Reasons for no gratuity in 2008 DDP???

[Dizserver]

It seems that guests are asking servers at some of the resturants about the gratuity issue in 2008. [As most on here know, gratuity has been dropped from the 2008 DDP and is now all out of pocket. The price of the plan only dropped by $1.00 for adults (average gratuity for a DDP meal was $4-$8 per adult), and the appetizer at table service meals was lost as well (another loss of $3-$8.)]

This week, guests trying to book the so-called "bounceback" free dining promotion for September 2008 have inquired as to why the gratuity was dropped for next year. Guests have reported (to their servers) being told by Disney representatives that "gratuity is not included next year because the servers voted it down in their contract renewals". In other words, it is implied that disney servers did not want the included gratuity and guests will now pay an OOP tip because of their server. The guests have asked if this is really true and why the servers would do this. The guests realized this made little sense.

Has anyone else been told this?

For the record, disney servers are for the most part outraged about the change. It hurts both them and the guest. (The guest pays more OOP, and servers fear their tips/income will suffer from some guests - not all but some). The only "person" benefiting here is the Disney shareholder. Instead of server tips being paid by Disney, now the guest pays extra to tip the server.

More disturbing is that guests are apparently being told that "your server is the reason your gratuity is not included". In contract negotiations, Disney 100% refused to budge on the removal of gratuity. They were firm on making this change. The servers were given no choice. Period. Yes, the new contract was approved. Did the servers have a choice or want this? No. (Well, short of striking, they had no choice).

Again, any reports in the coming days of what Disney representatives are telling guests about the removal of gratuity is appreciated. One would hope that telephone representatives blaming the change on the servers is an isolated incident and not a company line. (And yes, cast members can say some pretty random things sometimes that are far from the official Disney stance). Is this an isolated few incidents or a pattern?

 

[Flametamr]

I for one don't agree with this new policy. Even though I booked the new bounceback offer last week I think it stinks. I can't add in my head and refuse to carry a calculator. So guess who will loose next year. The server on most occasions. I think Disney played an underhanded card with this one and the server will loose big. They never should have voted for this contract. And if it's true that very few even took the trouble to vote then double shame on them. I'll try to be fair and tip based on real service given. But be warned I will not tip big just because you bring me a drink anymore at a buffet.

 

[Uncleromulus]

Remember that the servers made up only a portion of the Disney CM's who voted on this contract. It wasn't a "servers only" thing.

 

[Mackey Mouse]

Hopefully this will remain a healthy constructive discussion, but in the past these types of discussion turn into heated debates. Please know that the moderators of this board take these kinds of threads very seriously so please let's keep it on an even keel..

Thanks.

 

[bicker]

The reality is that the union and the company came to an agreement, which did away with the gratuity included in the Dining Plan. Both sides are equally responsible for that. Neither side should be blaming the other, nor should either side disclaim their own responsibility since both were party to the agreement.

The question of "why", when asked by a customer, is, I believe, a question that should never be answered. That information is strictly proprietary, and anyone who actually knows the information would be in violation of generally accepted rules of business ethics to reveal it. (That's why we can rest assured that anyone actually answering the question almost surely doesn't really know the answer, but just expressing their own personal opinion about it.) The responsibility of a company or a worker to a customer is to explain what is offered, not to explain why the offering is the way it is.

 

[smartestnumber5]

When I booked the bounceback offer a few days ago I didn't ask for any info about the changes. She said, "The 2008 DDP will not include appetizer or gratuity. But since they are raising the prices at the restaurants you'll still get that big savings anyway."

 

[gina2000]

It's very true that both sides came to an agreement but if it is true that the servers make up a very small segment of the union (which was suggested previously), their wants and needs may have been overruled in favor of a larger issue that affects a greater population of the union. This issue may also have had no bearing on their personal situations but may have been in the interest of the majority of the union. Not all factions are equally represented in union negotiations.

Also, when a significant change that affects a consumer's buying power occurs, they most certainly have the right to ask why. It may not be answered adequately but it certainly should be asked. If people are unhappy, however, the most significant action they can perform is to not buy the product. A business must only answer shareholders on any issue that affects a significant change in their bottom line.

