No exemption to mask policy.

[SteveMouse]

You are correct in that. But how do you prove an unmasked person poses a threat to others when they are not sick and not presenting symptoms? Force them to test for covid? Can a private company do that legally? I don’t believe so. And if you cannot explicitly prove that they are a danger to others than the public safety exception does not apply. So, again, Disney may be in violation of the ADA.

Under Florida law, Disney is in violation. There is no public safety exemption in it. I linked it in another post.

Nor do I trust the tests. Too many oddities reported.

https://nypost.com/2020/05/06/fault...-as-goat-and-fruit-test-positive-in-tanzania/

There is no general discrimination against individuals with disabilities if everyone, regardless of whether they are disabled or not, is required to wear a mask to address limiting the spread of COVID-19, which we know does not produce symptoms in all individuals infected by the virus.

If you’re going to cite relevant Florida statute, you might want to look at https://codes.findlaw.com/fl/title-xxx-social-welfare/fl-st-sect-413-08.html.

Paragraph two states, in part, “This section does not require any person, firm, business, or corporation, or any agent thereof, to modify or provide any vehicle, premises, facility, or service to a higher degree of accommodation than is required for a person not so disabled.”

I would read the Florida statute as if the service requires the use of a mask for all, there is no requirement to provide an alternative under this statute.

 

[Mnemorath]

No, Disney is not in violation of Florida law.

And Disney, like many, many other businesses, is basing the direct threat Of people not wearing masks on CDC guidance.

You may not trust science, which is certainly your right. But you have no right to expect the rest of the world to distrust it with you.

Florida law is clear and does not provide any exemption.

760.08 Discrimination in places of public accommodation.—All persons are entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, national origin, sex, pregnancy, handicap, familial status, or religion.

The CDC also recommends alternatives or alterations for those who cannot wear a mask. For those with sensory disabilities they recommend speaking with your doctor. While the story does not mention it, it is entirely possible the families physician expressly forbid the child from wearing a mask. I personally would not be surprised that was the case.

In order to avail themselves of the public safety exception Disney would have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the maskless person poses a danger. The only way to prove a person who does not present symptoms does not have COVID is an antibody test. This would be illegal for Disney to mandate. The test will also show false positives due to related antibodies for other corona viruses like the common cold.

I never make a claim I can’t back up and I always do my research.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/201...e-cover-guidance.html#feasibility-adaptations
https://thehill.com/changing-americ...false-positive-and-false-negative-coronavirus

 

[Mnemorath]

There is no general discrimination against individuals with disabilities if everyone, regardless of whether they are disabled or not, is required to wear a mask to address limiting the spread of COVID-19, which we know does not produce symptoms in all individuals infected by the virus.

There is if someone’s disability precludes them from wearing a mask. That is the point.

How can you prove the person who does not present symptoms does or does not pose a health risk to others by no wearing a mask? Legally, all you can do is ask them if they have certain symptoms and take their temperature. Anything in excess of that is prohibited. So, if you refuse service to someone who cannot wear a mask, by public accommodation laws you are discriminating.

I am not an attorney or judge. I just read the laws and interpret them as best I can. Bar stool law. By my reading and research, Disney is in violation of the ADA and Florida’s public accommodation laws. To get a public safety exception to refuse an accommodation they would have to prove the kid had COVID, (they can’t) and put that in writing as the reason they refused her entry. They cannot have a blanket policy as it would by its very nature exclude people. That is the definition of discrimination.

In the end, I figure this family will sue and Disney will settle out of court and we will never hear the results. Disney will not admit guilt period. Even a complaint to the EEOC of Florida or US would be buried.

 

[SteveMouse]

I‘m not suggesting that Disney needs to provide any accommodation, but if they were to provide any accommodation, Disney could select what was offered, as aptly demonstrated by the DAS.

 

[OurBigTrip]

There is if someone’s disability precludes them from wearing a mask. That is the point.

How can you prove the person who does not present symptoms does or does not pose a health risk to others by no wearing a mask? Legally, all you can do is ask them if they have certain symptoms and take their temperature. Anything in excess of that is prohibited. So, if you refuse service to someone who cannot wear a mask, by public accommodation laws you are discriminating.

I am not an attorney or judge. I just read the laws and interpret them as best I can. Bar stool law. By my reading and research, Disney is in violation of the ADA and Florida’s public accommodation laws. To get a public safety exception to refuse an accommodation they would have to prove the kid had COVID, (they can’t) and put that in writing as the reason they refused her entry. They cannot have a blanket policy as it would by its very nature exclude people. That is the definition of discrimination.

In the end, I figure this family will sue and Disney will settle out of court and we will never hear the results. Disney will not admit guilt period. Even a complaint to the EEOC of Florida or US would be buried.

