California Grill - dress code

[TriSeb°o°]

I once invited my baby sister, and she was wearing boutique jeans with slashes that exposed a bit of her skin. I had to convince the desk CM that it was designed that way and not old jeans that were torn because she was not being allowed to take the elevators up. We got lucky (or I am just that persuasive) as we were allowed to go upstairs.

BTW, anyone else seeing that ADRs for CG not open for any dates in the future? Thanks.

 

[Shelleyfs]

BTW, anyone else seeing that ADRs for CG not open for any dates in the future? Thanks.

I wouldn't worry too much about that. CG seems to be behind all the time in posting their reservation slots, especially brunch.

 

[TriSeb°o°]

I wouldn't worry too much

Thanks! I have been doing this for a long time and have never seen that much of a lag but glad it's just not me.

 

[sleepydog25]

It's fair to say that this issue of dress standards comes up repeatedly, just as it's fair to say the two major (opposing) sides will never agree. . .other than to disagree. To a large degree, it's all a matter of relevance. Personally, when I go to a nice, upscale restaurant, I want to dress up. Others don't. While I don't quite understand why they want to flaunt a dress code--even though I realize Disney gives the ol' wink-wink to it--I don't let it bother me if possible. To those who would find my attitude stale, it's okay; I understand. Alternately, I'd think it fair to say that many of those same people would be bothered if I was invited to a family member's wedding and showed up in shorts and flip-flops. Relativity. It's not important to some to bother dressing up for a signature restaurant outside a park, but it might be very important to them if someone sports a similar attitude at a function they do consider important. Human behavior being what it is, we tend to place a lot more value on things we believe and support than what we perceive others to believe and support. . .unless it aligns with our own views.

 

[nickg420]

I think maybe the word you are looking for is "context"....

Let's use your example of a wedding...If a friend of mine worked somewhere and couldn't get off for the wedding event, but could make it to the ceremony and reception in his work attire, I'd be ok with that. The fact he was there would be far more important than what he was wearing. Much in the same way if someone shows up to CG fresh from the parks in their Disney tee, shorts, and Nikes, hell even flip flops, I'm ok with it too. I understand the context of why they are "under dressed". On the flip side I wouldn't look at someone at CG in a 3 piece suit and their SO in a evening gown and go..."What a bunch of stuck up weirdos..." I'd likely assume they were celebrating something special and move on.

My overall theme in all of this was not so much a hardened disagreement, but more-so a thought of "Why let someone else's minor decision affect your experience?"...Enjoy the people around you, the food and experience you are sharing together... All the other nonsense really does not matter in the grand scheme of things.

Maybe I'm just naive as I approach my 40th birthday, or maybe I'm just really beginning to understand these first 40 years went by in the blink of an eye. In an even seemingly shorter experience I've had almost 16 wonderful years of marriage, my oldest son will be 12 this year my youngest 9. IN the same "blink of an eye" they will be celebrating their successes, hopefully far beyond their mother's and father's. I'm rambling....

My long winded and never ending thought is this....Life is such a short experience...Sometimes you have to focus on the things you care about most and let everything else be as it may, otherwise you're going to miss some wonderful sh*t...And who wants to do that?...That's all I'm saying...

Regardless of what any of you wear, I truly hope your Disney experiences make memories that last you a lifetime

 

[DisneyHardin]

Well Disney Dude, I don't really want to see your feet in flip flops while I'm eating at a "nice" restaurant. I don't care about knees, but I don't want to see full on feet.

How are you even noticing people's footwear? Are you peeking under the tables to see what shoes they have on? When I eat at CG, I am focused on having a nice dinner with husband and can honestly say that I could not tell you what one single other diner in the restaurant has on their feet.

 

[Farro]

How are you even noticing people's footwear? Are you peeking under the tables to see what shoes they have on? When I eat at CG, I am focused on having a nice dinner with husband and can honestly say that I could not tell you what one single other diner in the restaurant has on their feet.

Usually I pretend to drop a fork, then sneak looks at everyone's feet.

 

[Farro]

If it makes you feel better I wear really nice Ralph Lauren flip flops and get a regular pedicure.

Sometimes I even paint my big toe black and put a red Mickey Mouse on it! Why? Because why not? I’m comfortable enough in my skin to rock a painted toe nail... lol

I do feel better.