 

[anabelle]

Pricing is determined in part by demand. Disney saw a huge demand and in many cases were unable to keep up without affecting quality. They downgraded quality because in all likelihood , they were actually losing money. In my opinion, Disney is actually seeking to reduce the demand with more in keeping with the amount of restaurants that can service it and still make a profit.

I think that the general consensus on the DIS is that the dining plan in 2008 does not hold the same value it once did. That being said, it doesn't make sense for the majority of us. We tend to visit more often and understand the in's and out's of the Disney system so a lot of us will do without a dining plan or use DDE. But remaining general public will still call up Disney Travel and say "Book a Disney vacation for me" and they will get sold the DDP not fully understanding it. I think Disney will still make out with the changes

 

[JLKennedy]

I for one don't agree with this new policy. Even though I booked the new bounceback offer last week I think it stinks. I can't add in my head and refuse to carry a calculator. So guess who will loose next year. The server on most occasions. I think Disney played an underhanded card with this one and the server will loose big. They never should have voted for this contract. And if it's true that very few even took the trouble to vote then double shame on them. I'll try to be fair and tip based on real service given. But be warned I will not tip big just because you bring me a drink anymore at a buffet.

Quick tip:

Move the decimal point one spot to the left (10%), add together (20%)....it's really not that difficult. I think people will tip less because they're cheap...not because it's inconvenient for them to figure gratuity.

 

[anabelle]

Quick tip:

Move the decimal point one spot to the left (10%), add together (20%)....it's really not that difficult. I think people will tip less because they're cheap...not because it's inconvenient for them to figure gratuity.

Ouch!

 

[bicker]

She said, "The 2008 DDP will not include appetizer or gratuity. But since they are raising the prices at the restaurants you'll still get that big savings anyway."

Good point.

 

[bicker]

It's very true that both sides came to an agreement but if it is true that the servers make up a very small segment of the union (which was suggested previously), their wants and needs may have been overruled in favor of a larger issue that affects a greater population of the union.

That's part of being part of a union. People need to take personal accountability for the decisions they make, including taking union jobs.

Also, when a significant change that affects a consumer's buying power occurs, they most certainly have the right to ask why.

There is absolutely no foundation whatsoever for any expectation for receiving a reply to an inquiry about why a company structures or prices its offerings a certain way. I believe you're simply incorrect in that matter.

If people are unhappy, however, the most significant action they can perform is to not buy the product.

Absolutely.

 

[WDWBetsy]

I'm planning on booking the bounceback offer when I'm at CSR starting Sept. 16. Would I rather have the tip included and still have the appetizer? Sure.

But I'm not going to pass up this offer since you still get plenty of food and hey - it's basically $800 off my budget if I book a moderate. We'll enjoy some fun character meals and relaxing table service meals instead of all counter service. Typically we've paid for the dining plan in the past and used a AAA discount, so the bounceback promo is much better.

We'll probably still pay OOP for breakfast in the food court, but I've already included that in my budget.

I usually tip 20% (unless the service is really bad), so IMO it's not that hard to take the total x 2 to figure out the tip. I also tip those who clear my table/bring drinks at a buffet. If I can afford my trip, I'll budget enough for the extras like tips.

 

[n2mm]

I'm planning on booking the bounceback offer when I'm at CSR starting Sept. 16. Would I rather have the tip included and still have the appetizer? Sure.

But I'm not going to pass up this offer since you still get plenty of food and hey - it's basically $800 off my budget if I book a moderate. We'll enjoy some fun character meals and relaxing table service meals instead of all counter service. Typically we've paid for the dining plan in the past and used a AAA discount, so the bounceback promo is much better.

We'll probably still pay OOP for breakfast in the food court, but I've already included that in my budget.

I usually tip 20% (unless the service is really bad), so IMO it's not that hard to take the total x 2 to figure out the tip. I also tip those who clear my table/bring drinks at a buffet. If I can afford my trip, I'll budget enough for the extras like tips.

