Paralyzed marine denied free entrance to Michigan's Adventure

Carrie M. said:

I would give the park the benefit of the doubt that says they get hit with that issue so many times that the resulting response is a little rehearsed and automatic. No.In retrospect, it makes perfect sense that this scenario, once completely revealed, doesn't fit the average mold. But at the time, there are some reflex responses going on to the request. That seems to be reasonable to me.

Carrie makes me think. Still undecided as to whether I actually like that or not....but I digress. What I'm envisioning as a possible scenario is the vet shows up at the park, and the first statement/interaction goes like this from Joel L.: "his fiance is participating in event X, so he, and his nurse/caregiver, should be comped in so they can go see her". Clearly, that tack wasn't working, so plan B was to bring up his being a vet. I'm not disrespecting the sacrifices made on a daily basis by those serving in ANY way, but it really is up to businesses to choose how they show their appreciation....not their customers.

edited for html tagging fix...

What annoys and amuses me at the same time about stories like this is all the people who chime in in support of the aggrieved. Yet their "support" is limited to demanding that someone else do something, whether it be change a policy, provide a freebie, etc. How many of these supporters would open their own wallets to pay this man's way-- and that of his nurse?

After reading through most of the comments, I loved the one by the person who said after this episode, they were never going to that evil Michigan's Adventure again-- from now on, they would spend their money at Cedar Point. :)

Gemini said:
I do agree, as a general principle, that workers should be empowered to make decisions. That does seem to be a problem at Cedar Fair.

Absolutely. I typed that same "empowerment" line more than once in this thread and then erased it because I was saving it for later.

Turns out I held my hand too long. :)

Carrie M. said:
Gonch you say you don't understand where the animosity toward this family is coming from. I would say, this article was written to elicit pure emotion and there are really only a couple of ways for the average reader to go with it.

You either feel sympathy for the veteran/family and then rage for the park or you feel resentment toward the veteran/family and sympathy for the park. Of course I don't mean that literally as the only options, but my point is that this article was written to get you to "feel" something. Period.

I feel like the family made an uninformed assumption. I feel like the park handled it poorly. I feel the park further dropped the ball with the comp tickets. That's admitting there was the need to smooth somthing over...even if it was just, "Sorry you got pissed" or "Sorry you were wrong" or "Sorry this made the news"

If it's company policy and it's a cold, hard policy, then that's the answer. It doesn't matter if they caved at the time or later...they caved. And the way I see it, the former keeps everyone happy and the situation on the lowdown and the latter lets everyone know you can bully your way into free tickets by claiming some issue or another.

I agree with Jeff and Pagoda in that a call to the park would have been the right thing to do. I would also add that given a single, consistent circumstance was not presented at the time (disabled veteran, injured in the tour of duty) it becomes really muddy for the employees.

Agreed.

rollergator said:
Carrie makes me think. Still undecided as to whether I actually like that or not....but I digress.

:( Um, there's no smiley or winky after that sentence. I really think you should edit that. ;) <-- see, like that.

Gonch said:
And the way I see it, the former keeps everyone happy and the situation on the lowdown and the latter lets everyone know you can bully your way into free tickets by claiming some issue or another.

In hindsight, sure, those are the two outcome scenarios and I choose the first one, too. But that's only because the family went to the press and I know that now.

What happens if the park does the former (the option that keeps things on the lowdown) and the family is so appreciative (or manipulative assuming they have been told by the park this was an exception) that they go to the press to tell the story about how Michigan's Adventure caters to the veteran military and the disabled? It's not lowdown any longer. And the message has been put out there that this is the policy of Michigan's Adventure.

My point is that the park can't predict what the family will do in the press. And making decisions based on those predictions is a dangerous game that could easily be lose/lose.

The park made a decision based on their policy and then they managed the bad press after it happened and that's really the best they can do for this situation, in my opinion.

Carrie M. said:

rollergator said:Carrie makes me think. Still undecided as to whether I actually like that or not....but I digress.

:( Um, there's no smiley or winky after that sentence. I really think you should edit that. ;) <-- see, like that.

Carrie makes my brain hurt....in a good way. I guess. :) Better? ;)

edited - I have to make edits to make paragraph breaks, so mostly I try to keep it brief, go without emoticons, or simply go ahead and use the edit button for paragraphs. Or something. ;)

I'm happy now, thanks! ;) :)

In the comment sections of that article the sister of Heather said the follow, " They did not try to use John's condition or role as a milatiry officer to gain entry into the park."

