Cast Members Rally

[lauradis]

But companies don't have to share the pie if they don't want to, beyond what they already provide (fair wages, raises based on their standards, bonuses, promotions and benefits). Is it fair or right? I don't know, it depends on who you ask (clearly, haha!)

I read once that Disney does give raises every year, but many positions have a max. Example: A Mousekeeper might max out at $12 an hour, even if he/she has been there 15 years.

I believe this DIS Unplugged podcast talked briefly about it, too (but I might be wrong): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_jXmkcYWII

Lots of company's have maxed limits for pay benefits.

Hotel wise most employees are hourly. Except management they are mostly salary.

Some housekeepers are paid by the room. Dollar amount depends on the class of hotel and location.

 

[eliza61]

Well, since you quoted me as one who "insinuated" employees should accept the offer, you may want to control your leaps too.


Does Disney pay enough? I don't know. Are they in line with other employers in comparable fields? If they're not, why do people decide to work for them?

maybe some don't have all those many options.

Now I don't know about Disney so I'll just give you a brief scenario since I work with many poor folks. Now this is just one snippet, not saying all situations are the same but I will say, this mantra of "just go out and find another job" is garbage.

One of the clients in our churchs program is a 55 year old women named Ms. Audrey, like so many she was caught up in the horrible recession and laid off. Her unemployment benefits were not renewed and sorry but "age-ism" is live and well. so to keep body and soul together she works at mcdonald's. She now she recognizes that it is a low wage job, she's was not expecting to make 90k a year but she does feel after 2 years, not missing time, making her franchise one of the most successful in South jersey, a 10 cent an hour is not far fetched.

so in this case "just" quitting is not an option she relishes. she is still looking and investigating a career change but that takes money. She's kept herself off of public assistance so far... barely.


I am assuming that they feel their compensation is not equitable based on the fact that they are rallying.
they may have some basis for feeling that way.

I know if my company was consistently busting big profits and not giving the folks who assisted with that a raise or bonus, we'd have issues.

protesting may or maynot be the answer but maybe it's just a point of calling attention to a problem

 

[sam_gordon]

eliza,

Let me ask you this... should employers be forced to give raises? If so, how much?

If someone (or group of people) can negotiate a raise, fine.

 

[lauradis]

Is Florida a right to work state?

Unions normally have harder time with contacts power in right to fire states.

 

[Acklander]

eliza,

Let me ask you this... should employers be forced to give raises? If so, how much?

If someone (or group of people) can negotiate a raise, fine.

I'm not Eliza, but I'll give my opinion - if a company makes enough to give the executives million dollar bonuses, while their worker bees make so little, that they need food stamps or public assistance, then yes - the employers should be forced to give a raise.

 

[Luvchefmic]

Is Florida a right to work state?

Unions normally have harder time with contacts power in right to fire states.

Yes it is a Right to Work state and therein lies the problem of all unions in trying to negotiate Also the Disney Co very much sets the standard for what a worker gets paid in the hospitality industry in this area

 

[disney1990]

yes I've asked for a raise, and if I didn't get it I had 3 choices, stay for what they were paying me, find the same job somewhere else that would pay more, improve my skills so I could either get more money there or go somewhere else.

I didn't rally. I took responsibility for my own fate

Perhaps you don't understand. They are taking responsibility for their own fate. They are union workers and cannot just ask for a raise. Rallys are the way that unions work within the system especially if they have a contract coming up.

 

[lauradis]

Yes it is a Right to Work state and therein lies the problem of all unions in trying to negotiate Also the Disney Co very much sets the standard for what a worker gets paid in the hospitality industry in this area

Well that stinks. Right to work states usually have higher poverty rates too.

Hmm guess unions aren't all bad.

 

[Luvchefmic]

Well that stinks. Right to work states usually have higher poverty rates too.

Hmm guess unions aren't all bad.

True about the poverty levels in RTW states Not saying Unions are " bad " just not as powerful as they used to be and not as powerful as their brother/sister local chapters in other areas Most of the Union locals in Florida are part of a National Union but the scales are tipped in this area in particular at which is more powerful the Union or the Employer

 

[eliza61]

eliza,

Let me ask you this... should employers be forced to give raises? If so, how much?

If someone (or group of people) can negotiate a raise, fine.

Hey Sam,
Depends on who's doing the forcing.
An outside source such as any government entity. No not at all.
If the employees themselves are forcing the company to give raises. No problem what so ever.

employee/employeer relationships are symbiotic relationships. they both need each other in order to survive. The both function better if both parties feel their interest are being served.

Usually there is a very direct cost in company's with continual labor unrest and high turnover and a worker with unrealistic demands will equally have issues.

So the question should be are the request unrealistic.

