Berating cast members

[bcla]

Oh I didn't mean as ID (although I should have clarified), but I had to have it for some reason and was carting it around in my purse for a good week before I put it back in the safe. I'd be so paranoid carrying my passport, but I guess if I wanna drink...

A passport is just an ID and travel document. If you somehow lost it, it's not that difficult to get it replaced. I would typically make a photocopy of the information page. That can be useful if you need an emergency passport. If you're in Disneyland, the closest Canadian consulate is in Los Angeles.

 

[GeneralTso]

I've witnessed a few instances where poor CMs were getting torn a new one. I felt so sorry for them.
Both cases--they relented and the jerks got their way. I think it's just not worth the fight for them.

 

[AussieCaribou]

A passport is just an ID and travel document. If you somehow lost it, it's not that difficult to get it replaced. I would typically make a photocopy of the information page. That can be useful if you need an emergency passport. If you're in Disneyland, the closest Canadian consulate is in Los Angeles.

Sadly, it's not that easy for other nationalities. The Australian consulate is in LA as well, but if I lost my passport, it would take 48+ hours for a reissue and a $300 fee. Plus the hotel, and paying the fees to change my flights, and food etc if I lost it on the last day there. All so that I can prove my age (which is on my Australian drivers license? Which I am carrying so I can use my credit card). In my case, it's not an issue (as I don't drink) but I can totally understand those who would be frustrated by this rule. Still no excuse for yelling at the CMs.

 

[Disney_Alli]

In Florida the rule was either the passport itself or our driver's licence or ID and a picture of the passport. It was even spelled out in my wedding contract last year. I haven't read up on the rules in California yet as we're still a couple months out.

 

[bcla]

Sadly, it's not that easy for other nationalities. The Australian consulate is in LA as well, but if I lost my passport, it would take 48+ hours for a reissue and a $300 fee. Plus the hotel, and paying the fees to change my flights, and food etc if I lost it on the last day there. All so that I can prove my age (which is on my Australian drivers license? Which I am carrying so I can use my credit card). In my case, it's not an issue (as I don't drink) but I can totally understand those who would be frustrated by this rule. Still no excuse for yelling at the CMs.

There's nothing in the state's guidelines that says an identification other than a passport must be issued in the United States. It says government issued.

https://www.abc.ca.gov/FORMS/ABC299.pdf

(3) Documentary Evidence of Age and Identity (Section 25660 Business and Professions Code) a) Bona fide evidence of majority and identity of the person is any of the following:

(1) A document issued by a federal, state, county, or municipal government, or subdivision or agency thereof, including, but not limited to, a valid motor vehicle operator's license, that contains the name, date of birth, description, and picture of the person.

(2) A valid passport issued by the United States or by a foreign government.

(3) A valid identification card issued to a member of the Armed Forces that includes a date of birth and a picture of the person.

(b) Proof that the defendant-licensee, or his or her employee or agent, demanded, was shown, and acted in reliance upon bona fide evidence in any transaction, employment, use, or permission forbidden by Section 25658, 25663, or 25665 shall be a defense to any criminal prosecution therefor or to any proceedings for the suspension or revocation of any license based thereon.

Note: The person accepting identification must make a reasonable inspection of the identification and act with due diligence to confirm that the identification presented is that of the person presenting it. The picture and physical description on the identification must match the customer. If the identification is altered or mutilated, it is not acceptable. It must be currently valid, in other words, not expired.​

 

[DahliaRW]

There's nothing in the state's guidelines that says an identification other than a passport must be issued in the United States. It says government issued.

https://www.abc.ca.gov/FORMS/ABC299.pdf

(3) Documentary Evidence of Age and Identity (Section 25660 Business and Professions Code) a) Bona fide evidence of majority and identity of the person is any of the following:

(1) A document issued by a federal, state, county, or municipal government, or subdivision or agency thereof, including, but not limited to, a valid motor vehicle operator's license, that contains the name, date of birth, description, and picture of the person.

