Disney is totally heartless!!!

[Amlee]

Another generalization that starts to look a wee bit shaky if one googles "ACLU" and "freedom of online speech." Many constitutional experts assumed our first amendment only extended to public employees, but that line is getting more and more blury - litigation has already succeeded against private universities and private sector employers who terminated staff/employees for speaking out on subjects like politics. And I won't even get into what happened to Time Warner when their AOL sub tried to censor certain board discussions!!

Also, I'm not implying private sector employers have no right to try and control employee discussions about them. Rather, I'm pointing out that in day and age when a board like this exists, it dramatically changes the dynamic - the horse can get out of the barn much faster and in front of a much larger audience in the past, and the media dynamics are much different -- or put another way, if anyone here thinks Central Florida media wouldn't just love a front page story about Disney firing a husband who just lost an infant, they have a lot to learn about the press!

Oh, that is why I said as of yet in my post. It's a very blurry. But it's still up in the air as to whether the 13 amendments extend to the the net or not.

 

[teacups]

QUESTION:
How would a company handle it if, let's say an enemy of someone posted information of a board such as this (or facebook or youtube, etc.) claiming facts that perfectly fit a differnet employee, just to get them in trouble. Then what?

 

[Disney Doll]

Also, I'm not implying private sector employers have no right to try and control employee discussions about them. Rather, I'm pointing out that in day and age when a board like this exists, it dramatically changes the dynamic - the horse can get out of the barn much faster and in front of a much larger audience in the past, and the media dynamics are much different -- or put another way, if anyone here thinks Central Florida media wouldn't just love a front page story about Disney firing a husband who just lost an infant, they have a lot to learn about the press!

I agree, which is why I am surprised that there is no mention of this story, which the OP states she called the local news and CNN with, on any news station. I would think someone from Universal woudl pay a lot of money to have some media source bash the heck out of Disney with regard to this issue.

Makes me wonder a bit...

 

[CJBaby]

QUESTION:
How would a company handle it if, let's say an enemy of someone posted information of a board such as this (or facebook or youtube, etc.) claiming facts that perfectly fit a differnet employee, just to get them in trouble. Then what?

Or, what if someone posted information about themselves, pretending to be someone pretending to be them pretending to be an entirely different person? THEN what?

 

[DVC~OKW~96]

I am terribly sorry for what has happened to your family. I would like to think Disney would be more compassionate at a time like this.

Then again, I would hope some of the members here would be more compassionate. I'm sorry for some of the things you've had to read in this thread.

Those of us who have lost someone as you have understand that the last thing we need or expect is to have an ugly surprise with benefits.

Please know that you are in my heart and thoughts. Would that that could help at all. {{{{{hugs}}}}}

 

[Grog]

To the OP, I am sorry for your loss.

Not trying to derail the thread, but as others have said you should be very careful about what is posted here if your DH works for Disney. It's not just Disney monitoring the internet that you need to worry about, but heartless people on these boards.

A couple of years ago there was a poster here who wanted to be a CM at WDW (sorry, can't remember her name). She finally landed a job there and posted from time to time about what she was doing. She made a couple of posts about rude guests. Next thing she knew she was in trouble over it (I can't remember if she actually lost her job or not). It turned out that it was a poster from here who was such a mindless Disney zombie that they couldn't stand seeing this poor woman vent after a long hard day and turned her in. Please be careful.

 

[TheFlame]

I am very sorry for your loss.

It is too bad in today's times that you can't always take what someone says at face value...especially on the internet.

If all is as stated, I hope that you do the right thing for your family and that the right thing is done for you.

May God help you find peace.

 

[SandraVB79]

I'm sorry for your loss , but in many cases, (life) insurances will only fully pay starting 6 months after you subscribe to it.

 

[nataliela]

Jadynne,

Have you gotten any word back from Disney regarding their policies?


I'm sure many of us here would like a follow up

 

[beachblanket]

I'm sorry for your loss , but in many cases, (life) insurances will only fully pay starting 6 months after you subscribe to it.

You are employing EU criteria - in most states in the U.S., by law you have to be insured the moment you are approved by underwriting and start paying premiums. In fact, I know of none that have anything close to a 6 month restriction - including Florida.

What do you like about Disney? You are very biased against them on the DCL boards.

I do indeed show a "bias" on the DCL forums - against people who have only sailed DCL and then go on and on about how it is better in every way than any other cruise line. And I will never apologize for pointing out their ridiculous, negative generalizations about competitors -- which are based on absolutely no first hand experience.

You know what I like about Disney the most? Despite not having to, they offer benefits to same sex partners of their employees.

I'm glad they've impressed you - and with all due respect I highly, highly doubt the thing you like the most about them is the primary (or even secondary, third or 22nd level) reason most people spend money on going to WDW. We don't all rule our purchases based upon the presumed politics of the seller .

 

[Kathi OD]

You are employing EU criteria - in most states in the U.S., by law you have to be insured the moment you are approved by underwriting and start paying premiums. In fact, I know of none that have anything close to a 6 month restriction - including Florida.

