Disneyland Strike?

[OlliePop27]

I'm reading online about a rejected contract and the threat of a strike. Does anyone know how this might impact park operations over the next few days?

I'm not wanting to delve into the merits of anyone's position, simply trying to understand what is going on and how park ops might be impacted. Please do not respond here with accusations or arguments in favor of a certain position.

 

[Geemo]

I'm reading online about a rejected contract and the threat of a strike. Does anyone know how this might impact park operations over the next few days?

I'm not wanting to delve into the merits of anyone's position, simply trying to understand what is going on and how park ops might be impacted. Please do not respond here with accusations or arguments in favor of a certain position.

Can you include the online article regarding a strike.

I have not heard or seen anything about a strike for Disneyland Anaheim.

 

[Wesley815]

Can you include the online article regarding a strike.

I have not heard or seen anything about a strike for Disneyland Anaheim.

https://www.micechat.com/306249-disneyland-contract-troubles-leave-cast-concerned/

I don't think we have to worry about strike yet, it's always so hard to really know what's going on between Disney and union in closed door meetings. I thought they also had a "no strike" clause in original contract, but could be wrong.

Quote from MiceChat:
"The ballot itself included language intended to scare cast members into voting “Yes” by making them think that a “No” vote would result in a strike. That’s not necessarily what would happen in a situation like this. The union would instead poll its members on what they would accept and attempt to continue negotiations with Disney. Only in the event that those negotiations failed would a strike possibly happen. But Disney would very likely be given the chance to step up to demands before workers take to the picket line. So don’t cancel your vacation just yet. "

 

[StageTek]

I'm reading online about a rejected contract and the threat of a strike. Does anyone know how this might impact park operations over the next few days?

There is no threat of a strike that might impact park operations over the next few days. The unions and management will go back to the table to work out the issues. Negotiations will be put on hold over the Thanksgiving weekend. If no agreement can be made during December the hold will continue over the Christmas/New Year period and resume sometime in January.

 

[OlliePop27]

There is no threat of a strike that might impact park operations over the next few days. The unions and management will go back to the table to work out the issues. Negotiations will be put on hold over the Thanksgiving weekend. If no agreement can be made during December the hold will continue over the Christmas/New Year period and resume sometime in January.

Thank you for clarification, I just found the situation confusing as an outsider! I also read that the contract they were working on had expired, so it no longer applied. Based on your response, it sounds like that's not the case.

 

[StageTek]

In a contract negotiation the employer will honor the previous contract for the duration of the talks - even if the contract has expired. If those talks break down the employer may choose to stop honoring an expired contract. Even when the union votes "no" on an offer the employees will continue working under the old contract while the talks continue.

No one wants to strike - not the company or the employees. It's a last stand if the talks come to a halt. And even then a strike may not happen.

My union recently authorized a strike by an huge margin. That brought the studios back to the table and just a few days ago the new contract was accepted by the members. so even after the unions voted to strike it didn't happen. No one needs to be concerned about their trip to the Disneyland Resort.

 

[Renarr]

Speaking as someone who has done work as a part of union leadership, there are basically two types of votes that we would have with our general membership (for information, my union work is on behalf of schools and systems might be different):

(1) We've received a "best and final offer" from management negotiators. That will almost always get brought to general membership. Whether we endorse that offer depends on how closely it hues to what we've been aiming for, but usually a "best and final offer" is a hardball offer that is pretty far from what we've been seeking. Accordingly, we usually recommend that membership reject the offer.

Once an offer has been rejected, we then have to talk about next steps. In one set of negotiations, our recommended next step was to return to the table with the rejection of their best and final offer in hand, as well as a vote to reconvene general membership in two weeks for a potential strike authorization vote. From that point of view and my experience, the Yes/No vote picture shown in the article is only really unusual in that the word "potential" is absent.

In a separate set of negotiations, after rejecting a best and final offer, we voted to authorize a strike right away unless we had a tentative agreement within the next 72 hours.

(2) We've come to a tentative agreement with management negotiators. We invariably endorse this offer and recommend it; we wouldn't have agreed to it if we thought we could negotiate better and/or if we didn't think it represented a significant amount of progress toward what our members wanted out of the negotiations.