 

[carol48b]

Awww...What I said wasn't nice? I'm sorry...

I mean are we being serious right now?

Tell me....Honestly...Does your food taste different because someone else is in a t-shirt and shorts? Nope...didn't think so...

I mean why would you be worried about what others are wearing rather than what and who is around the table in front of you? How would you even notice it?

Honestly, I could not even begin to tell you what someone is wearing in any restaurant I am in.

I do super nice restaurants for dinner meetings minimum 3 times a month. I dress up...but if someone showed up to The Sun Dial in a t-shirt & shorts and was let in despite the dress code...Not only would I not notice....If I did, I would not ask them to make him leave. hell I would likely just be jealous. He'd be far more comfortable than I am in my suit and tie...I certainly wouldn't care enough to ignore my wonderful glass of wine, cocktail or the food I am enjoying.

I'm sorry but, I just don't worry about things like that....

Maybe it's because I come from very humble beginnings, but I'm just there because I like the view and the food. Everything else is immaterial to me really...

When your 50th anniversary dinner is ruined by kids running around throwing handfuls of food in the air and staining your "business casual/fancy clothing", the parents (in shorts) are ignoring them - yeah, I don't enjoy my meal. - WDW is for kids, but some restaurants are advertised as being "special". What people wear affects their behavior. Sorry, but I don't think I'll make it another 50 years to enjoy a "special meal" with that someone special.

 

[marikujawa]

We've been to California Grill several times in the last few years, and it surprises us how many people are dressed nicely - even the children. Other than one sweaty group who came to brunch directly from an early morning at MK, we didn't see too many people in park attire. The anti-dress code group is very vocal on these boards, but they don't seem to have much presence at Cali Grill, at least not when we've been there.

I live in a city where many restaurants have dress codes and actually enforce them. Part of the fun at Disney is being able to go to some very nice restaurants without getting all dressed up. That said, if Disney bothers to publish a dress code, even a suggested one, we respect it. If you read them, they're not requiring much. I suppose the food tastes the same regardless of how you are dressed. It would also taste the same if served on paper plates with plastic utensils. But it seems Disney is going for a slightly better ambiance in some (very few) of its restaurants.

 

[ENJDisneyFan]

When your 50th anniversary dinner is ruined by kids running around throwing handfuls of food in the air and staining your "business casual/fancy clothing", the parents (in shorts) are ignoring them - yeah, I don't enjoy my meal. - WDW is for kids, but some restaurants are advertised as being "special". What people wear affects their behavior. Sorry, but I don't think I'll make it another 50 years to enjoy a "special meal" with that someone special.

Surely you aren't suggesting these kids were behaving badly because the parents were wearing shorts? Sorry but that's a stretch.

 

[nickg420]

When your 50th anniversary dinner is ruined by kids running around throwing handfuls of food in the air and staining your "business casual/fancy clothing", the parents (in shorts) are ignoring them - yeah, I don't enjoy my meal. - WDW is for kids, but some restaurants are advertised as being "special". What people wear affects their behavior. Sorry, but I don't think I'll make it another 50 years to enjoy a "special meal" with that someone special.

Carol....Can I call you Carol? If not...My apologies beforehand...

Let me begin first off saying that nobody in this thread at any point has said that they thought it was appropriate for kids to be running around or throwing food at each other.

I would submit that what you witnessed was bad parenting, period. What they were wearing had no bearing on their ability to parent. I mean I like that you pointed out they were "in shorts" to make your case but, I've seen plenty of people in high end clothes who also felt it perfectly fine to let their rugrats run around and even a couple of times witness them destroy items in a store. I've also seen it in people in tees and flip flops.

Unfortunately Carol, bad parenting is all over the place in Disney. Furthermore, bad parenting comes just as much from well dressed, under dressed, white, black, Asian, and pretty much anyone from anywhere. It's hard to watch and it usually affects someone's experience in a negative way. I think we all agree that's not acceptable.

Now Carol, I am terribly sorry that your 50th anniversary dinner was ruined by a bunch of rambunctious kids. You should absolutely be able to expect that kids wouldn't be the little devils that they can sometimes be in a public place at somewhere like CG. I would hope that someone would have tried to put a stop to it or at least moved you away from the nonsense.

