Disney workers fired over sweaty costumes

[KimBean]

Actually, I am a performer. In my case, people are paying for a specific show, so yes, unless I pass out, I'm going on (but I don't need to deal with someone's sweat on my clothes). And, I'm up there by myself, so if I don't go on, a significant portion of the show just doesn't happen. However, in this situation, if indeed the clothes were damp with someone else's sweat and there is no way that you can work the show around it or find replacement unitards, then you simply tell everyone that the current show has been canceled and that they can come back in one hour for the next one. Things get shut down for various reasons all the time in the parks.
And I've already said in another post that the person responsible should be reprimanded but not fired.

So looks like we essentially agree. I think your other points are valid. Still getting this feeling about this (total speculation) that the performers are disgruntled for some other reason and just found their reason to sue. OR a LARGE piece of the puzzle is missing from that article (in Disney's favor.) The posters who have said we need more info, are probably the most accurate.

 

[KimBean]

I am a performer as well-- and no, that's not what you do. There are very strict rules about the care and maintenance of costumes for the health of actors for a reason. There ARE health risks involved-- jock itch being only one of them (and I've seen it, it's DISGUSTING.) And if my costume was in ANY WAY damp from someone else's sweat, I wouldn't wear it, period. I wouldn't spray some Lysol on it and suck it up- actors have to do gross things early in their careers, but the thing is- Disney has been in the entertainment biz a LONG time, and they should know better! There should be rules and regulations about the care and maintenance of costumes. The fact that as recent as 2001 performers were expected to share tights grosses me out, and with the addition of this story, I think Disney needs just a little tweaking with how they care for costumes that performers wear.

We will agree to disagree, I'd imagine. But as an actor I just couldn't agree to put on a costume that had been treated like that. If it was damp from someone else's sweat... Yuck. I makes me nauseous thinking about it.

We will not have to agree to disagree because I think you make valid points. I know it is not common here on the Dis, but I am a person who can listen to other viewpoints and even change my mind when I am shown that my initial reaction is wrong.

In pretty much any situation in life I try to get the job done and 'suck it up buttercup.' I'm born and raised Texan and that might have something to do with it. So my gut reaction is you don't let your castmembers down because your outfit might have touched something sweaty.

I have to third or fourth the "where were the extras?"

 

[luvthemouse71]

Why, oh why, couldn't the outfits in question be some lumberjack flannels instead of Lion King unitards?

Lol!

 

[OKW Lover]

These were not principal performers. The teamsters are representing these employees. Actors Equity represents the principal performers.

Good point Jack. Thanks

 

[andeesings]

We will not have to agree to disagree because I think you make valid points. I know it is not common here on the Dis, but I am a person who can listen to other viewpoints and even change my mind when I am shown that my initial reaction is wrong. In pretty much any situation in life I try to get the job done and 'suck it up buttercup.' I'm born and raised Texan and that might have something to do with it. So my gut reaction is you don't let your castmembers down because your outfit might have touched something sweaty. I have to third or fourth the "where were the extras?"

I too wonder about that!! In the case of really elaborate, costly costumes, I see not having backups, but I wonder what kind of costumes these were? Unitards were involved but were those the performer's costumes or the sweaty costumes near them?

 

[Bluegrrl]

Although there is very little information in the article, I have to side with the employees. Performing in the hot sun in Florida is an entirely different sort of hot. It's the type of sweat you get from just standing in one position - forget even walking or dancing!

Although I am not a performer at Disney, I used to march in the Star Wars weekends parade and it is HOT. Plus the parades were a lot of "stand in the hot sun and wait" It took about 15min for step off and then a full 30min for the parade. At the end, stormtroopers were dousing water on their faces, and their bodysuits were disgusting. There is no WAY a trooper would want to share their suit or even touch another persons suit after the marches. And although their suit may get washed afterwards and put away, the Tupperware tubs that they kept the suits in still smelled horrible.

Ironically, when the first Animal Kingdom parade came out, they pulled some of the performers costumes because they were leotarded performers (zebras, cheetahs, etc) and the performers costumes were showing sweat in "non-Disney areas". So Disney knows of this "issue" - why should performers not want to perform in gross costumes surprise them? Really?

 

[Jennasis]

Although there is very little information in the article, I have to side with the employees. Performing in the hot sun in Florida is an entirely different sort of hot. It's the type of sweat you get from just standing in one position - forget even walking or dancing!

Although I am not a performer at Disney, I used to march in the Star Wars weekends parade and it is HOT. Plus the parades were a lot of "stand in the hot sun and wait" It took about 15min for step off and then a full 30min for the parade. At the end, stormtroopers were dousing water on their faces, and their bodysuits were disgusting. There is no WAY a trooper would want to share their suit or even touch another persons suit after the marches. And although their suit may get washed afterwards and put away, the Tupperware tubs that they kept the suits in still smelled horrible.