(2) A valid passport issued by the United States or by a foreign government.

(3) A valid identification card issued to a member of the Armed Forces that includes a date of birth and a picture of the person.

(b) Proof that the defendant-licensee, or his or her employee or agent, demanded, was shown, and acted in reliance upon bona fide evidence in any transaction, employment, use, or permission forbidden by Section 25658, 25663, or 25665 shall be a defense to any criminal prosecution therefor or to any proceedings for the suspension or revocation of any license based thereon.

Note: The person accepting identification must make a reasonable inspection of the identification and act with due diligence to confirm that the identification presented is that of the person presenting it. The picture and physical description on the identification must match the customer. If the identification is altered or mutilated, it is not acceptable. It must be currently valid, in other words, not expired.​

That document is from January 1998. The law was updated in 2009, as I linked earlier as well as the official law here (https://www.abc.ca.gov/trade/Industry Advisory re 25660 amendments_2009_12-16-09.pdf), and does specify that the ID needs to be issued by a United States agency. Here is my earlier post with this information: http://www.disboards.com/threads/berating-cast-members.3520598/#post-55978418

 

[Shanti]

While I haven't done it, I've seen it happen a few times. Just last trip I saw a dad whose family walked out, but where he wanted back in without the security check. A CM told him he needed to go through the entrance. Dad kept on arguing, complaining about a long day.

A few years back it was someone at RSR. Not quite sure what was the deal, but the CM wasn't letting his family in though the FP line. I think the CM might have even said he might call security if this kept up. The visitor was complaining about how much the trip cost him to plead his case to be let through.

I'm glad the CMs stood their ground in both cases.

People who act that way feel entitled. They're the ones who cut past people in line, who don't try to control their children's misbehavior yet get mad if anyone else dares to make a comment, etc.

We all have long days at WDW, and the trips cost all of us a lot of money. So why do these people feel they are specially entitled to break the rules for those reasons? They are just used to pushing their way through life, regardless of others, then get mad when they realize they can't get away with it all the time.

 

[bcla]

That document is from January 1998. The law was updated in 2009, as I linked earlier as well as the official law here (http://www.abc.ca.gov/forms/ABCAct_2011.pdf), and does specify that the ID needs to be issued by a United States agency. Here is my earlier post with this information: http://www.disboards.com/threads/berating-cast-members.3520598/#post-55978418

The revision date at the bottom of the document is 1/11 and it's the current clerk's affidavit form.

Even if the document you linked (which is huge) I can't find anything indicating that a foreign-issued driver license is not an acceptable document for purchasing alcohol. I've looked over several documents on the California ABC website, and they all say that it must be government issued, but I haven't seen anything that says it must be issued in the United States.

Here's the current law, which is exactly what was in the document I linked:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&group=25001-26000&file=25657-25668

25660. (a) Bona fide evidence of majority and identity of the
person is any of the following:
(1) A document issued by a federal, state, county, or municipal
government, or subdivision or agency thereof, including, but not
limited to, a valid motor vehicle operator's license, that contains
the name, date of birth, description, and picture of the person.
(2) A valid passport issued by the United States or by a foreign
government.
(3) A valid identification card issued to a member of the Armed
Forces that includes a date of birth and a picture of the person.
(b) Proof that the defendant-licensee, or his or her employee or
agent, demanded, was shown, and acted in reliance upon bona fide
evidence in any transaction, employment, use, or permission forbidden
by Section 25658, 25663, or 25665 shall be a defense to any criminal
prosecution therefor or to any proceedings for the suspension or
revocation of any license based thereon.​

 

[DahliaRW]

The revision date at the bottom of the document is 1/11 and it's the current clerk's affidavit form.

Even if the document you linked (which is huge) I can't find anything indicating that a foreign-issued driver license is not an acceptable document for purchasing alcohol. I've looked over several documents on the California ABC website, and they all say that it must be government issued, but I haven't seen anything that says it must be issued in the United States.