I work for a major fortune 500 corporation. consistently high on "best corporations" to work for and working women good grade list.
Now everyone does not make the same salary, of course our stock personnel make considerably less than a Phd scientist but all of us get raises and what we call variable compensation based on the companies bottom line. usually it's any where between 2-6% of the salary.
That means our company recognizes that when it makes a gabillion dollars in profit, the janitor keeping the lunch room clean contributed to that.
When the company does well EVERYONE from the ceo to the guard in the guard shack (if he's full time) benefits.

That has a very direct effect we believe on our productivity. we know it's reduced turnover and training cost.

Now this is just hypothetical as I don't know what the parks profit margin were last year but if the theme parks made 100 million dollars in ATOI (after tax operating income) I can see park workers taking some credit for that. they made that possible.

So are they looking at the companys bottom line for the past 5 years and seeing increasing profits, increasing dividends to stock holders, while they are getting bubuskas? are they seeing layoffs resulting in longer hours with no raises or compensation?

now as to how much? no answer for that. now my company made some thing like 113% of its profit objectives. In my platform, that translates to a 2.8% raise and depending on your performance review any where between a 4%-7% bonus. the maintenance man, the lab tech, shipping and receiving gal, associate investigator, fellow etc all share in the pot.

maybe that's all they are asking for

 

[gina2000]

If an employer gives a 3% raise to all employees, over time the gap widens between the lowest/midrange earners and the highest earners.

The gap between the rich and the middle class is ever widening as is the gap between the rich and the poor.

I can't blame any worker at this point for wanting more. Lack of health care benefits, lack of pension, and higher living costs have squeezed the middle class and the working poor to the brink.

Do we have modern day robber baron mentality returning to industry?

 

[sam_gordon]

I'm not Eliza, but I'll give my opinion - if a company makes enough to give the executives million dollar bonuses, while their worker bees make so little, that they need food stamps or public assistance, then yes - the employers should be forced to give a raise.

While I agree in theory with what you're saying, I have a problem with a proposal that has an outside influence determining what someone is allowed to make. Sure, it sounds good to say "hey, company 'x', you're not allowed to give out trillion dollar bonuses to your ceo unless you do x, y, and z for your hourly employees." But then what's to prevent someone from saying "hey, company 'x', you're not allowed to pay Acklander more than 'x' amount. We don't care if he's gone 'above and beyond' and saved the company millions, his pay is capped."

So the question should be are the request unrealistic.

I think that's what it comes down to. We know Disney offered the union 3.5% raises. What's the union "demanding"

Again let me point out, I'm not against the rally or workers asking for raises. I just don't think they should automatically get what they ask for just because Disney is "big business".

 

[reebs2]

...if a company makes enough to give the executives million dollar bonuses, while their worker bees make so little, that they need food stamps or public assistance, then yes - the employers should be forced to give a raise.

Last I checked, the United States wasn't a socialist country.

Employers can't be forced to give raises, with the exception of following an increase in the minimum wage. CEOs typically have contracts that spell out their compensation. If the CEO gets paid what their contract spells out then there should be no complaining. Eisner made a boat-load of money but he was paid for doing the job his contract called for.

"But he made too much money!".

Who is to say what "too much money" is? The government? That's a slippery slope comment right there.

Fast food employees are trying to unionize in my area. If that happens, that $1 burger I can get a McDonalds will now be $2. The company isn't going to lose money or reduce their profits - they'll pass the extra cost onto the consumer.

Same goes for Disney - if employee pay goes up you can bet that $99 dollar ticket that people are complaining about will be $125

 

[Acklander]

Last I checked, the United States wasn't a socialist country (even though the current administration is trying to change that).

Employers can't be forced to give raises, with the exception of following an increase in the minimum wage. CEOs typically have contracts that spell out their compensation. If the CEO gets paid what their contract spells out then there should be no complaining. Eisner made a boat-load of money but he was paid for doing the job his contract called for.

"But he made too much money!".

Who is to say what "too much money" is? The government? That's a slippery slope comment right there.

Fast food employees are trying to unionize in my area. If that happens, that $1 burger I can get a McDonalds will now be $2. The company isn't going to lose money or reduce their profits - they'll pass the extra cost onto the consumer.

Same goes for Disney - if employee pay goes up you can bet that $99 dollar ticket that people are complaining about will be $125

If I, as a taxpayer has to contribute to those benefits being given while the CEO takes home record bonuses, then I will say that they should be raising the minimum wage. As far as costs of product - while that contributes in part - also factored in is what people are willing to pay. Prices have gone up CEO pay has gone up, worker wages have remained the same. The gap is widening. One study showed that if walmart paid their employees 12.00 per hour, they would need to raise the prices 1% to cover the costs - so, if I usually pay 150$ at Walmart. I would now need to pay $151.50 in exchange several workers fall off the welfare list. Seems like a fair trade to me.
At Disney, you would not need to raise the ticket price 25% in order to pay a fair wage.

