Response to ADA Suit

[SMD]

One of the complaints in the suit is that the word "disability" appears below the picture. That seems easy enough to fix.

How many people on this board and in the Facebook group that recruited the plaintiffs have admitted that other members of their family used the GAC while the family member who was given the GAC was resting in the room or chose not to ride the attraction? I wonder how many people who dispute the need for pictures were taking advantage of that loophole.

 

[MickeyWheels]

One of the complaints in the suit is that the word "disability" appears below the picture. That seems easy enough to fix.

How many people on this board and in the Facebook group that recruited the plaintiffs have admitted that other members of their family used the GAC while the family member who was given the GAC was resting in the room or chose not to ride the attraction? I wonder how many people who dispute the need for pictures were taking advantage of that loophole.

+++++++++++++

In our case my daughters name was on the GAC but because I also am a wheelchair user and we needed the GAC for wheelchair access on some rides, we were actually instructed to use the card for me even though it was in her name. This was because they only allowed one GAC per family. The new DAS requires a separate one for each family member with a disability.

 

[SMD]

+++++++++++++

In our case my daughters name was on the GAC but because I also am a wheelchair user and we needed the GAC for wheelchair access on some rides, we were actually instructed to use the card for me even though it was in her name. This was because they only allowed one GAC per family. The new DAS requires a separate one for each family member with a disability.

I usually go to DLR, where many rides aren't wheelchair accessible, and technically one didn't need a GAC to load through the exit. In reality, it was probably easiest to just get one to have something to show the CM. I have seen families with multiple GAC at DL, though. They were pretty strict on the 6 person limit (printed on the GAC, they'd sometimes accommodate larger parties at the ride). They were also issuing GAC with long expiration dates, so I imagine many APs were just getting a new one before the first expired to accommodate large parties. The fact that they will now issue a DAS for a party over 6 (with everyone present) is actually an improvement over the GAC. Of course, I'm sure many people who had a few long expiring GACs and were splitting up their parties probably don't like the fact that records are now being kept when a DAS is issued.

 

[MickeyWheels]

I usually go to DLR, where many rides aren't wheelchair accessible, and technically one didn't need a GAC to load through the exit. In reality, it was probably easiest to just get one to have something to show the CM. I have seen families with multiple GAC at DL, though. They were pretty strict on the 6 person limit (printed on the GAC, they'd sometimes accommodate larger parties at the ride). They were also issuing GAC with long expiration dates, so I imagine many APs were just getting a new one before the first expired to accommodate large parties. The fact that they will now issue a DAS for a party over 6 (with everyone present) is actually an improvement over the GAC. Of course, I'm sure many people who had a few long expiring GACs and were splitting up their parties probably don't like the fact that records are now being kept when a DAS is issued.

_____________
The concept of where to draw the line on "family" for the DAS is a tough one! We were in line behind a "family" of 18 at DLR. There were 6 or 8 adults in the group. One wheelchair. But clearly another child could have also been disabled so no Im not judging, but it brings up the question of where should the line be? They are good about accommodating larger groups on the DAS, but I think in these cases they need to try and link the DAS with the FP. When we meet friends we do not add them to our "family" we try to coordinate their FP time. Problem is the FP are now gone 6 mo in advance so even thats a poor option. Not sure what the right answer is these days other than just go, be honest, and enjoy the trip and not worry what others are doing.

 

[SMD]

_____________
The concept of where to draw the line on "family" for the DAS is a tough one! We were in line behind a "family" of 18 at DLR. There were 6 or 8 adults in the group. One wheelchair. But clearly another child could have also been disabled so no Im not judging, but it brings up the question of where should the line be? They are good about accommodating larger groups on the DAS, but I think in these cases they need to try and link the DAS with the FP. When we meet friends we do not add them to our "family" we try to coordinate their FP time. Problem is the FP are now gone 6 mo in advance so even thats a poor option. Not sure what the right answer is these days other than just go, be honest, and enjoy the trip and not worry what others are doing.

That's a good point about drawing the line. It would be nice if a large group could stay together all day, but in reality, any group of 10-12 guests isn't going to be in the same ride vehicle most of the time, standby, FP or DAS. On POTC or Star Tours, maybe it's not such a big deal to fill 2 rows instead of 1 for a large group. But on rides where the vehicle only seats 4, or a ride like Dumbo or teacups, I can see where it's a strain on ride operation after awhile. I think that VIP tours are limited to 10, so I guess they have a system worked out for groups at least that size.