Figure again - no way would Disney settle this, as the law is on their side. Disney doesn’t have to prove that the child has COVID I order to use the direct threat exemption, all they have to is show that they didn’t consider her a threat due to her disability itself.

Not to mention this jerk of a father didn’t ask for an accommodation, he just tried to bully his way in.

You still haven’t answered what accommodation Disney should have made, short of allowing the child in without a mask.

 

[DLgal]

There is if someone’s disability precludes them from wearing a mask. That is the point.

How can you prove the person who does not present symptoms does or does not pose a health risk to others by no wearing a mask? Legally, all you can do is ask them if they have certain symptoms and take their temperature. Anything in excess of that is prohibited. So, if you refuse service to someone who cannot wear a mask, by public accommodation laws you are discriminating.

I am not an attorney or judge. I just read the laws and interpret them as best I can. Bar stool law. By my reading and research, Disney is in violation of the ADA and Florida’s public accommodation laws. To get a public safety exception to refuse an accommodation they would have to prove the kid had COVID, (they can’t) and put that in writing as the reason they refused her entry. They cannot have a blanket policy as it would by its very nature exclude people. That is the definition of discrimination.

In the end, I figure this family will sue and Disney will settle out of court and we will never hear the results. Disney will not admit guilt period. Even a complaint to the EEOC of Florida or US would be buried.

It's a good thing that Disney has real attorneys to advise them.

Do you really think Disney's lawyers would let them break federal law?

 

[Disney Frenhines]

Risking the health of his disabled daughter seems to be fine with him so long as he can have his vacation.

 

[fabfemmeboy]

Sensory processing issues are real, and they make mask-wearing much more difficult. I know from experience, as my partner struggles with them. Tags on shirts, lines on socks, fit of waistbands, all things that drive him nuts, and masks are no different. That's why - just like we tried basically every brand/style of socks until he found one that worked and then bought a zillion of them - we tried a wide variety of mask styles, shapes, fabrics, and fits. Fortunately for us I can sew, so it's just been a matter of time and energy rather than significant financial expense of buying so many masks, but for us it's every bit as much a part of the trip preparation as deciding which hotel and booking ADRs. If he could not wear a mask, we would not be going to Disney right now, and it would never occur to him to try to get an exemption. Why? Because unlike other accommodations where it only impacts his experience in the parks, this has a direct impact on others.

People with disabilities have a right to equal experience, but not when it is a direct threat to public health - or even just to the safety of other guests. For example, a person with a service dog has a right to bring that dog into the parks, but not a right to take that dog on BTMRR. Why? Because that would be incredibly dangerous - to the dog, to the attraction, to the person with the disability, and to other passengers on the ride! That's not discrimination or a violation of the ADA, it's a narrowly-tailored rule to ensure safe operation of the ride. If you have a prosthetic limb, you must remove it before riding certain roller coasters because it can literally fly off and hit someone below - and that's not discrimination if you're on a ride where literally no loose articles are allowed (like Hulk at USO/IOA). I do not have a right to insist that Disney strap my wheelchair onto a ride where it is not safe to do so; instead I have to transfer. If I cannot transfer, then I can't ride that ride. Is that unfortunate and frustrating? Of course. Is it discriminatory? Absolutely not! A person has to be able to be restrained safely in the ride vehicle in order to ride it. It's the same reason height requirements exist, even though they inherently restrict people with dwarfism from riding. The ADA does not require the company to make exceptions for disabled people when that exception could pose a threat to that person or to others. The company doesn't need to prove that that specific person would absolutely 100% pose a risk. Maybe the person has a type of prosthetic leg that locks into place so securely it takes 3 hex-screws and a team of people to remove it; maybe the person with dwarfism has really strong arms that will keep them holding onto the ride vehicle and not risk flying out. It doesn't matter. The ADA allows companies to make these rules and enforce these policies.

Dad is the equivalent of the people who have been wearing "masks" made of mesh to prove a point. The only person I feel bad for in this scenario is the daughter, who got taken to Disney World only to be told she had to go home.

 

[DisneyOma]

You are correct in that. But how do you prove an unmasked person poses a threat to others when they are not sick and not presenting symptoms? Force them to test for covid? Can a private company do that legally? I don’t believe so. And if you cannot explicitly prove that they are a danger to others than the public safety exception does not apply. So, again, Disney may be in violation of the ADA.

Under Florida law, Disney is in violation. There is no public safety exemption in it. I linked it in another post.