Here's the current law, which is exactly what was in the document I linked:

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=bpc&group=25001-26000&file=25657-25668

25660. (a) Bona fide evidence of majority and identity of the
person is any of the following:
(1) A document issued by a federal, state, county, or municipal
government, or subdivision or agency thereof, including, but not
limited to, a valid motor vehicle operator's license, that contains
the name, date of birth, description, and picture of the person.
(2) A valid passport issued by the United States or by a foreign
government.
(3) A valid identification card issued to a member of the Armed
Forces that includes a date of birth and a picture of the person.
(b) Proof that the defendant-licensee, or his or her employee or
agent, demanded, was shown, and acted in reliance upon bona fide
evidence in any transaction, employment, use, or permission forbidden
by Section 25658, 25663, or 25665 shall be a defense to any criminal
prosecution therefor or to any proceedings for the suspension or
revocation of any license based thereon.​

Sorry, wrong link. Here is the correct one https://www.abc.ca.gov/trade/Industry Advisory re 25660 amendments_2009_12-16-09.pdf which clearly states "
The identification itself must meet the requirements of the Section 25660. With respect to “federal, state, county, or municipal government, or subdivision or agency thereof”, such issuing government or agency shall be located within the United States."

It is an explanatory statement that is not included in the actual law, but clarifies the definition of what constitutes an appropriate agency that was released after the 2009 law went into effect. It's basically telling liquor establishments what they have to do, legally, to not face penalties. Also, it clearly states that, "Finally, nothing in Section 25660 overrides a licensee’s right pursuant to Section 25659 to “refuse to sell or serve alcoholic beverages to any person who is unable to produce adequate written evidence that he or she is over the age of 21 years.”". So basically, if the server cannot verify it is a legal document that proves age, they can refuse to serve that person to cover themselves legally from prosecution by the state. The burden of proof is on the licensee, not the state, if a violation is found (which is also stated in the explanatory document).

 

[Malcon10t]

The one where I asked for a manager - Being a Canadian, my wife and I were denied a drink in DCA because we didn't bring our passports into the park. We had our drivers licenses, we are in our mid 30's on our 10th anniversary trip, but were denied because apparently we needed a passport because it wasn't USA ID. Despite the fact that I'm sure they say way more BC drivers licences than say Maine USA or Rhode Island, another dumb enforcement of a ridiculous policy despite looking at the situation. I said my piece to the manager who still refused to serve us and we went to another location in DCA, weren't ID'd, and bought a drink there. They got a handful from me on twitter that day and I still think it is unreasonable that I need to carry my passport into the park just to get a beer.

Here is the thing. It is the law in California. And the rule is if you look under 35, you are to be carded. ID must be a US issued ID or a passport. Foreign licenses are not considered acceptable. Disney hires "shoppers" to verify employees are doing the job properly. Add to that, ABC hires "shoppers" to check on businesses and verify. Let's pretend that instead of being a guest trying to buy that beer, you were a shopper from Disney. If the server did not follow protocol, they would be retrained if first time offense, fired if the second. If the shopper was from ABC, Disney would be cited for first offense, and alcohol license revoked if it happens more often. My kids were shoppers when they were younger (technically I was the supervising shopper) and did numerous tobacco and alcohol shops. They have to have the right ID.

 

[bcla]

Here is the thing. It is the law in California. And the rule is if you look under 35, you are to be carded. ID must be a US issued ID or a passport. Foreign licenses are not considered acceptable. Disney hires "shoppers" to verify employees are doing the job properly. Add to that, ABC hires "shoppers" to check on businesses and verify. Let's pretend that instead of being a guest trying to buy that beer, you were a shopper from Disney. If the server did not follow protocol, they would be retrained if first time offense, fired if the second. If the shopper was from ABC, Disney would be cited for first offense, and alcohol license revoked if it happens more often. My kids were shoppers when they were younger (technically I was the supervising shopper) and did numerous tobacco and alcohol shops. They have to have the right ID.

