Fastpass Enforcement coming?

[vacationclub]

Oops, wrong post I was thinking of...it was on page 3.

That internal memo is not Disney's published policy....that's why it's called an internal memo. It was an operational reminder that gives instructions on how to handle certain anticipated issues with FP.

That was simply Disney's way of anticipating that some guests may miss their fastpass window (legitimately) and be upset about it because it messed up their day. Disney has always given the customer a lot of slack, so their internal memo was to remind CMs that they can allow people in if they "missed" (the exact word printed) the window. "Missed" implies that the guests simply couldn't get there in time, so Disney would still allow it. It doesn't imply that the guests purposely showed up hours after the window, but to the CM standing there looking at tickets, it's all the same.

Thus, it's not a policy as far as the guests are concerned....unless of course they all start comparing notes on Disboards, then realize what Disney is allowing, then exploit this for their own gain.

It was never a policy. It was a semi-known exploit that people learned about via means other than Disney itself. Enough people have apparently taken advantage of this exploit that Disney felt, for whatever reason, that it can not continue. So, they are now proceeding with much tougher enforcement of their public policy that's published on their web site, printed on the ticket, and posted on signs above rides.

Yea, it stinks if you were enjoying this exploit, but that's all it ever was.

 

[Reddog1134]

Ah...well, if we want an example of speculation, there you go. But it isn't there yet.

Can't think of why they really need to add it there though. It's been pretty much a walk-on since shortly after they re-introduced the ride part. Unless there has been a super-secret new attraction being built in there...

There are 3 possible explanations that I can think of right now:

1. With the closure of Test Track, they want Nemo to eat up some of FPs that would have been used for TT. Which only makes sense if...

2. The TT closure creates a wait for Nemo.

3. It has something to do with X-pass/Fastpass Plus.

 

[doconeill]

That internal memo is not Disney's published policy....that's why it's called an internal memo. It was an operational reminder that gives instructions on how to handle certain anticipated issues with FP.

That was simply Disney's way of anticipating that some guests may miss their fastpass window (legitimately) and be upset about it because it messed up their day. Disney has always given the customer a lot of slack, so their internal memo was to remind CMs that they can allow people in if they "missed" (the exact word printed) the window. "Missed" implies that the guests simply couldn't get there in time, so Disney would still allow it. It doesn't imply that the guests purposely showed up hours after the window, but to the CM standing there looking at tickets, it's all the same.

Thus, it's not a policy as far as the guests are concerned....unless of course they all start comparing notes on Disboards, then realize what Disney is allowing, then exploit this for their own gain.

It was never a policy. It was a semi-known exploit that people learned about via means other than Disney itself. Enough people have apparently taken advantage of this exploit that Disney felt, for whatever reason, that it can not continue. So, they are now proceeding with much tougher enforcement of their public policy that's published on their web site, printed on the ticket, and posted on signs above rides.

Yea, it stinks if you were enjoying this exploit, but that's all it ever was.

I guess then it depends on your definition of policy. It is what is advertised, or what is done according to the documents and training provided to the CMs?

An Operation Reminder should serve to remind employees of policy/procedure.

I'm really not sure how how anyone reads that document and doesn't understand that it was policy to allow the person in, except for the case that they simply don't want it to.

 

[vacationclub]

There has already been significant discussion as to whether "missed" could or could not include intentionally using them late ("intentionally missing" is still missing in my mind), but more to the point it did not specify any sort of exceptions, conditions, or anything of the sort.

Perhaps because at that time it wasn't anticipated to be a problem to avoid.

 

[MELSMICE]

That internal memo is not Disney's published policy....that's why it's called an internal memo. It was an operational reminder that gives instructions on how to handle certain anticipated issues with FP.

That was simply Disney's way of anticipating that some guests may miss their fastpass window (legitimately) and be upset about it because it messed up their day. Disney has always given the customer a lot of slack, so their internal memo was to remind CMs that they can allow people in if they "missed" (the exact word printed) the window. "Missed" implies that the guests simply couldn't get there in time, so Disney would still allow it. It doesn't imply that the guests purposely showed up hours after the window, but to the CM standing there looking at tickets, it's all the same.

Thus, it's not a policy as far as the guests are concerned....unless of course they all start comparing notes on Disboards, then realize what Disney is allowing, then exploit this for their own gain.

