PDA

View Full Version : Another Lawsuit at Disneyland



Pages : [1] 2 3

ChurroGirl
02-08-2013, 05:21 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/black-family-claims-disney-white-rabbit-character-refused-180034301--finance.html

Being 27, I don't get hugged or kissed on very often by Character CM's myself. On recent trips I had observed but didn't think anything of it, of characters not physically interacting with children. Some parents seem to notice, others didn't.

IMO, from the article and short video clip, I couldn't tell whether or not the White Rabbit was in any way being biased to the other children in line. I did observe however that the second set of children to approach the White Rabbit were much younger than the first family.


After reading the article and watching the video, what do you all think?

missm
02-08-2013, 07:05 AM
I'm impressed that they are only asking for a public apology and for the actor to be fired. I couldn't find a video.

jsilkey
02-08-2013, 08:44 AM
What bothers me is that they complained and were offered VIP passes but refused them. It isn't as if Disney can prevent any of their cast members from being racist (if the claim is true and that was the reason for the difference in treatment). What they can do is deal with it when brought to their attention, and hopefully discipline or fire the employee. I am guessing if they were offering this family VIP passes, etc. that it would prompt them to investigate the cast member.

Even though they aren't asking for huge sums of $, they are in the news and the kid is sharing his story on TV. Seems like a grab for 15 minutes of fame from a bad situation. They know it is going to be reported more heavily because of the Disney name. Even the newscaster said "Disney is accused of being racist" not a Disney cast member is accused of being racist. It is totally different than if they designed an exhibit that is racist or something the company could control ahead of time.

3Princesses1Prince
02-08-2013, 09:13 AM
I generally take issue with parents putting their young kids on tv to "tell their story" in these situations, it rarely to the child's benefit and can cause more chaos than good. I couldn't find the video so I can't comment in this particular case, but they generally sound rehearsed too.

I question the parents motives because this could've been resolved without the media sensationalism.

vegaspixie
02-08-2013, 09:19 AM
What bothers me is that they complained and were offered VIP passes but refused them. It isn't as if Disney can prevent any of their cast members from being racist (if the claim is true and that was the reason for the difference in treatment). What they can do is deal with it when brought to their attention, and hopefully discipline or fire the employee. I am guessing if they were offering this family VIP passes, etc. that it would prompt them to investigate the cast member.

Even though they aren't asking for huge sums of $, they are in the news and the kid is sharing his story on TV. Seems like a grab for 15 minutes of fame from a bad situation. They know it is going to be reported more heavily because of the Disney name. Even the newscaster said "Disney is accused of being racist" not a Disney cast member is accused of being racist. It is totally different than if they designed an exhibit that is racist or something the company could control ahead of time.

I'm sorry, but I respectfully disagree. True, you can't prevent what someone feels in their heart/mind (racist), but the behavior, if true, is completely unacceptable and if Disney is tolerating that behavior, then yes, the CM does represent the organization, just as any employee is, on some level, a representative of the organization they work for. If that's how the CM feels, they need to find a job where they won't be dealing with people of other races (good luck), or they need to find a way to keep it to themselves. That behavior should not be tolerated. As for the family refusing the VIP tx and $500, what I got from the story is that they wanted to make sure the problem was being addressed and not just swept under the rug.

Nobody wants that kind of 15 minutes of fame; its humiliating and degrading. They aren't suing for compensation, they are demanding accountability. And they are putting themselves out there to be judged. I don't fault them; of course I hope it was all just a terrible misunderstanding, but if it isn't, then Mr. White Rabbit should go work elsewhere, and not with the public. Racist behavior is intolerable.

3Princesses1Prince
02-08-2013, 09:51 AM
Nobody wants that kind of 15 minutes of fame; its humiliating and degrading.

You'd be surprised. And if they felt it was humiliating and degrading why are they putting their young child on tv to be humiliated too?

And why do you assume Disney hasn't investigated this or that they condone the behavior? Or that the behavior had anything to do with race?

vegaspixie
02-08-2013, 10:24 AM
You'd be surprised. And if they felt it was humiliating and degrading why are they putting their young child on tv to be humiliated too?

