New CS Seating Policy & The GAC

[ireland_nicole]

And with the new policy Disney is giving everyone EQUAL access. What some are complaining about is they aren't getting special access above being treated equally. Everyone gets in line gets food and then gets the next available table, no one gets put ahead of anyone else and no one is being denied access. The trouble IMO is some are asking for Disney to go above equal and give preferential treatment rather than just make everyone the same.

The definition of equal is: adequate or sufficient in quantity or degree. Equal does not always mean one size fits all. All anybody would expect is true equal access. As I previously stated, there are several ways to achieve this. However, it is necessary to recognise that simply having a wheelchair accessible queue line does not mean full equal access. This has nothing to do with having an "entitlement" complex, and expecting special treatment. By that logic, no service dogs should be allowed, because not everyone can bring a dog in, no ECV's or w/c's should be allowed because not everyone can ride, no sign interpretation should be available, because not every language is interpreted, no "special" seating for the visually impaired should be available, because not everyone can sit in the front row.

Do most CM's use reasonably good judgement? pretty much. Do all? Of course not. We have had cm's refuse to allow our stroller as w/c into attractions because "it's not a wheelchair" SueM has had a CM refuse to allow them to use the w/c entrance at Splash mountian because it "wasn't fair". But at least in these cases, it was possible to request a manager, and because of there being a clear policy the situation was sorted. It is not the respondibility of individual CM's to determine policy. A clear policy that ensures truly equal access is necessary to protect the rights of everyone.

 

[Beccabunny]

At peak times, there are plenty of other locations within the parks that can meet this type of need and at non-peak times even those few can meet this need. Why is this not reasonable?

Quite simply, that's not equal access, that's why it's not reasonable. If someone is forced to go to another restaurant because the accommodation cannot be reasonably met, and a non-disable person does not have to go elsewherem that's not equal access.

 

[Beccabunny]

And with the new policy Disney is giving everyone EQUAL access. What some are complaining about is they aren't getting special access above being treated equally. Everyone gets in line gets food and then gets the next available table, no one gets put ahead of anyone else and no one is being denied access. The trouble IMO is some are asking for Disney to go above equal and give preferential treatment rather than just make everyone the same.

This is not equal access. The accommodation some are requesting achieves one goal and that is to make it possible for that person to eat in the same restaurant as a non-disabled person. And it's impossible to make everyone the same. If we could do that, we wouldn't have disabilities.

 

[dclfun]

This thread seems to be going in the same direction as almost every other thread involving accommodations for people with autism. I don't see anyone on these boards telling those using wheelchairs or bringing a service animal or having any other need that they should go to a different restaurant, vacation at a different time, bring an extra person. Nor should we say any such thing! Why is it so hard to understand that those with autism often have needs that are not met with the same exact accommodations used by others with disabilities. This is about needs, not wants. For some reason these accommodations are perceived as an advantage when all they do is provide access. I see a lot of resentment and judgement of those with autism, here and elsewhere.

Actually, because I am in a wheelchair there have been MANY times that my family could not enjoy CS as there were no tables I could get to ( and we've had to hope the next restaurant might have a table ), many attractions I cannot access, and disabled people are often counselled to travel with an able-bodied guest to assist them. It is also often suggested that we travel during less busy times. I wouldn't judge someone with autism, but it would behoove those who insist that only one thing works to try something new. If it doesn't work, then fine- ask for some help, but don't shoot something down before you've tried. In this instance having a ready table vs. the milling crowds of people would likely assist a family dealing with an autistic family member to get to/from the table and w/in the restaurant safely. Maybe that table in the corner that you want might finally be available!---Kathy

 

[dclfun]

Quite simply, that's not equal access, that's why it's not reasonable. If someone is forced to go to another restaurant because the accommodation cannot be reasonably met, and a non-disable person does not have to go elsewherem that's not equal access.

So it's okay if there are no accessible tables that someone in a wheelchair has to eat elsewhere? Yes, this policy IS equal access...finally!---Kathy

 

[ireland_nicole]

So it's okay if there are no accessible tables that someone in a wheelchair has to eat elsewhere? Yes, this policy IS equal access...finally!---Kathy

I will freely admit that although I think I am reasonably aware of disability issues, I did not at all comprehend fully the difficulty those who use wheels full time have encountered under the previous system. Obviously, eating off your lap or not at all is completely unacceptable. But hopefully those of y'all who were denied equal access will be able to understand that the new system is just as unworkable for us. I agree completely that your right to be able to sit at a table should be considered and protected. I just want to make sure that as the policy expands that allows for accomodation for those who will now be put in a similar situation to the one you were in; i.e., the inability to access a dining experience just like everybody else. You can't make tables move out of your way, we can't make our kids brains work different. There is no reason for any of us to assume that the rights of one supercede or cancel out the rights of another.