 

[lauradis]

Actually the living wage for one adult in a household is 10.47 hr.

Google it it's rather interesting.

http://livingwage.mit.edu/places/1209553000

 

[sam_gordon]

If someone wants to advocate increasing the minimum wage, go for it. But just because a company is paying at least the current minimum wage doesn't mean they're being "unfair" or somehow "wrong".

 

[hopemax]

This WDW wage thing has been going on for a long time. Way back in 2006, in a discussion about wages I stumbled across a 1989 Orlando Sentinel article about WDW pay.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com..._1_walt-disney-disney-world-disney-characters

The relevant bits are

It also helps Disney's hiring that the company pays slightly more than most other tourism-related businesses in the area for entry-level jobs. Some employers pay the current minimum wage of $3.35 an hour for those jobs.

Earlier this month, Disney raised starting pay for part-time, temporary workers to $5 an hour from $4.65 an hour. Permanent employees start at $5.05 an hour. Wacker said pay for jobs being offered in the April hiring drive ranges from $5 an hour to $7.30 an hour.

Pay varies by experience and job category. An entry-level food worker, for example, would earn $5.05 an hour, while a cook with experience would earn from $6.10 an hour to $7.75 an hour. The highest paid, non-salaried chef earns from $6.90 an hour to $8.55 an hour, Wacker said.

So in 1989, WDW paid $5.05 for permanent, $5 for temp workers. Which at the time was $1.65 or $1.70 more than minimum wage. Or WDW paid about 50% more than minimum wage.

At the time I first found the article, I compared to the situation to 2006. The discussion had come about because there was a Mouseplanet article ( http://www.mouseplanet.com/8047/Walt_Disney_World_Park_Update ) that Universal Orlando had just raised its starting wage to $7.25 while Disney's was $6.90. I had also looked up that Florida's minimum wage at that time was $6.40 or Disney had dropped to paying only a bit under 8% above minimum wage.

In 2014, Florida minimum wage is $7.93. I did see in one article that characters are paid at $8.20, which is down to just 3.5% above minimum wage.

And that $5.05 1989 wage translates to $9.53 in today's dollars. So current WDW CMs are making 16% LESS than their 1989 counterparts.

It's also worth pointing out that your typical Disney CM has also changed. In the 80's and 90's there were many full time positions, many, many part time positions and the College and International Programs were small. These days, the CP and IP people make up a substantial part of WDW's workforce. The problem with this is that there is no development of institutional knowledge among the staff. Every 6, 9 or 12 months a new batch of people come who are starting from scratch. And even it's part time staff has high turnover. Remember in the mid-90s how CM's used to wear name badges that had their start year on them? And over the last 20 years, Disney has decimated its training program too, which would be another discussion. Everyone can pretty much handle the basic transaction, or hand out a sticker to create a magic moment, but the moment anything gets even a hair out of the ordinary, that's when the problems start escalating, and the time spent on unraveling mistakes grows.

In January, I visited Disney with a WDW CM. Which means that they are eligible for an employee discount. Over the course of 2 weeks, they went to make purchases at probably a dozen or so different locations. Do you want to guess how many of those 12-15 encounters the CM properly applied the employee discount without assistance or without multiple tries? ONE, the young International Program lady working in Japan. I'm pretty confident in the real world that I could go to Macy's or Home Depot or wherever, and the cashier would know exactly how to ring up an employee discount. In their defense, Disney's procedures are really messed up in this regard. They provide a card that has a magnetic strip that doesn't swipe, a barcode that doesn't scan, several different numbers written on the card and the important one is the smallest number on the card. Sometimes working in poor lighting conditions. It's just one example on how Disney "positions its CM's to fail." They made it completely not intuitive, and never bothered to really train people on it. But despite that, an employee discount is a basic task. And if Disney fails so badly at this pretty common retail world task, what else are they failing at?

Turnover, training, productivity, I really believe that Disney is hurting badly in these areas, that is ultimately damaging to their bottom line. It's a hard case to make when they are still pulling in billions. But imagine if they could be making even more billions? And the worst thing is I don't think the executives are even aware of how poorly the operational conditions are. And that's going to cost ever so much more to fix in the long run.

Anyway, I thought I'd through out some real Disney and Florida minimum wage numbers into the discussion, from over the years.

 

[Gumbo4x4]

Too bad they didn't rally to get rid of Fastpass+.

 

[Acklander]

If someone wants to advocate increasing the minimum wage, go for it. But just because a company is paying at least the current minimum wage doesn't mean they're being "unfair" or somehow "wrong".

I'm not saying they are unfair or wrong. I'm saying good for them for trying to negotiate a higher wage.

 

[sam_gordon]

I'm not saying they are unfair or wrong. I'm saying good for them for trying to negotiate a higher wage.

Others have.