 

[Wendydagny]

I for one am pleased that there is an official policy on large party size and the DAS. We have six children, and my oldest is 14, so it's not like they are adults. We were always allowed to stay together with the GAC, but that was unofficial and always a but worrisome.

I am bothered by the lawsuit and the grouping of disability in the ensuing discussion because the assumption is that there are mobility issues and cognitive issues, and that's it. My child has BOTH and neither are the real reason she needs a GAC.

The other assumption is that immediate access is only needed for autism and that the need for immediate access always equals the need for looping. That is simply not the case. I've seen a few comments where no one questions that wish children need/deserve immediate access. The reality is that those wish children come back to disney, and they sometimes stubbornly live for a lot longer than people think they should their needs don't really change on repeat trips.

My child took a rush wish trip in 2010, and her medical situation has only worsened since then. We have returned to Disney 6 times since that trip. Many of our trips actually left our other five children behind because her medical needs were just too intense to manage everything. We used the GAC for immediate access to attractions, but not for looping. Even doing that, our usage was minimal because of her limitations.

We have done two trips with the DAS, and while we have made it work, it makes our trips significantly more difficult. The level of my child's needs are obvious within seconds of seeing her. We have encountered many CM's on these trips that do not like the changes that limit their ability to help us-- we have had countless CMs fudge return times (on their own), and I have never been allowed to wait in a non-FP character line because the CM's will come grab us and say not on my watch. We have never had a guest glare at us and wonder why my child is getting special treatment. In fact, quite the opposite-- I have guests who insist we get in front of them, and my child once got a clapping standing ovation at ETWB. I have had so many pixie dust moments and tears streaming down your face moments thanks to Disney and the CM's and guests there.

I feel a need to interject here because I know I mentioned rides like test track, etc earlier in the thread. Yes I take my scary very ill child on a few specific rides that technically are not completely safe for someone in their condition. So do most people on wish trips-- my child's outcome will be the same, even if I don't let her ride any thrill rides. But there have been several trips that she has been to unwell to even think about riding these rides.

Anyway-- I know of many people with children whose needs are as complex as my daughters who have decided that They can no longer make Disney work for them. Which IMO is sad. The group of "stubbornly living wish kids on non wish trips" isn't represented a lot and it's important to remember them.

 

[SueM in MN]

+++++++++++++

In our case my daughters name was on the GAC but because I also am a wheelchair user and we needed the GAC for wheelchair access on some rides, we were actually instructed to use the card for me even though it was in her name. This was because they only allowed one GAC per family. The new DAS requires a separate one for each family member with a disability.

That was one issue with GACs.
There never was a requirement for GAC for wheelchair access, but many people, including guests and some CMs thought there was. Requiring some 'proof' like a GAC to use the wheelchair accessible entrance with a wheelchair would be against the law (ADA).

So, how did that happen?
1) There WAS a GAC stamp to use the wheelchair accessible entrance that was meant for guests with mobility needs who did NOT have a wheelchair. That stamp was also sometimes given out when guests did not plan to use their wheelchair in line.
CMs at Guest Relations also sometimes gave it out to guests with wheelchairs who insisted they needed a GAC (this is what I have been told by CMs). It actually did nothing that the person could not do with just their wheelchair.

2) When MK and Epcot opened, most lines were not wheelchair accessible and guests with wheelchairs used a different entrance, often the exit.
In the late 1980s thru 1990s, WDW started renovated lines to create Mainstream Access, which was required by the ADA. Mainstream Access means attractions are accessible thru the main line, as much as possible, the same way other guests access the attraction. The Studio and AK were built with Mainstream access, so have not changed any of their lines.
Guests who had visited previously came back to use what had been the 'handicapped entrance' and were told they could not use it with just a wheelchair and needed a GAC. It had often become the "alternate entrance" used by guests with other types of needs or other types of needs in addition to mobility needs.
Many people did not realize the regular line was now accessible and thought their only way in was to get a GAC.

3) Fastpass came into use. Sometimes, guests with wheelchairs were sent thru the Fastpass line because there was a short wait in the regular line and sending them to it slowed down the regular line. Sometimes it was pixie dust. In most cases, no explanation was given, so the guest thought it was the handicapped entrance. When they came back to the Fastpass entrance to ride again, they were told they needed a GAC to use that entrance.
That was the "alternate entry" and a GAC was needed for guests with other needs or who had other needs beside the mobility device.

4) some guests with wheelchairs has other needs and did need a GAC with an alternate entry stamp or they were traveling with someone else who had a GAC for that entrance.