It was never a policy. It was a semi-known exploit that people learned about via means other than Disney itself. Enough people have apparently taken advantage of this exploit that Disney felt, for whatever reason, that it can not continue. So, they are now proceeding with much tougher enforcement of their public policy that's published on their web site, printed on the ticket, and posted on signs above rides.

Yea, it stinks if you were enjoying this exploit, but that's all it ever was.

It was not published to the public, however, management allowed & even told the CM's to take FP's late. In fact, it looks as though they told the CM's they could hand out FP's to people that said their entire party lost their FP's. They would even exchange FP's from one attraction for another if you tried to ride an attraction with the wrong FP.

You're not going to tell me that no one ever tried these other 2 scenarios. It certainly wouldn't be made public........especially not on these boards.......but I can guarantee that someone did it/tried it once & figured if it worked once why not try it again. They certainly are not going to publish that on their FP's or in their official policy, but it looks like they'll allow the CM's to do it.

Now let's call in the moral police!

 

[doconeill]

There are 3 possible explanations that I can think of right now:

1. With the closure of Test Track, they want Nemo to eat up some of FPs that would have been used for TT. Which only makes sense if...

2. The TT closure creates a wait for Nemo.

3. It has something to do with X-pass/Fastpass Plus.

The TT closure could add traffic to The Seas, but some of that will be divided between people going via the ride and others just walking in. But unless they somehow plus The Seas, I don't see how it is going to draw that much traffic vs. people going back and riding Soarin' some more. Unless somehow advertising it as having FP/FP+ drives the desire for it...kind of like vacuous advertising statements.

I was thinking how the FP return window enforcement might help prevent some of the added heat on FPs at Soarin', but the FPs available for Soarin' would probably still run out so fast that it's self-limiting. You probably couldn't get more than 2 FPs for Soarin' anyways - get one at opening, and get another in 30-60 minutes at best, but the second one is probably further out in 2 hours, so by the time you can get another they'll probably be gone anyways.

 

[vacationclub]

I guess then it depends on your definition of policy.

Actually it depends on which context you are using the term. For the average park goer, they rely on the official published policy (because to them, there IS no other policy). In which case, you go by what they are telling you to be their policy. Now, from an insiders point of view, and lack of enforcement due to a loophole that was potentially designed for legitmate purposes, may also constitute a policy since they realize the company is allowing all sorts of people who may not fit the original spirit of the law, but do fit the letter of the law.

An Operation Reminder should serve to remind employees of policy/procedure..

No, it advises them on how to deal with situations that may occur that could conflict with the published policy. Again, letter of the law, spirit of the law...or in this case, enforcement.

I
I'm really not sure how how anyone reads that document and doesn't understand that it was policy to allow the person in, except for the case that they simply don't want it to.

Yes, if you simply read it for what it says, and not what it may mean but can't or didn't also say (which is that some guests my exploit this but we aren't dealing with that issue right now).

But, clearly, now they are dealing with it.

 

[doconeill]

Perhaps because at that time it wasn't anticipated to be a problem to avoid.

But also, they could have revised this document if needed. Which they may finally be doing (although that document was still on the internal Hub even after the memo was sent - don't know if they've pulled/changed it yet, so there is conflicting information for CMs at the moment), but also it's happening before the anticipated introduction of a new form of Fastpass, which with some logic it would make sense that the new system would require enforcement to be effective.

 

[MikeandReneePlus5]

I guess then it depends on your definition of policy. It is what is advertised, or what is done according to the documents and training provided to the CMs?

An Operation Reminder should serve to remind employees of policy/procedure.

I'm really not sure how how anyone reads that document and doesn't understand that it was policy to allow the person in, except for the case that they simply don't want it to.

I'm gonna go with.... this is a policy for dealing with problems arising from guests failing to meet the FP policy.

And I actually mean that.

 

[vacationclub]

It was not published to the public, however, management allowed & even told the CM's to take FP's late. In fact, it looks as though they told the CM's they could hand out FP's to people that said their entire party lost their FP's. They would even exchange FP's from one attraction for another if you tried to ride an attraction with the wrong FP.