It's not a violation of an alcoholic beverage license to sell alcohol without carding. However, California ABC has "standards & practices" in place. A violation would only be for selling to someone under 21, and law enforcement can use "decoys" who by law have to be age 20. Having asked and received acceptable identification is considered to be an affirmative defense against the charges of selling to someone under 21.

https://www.abc.ca.gov/questions/enforcement_faq.html

Q. 73. Is there anything a licensee or an employee may do to prevent selling to minors?

A. A licensee is authorized to demand documentary evidence of the age and identity of any person prior to the sale whenever there is the slightest doubt of the age of the prospective patron. Proof that a licensee was shown bona fide identification of the age and identity of the person, and in good faith relied on the evidence, establishes a defense. (Section 25660)​

I get that California ABC has issued an advisory notice that a driver license must be issued in the US to be acceptable as an ID to purchase alcoholic beverages. However, I don't think that's ever been tested in court. The actual statute that mentions it says "government agency".

 

[DahliaRW]

And if it was determined that the person was under 21 and the server relied on a foreign ID that was not a passport, they would be liable. So I totally understand an abundance of caution. Disney probably also has their own policies that most likely set the standard for alcohol sales at DLR as well. It would be REALLY bad PR for Disney to be caught selling to a minor. I imagine they are more cautious than most. In the case of the PP, the CM was totally within their right to not sell to them under CA state law.

As a side note, decoys have to be UNDER 20 and look under 21 and carry their own id with correct DOB. They aren't carrying falsified documents or foreign IDs. http://www.abc.ca.gov/programs/minor_decoy.html . If the establishment is found to have served a minor, one of the defenses can be "The person to whom the alcoholic beverage was sold or served furnished bona fide documentary evidence of majority and identity as described in Q.74. An example would be a motor vehicle operator's license or an identification card issued by the Armed Forces which the licensee in good faith carefully examined and reasonably relied upon as such evidence. (Section 25660)". However, under the advisory, a non US issued ID would not meet that criteria (outside of a passport) https://www.abc.ca.gov/questions/enforcement_faq.html .

 

[bcla]

And if it was determined that the person was under 21 and the server relied on a foreign ID that was not a passport, they would be liable. So I totally understand an abundance of caution. Disney probably also has their own policies that most likely set the standard for alcohol sales at DLR as well. It would be REALLY bad PR for Disney to be caught selling to a minor. I imagine they are more cautious than most. In the case of the PP, the CM was totally within their right to not sell to them under CA state law.

As a side note, decoys have to be UNDER 20 and look under 21 and carry their own id with correct DOB. They aren't carrying falsified documents or foreign IDs. http://www.abc.ca.gov/programs/minor_decoy.html . If the establishment is found to have served a minor, one of the defenses can be "The person to whom the alcoholic beverage was sold or served furnished bona fide documentary evidence of majority and identity as described in Q.74. An example would be a motor vehicle operator's license or an identification card issued by the Armed Forces which the licensee in good faith carefully examined and reasonably relied upon as such evidence. (Section 25660)". However, under the advisory, a non US issued ID would not meet that criteria (outside of a passport) https://www.abc.ca.gov/questions/enforcement_faq.html .

OK - I read it wrong. However, the decoy is allowed to attempt to purchase an alcoholic beverage without ID.

 

[Malcon10t]

OK - I read it wrong. However, the decoy is allowed to attempt to purchase an alcoholic beverage without ID.

Yes. However, a shopper for the business, to determine if the employee is following the location rules is different than a decoy. We done both. Examples, my daughter would attempt to buy without ID to verify they did ask for ID, or use ID that wasn't acceptable to determine if the server was following the businesses rules.

 

[bcla]

Yes. However, a shopper for the business, to determine if the employee is following the location rules is different than a decoy. We done both. Examples, my daughter would attempt to buy without ID to verify they did ask for ID, or use ID that wasn't acceptable to determine if the server was following the businesses rules.