With that said, I want to reiterate what I said earlier. What those parents were wearing had no effect on whether those kids were going to be spawns of Satan or not. The only thing that affects that is the discipline they do or do not receive at home.

Congrats on 50 years of marriage! That is quite an accomplishment! You shouldn't have to wait another 50 to celebrate! Let loose and celebrate whenever and whatever you want! Just apparently not wherever...

 

[eeyoreandtink]

Surely you aren't suggesting these kids were behaving badly because the parents were wearing shorts? Sorry but that's a stretch.

I don't think they were, but disregarding the dress code was part of an overall attitude of not having respect for rules or for how your behavior effects others. There is definitely a correlation that has been shown through research between disregard for appropriate dress and other inappropriate behaviors.

 

[eeyoreandtink]

.

With that said, I want to reiterate what I said earlier. What those parents were wearing had no effect on whether those kids were going to be spawns of Satan or not. The only thing that affects that is the discipline they do or do not receive at home.

That's just it. Teaching kids its ok to ignore the rules when it suits you feeds their disregard for appropriate behavior. That's the message you are sending when you decide that the dress code doesn't apply to you and your family.

 

[ENJDisneyFan]

I don't think they were, but disregarding the dress code was part of an overall attitude of not having respect for rules or for how your behavior effects others. There is definitely a correlation that has been shown through research between disregard for appropriate dress and other inappropriate behaviors.

If you read above, I posted the full dress code which does, in fact, allow nice shorts. The poster didn't mention what type of shorts the parents were wearing, so we don't know if they were respecting the rules or not. Regardless, I'm willing to bet those kids would have still been misbehaving even if their parents were in formal wear. Bad kids tend to be bad in any situation, based on the lack of parenting not chosen attire.

 

[nickg420]

That's just it. Teaching kids its ok to ignore the rules when it suits you feeds their disregard for appropriate behavior.

You're really grasping at straws here...

I mean first off the kids would have to know that shorts were against the rules to know they were "breaking the rules" which I am sure they didn't so these parents weren't teaching their kids anything by wearing shorts.

Secondly, READ THE RULES....Shorts are ok. Sure it says "dress shorts", but take it from someone who writes iron clad contracts for a living. That term is so ambiguous it would never ever be used to turn someone away. You know why? Because what you consider dress shorts may not be what someone else considers dress shorts. Furthermore based on the statement about graphic tees...It could also be suggested that Tees shirts are also ok as long as they do no violate those set rules of graphic or offensive themes. Again this is also ambiguous. Who defines what's offensive? Again, I do this for a living...We can do this all day long. There's reason you don't use ambiguous language in a contractual document. You state clear and concise requirements and they have absolutely no way to not be followed or enforced.

Those kids behaved badly because they lack discipline. Period end of story. What the parents are wearing, where they come from, all of that is immaterial.

Kids are kids sometimes....It's up to the parents to make sure they understand right from wrong and these parents were not doing that.

 

[hertamaniac]

I've eaten at a couple of Disney resort signatures (Jiko/FF) and purposely wore cargo shorts. I've spent a career dressed in business casual in the office and no longer feel comfortable in it (yes, I live in central FL and flip flops/t-shirts are the norm). I felt that my $1 is equal in value to the next guest's $1. I didn't wear anything that would generally be deemed offensive, had a golf-shirt and wore sneakers. I personally wouldn't feel comfortable with flip-flops, but that's on me and not what other guests think of me.

I am more target fixated on my dining partner and the meal experience, not what someone wears.

 

[eeyoreandtink]

You're really grasping at straws here...

I mean first off the kids would have to know that shorts were against the rules to know they were "breaking the rules" which I am sure they didn't so these parents weren't teaching their kids anything by wearing shorts.

Secondly, READ THE RULES....Shorts are ok. Sure it says "dress shorts", but take it from someone who writes iron clad contracts for a living. That term is so ambiguous it would never ever be used to turn someone away. You know why? Because what you consider dress shorts may not be what someone else considers dress shorts. Furthermore based on the statement about graphic tees...It could also be suggested that Tees shirts are also ok as long as they do no violate those set rules of graphic or offensive themes. Again this is also ambiguous. Who defines what's offensive? Again, I do this for a living...We can do this all day long. There's reason you don't use ambiguous language in a contractual document. You state clear and concise requirements and they have absolutely no way to not be followed or enforced.