Yep, it says all that. But don't you believe it's because Disney is very forgiving, and is known for the best customer service on the planet? They are very lenient on certain things, and I'm sure there was some early discussion as to what this could lead to. Before the internet they could have done this of a long time without people figuring out that it could be exploited. But at some point, it actually did get exploited to a certain level that Disney found unacceptable.

 

[doconeill]

Yes, if you simply read it for what it says, and not what it may mean but can't or didn't also say...

Which, ironically, is what I'm being told I should do when reading the CM memo. So which one do I read at face value, and which one do I infer more meaning from?

 

[doconeill]

I'm gonna go with.... this is a policy for dealing with problems arising from guests failing to meet the FP policy.

And I actually mean that.

See...a policy! Therefore...a witch! Burn!

(sorry, we need to get back to movie quotes..._

 

[vacationclub]

But also, they could have revised this document if needed.

I think i's fair to say this new enforcement is doing exactly that.

, but also it's happening before the anticipated introduction of a new form of Fastpass, which with some logic it would make sense that the new system would require enforcement to be effective.

Perhaps...

 

[MELSMICE]

A question for the "moral police"........

Let's say you work in the service industry.......you're a hair stylist. There is a huge sign in the salon that says, "We will not accept post dated checks". It's clear as day for the customer to see. A customer comes in & when it's time to pay says that she forgot her wallet with her cash & credit cards. She only has her checkbook but funds won't be available until Friday & it's only Wednesday.

You are aware of the policy but an "internal memo" has been issued stating that while we publicize that we won't accept post dated checks, to avoid any issues with the customer you are able to accept them if the customer has no other form of payment. You tell the customer you will accept the check this time but in the future please provide another form of payment.

Are you "wrong & unfair" to the other customers for doing what management has told & allowed you to do. Would it be better to confront the customer by pointing to the sign & telling them you can not accept the check. You are in reality disobeying management if you don't accept the check. How fair is that to others though that may see the sign, realize they don't have cash or a credit card & must somehow make other arrangements for payment because they don't know of the "internal memo".

The thing is, if a Disney guest that knew FP's could be accepted late encountered a CM that told them they could not use their FP late & asked to speak to a manager, the manager would most likely override what the CM said & allow the guest to enter. I would imagine that the CM would then be "talked to" about how FP's could be accepted late & reminded of the internal memo.

I still fail to see how it has anything to do with fair or unfair. I've used them late, I'll use them late next week if I miss my window for any reason, or give them to someone else that will use them late. When I return in April, I'll use them on time or end up throwing them in the garbage if I'm not going to use them.

 

[doconeill]

Yep, it says all that. But don't you believe it's because Disney is very forgiving, and is known for the best customer service on the planet? They are very lenient on certain things, and I'm sure there was some early discussion as to what this could lead to. Before the internet they could have done this of a long time without people figuring out that it could be exploited. But at some point, it actually did get exploited to a certain level that Disney found unacceptable.

I meant to post this earlier, because this came to me this morning.

Disney is certainly noted for it's customer service - so much so, that other companies pay Disney to train them.

It stands to reason that one way to provide amazing, magical customer service, is to advertise a "policy" to the customer that has a number of restrictions, but then have an internal policy that is much more lenient. That way, when you "bend the rules" for the customer, they think they are getting magic, while no rules were actually bent or broken.

Eventually, word might get out, and eventually, you either have to become more restrictive (and lose the ability to provide magic), publicly change to the more lenient rules (and lose your "cushion"), or advertise that you have been lenient as a matter of policy but that you are going to be more restrictive - and then keep the same rules

 

[MELSMICE]

Yep, it says all that. But don't you believe it's because Disney is very forgiving, and is known for the best customer service on the planet? They are very lenient on certain things, and I'm sure there was some early discussion as to what this could lead to. Before the internet they could have done this of a long time without people figuring out that it could be exploited. But at some point, it actually did get exploited to a certain level that Disney found unacceptable.

I 100% believe it's because of Disney's customer service. I'm sure the "internal memo" was put out so that it would avoid confrontations between the customer and the CM, especially in a public place.

I have dealt with many CM's (mainly DVC resort or regular resort). They are the best trained employees in customer service that I have ever encountered. I have learned many ways to deal with my own clients by dealing with the Disney CM's.

 

[MikeandReneePlus5]

See...a policy! Therefore...a witch! Burn!

