are having to be much more sensitive to these sorts of things today than just a few years ago.

 

[Stressless]

Has nothing to do with it. Disney Parks present themselves as a "performance" or a "theatrical presentation," if you will. That's why every worker is called a "cast member." Every Disney park worker plays a critical role in the storytelling throughout the parks. In a sense, they are all a character. And when they are cast, there is a strict costume guideline for them. That includes hair style, facial hair, ect. It is no different than performing onstage. You are performing a role.

If you don't want to perform a role "onstage," then go work for Universal, Six Flags, Busch Gardens, or Sea World. Over there, you can be yourself. But at Disney, you are essentially playing character. If you're an attractions cast member on Pirates of the Caribbean (which is where I was), you don't have a generic outfit. You have a pirate outfit with a vest, knickers, a hat... Disney is your director. You are the actor. The actor performs a character. Actors in plays whether it be broadway or community theatre must abide by a costume/hair/makeup guideline. The same goes for Disney cast members. It's all part of the storytelling.

Great thought here

 

[Animaniac93-98]

This has been an ongoing question for some time now. On one hand, Disney wants to appeal to (and welcome) a broad and diverse audience. Having CMs, actors, and PR folks who represent and demonstrate that diversity is a good look for Disney.

On the other hand, I’m not sure Disney is making this particular policy change willingly. The threat of discrimination law suits is more likely the cause here. There have been claims of discrimination for a long time now, but the culture is shifting and companies are having to be much more sensitive to these sorts of things today than just a few years ago.

What does that have to do with costumed employees being taken seriously in an emergency?

 

[CJR]

Ah you mean the "Six Flags One Park One Uniform" Method....

Think of the magic Disney could add!

I know I was making a joke there, but I do imagine at some point, it probably already has, someone in management would suggest "one park" uniforms. No need for all those costuming employees that way.

As the matter of fact, they could have employees buy their own uniforms. I'm sure that's come up too, or it will. The bar keeps going lower and lower.

I could see them saying "You need to buy a red or blue shirt and khakis. Or, you can wear items purchased in a Disney Parks shop, as long those items are currently available for guests to purchase. In that case, we'll give you a Walmart-like vest to wear so customers, I mean guests, can identify you as an employee." Will the bar ever sink that low? Hope not, but I wouldn't be shocked.

 

[Lilofan]

05, member: 115164"]
I’m pretty sure the change in policy is related to ongoing religious discrimination claims. You may remember the case back in 2013 when a Sikh employee successfully challenged the Disney Look policy regarding his beard and turban:

ACLU: Sikh employee at Disney wins right to wear turban, full beard

A Sikh worker at Walt Disney World has won the right to wear a turban and long, tied beard in view of theme park guests, the American Civil Liberties Union said this week. The ACLU announced that D…

www.orlandosentinel.com

Sikhs also do not cut their hair or trim their beards, and wear bracelets called “Kara.”

Disney’s effort to relate to and reflect a more diverse audience is not new. Consider the diversity seen on the Disney channel and in films. From a PR and customer service perspective, it makes sense that Disney would want Cast Members at the parks to retain their cultures.

And in 2004, a Muslim cast member tried to wear her hijab onstage in her role. WDW offered her a backstage role. She refused and she was fired. The company and her settled out of court after she sued.

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

I know I was making a joke there, but I do imagine at some point, it probably already has, someone in management would suggest "one park" uniforms. No need for all those costuming employees that way.

As the matter of fact, they could have employees buy their own uniforms. I'm sure that's come up too, or it will. The bar keeps going lower and lower.

I could see them saying "You need to buy a red or blue shirt and khakis. Or, you can wear items purchased in a Disney Parks shop, as long those items are currently available for guests to purchase. In that case, we'll give you a Walmart-like vest to wear so customers, I mean guests, can identify you as an employee." Will the bar ever sink that low? Hope not, but I wouldn't be shocked.

Could also be something similar to the Disney Store Uniform....

 

[_caleb]

What does that have to do with costumed employees being taken seriously in an emergency?

Sorry, I saw your message in response to one of my posts and thought it was in response to another of my posts! My mistake.

I was trying to weigh in on the idea that CMs should be part of the theming. They're really only sort of part of the theming, they also have to be taken seriously in emergencies.

 

[Mat Cauthon]

It is not the case. Not shaving for a couple of days (up to an inch) does not make you look the best.

Pssshh...Many of the styles I see on men in their 20's these days looks like either 3 day growth, lumberjack or a full beard from the 80's.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I did a few pegs back. Maybe you missed my post:

Working with specific religious items is not the same as just blankety allowing a general category of item. Personal hats are not allowed and headwear is a far more common religious item than bracelets. Allowing appropriate exceptions and differences for things like religious and medical reasons can be done.

 

[Cmdr_Crimson]

Pssshh...Many of the styles I see on men in their 20's these days looks like either 3 day growth, lumberjack or a full beard from the 80's.

When they decide Man-Buns are allowed...It's the end..