Maybe you should check out this site regarding insurance for employees of Columbia University in NYC. The insurance carrier is New York Life.

http://www.insurecolumbiaalumni.com/gtl_info.htm

Here's what it says regarding benefits for children:

Your children may be covered for up to $4,000 each between the age of 6 months and 19 years (23 if a full-time student). Between the age of 15 days and 6 months the benefit is $100.

This seems to be less than OP got.

The teachers at Kansas State University have a similar clause in their life insurance policy. Those paying the minimum premium get only $200 (also less that OP got) if their child dies between the ages of 14 days and 6 months. However, these teachers can opt to pay a higher premium to get a higher benefit in case a child dies. http://www.k-state.edu/hr/benefits/tea.htm

I would bet that OP's DH's policy had such a clause that they were not aware of. This is a very commonplace practice within the insurance industry. So while you may think it is illegal, it most obviously is not.

Hugs again for the suffering that OP and her family are experiencing at this time. Losing a child is a horrible thing at any age.

 

[creativeamanda]

IMO, the OP has a bigger beef with the insurance companies and their endless lobbyists.

I am sorry for your loss.

 

[beachblanket]

Maybe you should check out this site regarding insurance for employees of Columbia University in NYC. The insurance carrier is New York Life.

http://www.insurecolumbiaalumni.com/gtl_info.htm

I realize everyone isn't a student of (or well read in) the life insurance industry, so a point of information: New York Life isn't even in the group employer business anymore (they sold that part of their operation fifteen years ago).

Next point: there are different forms of group insurance that operate under different regulatory codicils. What you are referencing re: Columbia alumni is not employee insurance, but actually a program administered by the association markets unit at New York Life. They sell to entities like the American Bar Association, the International Association of Electrical Engineers, etc (groups linked by designations or licenses, not by employer). Those programs are regulated under different criteria than employee programs. Hence the infant mortality exclusion.

The teachers at Kansas State University have a similar clause in their life insurance policy.

O.K., we're now back in the employee realm, which you noted has one huge, critical, Kansas-mandated difference: the policy here HAS to offer a higher face amount to infants as an option. Trust me, the underwriters didn't do that just to be beneficent.

Now, if I had ready access to certain life industry databases (particularly the the SRI or LIMRA policy ones), I could quickly come up with an assessment of the percentage of domestic employer group life policies with true major infant exclusions.

But unfortunately I can't -- and to date neither has anyone here. So any generalizations that "most" group employers policies still contain such exclusions are still just that - unsupported generalizations (gee, I'm beginning to feel like I'm back on the DCL boards.... )

Whatever, to close on a factual tangent: when controlling for socioeconomic status, infant mortality in the U.S. has been dropping for the last four decades. So what? That means the insurable risk has declined for most buyers. Which in turn should lower, not increase exclusions.

And to "Jade" (the OP) - if you're still reading all this, has your husband requested a copy of the policy declaration from the HR area? Again, he is entitled to it by state law.

 

[CJBaby]

OT:

Hey Beach Blanket, thanks for making me depressed. I just realized that I don't know as much as you know about insurance, about ANYTHING anymore.

I swear I was smart in my other life.......

 

[Kathi OD]

I realize everyone isn't a student of (or well read in) the life insurance industry, so a point of information: New York Life isn't even in the group employer business anymore (they sold that part of their operation fifteen years ago).

Next point: there are different forms of group insurance that operate under different regulatory codicils. What you are referencing re: Columbia alumni is not employee insurance, but actually a program administered by the association markets unit at New York Life. They sell to entities like the American Bar Association, the International Association of Electrical Engineers, etc (groups linked by designations or licenses, not by employer). Those programs are regulated under different criteria than employee programs. Hence the infant mortality exclusion.



O.K., we're now back in the employee realm, which you noted has one huge, critical, Kansas-mandated difference: the policy here HAS to offer a higher face amount to infants as an option. Trust me, the underwriters didn't do that just to be beneficent.

Now, if I had ready access to certain life industry databases (particularly the the SRI or LIMRA policy ones), I could quickly come up with an assessment of the percentage of domestic employer group life policies with true major infant exclusions.

But unfortunately I can't -- and to date neither has anyone here. So any generalizations that "most" group employers policies still contain such exclusions are still just that - unsupported generalizations (gee, I'm beginning to feel like I'm back on the DCL boards.... )

Whatever, to close on a factual tangent: when controlling for socioeconomic status, infant mortality in the U.S. has been dropping for the last four decades. So what? That means the insurable risk has declined for most buyers. Which in turn should lower, not increase exclusions.

And to "Jade" (the OP) - if you're still reading all this, has your husband requested a copy of the policy declaration from the HR area? Again, he is entitled to it by state law.

You've missed the point entirely, but with that swelled head, it doesn't surprise me at all. Insurers do place limits, exclusions, and exceptions in policies, whether you like it or not, and it's not automatically an illegal practice to do so.