(sorry, we need to get back to movie quotes..._

lol.

this is starting to feel like pondering if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?

we really do need to laugh at ourselves don't we?

 

[doconeill]

lol.

this is starting to feel like pondering if a tree falls in the forest and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?

we really do need to laugh at ourselves don't we?

Heh...depends on the definition of "sound" (actually had this discussion with a teacher once...)

 

[Reddog1134]

I meant to post this earlier, because this came to me this morning.

Disney is certainly noted for it's customer service - so much so, that other companies pay Disney to train them.

It stands to reason that one way to provide amazing, magical customer service, is to advertise a "policy" to the customer that has a number of restrictions, but then have an internal policy that is much more lenient. That way, when you "bend the rules" for the customer, they think they are getting magic, while no rules were actually bent or broken.

Eventually, word might get out, and eventually, you either have to become more restrictive (and lose the ability to provide magic), publicly change to the more lenient rules (and lose your "cushion"), or advertise that you have been lenient as a matter of policy but that you are going to be more restrictive - and then keep the same rules

I work for a distributor. We have a written policy that states "we sell on a non-cancellable, non-returnable basis". Not a week goes by that I don't have to process at least one return or cancellation.

Also, that sort of reminds me of the Star Trek TNG episode with Scotty.

"Oh, you didn't tell him how long it would *really* take, did ya? Oh, laddie. You've got a lot to learn if you want people to think of you as a miracle worker."

 

[KellyNY]

Greater lengths than I have in any debate on these boards because, as someone who is very much a "rule follower," the accusations that I have been "abusing" the system really struck a raw nerve with me, especially when they are based on people's misperceptions of what is allowed and what is breaking the rules. Some seem to think that, because they CHOOSE not to do something that is perfectly acceptable under Disney's policies (just because THEY perceive it to be wrong), that they are better people.

Did anyone ever said we are better people? What with emotions?

This what is "officially" posted on the WDW site.



This seems like common sense.... You use the ticket within the time stated.

I found nothing "official" saying you can use the FP past the time stated on the ticket. The late use seems to be by "word of mouth" only. It may be an "internal memo" to CM's to let people in late if they complain, etc.

Now I have the Kelly, Kelly, Kelly, song in my head.

Exactly!

Florida Statutes Title XLVI Chapter 784.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ml&StatuteYear=2011&Title=->2011->Chapter 784

Just because you didn't find it on WDW website doesn't mean that it was not Disney's official policy. Some of you are so caught up in the notion that, "because I don't see it printed here or there, it is not so."

Let me try another analogy (a Disney one this time). The published check-in time at WDW resorts is 3pm. Guess what? It is Disney's policy to allow you to check-in before then. They may or may not have your room ready, but you an check-in. Also, they often DO have rooms ready, even early in the morning. Oh the humanity! I have taken advantage of a loophole, showing up early and getting a room early when all the MORAL people "followed the rules" and waited until 3 pm to check in. Clearly, I have aggregiously wronged all of those guests who check-in at the time printed on their reservation.

Can you please find already one analogy that actually works? it is just too easy to proove you wrong...

That internal memo is not Disney's published policy....that's why it's called an internal memo. It was an operational reminder that gives instructions on how to handle certain anticipated issues with FP.

That was simply Disney's way of anticipating that some guests may miss their fastpass window (legitimately) and be upset about it because it messed up their day. Disney has always given the customer a lot of slack, so their internal memo was to remind CMs that they can allow people in if they "missed" (the exact word printed) the window. "Missed" implies that the guests simply couldn't get there in time, so Disney would still allow it. It doesn't imply that the guests purposely showed up hours after the window, but to the CM standing there looking at tickets, it's all the same.

Thus, it's not a policy as far as the guests are concerned....unless of course they all start comparing notes on Disboards, then realize what Disney is allowing, then exploit this for their own gain.

It was never a policy. It was a semi-known exploit that people learned about via means other than Disney itself. Enough people have apparently taken advantage of this exploit that Disney felt, for whatever reason, that it can not continue. So, they are now proceeding with much tougher enforcement of their public policy that's published on their web site, printed on the ticket, and posted on signs above rides.

Yea, it stinks if you were enjoying this exploit, but that's all it ever was.

Yep, internal rule on how to deal with people, nothing else and the reason we all have such rules so we could not get in trouble with our management for going against Official Policy.