ETA: the funny thing is, we want/need exactly the opposite tables anyway. No one I know with a child with autism would choose to be seated right on a busy walkway. Ugh; it would really increase our childrens anxiety levels, overstimulate them, increase the possibility they would elope, etc. For the most part, my family and those I've talked to look for a table as far away from the moving crowds as possible, when we're lucky tucked into a corner, which is not a table you would want anyway.

 

[dclfun]

I will freely admit that although I think I am reasonably aware of disability issues, I did not at all comprehend fully the difficulty those who use wheels full time have encountered under the previous system. Obviously, eating off your lap or not at all is completely unacceptable. But hopefully those of y'all who were denied equal access will be able to understand that the new system is just as unworkable for us. I agree completely that your right to be able to sit at a table should be considered and protected. I just want to make sure that as the policy expands that allows for accomodation for those who will now be put in a similar situation to the one you were in; i.e., the inability to access a dining experience just like everybody else. You can't make tables move out of your way, we can't make our kids brains work different. There is no reason for any of us to assume that the rights of one supercede or cancel out the rights of another.

ETA: the funny thing is, we want/need exactly the opposite tables anyway. No one I know with a child with autism would choose to be seated right on a busy walkway. Ugh; it would really increase our childrens anxiety levels, overstimulate them, increase the possibility they would elope, etc. For the most part, my family and those I've talked to look for a table as far away from the moving crowds as possible, when we're lucky tucked into a corner, which is not a table you would want anyway.

I guess what I don't understand is *why* you have deemed the new plan to not be workable without trying it? I would see it as an improvement for your family too. There should be less stimulation and crowds, less people dashing to tables or milling around and hovering. There should be a CM to assist you in finding a good spot, where before you had to hope there was an appropriate table for your family too. There won't be a chance that you won't get a table at all. I still can't imagine a CM wouldn't help you either if you got inside and found you had an issue. This is such a limited time-frame thing during peak hours only and as everyone mentioned- it's a trial. If guests, including those with/without disabilities find it isn't helpful, then it will likely not be continued. Many things have been done on a trial basis at Disney and they take their research, observations, and feedback seriously. Let's just all give it a chance rather than jumping to conclusions.---Kathy

 

[Hannathy]

I guess what I don't understand is *why* you have deemed the new plan to not be workable without trying it? I would see it as an improvement for your family too. There should be less stimulation and crowds, less people dashing to tables or milling around and hovering. There should be a CM to assist you in finding a good spot, where before you had to hope there was an appropriate table for your family too. There won't be a chance that you won't get a table at all. I still can't imagine a CM wouldn't help you either if you got inside and found you had an issue. This is such a limited time-frame thing during peak hours only and as everyone mentioned- it's a trial. If guests, including those with/without disabilities find it isn't helpful, then it will likely not be continued. Many things have been done on a trial basis at Disney and they take their research, observations, and feedback seriously. Let's just all give it a chance rather than jumping to conclusions.---Kathy

I don't understand it either. This way you are guaranteed a table. Before you had to fight other people and make a mad dash across a crowded restaurant to grab a table and hope someone faster didn't beat you to it. And never know for sure if you would even find a table, or find the right size one. I'm also puzzled how you were able to do this with your children but you can't possible keep them contained for the few minutes to get your food and be shown a guaranteed table to fit your family.

 

[clanmcculloch]

Quite simply, that's not equal access, that's why it's not reasonable. If someone is forced to go to another restaurant because the accommodation cannot be reasonably met, and a non-disable person does not have to go elsewherem that's not equal access.

Based on your position, I'm being treated unreasonably since my family currently can not eat at many CS locations around WDW and for that matter not even at every TS location. The thing is, that's not the requirement. The requirement isn't that I can be given 100% equal experience to everybody else. The requirement is that I am able to get equivalent experience in some way, not in every way. Our WDW experience will never be equal to a family without special needs. That's just the nature of having special needs. WDW goes far beyond what is required and does lots of extras. They are not required to make my experience equal to that of others. They have to make it possible for me to access equivalent experiences which they do. I can have an equivalent dining experience at one of the restaurants that is set up to accomodate us. That's all that is required. Actually, even that much is not required. They could easily just say that they will offer us the exact same food that they offer to everybody else. The fact that the same food everybody else eats will make us sick is not WDW's problem. They CHOOSE to make lots of other options available and for that I'm grateful.