When it comes to these kinds of votes, strong opinions are the best. If a vote is narrow, you do want that narrow vote to be an approval and not a rejection. A narrow rejection, especially of a tentative agreement, is always difficult to negotiate with: not only have you (as a bargaining unit) signaled that you represent your constituency and that they will agree to terms, only to find out that they haven't, but also, you no longer fully represent the full membership, but primarily those who voted no. That significantly weakens your position at the table.

I'll confirm that what StageTek has said hues closely to my experience in this (although some details may vary slightly by union local). There was one group that I worked for where we worked without a contract for two full years. I actually had left that group (for unrelated reasons) when the contract was agreed upon about six months after I left.

 

[ishbit92]

Micechat's Disneyland update article today says the following:

So, could Disneyland be forced to close for a strike? Yes, that’s now a very real possibility. Our advice for those traveling to Disneyland in December and January is to make sure you have trip insurance, just in case it’s needed.
Link to Article

Any additional/different thoughts given this information?

 

[jordan13402]

its not going to come to this

 

[sjmac42]

After the latest “no” vote by cast members to the latest offer, Disney did not increase the offer, they have asked union members to vote again instead. This vote is on Dec 2nd so it’s a case of wait and see.

 

[CharleneTheDM]

Biting my nails. Our trip is 12/5-8! I hope everything works out for everyone involved!

 

[starry_solo]

After the latest “no” vote by cast members to the latest offer, Disney did not increase the offer, they have asked union members to vote again instead. This vote is on Dec 2nd so it’s a case of wait and see.

What?! I don't see union leadership telling/asking their members to re-vote on a contract that they already voted no against?!

 

[Geemo]

What?! I don't see union leadership telling/asking their members to re-vote on a contract that they already voted no against?!

Here is the full article so you can read the details of a possible strike.
Definitely looks like a possibility for DL.

Strike Watch
Disneyland’s unions represented by the Master Services Council (including attractions and custodial) recently rejected Disneyland’s contract proposal which would have given them a modest $3 raise over 3 years. Disney California Adventure employees narrowly approved the contract. As a result, only Disneyland unionized cast will return to the polls on December 3rd to vote on whether or not to authorize a strike.

Disneyland’s SEIU Union explained the situation to its members:
Based on the partial “no” vote on November 17th, the Master Services Council will be holding another vote on December 3rd. This message only applies to members that work at Disneyland park. DCA has a ratified contract but Disneyland Park does not. This means that only Disneyland Cast Members will be voting.

Why are we voting again?
On November 5th, the Master Services Bargaining Committee tentatively agreed to Disney’s modified last, best and final offer. Disney’s offer included the highest general wage increases ever negotiated with Disney, as well as bonuses up to $2,000 for long-term cast members. This offer was conditional on ratification by November 17th. On November 17th, Master Services Cast Members ratified the tentative agreement for DCA but rejected it for Disneyland park. Of USSW Cast Members at Disneyland who voted, 60% did so to reject recommendation by the bargaining committee and instead voted to authorize the bargaining committee to hold a strike. As per our constitution and bylaws, a strike authorization vote requires a 75% threshold in order for it to be sanctioned, which was not met.

Since this offer was contingent upon it being ratified by the 17th, Disney had no obligation to come back to the table to renegotiate a better agreement but has conceded to a second vote, contingent on it being voted and ratified by December 3rd. This offer includes the original offer that was voted on November 17th. Therefore, SEIU USWW’s Disneyland bargaining committee has called for a new vote on December 3rd and it is critical that members understand that the choice that day will be to accept the new contract offer or to go on strike. By allowing this 2nd vote, we want to give members the opportunity to be informed of what a yes or no vote means that day. More information will be forthcoming over the next two weeks up until December 3rd.

The previous NO vote by Disneyland workers was definitive. The drumbeat to strike seems to be the popular opinion among cast on social media. These are extraordinary times and it’s clear that a movement to demand better working conditions and pay via a strike vote has the potential to win big on the next vote.

