Has California Grill become more relaxed?

[AMusicLifeForMe]

My Dad and I have a reservation at California Grill at the end of May. We have never eaten here, but we decided to give it a try on this trip. We have been to a lot of signature dining restaurants on property with my personal favorite being the Flying Fish. The last couple of times I was at Flying Fish, I wore a polo and jeans. When I talked to the CM yesterday, she told me the dress code, and I was surprised when it was the same dress code as the Flying Fish. I was told that California Grill was usually more upscale dress code with men wearing suit jacket/slacks/etc. I asked the CM that yesterday, and she said that it "used" to be that way. All the pictures I have seen of the place has mostly been a more upscale dress code. So, does anyone have some recent first hand experience with the relaxed dress code? I really want to make sure that it will be ok for me not to pack a suit if I don't have to.

 

[FSU Girl]

When I was there in September my boyfriend and I dressed up, but there were also people there that had clearly just come from the parks and weren't remotely dressed up. I would say dress however you like, you won't be turned away at the door for either choice.

 

[lullwater]

They do ask that hats are removed.

 

[Dis703]

The only restaurant with a real dress code on property is V&A. At any other signature dining location it pretty much states no torn clothing, offensive language or graphics on t-shirts, swim suits, tank tops, etc. While there are guests who prefer to dress up it's not required.

 

[wilkeliza]

I think Polos have always been allowed but since it is at a hotel and the atmosphere is much nicer people usually dress up by choice.

With that said they won't turn you away. For everyone dressed in a full suit you'll see someone in t-shirt, shorts, and flip flops.

 

[AngiTN]

The only restaurant with a real dress code on property is V&A. At any other signature dining location it pretty much states no torn clothing, offensive language or graphics on t-shirts, swim suits, tank tops, etc. While there are guests who prefer to dress up it's not required.

Exactly. It was this way when we ate at CG in 2011. Many people took the dress code as requirement but it's just suggested. With the few above exceptions that are not allowed.

 

[amberpi]

I think I first ate there in 2005 as an adult. My then husband wore a linen suit and pocket square and I had heels and a dress. Many companions, and a different husband, that's still how my travel parties roll, but ties for v&a only and sometimes dark jeans with jacket and pocket square, or vest for guys. When my dad goes though, he looks like he rolled out of the silk section of the Tommy Bahama store - because he did. Mom can't do anything with him....now that I think about it, Mom packs for vacay like she knocked over a LP store, so they're both kinda tourist cliques, in a cute way.

 

[Branflakes]

We eat at CG nearly every trip. Some dress straight from the park. It's my feeling that if we have a sig dinner res, we are taking the time to go back and freshen up for dinner. I usually wear a nice sundress with dressy sandals or maybe nice black crops, wedges and a silk blouse. Tasteful jewelry. My husband will wear a collared button up shirt and linen pants. You'll fit in no matter how you dress, so I'd just go how you like and what's normal for a nice dinner. I think all signature restaurants should have some minimal standards. Either way, enjoy.

 

[DISNEY1975]

I was told that California Grill was usually more upscale dress code with men wearing suit jacket/slacks/etc. I asked the CM that yesterday, and she said that it "used" to be that way. All the pictures I have seen of the place has mostly been a more upscale dress code.

Anything goes. I have never seen anyone in a suit jacket except large groups who looked like they just came from a conference. While I woulnt wear jeans, khakis and a polo seem to be the norm for men. My husband wears dress slacks and a button up, but no tie. Some wear shorts, some dress to the 9s. Ive been going for years and never saw it as upscale...just regular. Maybe it seems more upscale compared to the 100 theme park restaurants nearby. Dont pack a suit!

 

[Sweet Pea Reed]

DH and I ate there last month. I wore a sun dress, he wore dark jeans and a golf shirt. Didn't see but 2-3 men in suits. Most were wearing dress pants or khaki shorts. Most women in Capri's. Wear what makes you comfortable. Hats are not allowed though.

 

[Laurieannc]

When we went to CG in July 2016 many people were dressed in casual in park attire--shorts, t shirts, sneakers. We were dressed nicely--DH in dress slacks and silk shirt, DD in a dress and me in dress pants and a dressy top with nice shoes. One of my pet peeves with Disney signatures is the lack of enforcement of a dress code. While some people don't care what others surrounding them are wearing, I do. For me, the lack of the dress code takes away from my "signature" dining experience. To answer your question--wear whatever you are comfortable with. The fact that you are even asking tells me you will be dressed nicer than many people I saw dining there.

 

[lwc]

My husband and son wear jeans/khakis button down shirt and blazer.

My daughters and I wear sundresses.

 

[ShellieMimi]

Yeah, it "used to be that way" when it was Top of the World, a billion years ago.

People like to pretend that Sigs are something they aren't. What they actually are = theme park restaurants that do not & should not require a dress code. They are not fine dining venues (except V&A). You are of course free to adhere to any dress code you would like to impose for yourself/your family, but don't expect others to do the same.

 

[wilkeliza]

Yeah, it "used to be that way" when it was Top of the World, a billion years ago.