Confusing?
It was very confusing to both guests and CMs. Some CMs thought anyone using a wheelchair also needed a GAC - and would send guests back to Guest Relations to get one.
My family was told a number of times that we needed to have a GAC to bring our daughter's wheelchair in line or bypass stairs. Several times, we had Fastpasses and were told we needed a GAC to use the Fastpass line!
Once, we waited in the regular line at Splash Mountain, but the CM at the wheelchair gate just before getting to the stairs told us she could not let us through because "that would be cutting".
In all cases, when we asked for a Supervisor, the CM was told it was against the law to require a guest with a mobility device to have a GAC just to use the accessible line.
I know that a lot of people didn't ask for a supervisor, but just went back to Guest Relations to try to get a GAC.

_____________
The concept of where to draw the line on "family" for the DAS is a tough one! We were in line behind a "family" of 18 at DLR. There were 6 or 8 adults in the group. One wheelchair. But clearly another child could have also been disabled so no Im not judging, but it brings up the question of where should the line be? They are good about accommodating larger groups on the DAS, but I think in these cases they need to try and link the DAS with the FP. When we meet friends we do not add them to our "family" we try to coordinate their FP time. Problem is the FP are now gone 6 mo in advance so even thats a poor option. Not sure what the right answer is these days other than just go, be honest, and enjoy the trip and not worry what others are doing.

Just so you are aware - for most attractions, not all of the Fastpasses are released at the same time. Some are held for same day release and some become available closer to the time of the trip.
So, if you have things you want, keep looking, even to the day you are going you the park.

 

[asc]

Actually, the ADA is very clear in the fact that a business does not have to provide every single possible situation for every single possible person. It is also clear the the experience may not be the same person to person and it doesn't have to be. This isn't an "agree" or "disagree" issue. It is clearly spelled out in the law.

Perhaps, being from Canada, the law is different there and thus there is some confusion?

no. the law is similar.

in Canada, businesses have an obligation to accommodate up to undue hardship. that is what the human rights codes in each province require.

so it is similar as in the US.

that means that not all businesses would have to, say provide services in sign language, however, larger companies might have to accommodate the same since what is undue hardship for one business is not for another.

I don't think accelerated access to rides is deleterious to Disney's business. That said, I think they can come up with a way to accommodate the variety of needs better than they do. Perhaps this might mean some don't wait at all. I can live with that.

That is what I did not agree with. As to how far a business must go to accommodate persons with additional needs, that is what courts are for. Therefore, my other comment was it is really not for us to decide that.

Just like here, courts determine what is undue hardship for a business.

That's all.

[I will add that regardless of what the legal obligation is or may be, I would think that a large organization like Disney could go above and beyond if they wanted to.]

 

[Napria]

I've pretty much stayed off these boards since my son with multiple disabilities got older. Everyone has different issues and Sue has done a fantastic job of moderating this board (you have the wisdom of Solomon and the patience of a saint, Sue) but the ignorance I read about here just gets my blood pressure up. I'm not talking about ignorance from people posting here, but the things like this lawsuit that people post about on here.

The one glaring thing after reading Sue's comments was the plaintiff's issue with the word "disability" Okay... I know it's more politically correct to say "differently abled" or some other positively phrased euphemism, but does this mean the "Americans with Disabilities Act" will be sued next for the derogatory word?

My son has many physical and cognitive issues. He needs accommodations in everyday life. I don't know if he will want to go into the Parks or not next trip, but if he does AND if he wants to go on any rides we will have absolutely no problem with Disney's taking his picture, putting it on a DAS and issuing it to him. They are doing it to help him, regardless of the wording.

And if people have a problem with the word "disabled" they need to start with changing the name of ADA. In my opinion Disney is just trying to follow in the spirit of that legal act.

Just my .02.

 

[SMD]

The other assumption is that immediate access is only needed for autism and that the need for immediate access always equals the need for looping. That is simply not the case.

Every child in the suit has autism. Since this thread is based on that, it will probably keep circling back to that.

I've seen a few comments where no one questions that wish children need/deserve immediate access.

I think most people would agree that they deserve the access because it is their Wish trip.

The reality is that those wish children come back to disney, and they sometimes stubbornly live for a lot longer than people think they should their needs don't really change on repeat trips.

Wow.