Well if you didn't do that why the hell would the park let them in for free?

I thank John for his service but his family has made this an ugly incident. Someone above said it correctly, you either feel for the vet or feel for the park. I'm 50/50 should have been let in, sure why the heck not. Did they have to no. Would it have been a nice guester? Yes.

I can also see them expecting the Nurse to pay. She is able to go on rides. But according to the article this was just them meeting up with Heather. The park is not a meeting place. So he shouldn't be let in for free just to meet someone.

If he can't do anything at the park anyway -- which is the family's reasoning for why he should get in free -- then what's the purpose of meeting IN the park rather than outside or somewhere else? If you get even one util of enjoyment from being inside the gate, that's why you're being charged for entry at gated parks. Not all parks have a gate fee, but that's their choice.

I also wonder how the comments following the article might be different if his military service weren't a factor. I imagine many of those people would be saying how the park is a private business and under no obligation to make exceptions for irate customers and Oh My God That's Society Today Everyone Feels Entitled To A Handout™. But because he's a veteran, and a severely disabled one at that, and disabled by a very recent war, suddenly it becomes an emotional issue.

Like Carrie said, it sounds as though they first tried to ask for free entry on the idea that he wouldn't be able to ride anything, a question which the ticket people are probably faced with countless times a day from the likes of grandparents, chaperones, kids who are too scared to ride roller coasters, and "well he just turned 3 yesterday, does that count as 3?" Really, the fact that he's a disabled Iraq veteran is wholly irrelevant to his gaining entry to an amusement park.

Now, the PR issue is separate, but the commenters on the article don't seem to get that, and keep twisting it into a political thing. I'm leaning toward agreeing with Gonch that it would have been better of the GM, from a PR standpoint, to just give him and his nurse a free ticket and get them out of her hair. It wouldn't be that hard to predict the family of a disabled Iraq vet would go to the news media with this, whereas letting him in would have resulted in very few people knowing that an exception was made.

However, I do tire of this "the bitchy wheel gets the grease" attitude American consumers seem to have, and incidents like this -- with the GM eventually caving in, combined with the press coverage -- only serve to reinforce it. Reminds me of the time a friend of mine argued with a CompUSA salesman regarding a $30 instant rebate on scanners: He maintained that an inkjet printer with a scanner cartridge counted as a "scanner" and therefore the rebate should apply, even though the printer came free with the computer he was buying. After several minutes of arguing with the manager and my friend getting increasingly loud, the manager finally said words to the effect of, "Fine, I'll pay you $30 if you'll just leave my store." My friend thought the story was hilarious but also felt he was in the right and wasn't cheating the store out of anything.

Public relations... Let's face it. People are always looking for what they can get for free. It doesn't matter what business you are in, your customers will take whatever they can get.

That being said, I totally agree with the plan ahead statements. If you're not sure, don't make the drive and bring out the nurses and I'm sure wheelchair. People just need to learn to think sometimes.

I can't say I wouldn't have given in and just let the guy in. It's obvious he wasn't going to ride anything, but it has to be done in a matter that is professional on BOTH ends. If the people are there causing a scene in front of other customers, then how good would they have looked? Every customer paying to get in would have been pissed off and perhaps others would throw out their reasons for needing to get in for free too.

How you, the customer, handle a situation greatly affects the outcome. After spending years in customer service I know for a fact that if you handle yourself in a professional, kind manner then more often than not you'll get your way. When you're aggressive, angry, yell or do other things that put the manager on the defensive you will likely loose.

It's important to remember though that you won't win every situation, so you have to accept that fact and just walk away.

The fact that the family went to the press pretty much tells me how they handled the situation at the park - poorly.

Lol. I agree 100%, egieszi. Any time I was in a customer service position, I had the power to either help the person out or not to. If they acted like a dick, I would do the least I could for them and kindly explain that that was the best I could do. If they were respectful, they got everything that I could give them.

I would have to say as bad as this sounds, this may give the park some free PR. I salute the gentleman that did serve in Iraq and the scarifice he has made. On the other hand, how many other hand outs has this family exploited on the marine's condition?