I agree, getting the dining free is completely worth it, even paying the tips. However paying for the DDP and paying the tip = no 2008 DDP for us.

 

[Liz]

I agree, getting the dining free is completely worth it, even paying the tips. However paying for the DDP and paying the tip = no 2008 DDP for us.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[stitchlover]

I was told by the CRO rep I talked to that the servers did not want tip included anymore and that is why this change was made. Would I rather have the tip? Sure. Am I going to book dining in '08? Yep, already have. I will take enough Disney Dollars with me to cover 20% on the bill. If the server deserves 20% that's what I will give. If not then I will the appropriate amount. I kind of like being able to control the amount. There are some buffets that the server barely keeps your drink full, they didn't deserve the 18% they were receiving. I will go to every meal with the intention of tipping 20%, it is now up to the server to earn that 20%.

 

[disneydaveb]

I'll try to be fair and tip based on real service given. But be warned I will not tip big just because you bring me a drink anymore at a buffet.

I agree. I may leave more than 18% for great service at TS restaurants, but I wont be leaving 18% for a buffet. I think the buffet servers will be the ones who lose out on this deal.

 

[JimMIA]

Remember that the servers made up only a portion of the Disney CM's who voted on this contract. It wasn't a "servers only" thing.

Others can try to gloss over Disney making this change all they want, but Uncleromulus has it right. The servers are vastly outnumbered in the union, and this was jammed down their throats, as we all heard at the time. One of the things you learn in your labor relations courses in MBA school is how to structure your unions so that no single group of employees has much power, and Disney has done that very well.

The real reason the change was made was that it puts about $9-10 extra in Disney's bottom line for each Adult TS. It ain't rocket science folks!

The servers really have only a few choices.

They could (and probably should) petition the NLRB to form a separate bargaining unit, because their current bargaining unit is not representing their interests well. That's a long and costly process, but it could be done.

They could "suck it up" and move on, figuring that even with the changes they are better off than in a non-Disney job. I know many Disney employees refer to the Mouse as "The Rat," but there are worse places to work.

Or they could quit.

I think most of us here have a soft spot in our hearts for Disney CMs whereever they might work. But very few will change anything we're doing because of some perceived unfairness suffered by a particular group of CMs. We'll feel bad for you, but it won't change our behavior.

The fact that Disney has greatly reduced the value of DDP WILL affect many visitors' choices. But even with the changes, many others will still find DDP to be worthwhile (not anywhere as good as it once was, but still worth doing).

 

[Lewisc]

The cost of the included tip was a cash cost to Disney. I wouldn't be surprised if the cost of the included tip was as much as the actual cost of the food ingredients.

Dropping the included tip (significantly reduces Disney's cash costs) and dropping the appetizers (reduces sharing and time spent in the restaurant) makes the plan more profitable and better allows Disney to continue offering free dining.

I don't think the servers would have liked it but a compromise position would be to base the tip on the TS value of the plan (around $26). The DDP offers guests a price fixed meal and many of us base our tip on the cost of the price fixed meal and not on the a la carte cost of the food ordered.

 

[ElizabethB]

Amen to everything you said, JimMIA. This simply created a 20% increase in Disney's bottom line at the direct expense of the workers, without Disney having to raise the DDP price and perhaps suppress customer demand for it. Typical managerial tactic, but disgusting nonetheless.

And, by the way, Bicker -- there is no "generally accepted business ethics" regarding keeping what happened at the bargaining table confidential. If there is an agreed upon confidentiality arrangement, then, yes, the parties must abide by that. In the absence of a confidentiality agreement, discussing openly what went on at the bargaining table is perfectly fair and reasonable. And, Disney is already doing that by saying the workers wanted it. So, I can only presume that no confidentiality agreement applies.

I hope the CM's working in restaurants make it very clear that they lacked the union power to oppose what Disney forced on them. And, it is particularly egregious for Disney to try to "spin" this by saying the food service CM's wanted it.

And, I have no particular dog in this fight -- I'm not a CM and I don't know anyone who is.

I just appreciate calling a spade a spade. And, JimMIA has done that. Kudos.