And why do you assume Disney hasn't investigated this or that they condone the behavior? Or that the behavior had anything to do with race?

Why does every one assume that this family just wants their 15 minutes of fame?

Perhaps you would be surprised how horrible it feels to be discriminated against and/or stereotyped based solely on your physical appearance. Multiply that by the thought that your child is being treated that way. I can tell you from PERSONAL experience in my own childhood (because people of Asian decent were so welcome in the 60s and 70s in Arizona), it is degrading, humiliating, hurtful, inexplicable. I can't imagine having to looking at my child and see the hurt in their eyes, and now have to make excuses for other people's racist behavior.

And then, if you are brave enough (yes I said brave because, as evidenced by yours and many other remarks, the default reaction is to view the accuser of overreacting/lying/seeking attention), when you go to complain about it, and Disney basically validates your complaint by offering you compensation, that doesn't make you feel any better. In fact, it just makes you feel that much worse.

I mean, if it wasn't racist, why would Disney offer them anything? I'm sorry, but I've been in the City Hall/COC line (no not to complain, but to offer CM kudos) and when you listen to the all of the incidents being reported, and the CM response is, by and large, a very gracious apology and promise to forward the concern up the proper chain but RARELY if ever an offer of compensation of any type, a red flag goes up in my mind to hear that this family was offered immediate compensation, not once, but twice.

I don't think I said I ASSUMED that Disney hadn't investigated or condoned the behavior; as far as the race issue, I was responding to the thread conversation and the original news article in which the family was expressly accusing the CM of racist behavior.

ETA: Being on TV isn't humiliating; being discriminated against because of your color/race/nationality IS. Having it happen to your child in front of your eyes is DEVASTATING.

currence
02-08-2013, 11:23 AM
Your points are well made vegaspixie, but I don't think any employee should be fired over any one incident (unless there is abuse, theft, etc). I have done so many meet & greets and had a range of different interactions with the characters that could be perceived as discriminatory (for or against my kids) if I was looking for discrimination.

I don't know these kids/family. I don't know the kids/families that came after them. I don't know if the white rabbit or any other character at Disney is racist. Here is what I do know:

* The characters tend to spend more time with those groups that they perceive want to spend time with them.

From the Black (last name of the family) child's comments it appears that the white children came up to the rabbit and started showering him with affection which the rabbit returned in kind. If the Black family was more stand-off-ish, the rabbit may have responded similarly. In the pictures, what I see most are two hands which are clearly visible. This always reminds me of the "I am not inappropriately touching anyone" stance. This is not an uncommon stance. If I went through my photos, I would probably find lots of other similar pictures.

The younger child on the video appears to be at the edge of an age where he would want to have interactions with characters. The older child who is only shown briefly in a photo appears well beyond that age. The young white children are clearly younger. One of the photos appears taken in the same location as the Black family. The other is at a different site. Presumably they are close enough in time that the same rabbit simply moved.

When my daughter was afraid of characters but my son wasn't, I felt that some of the characters would rush my son to help remove my daughter from the situation, even though she was perfectly fine hiding behind me.

When I take pictures by myself, even when I do not "feel rushed" I know that they spend a whole lot less time with me than they do when I have my kids.

When my son brought toys or stuffed animals to "share" with the characters, they spent more time with him.

Even now, we have a personalized autograph book that has pictures of my kids with the characters and a space for them to sign. On several occasions, the characters have gone through the whole book with my kids. I have never seen them do this with a traditional autograph book (except the rare occasion when Alice (& wonderland) and Peter Pan told a story using all of the names in a kids autograph book). The people who had to wait for us to finish and then didn't get the same attention were discriminated against because they didn't have a cool book, not because of any other immutable factor.

* There may be more than one white rabbit (gasp)

Does the Black family want a specific individual fired or for the rabbit to never again be available for photographs? If it is a specific individual, Disney would need to research who that person was and do their own internal investigation, which I assume has already started and that the character in question is likely on paid or unpaid leave at this time. For all I know, that particular rabbit is black or part of a different discriminated against class and feels horrible for what was perceived to have happened. Or not.

