Black Market Handicapped Guides to Cut Lines at Disney

[Tyrannical]

They have a Sneetches ride at Universal too.

[Hermit]

As a hypothetical, what would be the ethical position if Disneyland offered special tickets, with access to the head of any line, at a cost, say, 5 or 10 times the going rate?

That is exactly what Disneyland does. From the link CES posted: "Disney Tours offers a VIP guide and fast passes for $310 to $380 per hour." The "dicks" who are hiring handicapped guides are not breaking any rules at all - as Animavore has pointed out, and CES has failed to acknowledge. They are merely availing themselves to the exact same kind of service provided by Disneyland itself, but at a cheaper rate. It's one of those lovely things free enterprise offers.

There's a difference IMHO between premium/priority service* - where you just pay through the nose to get better/faster access - and manipulating a system that was designed for another purpose altogether**.

*As to what I think of this a practice ... that's another matter.

**Which in this case is to not discomfit handicapped people by having them wait in line for the same amount of time as everyone else. The fact that it's ultimately in Disney's own selfish interests to have a policy like this doesn't mean that it's OK for people to abuse it.

So, when patrons of Disneyland avail themselves to the company's official "fast passes" offer at a rate of $310 to $380 per hour, that's OK, but when they hire handicapped people to avail themselves to that facility at a discounted rate of $130 an hour, the use of those passes becomes an abuse of policy? The only differences I can see is that the former is sanctioned by Disney, and the latter is cheaper, as well as enabling handicapped people to make some money.

[pErvinalia]

I presume Hermit has blocked me because he is a weener. Can someone reproduce my post where I point out it is against the rules to do what these people are doing?

[Coito ergo sum]

VIP cutting in line is also in poor taste.

However, the $310 "guides" are just that - guides. So, a person is hiring a guide to get through the park. The hired handicapped person is not a guide. The hired handicapped person is a person hired to take advantage of a loophole that a person otherwise would not be entitled to.

Is it illegal, no. Is it technically a violation of Disney's terms, I think so (since they say that the rule allowing handicapped people to bring members of their group to the front of the line is not the same thing as a group bringing a paid handicapped person to the front of the line. It's turning the exception on its head - it's saying that a rule designed to help handicapped people enjoy the park is really a way for abled people to cut in front of the line.

I wonder how much of the defense of this practice comes from the fact that I adopted an anti-line-cutting position on this thread. I bet if the thread started out with an opinion that all is fair in the free market position, those same people defending the practice now would be taking the opposite approach. Suddenly, we have a load of freemarketeers saying this is just an inventive way to use the system to one's advantage - good show and twut twut and wut wut.

[pErvinalia]

It's probably because it is Disney.

[pErvinalia]

.

[klr]

As a hypothetical, what would be the ethical position if Disneyland offered special tickets, with access to the head of any line, at a cost, say, 5 or 10 times the going rate?

That is exactly what Disneyland does. From the link CES posted: "Disney Tours offers a VIP guide and fast passes for $310 to $380 per hour." The "dicks" who are hiring handicapped guides are not breaking any rules at all - as Animavore has pointed out, and CES has failed to acknowledge. They are merely availing themselves to the exact same kind of service provided by Disneyland itself, but at a cheaper rate. It's one of those lovely things free enterprise offers.

There's a difference IMHO between premium/priority service* - where you just pay through the nose to get better/faster access - and manipulating a system that was designed for another purpose altogether**.

*As to what I think of this a practice ... that's another matter.

**Which in this case is to not discomfit handicapped people by having them wait in line for the same amount of time as everyone else. The fact that it's ultimately in Disney's own selfish interests to have a policy like this doesn't mean that it's OK for people to abuse it.

So, when patrons of Disneyland avail themselves to the company's official "fast passes" offer at a rate of $310 to $380 per hour, that's OK, but when they hire handicapped people to avail themselves to that facility at a discounted rate of $130 an hour, the use of those passes becomes an abuse of policy? The only differences I can see is that the former is sanctioned by Disney, and the latter is cheaper, as well as enabling handicapped people to make some money.

I certainly didn't say that was OK. It's an elitist policy IMHO, and I don't like it.

[Hermit]

I presume Hermit has blocked me

I have not blocked anyone on any forum. Ever. It's just that some people are worth more engaging with than others. Feel free to keep caterwauling, though.

[pErvinalia]

You're lame.

[Hermit]

As a hypothetical, what would be the ethical position if Disneyland offered special tickets, with access to the head of any line, at a cost, say, 5 or 10 times the going rate?

That is exactly what Disneyland does. From the link CES posted: "Disney Tours offers a VIP guide and fast passes for $310 to $380 per hour." The "dicks" who are hiring handicapped guides are not breaking any rules at all - as Animavore has pointed out, and CES has failed to acknowledge. They are merely availing themselves to the exact same kind of service provided by Disneyland itself, but at a cheaper rate. It's one of those lovely things free enterprise offers.

There's a difference IMHO between premium/priority service* - where you just pay through the nose to get better/faster access - and manipulating a system that was designed for another purpose altogether**.

*As to what I think of this a practice ... that's another matter.

**Which in this case is to not discomfit handicapped people by having them wait in line for the same amount of time as everyone else. The fact that it's ultimately in Disney's own selfish interests to have a policy like this doesn't mean that it's OK for people to abuse it.