Busch and Holiday World have policies for discounts for Veterans, Fire, EMS, and Police; Holiday World's policy is very clearly stated and when I contacted them about a discount that I could QUAILFY for, they were very prompt in returning my email. I emailed them on Saturday afternoon, in the busy season, had a response back before 10pm that same evening.

A simple email or phone call by the family would have saved everyone this hassel. IMO It's my gut feeling this family is exploiting this Marine's scarifice and condition for their own benefit, and unfortunaly the MI Adventure park is where they staged this event to get media attention.

Cedar Fair used to have a handicapped admission rate but they got rid of it years ago. If they still had it, this person could have gotten the rate which if I recall was around $10 for Dorney in the late 90's (same as the Jr/Sr rate). I wonder if they would have objected to that since it still wasn't free but heavily discounted.

I'm pretty sure that, as somebody mentioned earlier with Dollywood, dropping the handicapped admission discount had to do with ADA compliance.

If they think that he is allowed free admission, then they are admitting he doesn't qualify as a human being. As long as he's breathing he's on this Earth just as one of us, pay up! The age of entitlement must end!

The Muskegon paper has a round up summary of comments on their site, which is someone entertaining... http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2009/06/paralyzed_...offma.html

The comments on the article about the comments are just ridiculous. I'm always amazed by how much hate people have towards people who don't think the same as them on just about every web news forum.

I read a majority of the responces, and I am shocked at the slamming of this poor verteran, and his family. I strongly agree that there should have been some contact with the park before they arrived, but, to totally deny him access without paying full admission is ridiculous, only to issue free passes for another date, because they don't want to look like the cheap corporate jerks that they are...who is the bigger loser?

I will gaurantee, if there was no mention of this in the press. The park would not have double talked the issue after the fact. No free passes would have been issued. Another thing the article does not mention, is wether or not the veteran and his nurse paid to get into the park, or how long they were there...I think a refund of the veteran's admission would have been in order...along with the opology and whatever passes they offered to this young man.

I feel very sorry for any handicapped person who is taken to an amusement park, especially ones who are in such condition, that leaving their wheelchairs is not an option. Veteran or Not. What's the point? What does park management expect this person to be able to enjoy while they are there...besides baking in the sun?

For those who say that person could enjoy the other attractions, Um, what other attractions? Michigan's Adventure is a ride park, there are no other attractions, except people watching, and maybe shaking a cartoon charactors hand, or get a portrait or face painting, all stuff that costs extra. There is nothing for them to do...but sit in their chairs.

And, for those who think he was trying to get a discount just because he is a veteran are morons. He is a handicapped veteran there is a difference!! My brothers are both able bodied vetereans, and, would never ask for a discount, nor would I expect them to get one. But, i would be pissed as hell, if they were in this man's condition, and not allowed in free...or even a decnt discount would be nice.

To put all veterans into one group is a shame. And the handicapped certainly need special attention. So why would a park argue about it? Some areas of Michigan's Adventure do not have handicapped access, especially in the water park, where there are lots of stairs. I think that alone is reason enough for free admission.

Unless wheelchairs have Floaties...think about that. This something that the park certainly needs to consider. I think the family had every right to express their anger. If I was the manger of the park...I would have said, come on in, and enjoy yourself while you are here.

If an anslaught of handicapped happen, bring them on! they'll buy lots of food and souvinirs, and be happy.. Why the heck does this company go way out of its way to piss people off. I don't get it.

I am saddened by your remark. Entitlements for people who can not move their limbs? In this person's case, because he became paralized attempting to fight for a cause that has yet to be validated by an obvious war monger? How is it going to effect you personally in any way, if this person gets free entrance to an amusement park? Or for that matter, his absence of living a normal life...free of the obstacles that you would certainly miss out on if you were in his shoes.

In any case there are obviously no entitlements to begin with in this case. Because obviously there are no park policies reguarding handicapped at the park to begin with, other than a few ramps here and there to accomodate wheelchairs...that's about it. So, what's the problem?

I think the park should not have argued the issue, and allowed him in free. Or at least at a recuced rate.

Funny, I don;t see anyone getting their panties in a bunch over park policies for veterans in the past. Why is their so much backlash against this one family? I don't get it. Give the poor guy a break.

Suddenly I'm wishing for the return of the caret.