 

[Mat Cauthon]

When they decide Man-Buns are allowed...It's the end..

Quoted for truth!!!

 

[WondersOfLife]

Pssshh...Many of the styles I see on men in their 20's these days looks like either 3 day growth, lumberjack or a full beard from the 80's.

The hypocritical fact is that I am a 21 year old that falls in the 5 o'clock 1 inch shadow category. But I still believe it looks unprofessional. (I just don't have anything professional to do until I graduate. So I get one more semester of not caring.)

 

[Animaniac93-98]

I know I was making a joke there, but I do imagine at some point, it probably already has, someone in management would suggest "one park" uniforms. No need for all those costuming employees that way.

This has already started to happen at DHS, with some areas of the park now having the same uniform instead of specific attractions.

 

[Monorail_Orange]

Think of the magic Disney could add! They could offer a variety of shirts with Disney, Pixar, Star Wars, Marvel* and Fox* characters so that Cast Members can share their favorite Disney characters with guests who are visiting their favorite Disney characters.

*Restrictions apply.

Disney Store CM's already get do this with their nametags. (Although, it kinda makes sense, it would be rather pointless to have the local CMs in any given store all the same "hometown" and it's something extra than it just being blank.)

 

[Sir_Cliff]

I love the costumes, but I realize they're real (underpaid) people beneath those costumes first and small bits of personal appearance choice don't matter nearly as much to me as it may matter to them.

Indeed.

Every time I go to Disneyland Paris I have moments where I imagine how the heads of the more puritanical Disney fans would explode looking at the piercings and jewellery that CMs there are permitted. The main difference is that the resort's customers would likely be more annoyed by stories about Disney disciplining its employees for small expressions of individuality than they are by seeing people who don't look like they stepped out of 1950s Middle America.

If Disney wants people ringing up hotdogs to maintain a strict standard of personal appearance out of step with the world in which they live under the notion that they are cast members bringing to life a magical world of fantasy, they're going to have to start paying them a lot more.

 

[TrojanUSC]

When Joe is giving a talk or doing a documentary in behalf of the Walt Disney Company about attractions, etc. he is literally on stage. You don't get more onstage then a national audience. Walt did look debonair which is exactly what I am saying. If having the cute little mustache was a good look why did he think it was so terrible on everyone else. Don't do as I do, do as I say type of leadership? Was there anyone in the entire Disney organization more on stage the Walt Disney? Wasn't he the primary conveyor of image? Walt was a great person that gave all of us a lot of entertainment through the years, but he had some blatant double standards. In his defense though, I have to feel that Joe's earlobe dragging would have stopped before it began if Walt were still in charge. Unless, his job did not require him to be seen by any outsider at all, even then I don't think it would have been allowed. Sadly, it is that type of prejudice that would have cost Walt a very talented imagineer completely based on looks.

Even though I really don't care if Joe has the paperweight hanging from his ear, he is a very talented fellow. That said, however, whenever I see him speaking my focus goes directly to that ear. It's like a spotlight shining in your eyes. It really does take my concentration away from what he is saying and just centers it on his ear. Good look or bad look, all depends on the individual doing the viewing.

He is an artist discussing his craft in the present. At no point is Joe Rhode supposed to be working on Turn of the Century Main Street or at a 1939 Hollywood Hotel. He's speaking on stage at a conference or panel. It's two different things.

 

[_caleb]

Working with specific religious items is not the same as just blankety allowing a general category of item. Personal hats are not allowed and headwear is a far more common religious item than bracelets. Allowing appropriate exceptions and differences for things like religious and medical reasons can be done.

Right. Have you seen the wording of the new policy? Does it not mention headwear? Cross pendants?

You’re right that CMs have long been allowed to request exceptions to the Disney Look policy for medical or religious reasons, but my understanding is that these exemptions were not uniformly given or enforced by the Image and Appearance office or HR (hence the discrimination claims). This official policy could help clarify the rules and make them more fairly applied.

 

[Incomudro]

Indeed.

Every time I go to Disneyland Paris I have moments where I imagine how the heads of the more puritanical Disney fans would explode looking at the piercings and jewellery that CMs there are permitted. The main difference is that the resort's customers would likely be more annoyed by stories about Disney disciplining its employees for small expressions of individuality than they are by seeing people who don't look like they stepped out of 1950s Middle America.

If Disney wants people ringing up hotdogs to maintain a strict standard of personal appearance out of step with the world in which they live under the notion that they are cast members bringing to life a magical world of fantasy, they're going to have to start paying them a lot more.

Why would people need to be paid more in order to adhere to an appearance code?

Take your visible piercings out, and don't wear external jewelry while on the clock.
People want to be paid more for that?
Get lost.

*BTW, I'm no prude - a rock and roll guy from the 70's who's had his hair very long and I'll still wear silver rings sometimes, maybe a bracelet, a chain...
These things aren't attached to one's body.
If the job wants you to leave them off, you leave them off.