 

[kaytieeldr]

I think the point that is trying to be made by some of the comments in this thread is that while the policy may be wonderful for the majority of guests, there ought to be reasonable exceptions, as there are in other parts of the park via the GAC, for those people who may find it difficult to manage. While there are ways to avoid this specific policy now, there may not be any way to avoid it in the future should it be expanded,

There will always be some way to avoid the CS seating procedure. It may require eating at 'off' times on those days that the seating process is in effect. It may require eating at a location one wouldn't ordinarily have chosen. It might even require leaving the park and eating at a resort instead. Unless all Disney counter service locations are inundated with Guests holding tables prior to even ordering food at all hours every location is open (e.g. it ain't gonna happen), there will always be a way to avoid the seating procedure in the future.

Quite simply, that's not equal access, that's why it's not reasonable. If someone is forced to go to another restaurant because the accommodation cannot be reasonably met, and a non-disable person does not have to go elsewherem that's not equal access.

Respectfully, solo travelers and adults traveling with only small children - able or otherwise - frequently must go to another restaurant, i.e. not (nearly) their first choice, because parties whose makeup permits them to save tables are, yes, hogging tables at their restaurant of choice. Therefore, 'forcing' someone to go to a different restaurant because the seating policy's restrictions prevent them from being seated without food IS equal treatment.

If it doesn't work, then fine- ask for some help, but don't shoot something down before you've tried.

!!!

 

[KirstenB]

Our younger dd has autism, but we dont' really have a dog in this fight. We eat at off hours, etc. I actually like the system of not saving seats, because someone could have finished dining in the 15-20 minutes it takes to get your food.

My question refers to places we've eaten at that seem to have limited space. Specifically Columbia Harbor House, and Pinocchio's Village Haus---where are the families supposed to stand while waiting for mom/dad to return with the tray? If you've been to either place, you know what I mean. The tables are close together. Would the families hover over people already eating? I guess they would.

In Columbia Harbor House, dh waits upstairs with the kids, while I get the food. Most folks don't seem to know there's an upstairs. But, if I were in a wheelchair or ecv, we'd have to eat downstairs. In general, I think the MK is not equipped to handle the crowds they allow through the front gate during busy season. I bet Walt envisioned a busy day as having maybe 20000 guests through the gate. I don't know capacity at MK, but I'd bet it's 60 k plus.

 

[BillSears]

In Columbia Harbor House, dh waits upstairs with the kids, while I get the food. Most folks don't seem to know there's an upstairs. But, if I were in a wheelchair or ecv, we'd have to eat downstairs. In general, I think the MK is not equipped to handle the crowds they allow through the front gate during busy season. I bet Walt envisioned a busy day as having maybe 20000 guests through the gate. I don't know capacity at MK, but I'd bet it's 60 k plus.

Here's a little secret...

There is an elevator. It's not well known because officially you have to go backstage to use it. It's to the left of the cash registers, through a pair of swinging doors.

I'm not certain how many people the MK was designed to handle. But one thing is certain, it wasn't designed to handle lots of people with various disabilities. As more and more disabled folks learn how great WDW is at handling disabilities we are starting to stress the system.

 

[Beccabunny]

So it's okay if there are no accessible tables that someone in a wheelchair has to eat elsewhere? Yes, this policy IS equal access...finally!---Kathy

NO, it's NOT OK for you to have to eat elsewhwere. I have said TWICE in this thread that I think this policy is GOOD for you and others in a wheelchair. My only concern is that some accommodation should be made for those whose needs (not WANTS, not DESIRES!) make this new policy not workable.

 

[Beccabunny]

Based on your position, I'm being treated unreasonably since my family currently can not eat at many CS locations around WDW and for that matter not even at every TS location. The thing is, that's not the requirement. The requirement isn't that I can be given 100% equal experience to everybody else. The requirement is that I am able to get equivalent experience in some way, not in every way. Our WDW experience will never be equal to a family without special needs. That's just the nature of having special needs. WDW goes far beyond what is required and does lots of extras. They are not required to make my experience equal to that of others. They have to make it possible for me to access equivalent experiences which they do. I can have an equivalent dining experience at one of the restaurants that is set up to accomodate us. That's all that is required. Actually, even that much is not required. They could easily just say that they will offer us the exact same food that they offer to everybody else. The fact that the same food everybody else eats will make us sick is not WDW's problem. They CHOOSE to make lots of other options available and for that I'm grateful.