We have done two trips with the DAS, and while we have made it work, it makes our trips significantly more difficult. The level of my child's needs are obvious within seconds of seeing her. We have encountered many CM's on these trips that do not like the changes that limit their ability to help us-- we have had countless CMs fudge return times (on their own), and I have never been allowed to wait in a non-FP character line because the CM's will come grab us and say not on my watch. We have never had a guest glare at us and wonder why my child is getting special treatment. In fact, quite the opposite-- I have guests who insist we get in front of them, and my child once got a clapping standing ovation at ETWB. I have had so many pixie dust moments and tears streaming down your face moments thanks to Disney and the CM's and guests there.

Agree to disagree, but no kid should automatically get to skip all the lines just because they previously took a Wish trip. It's not some precedent that gets set for your level of pixie dust. If you skip a character line once because a CM pulls you out of line, and you realize that going forward it will be too hard to do it any other way, it's on you to decide if it's worth doing it again, not on Disney to keep pixie dusting you. Honestly, you sound a little entitled here.

The group of "stubbornly living wish kids on non wish trips" isn't represented a lot and it's important to remember them.

Um, how do you feel about a kid with leukemia who gets a trip? He has to survive treatment and get his immune system back up. He might be back in shape, playing little league before he could get his Wish trip. Should he not get special treatment on his Wish trip?

 

[aaarcher86]

no. the law is similar. in Canada, businesses have an obligation to accommodate up to undue hardship. that is what the human rights codes in each province require. so it is similar as in the US. that means that not all businesses would have to, say provide services in sign language, however, larger companies might have to accommodate the same since what is undue hardship for one business is not for another. I don't think accelerated access to rides is deleterious to Disney's business. That said, I think they can come up with a way to accommodate the variety of needs better than they do. Perhaps this might mean some don't wait at all. I can live with that. That is what I did not agree with. As to how far a business must go to accommodate persons with additional needs, that is what courts are for. Therefore, my other comment was it is really not for us to decide that. Just like here, courts determine what is undue hardship for a business. That's all.

Since the law here spells out that accommodations don't need to be given if they alter the operation of the business, and Disney has cited it specifically in the rebuttal, I don't see how there is much question.

If GAC holders were adding to the wait of the standby line and causing less FP to be given out, that kind of ends the debate. You may not believe it, but you can clearly run the numbers yourself and see how many guests were walking straight into the FP lines each day. I'm sure someone has the article citing HALF of the people in line at Radiator Springs had a GAC on opening day (paraphrasing).

How would you suggest disney decide who gets more accommodations/no wait and who doesn't?

 

[North of Mouse]

I don't think accelerated access to rides is deleterious to Disney's business. That said, I think they can come up with a way to accommodate the variety of needs better than they do.

[I will add that regardless of what the legal obligation is or may be, I would think that a large organization like Disney could go above and beyond if they wanted to.]

I'm sorry but I just don't agree with this. Disney does and 'has been' going above and beyond what most any other business does in regards to being 'handicap friendly'. 'Accelerated' access was becoming a very big problem for them because of the sheer number of people that were using (some abusing) them.

It (the GAC) was being used in ways it was not intended, and was getting out of hand, over whelming attractions, and was impacting all other guests.

The DAS was created, and serves the purpose for which it is intended (perfect, no) but there will never be a 'one size fits all' for people needing assistance in any form.

Disney isn't perfect, but just ask the sheer number of guests needing assistance which park (business) is the most accommodating to their 'needs' and you will hear 'Disney'!

'All' places must 'meet' ADA requirements, but Disney has and does go beyond!

 

[asta]

I for one am pleased that there is an official policy on large party size and the DAS. We have six children, and my oldest is 14, so it's not like they are adults. We were always allowed to stay together with the GAC, but that was unofficial and always a but worrisome.

I am bothered by the lawsuit and the grouping of disability in the ensuing discussion because the assumption is that there are mobility issues and cognitive issues, and that's it. My child has BOTH and neither are the real reason she needs a GAC.

The other assumption is that immediate access is only needed for autism and that the need for immediate access always equals the need for looping. That is simply not the case. I've seen a few comments where no one questions that wish children need/deserve immediate access. The reality is that those wish children come back to disney, and they sometimes stubbornly live for a lot longer than people think they should their needs don't really change on repeat trips.

My child took a rush wish trip in 2010, and her medical situation has only worsened since then. We have returned to Disney 6 times since that trip. Many of our trips actually left our other five children behind because her medical needs were just too intense to manage everything. We used the GAC for immediate access to attractions, but not for looping. Even doing that, our usage was minimal because of her limitations.