I personally don't think any one person should be able to get any other person fired for having a bad few moments, if no other policies were broken. Retrained, yes, reassigned, perhaps, fired, no! And since that is the "only" thing they want (along with an apology from Disney) they are asking for something that I do not feel Disney should give them. Because that sets a horrible precedent of people having a bad experience at the park and demanding that the offending cast member be fired.

* Even if the family only wants an apology and the offending employee terminated, they have retained an attorney who will presumably want to be compensated for his time and efforts.

I cannot imagine this attorney being hired on an hourly basis, which means that the attorney's fees will be paid for by Disney (if they lose or settle).

* I think the end-result of this may be more sealed meet and greet experiences and less spontaneous ones.

Many of the new meet & greets (princesses, Rapunzel, Disney Visa) have limited ability to see the characters interact with the other guests. The White Rabbits interactions were only objectionable when compared to his interactions with cute little kids. If the Black family had not seen/photographed those interactions, they may not have felt as discriminated against. I fear this could lead Disney to cutting back even further on their roaming characters and have more of them set up in predesignated spots with limited viewing by other guests.

cookie7762
02-08-2013, 12:07 PM
I also am wondering if this was the same white rabbit as the backgrounds look very different in the pictures featured. Could it be possible that one CM playing the rabbit is very touchy-feely while the other is more of a hands off kind of character? The article states that the other children approached him "around the same time". I have frequently seen mickey leave an area, only to return moments later, which I usually assume is a cast change. I just think there is a lot missing from this story for someone to lose there job over a proof-less allegation.

familymemories
02-08-2013, 12:30 PM
I generally take issue with parents putting their young kids on tv to "tell their story" in these situations, it rarely to the child's benefit and can cause more chaos than good. I couldn't find the video so I can't comment in this particular case, but they generally sound rehearsed too.

I question the parents motives because this could've been resolved without the media sensationalism.

I was totally thinking this too. Questioning the parents motive.

josephbandrews
02-08-2013, 12:42 PM
It comes off as no different than many of the skewed stories in the media whereas by the time the truth comes out you won't know what to believe. I get the impression more and more that media journalists (especially in smaller share markets) are becoming more and more shock-jocks to save ratings or boost their careers.

With the implications brought forth here, I'd be surprised if Disney jumped to action on a press release. Doing so too early could be an admission or denial of guilt before an investigation is even complete. I also would not be surprised (if the incident was found to be inappropriate) that the CM has already been terminated and won't be publicly identified as such until the lawyers are done with everything.

Unfortunately since there are probably 2 dozen CMs that portray the rabbit at different times and different days, we'll just have to trust that Disney will find the truth and act accordingly...

vegaspixie
02-08-2013, 01:18 PM
I personally don't think any one person should be able to get any other person fired for having a bad few moments, if no other policies were broken. Retrained, yes, reassigned, perhaps, fired, no! And since that is the "only" thing they want (along with an apology from Disney) they are asking for something that I do not feel Disney should give them. Because that sets a horrible precedent of people having a bad experience at the park and demanding that the offending cast member be fired.


I agree with you; as I'd wrote earlier, Disney (nobody) can control what is in someone's heart/mind; unfortunately we walk this earth alongside many people who silently hate, for whatever reason. If a person can keep those feelings to themselves and treat their customers fairly, then no harm no foul (I guess). And if this situation can be successfully addressed with a re-training, "I" would be satisfied based on the events described had they happened to me/my kids.

But I do not face racially-based discrimination with any frequency as an adult (really, almost none....almost). As a child it was there (and I'm only "half" Asian, although I had a more Asian look as a child, so I grew up as a "jap" "chink" "gook" etc etc), and I know it was a reflection of the times, the location, the way the world was when I was growing up. So I couldn't wager a guess as to how much racially-based discrimination this family has to deal with it in their day-to-day lives. But I do not doubt that they do.

Even though we, as a culture, have come such a long way since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, if you really think about it, that wasn't very long ago. And the passage of the act didn't necessarily change the beliefs that people had been taught were perfectly acceptable when it came to race. No law can force anyone to change how they feel. The generations born since then, especially kids born in the 80's, 90's and beyond, I believe wholeheartedly will transcend the ugliness of this country's past when it comes to racial discrimination.