I get that. However, a decoy who isn't working with law enforcement doesn't put the alcoholic beverage license in jeopardy. I do understand that the business's standard practices are in place to conform with the recommendations and reduce the risk of a violation for selling to a minor.

 

[Malcon10t]

I get that. However, a decoy who isn't working with law enforcement doesn't put the alcoholic beverage license in jeopardy. I do understand that the business's standard practices are in place to conform with the recommendations and reduce the risk of a violation for selling to a minor.

An employee who would sell to the shopper/decoy without law enforcement, will end up causing issues for the license. The establishment becomes known for not following the rules, thus a target.

 

[Nonsuch]

I've witnessed a few instances where poor CMs were getting torn a new one. I felt so sorry for them.
Both cases--they relented and the jerks got their way. I think it's just not worth the fight for them.

A family was obstructing the DCA entrance from the GCH, insisting they be allowed through. The husband was being quite loud, but the CMs insisted they needed to wait until 11AM.
I had to squeeze around their stroller, since they refused to move.

I happened to see this same family (looking like they were in the UN-happiest place on earth) exiting DCA headed toward Harbor (around 11:15).

 

[tdhickey]

Here is the thing. It is the law in California. And the rule is if you look under 35, you are to be carded. ID must be a US issued ID or a passport. Foreign licenses are not considered acceptable. Disney hires "shoppers" to verify employees are doing the job properly. Add to that, ABC hires "shoppers" to check on businesses and verify. Let's pretend that instead of being a guest trying to buy that beer, you were a shopper from Disney. If the server did not follow protocol, they would be retrained if first time offense, fired if the second. If the shopper was from ABC, Disney would be cited for first offense, and alcohol license revoked if it happens more often. My kids were shoppers when they were younger (technically I was the supervising shopper) and did numerous tobacco and alcohol shops. They have to have the right ID.

Already covered previously by other posters regarding the actual law, but interesting enough I have used my DL at every other establishment in CA that I have been carded at and have never been refused. This has only happened in Disneyland as every other establishment accepts a drivers license, I've visited multiple liquor stores and restaurants in the area and tested this many times over the years

 

[beachdreamr1229]

As someone who used to work in the amusement park industry, I try to never get upset with a CM. Honestly, those who work at DLR are, for the most part, the best in the industry. It's rare to see them really goofing off, having a negative attitude, or even really making mistakes. The only times I've ever really seen a problem were during the 24 hour thing last year when everyone was tired and the crowds were unmanageable.

As for the alcohol thing, it's right what people are saying about California laws. I worked in a bar-like area for a while and the tests they make you take are insane. If you as an employee mess up, your job can be on the line. So, when in doubt, you always err on the side of caution, especially if you are unfamiliar with an out of country license. The general rule most places is that if you look like you're under 35 years old, you get carded. I once carded a 50 year old woman because I just couldn't be sure. She wasn't thrilled because it's a hassle, but she said it was nice to know she looked young enough for it to be a concern. Managers and supervisors will almost always support their employees on their judgment calls when they are overly cautious because the fines and penalties for serving to someone underage are severe.

 

[Gari14]

While I would never do anything like scream at a CM at Disneyland or any other park, something did happen to me when I visited Disneyland last week. We were waiting to have our picture taken with a Stormtrooper and as most of you know, you have to wait for the Stormtrooper to point to you before you can have your picture taken. So, we're waiting and he points at us to come forward which we then start to do until the CM with him screams at us and tells us to get back as he didn't call us forward. My friend who was with me said to the CM that he did call us up but he wouldn't have it. The Stormtrooper pointed at us again to come forward to which my mate said to the CM "see, we told you" and the CM then rolls his eyes and says "be quick then"

Its the first time Ive ever had an issue with any CM at any of the Disney parks. This guy was the most arrogant, obnoxious person I've ever met that works for Disney. Because he was with a Stormtrooper, I think he thought it gave him some sort of power or something.