No, that is not my position at all. I've made enough trips to Disney and elsewhere to know our family's experience will never be equal to those without a disability. This is just about reasonable accommodation. Your definition of reasonable is "go eat somewhere else." I disagree.

 

[Beccabunny]

First of all, I've never been a fan of "table-hogging", to use Kaytieeldr's words. Nowhere in any of my posts did I say I think that's right. I am not disagreeing with the new policy because it will work for those in wheelchairs. I've already said that several times. I've only said that I think there should be a GAC for restaurants so that the few people that NEED a certain seating arrangement can have it.

With the previous arrangement, it was equal access, equally BAD for everyone, disabled and non-disabled. You might get the table you want, but you might not get any table at all. Not good. However, with the change, a certain segment of the disabled population will benefit, but others won't have access. So it's not equal.

 

[Beccabunny]

Actually, because I am in a wheelchair there have been MANY times that my family could not enjoy CS as there were no tables I could get to ( and we've had to hope the next restaurant might have a table ), many attractions I cannot access, and disabled people are often counselled to travel with an able-bodied guest to assist them. It is also often suggested that we travel during less busy times. I wouldn't judge someone with autism, but it would behoove those who insist that only one thing works to try something new. If it doesn't work, then fine- ask for some help, but don't shoot something down before you've tried. In this instance having a ready table vs. the milling crowds of people would likely assist a family dealing with an autistic family member to get to/from the table and w/in the restaurant safely. Maybe that table in the corner that you want might finally be available!---Kathy

You seem to think I don't want this to work for you. I don't know why you feel that way. I've repeatedly said this is a good thing for you. I want this to work for everyone. You know, EQUAL. It shouldn't be a matter of certain disabilities being pitted against others. Disney CAN accommodate your seating needs and those of people with autism in a restaurant without a lot of effort. By the way, I never said I need a table in the corner. There are ALWAYS difficulties for my family, but we do OK. Others, however, may not fare so well. If somebody has already made numerous trips to Disney and knows what works for their child, I'm not going to tell them they need to try something new. In most cases I think a CM would be helpful, but there are definite instances where they are not, and I don't think it's right to tell someone to leave it up to chance when they already know their child very well.

 

[Schmeck]

RE: bringing an extra person- um, I DO. My DH. But even just getting food can take 10-20 minutes as you all know. QUOTE]

Yes, but you have stated that he needs to keep the kids corraled to keep them safe - so perhaps even one more adult would make the trip more safe?

 

[Disneyadore]

So Disney has to give priority searing to disabled people. Now lets see.
What about other guests with problems?
Elderly people, parents with little tired an cranky children. They all need a seat but still they have to wait patiently like any one else although maybe they are more tired ore sick than a legally disabled person.
Maybe Disney could make a list. Disabled with GAC gold card, disabled without a GAC silver card, elderly above 65 the green card, parents with children younger than eight years the bleu card, parent with bigger kids the yellow card, couples without children the orange card, teenagers alone the read card and way back behind solo travellers with the black card because the only use up space.(sarcastic mode)
If one party gets priority seating its only fair others get this kind of treatment to.

 

[peemagg]

I have read all that everyone has said and have one question for you all.

If you need a certain spot to sit, why can't you while the other person is ordering ask the Cm who is doing the seating, to see if they can't find that spot for you? If you can show that you have another person who is in line and ordering and need a special seating, then I think they (the Cm's) should be able to seat the rest of the party if that type of seating becomes available for you. Kind of like waiting for a certain car for the rides.

 

[KirstenB]

Here's a little secret...

There is an elevator. It's not well known because officially you have to go backstage to use it. It's to the left of the cash registers, through a pair of swinging doors.

I'm not certain how many people the MK was designed to handle. But one thing is certain, it wasn't designed to handle lots of people with various disabilities. As more and more disabled folks learn how great WDW is at handling disabilities we are starting to stress the system.

Bill, I'm so glad to hear that. I think most/all of the MK was built before ADA, so I didn't think CHH would be accessible upstairs. It's a great quiet spot to get away from crowds while you're eating!