Until then, please understand, it really isn't easy to stand up for yourself (or your loved ones) in a situation like this. And it even sounds like initially the dad was trying to rationalize the CM's behavior, rather than jump on the discrimination bandwagon ("The boys' father, Jason LeRoy Black Sr., initially thought the park had implemented a new policy preventing the characters from touching children"). So just imagine; this thing happens, and your gut says somethings not right, but your mind tries to rationalize it and you decide to move on, and then you see something that goes against what you were thinking, and then Disney starts offering VIP passes, money and nondisclosure agreements, and you're like HUH? This really just happened to me...all I wanted was to take my kids to Disneyland...



* Even if the family only wants an apology and the offending employee terminated, they have retained an attorney who will presumably want to be compensated for his time and efforts.

I cannot imagine this attorney being hired on an hourly basis, which means that the attorney's fees will be paid for by Disney (if they lose or settle).

As to this, this is what I read: "Dan Gilleon, the family's attorney, said the Black family is asking Disney to issue a public apology and fire the employee who portrays the White Rabbit. “They’re not trying to get something they don’t deserve,” Gilleon told the station. “In fact all they’ve asked for is a little bit of recognition that this should not have happened."

currence
02-08-2013, 01:39 PM
It just seems that at the end of the day, when they concede that even a judge does not have the right to force Disney to fire an employee, they will then ask for millions of dollars instead - to act as a deterrent from allowing this to happen again to someone else's child.

I don't know what the VIP experience was that they were offered - but thinking about it, my guess is that it may have been a one-on-one encounter with the rabbit. I think I have heard of other families (make a wish?) getting private interactions with their favorite characters. If that is what was offered, it would make sense and not be a sign by Disney that anyone did anything wrong - just someone trying to make things better by creating a magical moment for the family.

Similarly, even though $500 is portrayed by the media as hush money, that is the price of four one-day park hoppers. And while I don't know why Disney would require them to sign a non-disclosure agreement, if I were Disney I certainly wouldn't want word to get out that you just had to complain that you were discriminated against and you could get a full refund of your admission tickets.

The family has the right to feel discriminated against. They even have the right to sue Disney for the discrimination. I just would have a lot more sympathy for them if the lawsuit was discovered by people combing public records than them going full press to the media. I get that this is how trials are held these days (in the media, via the court of public opinion) but I don't approve.

ETA: according to a different article, the kids are 6 & 9 - that's still pretty young in my book. Also, as noted above that the pictures of happy little white kids were taken in possibly different locations (and thus at different times) it should be further noted that the clock hanging around the white rabbit's neck appears missing in the other photos. Again, not saying that what they saw/experienced wasn't real, just that these photos don't prove anything.

Iceman
02-08-2013, 08:14 PM
I showed this thread to a coworker of mine just to get his impressions. He's black and I'm white. Not to put too fine a point on it, but he's VERY black (grew up in a poor family in the south, has friends who fell into the ghetto culture, etc.) and I'm pretty darn white (grew up in a middle class family in Massachusetts, went to private Catholic school, etc.). We are now both officers in the military, which is a very racially-integrated organization, and enjoy talking about uncomfortable topics like racism in a mature, rational way.

His first reaction upon reading this story was one of disgust--he thinks they are clearly greedy and going after the money. I was a little surprised that he reacted so strongly. But he said that he's experienced racism his entire life, true and obvious racism. It's not right, but it's common enough that he just accepts it (that's not the right term, but you know what I mean) and moves on. He started listing a dozen other explanations for what might have been going on here with the White Rabbit that were completely innocent or at the very least not racist.

He told me that some of his former friends got so bitter about racism that they started looking for it in every interaction in their lives. Someone cut them off on the highway without using a blinker? Racism. Someone bumped into them in line at the airport? Racism. The barcode on their canned corn didn't ring up right at the grocery store? Racism. You see what I mean, and what his point was--that countless little problems every day that most of us brush off as facts of life (and which are in reality innocent facts of life) can be perceived as racism-based if you look at everything through that filter.