What’s unclear is what Disneyland would do about a strike. The labor market in Orange County is tight. Disney has had trouble staffing all positions, as have nearly all hotels, restaurants, and shops in the region. So, it wouldn’t be possible for Disneyland to suddenly staff, train, and certify enough new hourly employees to replace striking union workers (especially in positions which have a direct impact on guest health and safety). Nor does Disneyland have enough managers to fill in for all the employees who would likely go out on strike.

So, could Disneyland be forced to close for a strike? Yes, that’s now a very real possibility. Our advice for those traveling to Disneyland in December and January is to make sure you have trip insurance, just in case it’s needed.

We are keeping very close tabs on this potentially volatile situation.

 

[jordan13402]

sounds to me that since they didnt hit that 75% threshold, they cant strike yet

 

[PatMcDuck]

We arrive December 4th (from east coast) so wondering what will happen. Big trip for us, GC is a splurge.

 

[twitch]

My opinion is that *that other website* is generating ad revenue through hyperbole, poor journalism, and misrepresenting what's actually happening.

Here's my summary:

• The union recommended a yes vote on a new contract with raises and bonuses.
• DCA employees voted in favor of the new contract.
• DL employees failed to authorize the contract, but did not meet the threshold for a strike. (They needed 75% "no" for a strike, and 50+% to accept the contract. Their 60% put them in no-man's land)
• DL is being generous by allowing DL employees to revote in order to authorize the new contract. Otherwise, they'd be working without a contract, under the old contract, or continue negotiations, which have stalled.
• The union is recommending a yes vote.
• Alternative demands have not been presented by the cast members.
• I expect that DL employees will accept the contract, knowing that they failed to reach the pretty high 75% threshold for a strike.

I think this is much ado about nothing, and *that other website* should be ashamed of themselves by using the fear of a strike to generate ad revenue for themselves. While all of the above information is included in their article, the tone of the article interprets the details in sensationalistic ways.

 

[ishbit92]

My opinion is that *that other website* is generating ad revenue through hyperbole, poor journalism, and misrepresenting what's actually happening.

Here's my summary:

• The union recommended a yes vote on a new contract with raises and bonuses.
• DCA employees voted in favor of the new contract.
• DL employees failed to authorize the contract, but did not meet the threshold for a strike. (They needed 75% "no" for a strike, and 50+% to accept the contract. Their 60% put them in no-man's land)
• DL is being generous by allowing DL employees to revote in order to authorize the new contract. Otherwise, they'd be working without a contract, under the old contract, or continue negotiations, which have stalled.
• The union is recommending a yes vote.
• Alternative demands have not been presented by the cast members.
• I expect that DL employees will accept the contract, knowing that they failed to reach the pretty high 75% threshold for a strike.

I think this is much ado about nothing, and *that other website* should be ashamed of themselves by using the fear of a strike to generate ad revenue for themselves. While all of the above information is included in their article, the tone of the article interprets the details in sensationalistic ways.

Thank you, I appreciate this take. I tend to believe there is always a more boring rational explanation for most news stories, but I have no knowledge on the contract/strike situation in DL so I couldn't discern how much it was being sensationalized.

 

[jordan13402]

theyre not going to go straight to a strike from a first vote

 

[twitch]

A couple more thoughts:

According to the Union's statement, "This vote will also give the chance to the 50% or so of those who did not vote on November 17th to have an opportunity to have their voice heard in this important matter."

My theory: those in favor of a strike would have turned out in spades on November 17th. If 50% of the DL castmembers didn't bother to vote on November 17th, I doubt there's the momentum for moving toward a strike.

Additionally, the knowledge that the DCA castmembers accepted the contract will likely tip some DL castmembers in favor of accepting the contract.

 

[jordan13402]

A couple more thoughts:

According to the Union's statement, "This vote will also give the chance to the 50% or so of those who did not vote on November 17th to have an opportunity to have their voice heard in this important matter."

My theory: those in favor of a strike would have turned out in spades on November 17th. If 50% of the DL castmembers didn't bother to vote on November 17th, I doubt there's the momentum for moving toward a strike.

Additionally, the knowledge that the DCA castmembers accepted the contract will likely tip some DL castmembers in favor of accepting the contract.

all very important points