Nor do I trust the tests. Too many oddities reported.

https://nypost.com/2020/05/06/fault...-as-goat-and-fruit-test-positive-in-tanzania/

Federal law does have the public safety wording in it, as stated by PP. Let's see, you don't trust the tests, masks, and people can't be made to do anything they don't want to do. Sounds like a miserable spot to be in right now, and I feel sorry for you.

You don't have to force someone to test for COVID, but you could require proof of a negative test for entry.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Federal law does have the public safety wording in it, as stated by PP. Let's see, you don't trust the tests, masks, and people can't be made to do anything they don't want to do. Sounds like a miserable spot to be in right now, and I feel sorry for you.

You don't have to force someone to test for COVID, but you could require proof of a negative test for entry.

Agree. And his interpretation of Florida law is...well, interesting, to say the least.

 

[Mnemorath]

Agree. And his interpretation of Florida law is...well, interesting, to say the least.

I am interpreting it literally as it is written. I am also using a similar law here in WA that was used in 05 to win against another big company that refused to let a woman with her service dog to do her own shopping. I have heard from attorneys here that WA law will find the company in violation even if they use the ADA exemption.

The comment that Disney can say that her not wearing a mask is a direct threat is also false. It is discrimination based on her disability. Her disability precludes her wearing a mask, Disney says not wearing a mask is a threat, therefore her disability is a threat, therefore Disney barred her entry because of her disability. This is not a narrowly tailored rule, it’s a broad one. No mask, no entry, zero exceptions.

The law REQUIRES that there be exemptions. Here in WA, any company that denies entry can be sued and if so, according to many local attorneys, they will lose. FL law is similar.

 

[Renarr]

I am interpreting it literally as it is written. I am also using a similar law here in WA that was used in 05 to win against another big company that refused to let a woman with her service dog to do her own shopping. I have heard from attorneys here that WA law will find the company in violation even if they use the ADA exemption.

The comment that Disney can say that her not wearing a mask is a direct threat is also false. It is discrimination based on her disability. Her disability precludes her wearing a mask, Disney says not wearing a mask is a threat, therefore her disability is a threat, therefore Disney barred her entry because of her disability. This is not a narrowly tailored rule, it’s a broad one. No mask, no entry, zero exceptions.

The law REQUIRES that there be exemptions. Here in WA, any company that denies entry can be sued and if so, according to many local attorneys, they will lose. FL law is similar.

The first question in the FAQ's section of the Department of Health website, under "At Work, School or a Business" would disagree with you about current WA state law:

https://www.doh.wa.gov/Emergencies/...veringsandMasks/ClothFaceCoveringsandMasksFAQ

 

[Mnemorath]

The first question in the FAQ's section of the Department of Health website, under "At Work, School or a Business" would disagree with you about current WA state law:

https://www.doh.wa.gov/Emergencies/...veringsandMasks/ClothFaceCoveringsandMasksFAQ

Read the flow chart on this page:
https://washingtonmaskeducation.wordpress.com/

 

[jlnten17]

This whole post just makes me sad. Whether you agree with Disney's mask requirement or not the rules are very clear. Even for those who don't follow these boards or do significant research prior to traveling to Disney a quick phone call would have cleared this up. Disney also has a very generous refund policy presently. This father should have put his daughter's best interest first and rescheduled the trip. I also feel for the cast members who are just trying to do their job.

 

[mcall12]

.

Read the flow chart on this page:
https://washingtonmaskeducation.wordpress.com/

This is a pretty critical piece of information from that very site (a wordpress site, which can be created for free, by anyone, nonetheless):

The information provided in this website is for educational purposes only and to provide a general understanding of the subject matter. It does not constitute legal advice, and should not be substituted for the advice of a licensed attorney.

It would be important to know who is behind the website. This reminds me of the mask exemption cards that were being provided by the “freedom to breathe agency”, which is not a government agency. Story below where a woman claiming to be from this agency advised a grocery store employee about how they were violating the law. The store is still requiring masks of customers and the DOJ issued a warning about the face mask exemption cards they are selling as they do not carry the force of law.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehil...-from-freedom-to-breathe-agency-gets-into?amp
Just because it’s on a website doesn’t make it true, fully accurate and/or applicable to all situations. People need to be careful about where they source their information. My husband, a “real” lawyer admitted to the PA bar, would be thrilled to know his law degree from an accredited law school, years working as a clerk on the federal circuit and the many many billable hours he spends practicing law are second only to someone who can “read and interpret” state and federal law and all associated implications.

 

[daisy2013]

Read the flow chart on this page:
https://washingtonmaskeducation.wordpress.com/

.


This is a pretty critical piece of information from that very site (a wordpress site, which can be created for free, by anyone, nonetheless):

The information provided in this website is for educational purposes only and to provide a general understanding of the subject matter. It does not constitute legal advice, and should not be substituted for the advice of a licensed attorney.