He clearly thought this was another case of that. If the two families in question had both been white, the exact same thing could have happened and the explanation would not have been a racist CM portraying the White Rabbit. But because this family looks for and sees racism literally everywhere, the littlest possible slight (like this case) is seen in the most nefarious way.

In fact, he was pretty ticked off at this family for filing a lawsuit. His position was that there is enough legitimate racism still around in America such that frivolous lawsuits like this one undermine the case when a real one comes up. It was kind of a chicken little situation to him.

Tink Lover
02-08-2013, 09:05 PM
We are now both officers in the military, which is a very racially-integrated organization, and enjoy talking about uncomfortable topics like racism in a mature, rational way.


Thanks for sharing the perspectives of ONE black person.

Since you guys like to talk about uncomfortable topics, would you mind asking how he felt about the OJ trial and the fact that OJ was acquitted? Was he outraged (as so much of white America was), or did he think that it was a fair verdict (as so much of black America felt)? I had my own long and fascinating discussion with a black coworker (I am white) around that time; I was fascinated to learn how different his experiences had been from mine growing up in the same country that I did.

Not all blacks think alike. Some blacks are viewed as Uncle Tom's by many others. I am not trying to call your friend an Uncle Tom, but his views might not be shared by a majority of other blacks.

cstephens
02-08-2013, 11:14 PM
He told me that some of his former friends got so bitter about racism that they started looking for it in every interaction in their lives. Someone cut them off on the highway without using a blinker? Racism. Someone bumped into them in line at the airport? Racism. The barcode on their canned corn didn't ring up right at the grocery store? Racism. You see what I mean, and what his point was--that countless little problems every day that most of us brush off as facts of life (and which are in reality innocent facts of life) can be perceived as racism-based if you look at everything through that filter.

Yep, I totally get your point and his point. I'd read a bit about this story before this thread was posted, but I haven't looked at any pictures. Based on the descriptions I'd read from the family, it wasn't clear to me whether it was explicit racism or if there was some other explanation for it. I do agree that sometimes, people find it easier to blame racism or any other kind of discrimination rather than looking at the specifics of the situation. The gesture that they described the White Rabbit making seemed vague and indeterminate to me. I would have been puzzled by that behaviour as well, but I don't think I would personally have jumped to discrimination as the reason for it.

I can understand why Disney made an offer to them. They might have investigated the situation and really didn't have anything to go on other than the family's description of what occurred. They couldn't undo what the family perceived happened, so the only real remedy was to try to offer the family something to make up for what they said happened to them.

ogold72
02-09-2013, 08:04 AM
I also am wondering if this was the same white rabbit as the backgrounds look very different in the pictures featured. Could it be possible that one CM playing the rabbit is very touchy-feely while the other is more of a hands off kind of character? The article states that the other children approached him "around the same time". I have frequently seen mickey leave an area, only to return moments later, which I usually assume is a cast change. I just think there is a lot missing from this story for someone to lose there job over a proof-less allegation.

Its not even the same rabbit in the photos. The one the family took pictures with had a clock around its neck while the ones with the other kids didnt. The little girl had her hands crossed, maybe the Rabbit didnt think that a hug was the right pose with these guests. Maybe the castmember had to go to the bathroom and didnt feel like doing a whole lot of interaction. There are a mulitude of explanations for what we see in the pictures. The characters do different poses all the time and it doesnt infer a cast members feeling about the guest.

Here is a question, at what point did the family believe that racism occured? They posed for more than one photo. If you were upset by the Rabbits behavior would you continue taking pictures? Thats odd to me. The kids arent frowning either, they are smiling.

As it stands, no one knows exactly what happened, there isnt enough information out there, at this point it was perception that some kids were snubbed and attributing it to race. I dont know how that family made that leap but Iceman said it well. Im an officer in the military too and grew up in the south. Ive seen racism, sbeen on the recieving end of racism, seen racists and seen those who look at everything that happens to them as an issue of race. I think the latter is the case here. They may have very well thought that what the rabbit did or didnt do was based on racism, but simply believing that doesnt make it so. The park wasnt trying to buy them off nor acknowledge any wrong doing by offering some $ and VIP, they wanted to try to make a unpleasant situation better the best they could.

josephbandrews
02-09-2013, 09:13 AM
Thanks for sharing the perspectives of ONE black person.