People like to pretend that Sigs are something they aren't. What they actually are = theme park restaurants that do not & should not require a dress code. They are not fine dining venues (except V&A). You are of course free to adhere to any dress code you would like to impose for yourself/your family, but don't expect others to do the same.

I wouldn't consider the ones at the botels "theme park restaurants" they are hotel restaurants and are a little nicer then tshirts and blue jeans. Am I going to care that anyone is wearing that nope but for me I'll continue to wear at minimum a polo or sundress for the hotel sigs.

 

[Ewoks]

As others have said, Victoria & Albert's is the only restaurant on property that has a strict dress code one must adhere to in order to dine there. We've eaten at CG many times and have typically seen a lot more folks in casual clothes than dressed up. On our first trip to WDW, I took nicer dresses and my husband took dress clothes with a jacket and ties, and honestly we felt more out of place at CG and other signatures than we would've in "park" clothes. We go much more casual now, unless we're eating at V&As.

CG to my knowledge has never had a real dress code other than "no hats or pool clothes," except back when it was Top of the World Lounge in the 70s and 80s (as a poster above said)! Back then, they required jackets for men.

 

[ShellieMimi]

I wouldn't consider the ones at the botels "theme park restaurants" they are hotel restaurants and are a little nicer then tshirts and blue jeans. Am I going to care that anyone is wearing that nope but for me I'll continue to wear at minimum a polo or sundress for the hotel sigs.

IMO, they are all the same. "Signature" is such an arbitrary term for me. Le Cellier wasn't one, but then it got popular, so it became one, but nothing about it changed. What does "Signature" even mean, then? "We will feed you something slightly more interesting at this location" "Lots of people think they should eat here" - ??? I hear more horror stories about Narcoossee's than about resort QS.

Disney also likes to call some of the resorts "Deluxe," but in the real world, they aren't. Same goes for the restaurants inside. V&A is a beautiful restaurant, and absolutely an exception. The rest? I guess I just haven't yet found one I'd be willing to give the same distinction to.

 

[wilkeliza]

IMO, they are all the same. "Signature" is such an arbitrary term for me. Le Cellier wasn't one, but then it got popular, so it became one, but nothing about it changed. What does "Signature" even mean, then? "We will feed you something slightly more interesting at this location" "Lots of people think they should eat here" - ??? I hear more horror stories about Narcoossee's than about resort QS.

Disney also likes to call some of the resorts "Deluxe," but in the real world, they aren't. Same goes for the restaurants inside. V&A is a beautiful restaurant, and absolutely an exception. The rest? I guess I just haven't yet found one I'd be willing to give the same distinction to.

V&A is more than a signature to me though. Signature just means we sre serving a better quality food in a nicer establishment. Again some are poorly managed bit that's what they are billed as. V&A is a "fine" dinning which is like leaps and bounds over signature.

 

[AngiTN]

IMO, they are all the same. "Signature" is such an arbitrary term for me. Le Cellier wasn't one, but then it got popular, so it became one, but nothing about it changed. What does "Signature" even mean, then? "We will feed you something slightly more interesting at this location" "Lots of people think they should eat here" - ??? I hear more horror stories about Narcoossee's than about resort QS.

Disney also likes to call some of the resorts "Deluxe," but in the real world, they aren't. Same goes for the restaurants inside. V&A is a beautiful restaurant, and absolutely an exception. The rest? I guess I just haven't yet found one I'd be willing to give the same distinction to.

I think the key is you can't compare to outside, real world locations.
The Deluxe resorts at Disney are the nicest at Disney.
The Signature restaurants at Disney are the higher end at Disney.
Are they equal to 4 star outside the property? no. But I don't believe anyone thinks they are either.
All the signatures we've been to are slightly above all the other restaurants (at Disney) in terms of menu and decor.
Key here being AT DISNEY.
Not sure it's right to compare them to away from Disney, since they aren't.

 

[Nancyg56]

Yeah, it "used to be that way" when it was Top of the World, a billion years ago.

I loved Top of the World!

 

[ShellieMimi]

I think the key is you can't compare to outside, real world locations.
The Deluxe resorts at Disney are the nicest at Disney.
The Signature restaurants at Disney are the higher end at Disney.
Are they equal to 4 star outside the property? no. But I don't believe anyone thinks they are either.
All the signatures we've been to are slightly above all the other restaurants (at Disney) in terms of menu and decor.
Key here being AT DISNEY.
Not sure it's right to compare them to away from Disney, since they aren't.

That's a good point. I'm sure those terms are used for a reason. A first-time visitor sees "Deluxe" & "Signature," and they expect a type of experience that they aren't going to get.

However, even on this board I see posts talking up CG like a Five Diamond with accolades of "the best sushi I ever had." For me, that isn't the case. Food is such a subjective thing. I enjoy CG, but if I knew I had to go all out for a restaurant that I don't consider to be anything close to an "experience," I just wouldn't go - and I don't wear jeans, T-shirts, shorts, flip flops etc anyway! I think the Sigs are comfortable for everyone as they are now, with the lax dress code, so that each family can dress however they'd like for the type of experience they believe they will have.