It would be important to know who is behind the website. This reminds me of the mask exemption cards that were being provided by the “freedom to breathe agency”, which is not a government agency. Story below where a woman claiming to be from this agency advised a grocery store employee about how they were violating the law. The store is still requiring masks of customers and the DOJ issued a warning about the face mask exemption cards they are selling as they do not carry the force of law.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehil...-from-freedom-to-breathe-agency-gets-into?amp
Just because it’s on a website doesn’t make it true, fully accurate and/or applicable to all situations. People need to be careful about where they source their information. My husband, a “real” lawyer admitted to the PA bar, would be thrilled to know his law degree from an accredited law school, years working as a clerk on the federal circuit and the many many billable hours he spends practicing law are second only to someone who can “read and interpret” state and federal law and all associated implications.

Seriously.
The law in general is complex (which it why it requires three years of full time study to be even eligible to sit for the licensing exam). And then when you add in the interpretations of statutory law by the courts (case law) which can vary by state and division of the federal judiciary.
But hey some woman created a wordpress website so that must trump the advice from the actual government.

 

[Kestryl]

.


This is a pretty critical piece of information from that very site (a wordpress site, which can be created for free, by anyone, nonetheless):

The information provided in this website is for educational purposes only and to provide a general understanding of the subject matter. It does not constitute legal advice, and should not be substituted for the advice of a licensed attorney.

It would be important to know who is behind the website. This reminds me of the mask exemption cards that were being provided by the “freedom to breathe agency”, which is not a government agency. Story below where a woman claiming to be from this agency advised a grocery store employee about how they were violating the law. The store is still requiring masks of customers and the DOJ issued a warning about the face mask exemption cards they are selling as they do not carry the force of law.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehil...-from-freedom-to-breathe-agency-gets-into?amp
Just because it’s on a website doesn’t make it true, fully accurate and/or applicable to all situations. People need to be careful about where they source their information. My husband, a “real” lawyer admitted to the PA bar, would be thrilled to know his law degree from an accredited law school, years working as a clerk on the federal circuit and the many many billable hours he spends practicing law are second only to someone who can “read and interpret” state and federal law and all associated implications.

You read my mind!

It’s very telling that lawyer after lawyer after lawyer will state that the ADA doesn’t give some blanket immunity for people to go without masks, while those practicing “bar stool law” harp on how businesses must allow people to go without masks as if everything is normal.

 

[OurBigTrip]

Federal law does have the public safety wording in it, as stated by PP. Let's see, you don't trust the tests, masks, and people can't be made to do anything they don't want to do. Sounds like a miserable spot to be in right now, and I feel sorry for you.

You don't have to force someone to test for COVID, but you could require proof of a negative test for entry.

Agree. And his interpretation of Florida law is...well, interesting, to say the least.

I am interpreting it literally as it is written. I am also using a similar law here in WA that was used in 05 to win against another big company that refused to let a woman with her service dog to do her own shopping. I have heard from attorneys here that WA law will find the company in violation even if they use the ADA exemption.

The comment that Disney can say that her not wearing a mask is a direct threat is also false. It is discrimination based on her disability. Her disability precludes her wearing a mask, Disney says not wearing a mask is a threat, therefore her disability is a threat, therefore Disney barred her entry because of her disability. This is not a narrowly tailored rule, it’s a broad one. No mask, no entry, zero exceptions.

The law REQUIRES that there be exemptions. Here in WA, any company that denies entry can be sued and if so, according to many local attorneys, they will lose. FL law is similar.

No, the law does not require exemptions.

 

[Aladora]

The absolute hysteria over this virus is out of control. Children are proven not to be significant vectors for the disease, and distancing is far more important than masks that don’t stop the virus anyway. I am disgusted to see people applauding Disney for this ridiculous position.

I doubt you will come back to this thread and reply but I wanted to add a few more reports for you to consider regarding children and them not being "significant vectors for the disease"

Universities scramble to respond to outbreak

As schools open, coronavirus outbreaks follow

More than 97,000 children in the US test positive for Covid-19 in the last two weeks of July

In England, schools see dozens of coronavirus outbreaks as they open

925 students, staff quarantined after coronavirus outbreak in Georgia

But yeah, there is obviously out of control hysteria over this virus and children are not a significant vector for this virus.

 

[thanxfornoticin]

Risking the health of his disabled daughter seems to be fine with him so long as he can have his vacation.

I was thinking the same thing. Did he risk her health just to make a point? I find it hard to believe he wasn't aware of the requirements before he got there, and knew how it was going to play out. It's a tough time for all - there is no "normal" right now. We're all missing out on things and making adjustments.