Since you guys like to talk about uncomfortable topics, would you mind asking how he felt about the OJ trial and the fact that OJ was acquitted? Was he outraged (as so much of white America was), or did he think that it was a fair verdict (as so much of black America felt)? I had my own long and fascinating discussion with a black coworker (I am white) around that time; I was fascinated to learn how different his experiences had been from mine growing up in the same country that I did.

Not all blacks think alike. Some blacks are viewed as Uncle Tom's by many others. I am not trying to call your friend an Uncle Tom, but his views might not be shared by a majority of other blacks.

Like people saying RGIII isn't "black enough" because he has a white girlfriend and he is a Republican. Way to stamp out stereotypes guys! Keep up the good work. :D

Even funnier that former pro athletes working as reporters for pro sports, can make such stupid comments on national TV and not be criticized.

Tink Lover
02-09-2013, 11:21 AM
Like people saying RGIII isn't "black enough" because he has a white girlfriend and he is a Republican. Way to stamp out stereotypes guys! Keep up the good work. :D

Way to put words in my mouth, josephbandrews. Keep up the good work. :D

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/O._J._Simpson#Legal_history

The trial, often characterized as "the trial of the century", culminated on October 3, 1995 in a jury verdict of not guilty for the two murders. The verdict was seen live on TV by more than half of the U.S. population, making it one of the most watched events in American TV history. Immediate reaction to the verdict was notable for its division along racial lines: polls showed that most African-Americans felt that justice had been served by the "not guilty" verdict, while most white Americans did not

Offering up the opinions of a single black person who agrees with white America does not negate the opinions of a majority of blacks who might feel differently.

3Princesses1Prince
02-09-2013, 11:55 AM
Wikipedia is gospel after all. I mean its not like it can be edited by anyone at any time.

currence
02-09-2013, 11:56 AM
Can we please keep this limited to the topic of a single family suing Disneyland over allegations of racial discrimination by a single rabbit? More general racial discussions will simply get this thread moved to the forum, or closed, or both. I would prefer to not see that happen.

I tried to find a copy of the complaint, which Disney claims they have yet to see. None of the articles I could find had a link, which makes me wonder if it has actually been filed.

I did discover that the alleged incident took place over the summer, so there has been plenty of time for back and forth between the parties. I'm curious what has happened to cause them to go to the media now. Either they just got their attorney, they are close to a Statute of Limitations for filing, or their attorney sensed it was a slow news week and that the story had the best chance of being picked up.

I imagine Disney has concluded their internal investigation by now. No idea what happened to that Rabbit, though it he was a summer seasonal worker it is likely that he will not be hired again, even if he was not "fired."

cstephens
02-09-2013, 03:41 PM
Can we please keep this limited to the topic of a single family suing Disneyland over allegations of racial discrimination by a single rabbit?

I agree. What did or didn't happen in any other case involving race or discrimination, especially when it didn't involve Disney at all, is the equivalent of invoking Godwin's Law as far as I'm concerned.

I also don't think an opinion should be discounted just because it might not be the same as other people's nor should it be taken to represent someone speaking on behalf of a whole group of people.

It'll be interesting to see what the actual claim says once that info is available.

Tink Lover
02-09-2013, 04:47 PM
Wikipedia is gospel after all. I mean its not like it can be edited by anyone at any time.

Are you trying to imply that the information I quoted was incorrect? If so, how do you think that it was incorrect?



I also don't think an opinion should be discounted just because it might not be the same as other people's nor should it be taken to represent someone speaking on behalf of a whole group of people.


In other words, the opinions of the parents who filed the lawsuit should not be discounted just because their experience might not be the same as the experience of many of those posting on this thread?

ogold72
02-09-2013, 04:50 PM
Just close the thread. Some just cant help but stay off topic and would rather argue

3Princesses1Prince
02-09-2013, 06:26 PM
It'll be interesting to see what the actual claim says once that info is available.
I agree.