We have done two trips with the DAS, and while we have made it work, it makes our trips significantly more difficult. The level of my child's needs are obvious within seconds of seeing her. We have encountered many CM's on these trips that do not like the changes that limit their ability to help us-- we have had countless CMs fudge return times (on their own), and I have never been allowed to wait in a non-FP character line because the CM's will come grab us and say not on my watch. We have never had a guest glare at us and wonder why my child is getting special treatment. In fact, quite the opposite-- I have guests who insist we get in front of them, and my child once got a clapping standing ovation at ETWB. I have had so many pixie dust moments and tears streaming down your face moments thanks to Disney and the CM's and guests there.

I feel a need to interject here because I know I mentioned rides like test track, etc earlier in the thread. Yes I take my scary very ill child on a few specific rides that technically are not completely safe for someone in their condition. So do most people on wish trips-- my child's outcome will be the same, even if I don't let her ride any thrill rides. But there have been several trips that she has been to unwell to even think about riding these rides.

Anyway-- I know of many people with children whose needs are as complex as my daughters who have decided that They can no longer make Disney work for them. Which IMO is sad. The group of "stubbornly living wish kids on non wish trips" isn't represented a lot and it's important to remember them.

My sympathy to your situation but your post reads like an abuse of the courtesies extended by WDW. I thought WISH trips were designed to be once in a life time experiences with magical courtesies extended to very ill children. It just seems wrong to expect those conditions on other trips. Where does Disney draw the line? If you need multiple MAW type trips maybe that should be approached with MAW granting multiple trips instead of expecting Disney to always give you front of the line access.

 

[SueM in MN]

Please keep in mind that there are real people with real feelings posting and reading here.
If you would not want it said about you it your child, please keep it to yourself. Other people don't want to have it said about them or their child either.

This thread has stated open longer than I thought it would, but if it is getting too personal, it will be closed.

 

[Wendydagny]

Wow. Obviously everything I say is constantly being misinterpreted so I will now out after a few responses for clarification.

I never abused my child's pass or used if in any way than was suggested by disney. When we used it for immediate access my daughter was spending an average of 3-4 hours in the park per day and accessing maybe 4 attractions per day.

I have never in a single time asked a cm to let my child skip a character line. They seek my child out and are insistent.

I have no problem with people on wish trips who are well when they take the trip. My child is not one of those kids. She will not get well.

I do have a problem saying that some wish children who don't get well but happen to stay alive should not be able to come back to disney because their needs are too great.

I am not entitled not do I ask or require that Disney or you (general you) do anything. Just because someone's needs are great does not mean they are entitled.

Ido not expect pixie dust to be legalized.

I'm saying it's sad that a group of kids who used to be served by the GAC is no longer served and is opting to not go.

 

[MickeyWheels]

I for one am pleased that there is an official policy on large party size and the DAS. We have six children, and my oldest is 14, so it's not like they are adults. We were always allowed to stay together with the GAC, but that was unofficial and always a but worrisome.

I am bothered by the lawsuit and the grouping of disability in the ensuing discussion because the assumption is that there are mobility issues and cognitive issues, and that's it. My child has BOTH and neither are the real reason she needs a GAC.

The other assumption is that immediate access is only needed for autism and that the need for immediate access always equals the need for looping. That is simply not the case. I've seen a few comments where no one questions that wish children need/deserve immediate access. The reality is that those wish children come back to disney, and they sometimes stubbornly live for a lot longer than people think they should their needs don't really change on repeat trips.

My child took a rush wish trip in 2010, and her medical situation has only worsened since then. We have returned to Disney 6 times since that trip. Many of our trips actually left our other five children behind because her medical needs were just too intense to manage everything. We used the GAC for immediate access to attractions, but not for looping. Even doing that, our usage was minimal because of her limitations.

We have done two trips with the DAS, and while we have made it work, it makes our trips significantly more difficult. The level of my child's needs are obvious within seconds of seeing her. We have encountered many CM's on these trips that do not like the changes that limit their ability to help us-- we have had countless CMs fudge return times (on their own), and I have never been allowed to wait in a non-FP character line because the CM's will come grab us and say not on my watch. We have never had a guest glare at us and wonder why my child is getting special treatment. In fact, quite the opposite-- I have guests who insist we get in front of them, and my child once got a clapping standing ovation at ETWB. I have had so many pixie dust moments and tears streaming down your face moments thanks to Disney and the CM's and guests there.

I feel a need to interject here because I know I mentioned rides like test track, etc earlier in the thread. Yes I take my scary very ill child on a few specific rides that technically are not completely safe for someone in their condition. So do most people on wish trips-- my child's outcome will be the same, even if I don't let her ride any thrill rides. But there have been several trips that she has been to unwell to even think about riding these rides.