However, you are right that OP's DH should check his policy to see exactly what his coverage is. Since none of us have actually read said policy, we have no idea whether they are entitled to more of a payout or not.

OT:

Hey Beach Blanket, thanks for making me depressed. I just realized that I don't know as much as you know about insurance, about ANYTHING anymore.

I swear I was smart in my other life.......

Take comfort in that you're not alone. Some people can only feel good about themselves when they are making others feel inferior.

 

[Mkgaapril]

when I worked for disney you paid for insurance and the only paper work you got about the policy you had is how much you paid and that you took it out. I ask for a year for a copy of what I purchased and never got it...I think they are a joke, family my butt...when I had surgery I was in icu and they demanded my doctor fill out a paper and fax it that sec..the doctor was hot and talked with DH about what a joke the mouse was...I am sorry for you and have no doubt in my mind you were lead to belive you had coverage and not just coverae when you reach a certain age...

 

[remain seated please]

First off, Jadynne. I am very sorry for your loss. I cannot imagine what you went through losing a child. But I am very familiar with Disney's attitude and agree with your view of the company completely. Furthermore...

Business or not I find it ludicrous that DIS'ers are actually saying that Disney is somehow OK here. The OP is absolutely correct. These slugs do anything they can to project family values and take every dollar they can from us in the name of family entertainment - but must follow the 'letter of the law' when one of their own has the worst kind of tradgey imaginable.

Shame on you folks defending Disney and shame on Disney.

I've never used this oft misguided phrase before but I will now, Walt must be rolling over in his grave.

Peter Pirate, I could not have said it any better. It is commonplace for some people on these boards to defend Disney at all costs. From ride accidents to unfortunate situations like Jadynne's. It is amazing that people can be so ignorant when it comes to this company.

Jadynne is one of many people to experience a dark side of Disney. But she is only one of a very few to share her experience on these boards. She has great courage to put something so fresh and painful on a board like the DIS for all to see. While the many people who shared thier condolances should be commended, the others who defended Disney have no respect or human decency.

I don't want to take away from Jadynne's tragic story in any way. But I used to be a Store Manager for The Disney Store. My mom was diagnosed with breast cancer and had to undergo surgery at the same time while my dad was in the hospital recovering from major surgery of his own. My parents lived 3 hours away and I had to take an emergency FMLA to be with both of them. My DM and HR did not want to grant me the leave, saying that the business was more important than my personal situation. I was forced to jump through hoops and go further up the chain of command to get a lousy week off.

Shortly after I returned from the leave, my DM took away another previously arranged trip that I had planned to be with my parents for a holiday. This was days before my mom was to begin radiation treatments for the cancer. Once again I was told that the business was more important than my personal situation.

I still took the 1 day off as planned. Two days after I returned to work, I was fired from my job. Looking back on it, I have always said that it was the best thing Disney did for me while I worked there. But it still shows how pathetic this company is when it comes to treating their employees with respect and dignity.

When I emailed my DM, Regional Director and HR to inform them that I would not be at work on the day I had previously been granted off, I used the quote by Walt Disney that appears at the bottom of this and all of my posts.

To those who wish to defend the mighty Disney by using the DIS to DISS those who have had a bad experience, think again. Better yet, keep your thoughts to yourself.

 

[Goobergal99]

why do ppl always feel the need to counter these types of posts?? let the chick vent, whether it is real or not...

I mean seriously ppl here defend the Disney company as if they are having dinner at Iger's house on Sundays GET OVER IT, they are a corporation and believe it or not as much as I love the fantasy of Disney, the reality is that they are a for profit business and far from perfect

 

[Tinkerbell424]

I'm so sorry for your loss.

 

[Tiggerlover91]

My husband works for Disney. We used to love Disney but they are soulless money grubbers that care about nothing more than money!!!

My baby was born 8 weeks premature and so my husband needed to use some FMLA time. They denied it stating he wasn't eligible even though we met all of the requirements. We had to threaten to call the labor board and file a complaint to get it approved.

Then they cancelled it "accidentally" midway through. We lost our son on May 1st and had a life insurance policy in effect when Ethan was born for $5,000 through Disney. we paid every premium. Every cent of that money is owed to the funeral home. Funerals are expensive, even for babies.

Disney paid us $500.00. They claim that they have a policy in effect that if your child is less than 6 months old they only have to pay that amount. It's not the life insurance company's policy, it's Disney's.

So now, I cannot pay the funeral bill, or put up a marker because Disney decided that my baby doesn't deserve one. They make billions of dollars each year, they pay their employees peanuts. those cast members that give you such great service make $6.90/hr. Plus, their insurance costs are 60% of their paycheck if they have kids. Disney merely provides insurance, they pay no part of it.

I cannot believe that they can value a child's life at $500.00. They make more than that off of one family spending one day in the park.

Oh my....I am SO sorry for your loss. I cannot imagine what you're going through. I'm a mother to a six month old and I CANNOT imagine my life without him! Best to you and be blessed.