Those kids behaved badly because they lack discipline. Period end of story. What the parents are wearing, where they come from, all of that is immaterial.

Kids are kids sometimes....It's up to the parents to make sure they understand right from wrong and these parents were not doing that.

You are splitting hairs and trying to justify. If we really look at the language of the dress code its clear what the intent is.
Here is the exact language:

Men must wear khakis, slacks or dress shorts and collared shirts. Jeans may be worn if in good condition. Sport coats are optional.

Women must wear Capri pants, skirts, dresses or dress shorts. Jeans may be worn if in good condition.

Not permitted are tank tops, flip-flops, swimsuits, swimsuit cover-ups, hats for gentlemen, cut-offs, torn clothing and t-shirts with offensive language and/or graphics.



It uses the word MUST here. That's a pretty strong word. Men should in a COLLARED SHIRT (no tees), khakis, slacks, or dress shorts or jeans in good condition. That's pretty clear. Anything outside that is choosing to disregard the dress code.


Behaviors are connected, and patterns of behavior shape future behavior. That is accepted as fact in the realm of behavioral psychology. You cannot cherry pick and say that the ones you think are ok don't apply. They do. We all understand what the dress code is trying to get at, regardless of what specific words they use. They want you to dress appropriately for the restaurant.

 

[marikujawa]

You're really grasping at straws here...

I mean first off the kids would have to know that shorts were against the rules to know they were "breaking the rules" which I am sure they didn't so these parents weren't teaching their kids anything by wearing shorts.

Secondly, READ THE RULES....Shorts are ok. Sure it says "dress shorts", but take it from someone who writes iron clad contracts for a living. That term is so ambiguous it would never ever be used to turn someone away. You know why? Because what you consider dress shorts may not be what someone else considers dress shorts. Furthermore based on the statement about graphic tees...It could also be suggested that Tees shirts are also ok as long as they do no violate those set rules of graphic or offensive themes. Again this is also ambiguous. Who defines what's offensive? Again, I do this for a living...We can do this all day long. There's reason you don't use ambiguous language in a contractual document. You state clear and concise requirements and they have absolutely no way to not be followed or enforced.

Those kids behaved badly because they lack discipline. Period end of story. What the parents are wearing, where they come from, all of that is immaterial.

Kids are kids sometimes....It's up to the parents to make sure they understand right from wrong and these parents were not doing that.

Nah, real people are able to figure things out - they do it every day.

 

[nickg420]

You are splitting hairs and trying to justify. If we really look at the language of the dress code its clear what the intent is.
Here is the exact language:

Men must wear khakis, slacks or dress shorts and collared shirts. Jeans may be worn if in good condition. Sport coats are optional.

Women must wear Capri pants, skirts, dresses or dress shorts. Jeans may be worn if in good condition.

Not permitted are tank tops, flip-flops, swimsuits, swimsuit cover-ups, hats for gentlemen, cut-offs, torn clothing and t-shirts with offensive language and/or graphics.



It uses the word MUST here. That's a pretty strong word. Men should in a COLLARED SHIRT (no tees), khakis, slacks, or dress shorts or jeans in good condition. That's pretty clear. Anything outside that is choosing to disregard the dress code.


Behaviors are connected, and patterns of behavior shape future behavior. That is accepted as fact in the realm of behavioral psychology. You cannot cherry pick and say that the ones you think are ok don't apply. They do. We all understand what the dress code is trying to get at, regardless of what specific words they use. They want you to dress appropriately for the restaurant.

So if the rules are "implying" No Tees then why add the language "t-shirts with offensive language and/or graphics"....

There would be no need for that language at all, right? If we are suggesting that ALL Tees were against the rules. The fact they are calling out Tees with offensive language and graphics absolutely means that tees that do not have those items are indeed permissible to wear. Otherwise, there would not be a need to single out a certain group of tees at all. You would simply understand all tees were against the rules. Or better yet I would think they would simply state NO TEES. There would not be any ambiguity to the rules at all.

Again, I do this for a living.