Ironically, when the first Animal Kingdom parade came out, they pulled some of the performers costumes because they were leotarded performers (zebras, cheetahs, etc) and the performers costumes were showing sweat in "non-Disney areas". So Disney knows of this "issue" - why should performers not want to perform in gross costumes surprise them? Really?

These costumes never see the light of day or the Florida sun (other than to be hung outside to dry apparently) as the performance happens in the indoor Air conditioned theater...that said, the performers do get extremely sweaty regardless. Just like any broadway perfomer would.

 

[Ronda93]

Sounds like the tumble monkeys.

 

[cakebaker]

I don't think we can know what really happened here from the article.

Since when does the Dis let the lack of facts and not knowing the full story get in the way of a good argument?

 

[LaurenT]

When I said squashed up against, I was responding to someone who took the "the soiled costume came in contact with te clean one" out of context and made it look like it was childish. I don't know if that poster read the whole article, but my slightly exaggerated "squashed" came from this, near the end of the article:

The costume parts get drenched because, "We sweat like crazy," said Drew Pearson, one of the fired workers. "It's such a high-intensity show."

One day in June, workers moved the used costume parts inside when it rained. Performers said they found the dirty garments pushed up against the clean ones.

So, no, not squashed ... But pushed up against ... That implies more than just barely touching. And I'll say again that I don't see why anyone would assume that three professional Disney dancers would risk their job if those unitards weren't in fact damp with someone else's sweat. Though of course, I wasn't there to testify to it.

 

[Itinkso]

Sounds like the tumble monkeys.

No, because the tumble monkeys are equity performers. The CMs who have been identified are Entertainment CMs and are covered by strict contracted guidelines regarding health and safety.

 

[MonkeyDishwasher]

I'd like to address the "Why didn't they do the show without them?" questions.

In any show, there is choreography that includes specific placement(blocking) of various performers. If those performers are missing, the performers who are present need to be placed in different places (re-blocked). If there is no time to do a rehearsal to reblock the show, then the show probably has to go down as it could become a choreography/safety issue during the performance. Since this incident seems to have taken place backstage as the show had already begun, obviously there was no time to have a rehearsal and fill in the gaps.

BUt again, we still dont know exactly which roles these performers were playing in this viewing of the show. Maybe they were tumble monkeys, maybe they were the animal performers. Either way, I'm sure they probably didn't refuse to go on because a minor bit of dampness came in contact with their clean costumes. If you've ever focused on those dancers at the end of the shows, there's a LOT of sweat on every single one of them.

 

[ttintagel]

Even if I agreed with management (which I don't; with such a large wardrobe department it seems like they could have gotten some clean unitards over there, even if it delayed the performance) firing the performers seems like a pretty over-the-top reaction. They should be reinstated, even if management feels they should have some disciplinary action.

 

[Gru]

I know this has nothing to do with sweaty costumes, but I just wanted to remark on what I saw this past August on our vacation. While watching The Lion King show, I noticed that the bird that flies around on the wire had a hole in her costume, and her big toe was sticking out the whole time. I thought it odd, it being Disney and all, that they would let the performer go onstage in a costume in that condition. At the time I thought maybe it tore right before show time, now I'm thinking maybe Disney doesn't keep the costumes in pristine condition after all.

 

[Planogirl]

There's no way to know whose side to be on. I don't see enough information to make a judgment.

 

[olwyngdh]

This is one of those instances where Abby Lee Miller may be right--Everyone's replaceable. I m sure there are plenty of people who didn't make the cut at the audition who would love to step into the place of these performers, even if some sweaty costume piece might touch their unitard.

I know my daughter's studio requires a flesh tone leotard with clear straps under costumes, I can't imagine that professional dancers don't own and use them.

 

[leebee]

1) I stand with the performers on this one.

If you should happen to tip a brewski with a tumble monkey in the near future, please pass on our gratitude for their dedication and hard work. I am a sucker for a good production number, and FOTLK is my favorite, hands down. DD's dream is to dance in the production, but she's always the wrong height for whatever is being auditioned that day. She will not give up… but it's a hard role to get in a wonderful performance!

I know this has nothing to do with sweaty costumes, but I just wanted to remark on what I saw this past August on our vacation. While watching The Lion King show, I noticed that the bird that flies around on the wire had a hole in her costume, and her big toe was sticking out the whole time. I thought it odd, it being Disney and all, that they would let the performer go onstage in a costume in that condition. At the time I thought maybe it tore right before show time, now I'm thinking maybe Disney doesn't keep the costumes in pristine condition after all.