Anyway-- I know of many people with children whose needs are as complex as my daughters who have decided that They can no longer make Disney work for them. Which IMO is sad. The group of "stubbornly living wish kids on non wish trips" isn't represented a lot and it's important to remember them.

________________
I fully agree! My child is the same! Sadly she can look "healthy" yet deformed because you cannot see her failing systems. We could not travel to Florida at the time of my daughters Wish trip because she just was not healthy enough and they wanted to get her trip in as they did not expect her to get stronger. Well... she is not stronger she is simply a bit more stable so we CAN make the trip and make memories, but we will still spend a lot of down time to accommodate her disability and that's OK too! We are there for memories!

Disney is in fact wonderful and over time we see the DAS being tweaked to accommodate better and better. My fear in the lawsuit is it will lead Disney to tighten the reigns rather than continue to flex for the needs of special families.

Earlier someone said that MAW is not for kids with life threatening illnesses and those who are potentially terminal were the minority who get wishes. Oh how wrong they are. While it is true many who do wish trips are not actively terminal, it is because if you are not fully stable you cannot travel, so kids usually get their wish early on in their disease progression so they can enjoy it while able. There are other wish organizations that do a Wish for families of kids who are not potentially terminal, but MAW really does focus on kids with life threatening illnesses. That said... my kid is one who beats the odds each year and we WILL celebrate that feat at Disney every year for as long as we can! I won't quit until my child's body does.

Every family, even those without a child with a disability, should plan Disney to be a family fun event. Go with the flow, do what you can, enjoy every moment, make memories, and go in knowing that some things will just have to wait until next trip because its not possible to do everything. With that mindset people might slow down a bit and actually enjoy Disney! Our last trip accommodations stunk (the DAS was under test) and it resulted in an ER visit. This trip it will be better. Disney is striving to improve each day but they need to be told what is working so they can keep adapting and one day will have a pass that works great for our kids

 

[StitchesGr8Fan]

Back to the original topic. What happens next with the suit, and when?

 

[Wendydagny]

One more thing.

When I talked about kids stubbornly staying alive with a wink, I was in no way being derogatory or suggesting children should die. I was being sarcastic regarding my own child's situation, when the doctors are constantly wrong re her prognosis/life expectancy. She is in 7 organ failure and survived a failed organ transplant. In reality it is a miracle that she is alive and that she lives as well as she does, but I have no level of denial that she will be with us for long, despite my fervent desires that she will live forever.

There are many many parents with children like mine who continue to bring their children to Disney in order to live life to the fullest.

 

[ttintagel]

That was one issue with GACs.

...There never was a requirement for GAC for wheelchair access, but many people, including guests and some CMs thought there was...

...CMs at Guest Relations also sometimes gave it out to guests with wheelchairs who insisted they needed a GAC (this is what I have been told by CMs)...

...In most cases, no explanation was given, so the guest thought it was the handicapped entrance. When they came back to the Fastpass entrance to ride again, they were told they needed a GAC to use that entrance...

...Some CMs thought anyone using a wheelchair also needed a GAC - and would send guests back to Guest Relations to get one...

What you're describing isn't problems with the GAC system itself. It's problems with the shoddy training, understaffing, and poor managerial support being given to CM's, so they weren't doing their jobs correctly. ANY system is going to end up with problems under those conditions.

 

[AndreaA]

Since the law here spells out that accommodations don't need to be given if they alter the operation of the business, and Disney has cited it specifically in the rebuttal, I don't see how there is much question.

If GAC holders were adding to the wait of the standby line and causing less FP to be given out, that kind of ends the debate. You may not believe it, but you can clearly run the numbers yourself and see how many guests were walking straight into the FP lines each day. I'm sure someone has the article citing HALF of the people in line at Radiator Springs had a GAC on opening day (paraphrasing).

How would you suggest disney decide who gets more accommodations/no wait and who doesn't?

But technically, the DAS should not be decreasing the number of people allowed to use the FP line except in that it has prevented a number of people from even going to Disney at all.

If 50 people with a DAS suddenly want to ride Radiator Springs and go get a return time, that return time will be basically the same for all of them and all 50 could conceivably return to the ride at the same time.

Universal's rules state that if the wait is 30min or less, then the person gets immediate access to the Express (FP) line - NOT to the front of that line, mind you. I think that in light of the fact that MANY rides in DW are now seeing significantly longer waits since FP+ that such a rule change would not be amiss.