So, when patrons of Disneyland avail themselves to the company's official "fast passes" offer at a rate of $310 to $380 per hour, that's OK, but when they hire handicapped people to avail themselves to that facility at a discounted rate of $130 an hour, the use of those passes becomes an abuse of policy? The only differences I can see is that the former is sanctioned by Disney, and the latter is cheaper, as well as enabling handicapped people to make some money.

I certainly didn't say that was OK. It's an elitist policy IMHO, and I don't like it.

Would you care to reply to the gist of my post in addition to its opening clause?

[pErvinalia]

Some attractions at Walt Disney World Resort have auxiliary entrances for Guests with disabilities. These are intended to offer Guests in wheelchairs or with trained service animals a more convenient entrance to the attraction. Auxiliary entrances are not intended to bypass waiting lines. Guests with disabilities and up to five members of their party may enter through these entrances. The rest of the party should use the main entrance.

And aside from this, most contracts or user agreements have a fair use policy. That is, if you are rorting the system, then it's not fair use of the service. Hiring a disabled person for the purposes of jumping the queue is not fair use of the service.

[Bella Fortuna]

As a hypothetical, what would be the ethical position if Disneyland offered special tickets, with access to the head of any line, at a cost, say, 5 or 10 times the going rate?

That is exactly what Disneyland does. From the link CES posted: "Disney Tours offers a VIP guide and fast passes for $310 to $380 per hour." The "dicks" who are hiring handicapped guides are not breaking any rules at all - as Animavore has pointed out, and CES has failed to acknowledge. They are merely availing themselves to the exact same kind of service provided by Disneyland itself, but at a cheaper rate. It's one of those lovely things free enterprise offers.

There's a difference IMHO between premium/priority service* - where you just pay through the nose to get better/faster access - and manipulating a system that was designed for another purpose altogether**.

*As to what I think of this a practice ... that's another matter.

**Which in this case is to not discomfit handicapped people by having them wait in line for the same amount of time as everyone else. The fact that it's ultimately in Disney's own selfish interests to have a policy like this doesn't mean that it's OK for people to abuse it.

So, when patrons of Disneyland avail themselves to the company's official "fast passes" offer at a rate of $310 to $380 per hour, that's OK, but when they hire handicapped people to avail themselves to that facility at a discounted rate of $130 an hour, the use of those passes becomes an abuse of policy? The only differences I can see is that the former is sanctioned by Disney, and the latter is cheaper, as well as enabling handicapped people to make some money.

It goes back to intent. Their policy states that the auxiliary lines are not to be used as a general bypass of waiting in queues, and that was exactly the intent of these people. The intent of the fast passes IS to bypass the wait.

[Hermit]

So, when patrons of Disneyland avail themselves to the company's official "fast passes" offer at a rate of $310 to $380 per hour, that's OK, but when they hire handicapped people to avail themselves to that facility at a discounted rate of $130 an hour, the use of those passes becomes an abuse of policy? The only differences I can see is that the former is sanctioned by Disney, and the latter is cheaper, as well as enabling handicapped people to make some money.

It goes back to intent. Their policy states that the auxiliary lines are not to be used as a general bypass of waiting in queues, and that was exactly the intent of these people. The intent of the fast passes IS to bypass the wait.

Unless, of course, patrons avail themselves to exactly that bypass by paying Disney Corp itself for the privilege.

[Bella Fortuna]

So, when patrons of Disneyland avail themselves to the company's official "fast passes" offer at a rate of $310 to $380 per hour, that's OK, but when they hire handicapped people to avail themselves to that facility at a discounted rate of $130 an hour, the use of those passes becomes an abuse of policy? The only differences I can see is that the former is sanctioned by Disney, and the latter is cheaper, as well as enabling handicapped people to make some money.

It goes back to intent. Their policy states that the auxiliary lines are not to be used as a general bypass of waiting in queues, and that was exactly the intent of these people. The intent of the fast passes IS to bypass the wait.

Unless, of course, patrons avail themselves to exactly that bypass by paying Disney Corp itself for the privilege.

Well, I wasn't stating a moral/personal judgment on the situation, but stating why one was different in contrast to the other.

[Hermit]

So, when patrons of Disneyland avail themselves to the company's official "fast passes" offer at a rate of $310 to $380 per hour, that's OK, but when they hire handicapped people to avail themselves to that facility at a discounted rate of $130 an hour, the use of those passes becomes an abuse of policy? The only differences I can see is that the former is sanctioned by Disney, and the latter is cheaper, as well as enabling handicapped people to make some money.

It goes back to intent. Their policy states that the auxiliary lines are not to be used as a general bypass of waiting in queues, and that was exactly the intent of these people. The intent of the fast passes IS to bypass the wait.

Unless, of course, patrons avail themselves to exactly that bypass by paying Disney Corp itself for the privilege.

Well, I wasn't stating a moral/personal judgement on the situation, but stating why one was different in contrast to the other.

So, what is the difference between buying a fast pass from Disney and buying one from a private entrepreneur who is handicapped? And yes, you did make a moral judgement. Your statement that intent to bypass Disney's policy regarding waiting in queues is a moral one, and it holds no water as long as Disney offers an official channel, amply paid for, to do just that. A short time ago I mentioned three differences, and - unlike the one you failed to substantiate in the light of what I said - none of them had any moral ramifications as such. I could have cast aspersions on Disneyland, its patrons, and capitalism in general, but I consciously steered well clear of all of that in this thread.