That's odd, because it'd seem that she wasn't wearing shoes, if you could see her toe. I noticed last week that the bird has lovely, dyed to match performance shoes (I am a bit of a nut over the matching shoes… you should see me swoon over the dyed-to-match character shoes in "Be Our Guest" , it's a little sad), but couldn't tell if they were fabric or leather ballet shoes. I can't imagine any performer would go out there in tights without shoes, so this is odd.

I think there is way more here than meets the eye. I have worked as costume mistress and seamstress for a ballet company, and the costumes get GROSS. Our dancers have to provide their own body liners (which they sweat through in about 27 seconds) and tights. There is NO WAY we would be laundering and reassigning tights and body liners, much less unitards, unless each dancer were assigned specific pairs and she, and ONLY she, wore those pairs- which would be cleaned between shows, obviously. I honestly struggle with the concept of the dancers sharing neckpieces and headpieces. HEADpieces? Dancers won't share brushes, but DIsney is asking them to share headpieces?

I don't know that there's enough information here to base a decision: Were the dancers over-reacting? No way to know as we don't know how "wet" the clean costumes really were, but if clean costumes were laid out and icky ones were dumped on them, I wouldn't wear them, either. Were the dancers going out on a limb to prove a point: That Disney seems to disregard basic public health recommendations by making dancers share sweaty costume pieces (skirts, collars, headpieces)? I just can't believe that these 3 dancers would jeopardize their jobs and careers over something as minor as what is presented in the article.

 

[Angel Ariel]

I know my daughter's studio requires a flesh tone leotard with clear straps under costumes, I can't imagine that professional dancers don't own and use them.

I would imagine that what Disney allows them to wear when they are onstage is incredibly regulated.

 

[Friend of a Mouse]

From the article: "Though this was a one-time incident, Teamsters recording secretary and business agent Donna-Lynne Dalton likened it to a controversy that arose in 2001 over Disney's practice of making workers share bike shorts and tights. In a contract agreement reached that year, Disney gave in and allowed each worker to have his or her own set."

Disney was run a bit better back them and they wanted people to share shorts and tights???
I can only imagine what they doing now in their days of cuts all over the place..it sounds to me like there is a lot more to this story than one rack touching another rack...

Havig been a character performer at Disney and then another theme park, let me say that I did not have my own set of tights even in the early 2000s, but every costume is washed between people so it was never a big deal to me. At the second theme park I worked at, we rotated costumes throughout the day. There were days people came in sick and I would have to put on their costume less than half an hour after they wore it with no sanitation in between.

For the "fur" characters, you wear shorts, a shirt, and socks underneath. The shirt is changed every set and the shorts several times a day. The heads are sterilized with a chemical called Ster Bac but every performer does it on their own. We even shared the velcro shoes, but used a chemical called Asepticare in between performers.

Some costumes could not be washed, so those had linings. SPectromagic costumes were that way. THe lining snapped onto the garment and let me tell you, even with a washable lining, there were times that those costumes started to get a real funk to them. Whenever that happened, our managers went out ofthe way to try to find a solution, but sometimes you just had to wear the funky smelling costume.

They are very strict with their characters and you are made aware of it when you train. Decide you don't want to wear a chin strap and your head falls off? Fired. Talk in costume in front of guests? Fired. Refuse to go on set for not a good reason? Fired.

From my friends that work there now, the actual working conditions in entertainment are not that much different from what they were in the early 2000's. Based on the wording of the story, this sounds like a bogus reason to refuse the show. IF they costumes were on another rack and they were pushed together, how soiled could the costumes have possibly been? THey do realize that they share the same furniture with the sweaty people in between shows right? If you're going to get something, that is how it will happen. IF as presented, I am on Disney's side on this one.

 

[Friend of a Mouse]

This is one of those instances where Abby Lee Miller may be right--Everyone's replaceable. I m sure there are plenty of people who didn't make the cut at the audition who would love to step into the place of these performers, even if some sweaty costume piece might touch their unitard.

I know my daughter's studio requires a flesh tone leotard with clear straps under costumes, I can't imagine that professional dancers don't own and use them.

You only wear what Disney allows. In many of the FOLK costumes a flesh colored unitard would be noticeable. As for not having extras, it could be that the extras were being washed from a previous day or too far away. The costuming buidingat AK is nowhere near the performing areas. The performers are on a very tight schedule with the times of each show and parade closely intertwined, so a dealy may not have been possible.

I performed for two years at Disney. The only rashes I saw were heat rashes. Lice were more common but typically came from th furniture vs. the costumes. I have been in that situation. On a two parade night, a person got sick in between (overheated) and I was asked to wear their costume that had not been washd. I agreed because the show must go on and I knew she was not contagious, just overheated. I did shower extra long that night.