Should cast members be paid more?

[Dis4]

WRONG. Not all CMs are unskilled workers. Disney employs many many skill levels from entry-level foods workers to Imagineers with very specialized mechanical and creative skillsets. Please don't lump all CMs into one big pool and assume that "anyone can do it."

Thanks

I'm not including imagineers in my CM category. I'm referring to food workers, ticket checkers, security guards, purse checkers, store people, restaurant servers, gardeners, people who check fastpass times.. lol.

 

[Dis4]

When the wealthy exhibit the same ignorant, selfish behaviors as the lower income class does, it makes me shake my head.

Disney is a publicly traded company owned by shareholders. The management of Disney has a responsibility to the owners to keep profitability as high as possible (this means keeping costs as low as possible while preserving the product). It would be irresponsible to raise wages of the CMs when it is not necessary to keep the company running.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Please don't assume that wealthy people that believe in free markets as the best way to determine wages are heartless or uncaring about the poor. It is my belief that free markets may seem cruel, but they actually produce the best outcomes for people at all income levels. I base that belief both on the economic theory I've been taught and by observations of the results of various systems around the world.

I've seen many very poor countries become much better off when they reduced their government intervention in businesses, like Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Chile. I've watched as India and China have liberalized their markets and drastically improved their standards of living. While it may not be perfect, there is a very strong correlation between economic freedom and improvements in standard of living.

I don't doubt that you believe that people would be better off if we strictly regulated wages. I happen to think that exactly the opposite would happen. It is not that either of us has any less compassion than the other. We just disagree on which approach will produce the best outcome for the most people.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

...When the wealthy exhibit the same ignorant, selfish behaviors as the lower income class does, it makes me shake my head.

People are generally selfish creatures. What you really want is to change human nature.

But, with respect the thread topic, WDW employee wages have nothing to do with greed, per se. They are the result of a job market in a capitalist society. Now, you may not support capitalism, but it still beats any other socioeconomic system developed to date.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I love how so many people go on and on about "unskilled workers"... do you actually realize you're putting your life in the hands of the CM that's pushing that green button?? Not all rides are complicated or dangerous, but people do stupid stuff all the time and they're the ones that have to keep every one else safe.
.

That is interesting.

I'm not sure I believe that it requires special training meriting several dollars more an hour of pay...

But what *I* realize, being trained at something doesn't make it a skills required job which is what I am referring to when I say unskilled.

I was trained to clean properly and safely--but that doesn't mean I needed a special skill to be trained. For me--that is what I mean by unskilled laborer. Most everyone has to learn how to do a specific job. Some jobs require special skills before learning how to do that job.

The toilet scrubber or ticket taker will not be constructing the next theme park attraction.

The fry cook isn't going to be the one trouble shooting why Mt Everest isn't running properly (cousin married to someone who used to have one of the many jobs making sure it did run properly and he was salaried and he had an engineering degree).

Now, let's take it a step further.

When I worked as a daycare provider at my church, I had to take a CPR course to be able to get that job so that in the event of an emergency, I Could hopefully save the life of a child. It takes special training to be able to do CPR, but it doesn't require any special skill that would warrant me being paid several dollars an hour more than I did.

While the person operating the switch that makes an attraction vehicle move, and while they might have had special training to be able to discern when it is safe to make the vehicle move versus when it is hazardous...

I'm not convinced that it requires a special skill set to be able to perform that function that could not be learned on the job.

Throwing out that people's lives are in their hands--elevates the position to much more than it is. Someone who checks seatbelts, makes sure the track is clear and that arms and hands remain in the vehicle--doesn't require any special skill as a requisite for the position that I am aware of. Or does it?

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Please don't assume that wealthy people that believe in free markets as the best way to determine wages are heartless or uncaring about the poor. It is my belief that free markets may seem cruel, but they actually produce the best outcomes for people at all income levels. I base that belief both on the economic theory I've been taught and by observations of the results of various systems around the world.

I've seen many very poor countries become much better off when they reduced their government intervention in businesses, like Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Chile. I've watched as India and China have liberalized their markets and drastically improved their standards of living. While it may not be perfect, there is a very strong correlation between economic freedom and improvements in standard of living.

I don't doubt that you believe that people would be better off if we strictly regulated wages. I happen to think that exactly the opposite would happen. It is not that either of us has any less compassion than the other. We just disagree on which approach will produce the best outcome for the most people.

Well said.

 

[bicker]

I have my suspicions that they could pay more without eating into profit much.

They're not supposed to eat into profit at all. They have an obligation, a fiduciary responsibility, to respect their owners' financial interests. That obligation has so much primacy in our society that if they do routinely and deliberately disrespect it, they can face criminal prosecution.

My big question is why people are willing to work under these conditions.

Because the conditions aren't as bad as those employees and their advocates want the public to think. Those jobs - factoring working conditions, pay, benefits, etc. - are as good as all the other jobs those employees could get.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Disney is a publicly traded company owned by shareholders. The management of Disney has a responsibility to the owners to keep profitability as high as possible (this means keeping costs as low as possible while preserving the product). It would be irresponsible to raise wages of the CMs when it is not necessary to keep the company running.

Disney's management is responsible for maximizing the shareholders return. They might do so by trying to keep wages as low as possible. On the other hand, they might take a strategy of paying above market wages to improve the quality of their staff and reduce turnover. There are publicly traded companies that pay very well and are run by people fulfilling their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholder owners.

In my opinion, it's up to Disney's managers with the approval of the board of directors and shareholders to decide how well Disney will pay. It is up to each employee to decide whether stay or leave. I don't think that it is anyone else's business.

 

[bicker]

However, Years ago I read a book by the guys who started Ben & Jerry's. They way they used to do it, is entry level would make X amount of dollars. The next level up (supervisor) would make no more than...

Ben & Jerry's ended that policy over fifteen years ago.

Support for company policies like that are practically religious in nature, and in context. A Ben & Jerry's investor was once quoted thanking the company for the "privilege" of supporting the company. Such sentiments don't reflect a reasonable semblance of what Americans expect from the companies they invest their hard-earned money in. Folks want their investments to pay them financial returns, not give them warm-fuzzies.

 

[Dis4]

Disney's management is responsible for maximizing the shareholders return. They might do so by trying to keep wages as low as possible. On the other hand, they might take a strategy of paying above market wages to improve the quality of their staff and reduce turnover. There are publicly traded companies that pay very well and are run by people fulfilling their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholder owners.

In my opinion, it's up to Disney's managers with the approval of the board of directors and shareholders to decide how well Disney will pay. It is up to each employee to decide whether stay or leave. I don't think that it is anyone else's business.

What do you think would happen right now to Disney stock if CNBC reported this: "Disney Management voluntarily raises all CM wages by 50%."

Sure some companies pay great (Goldman Sachs jumps to mind right away). The people at Goldman Skills are some of the most highly skilled people in their respective industry so the wages are justified. It is not difficult to train someone to sell mouse ears so that person shouldn't expect much more than minimum wage. Wages are almost always correlated with skills and talent.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Disney's management is responsible for maximizing the shareholders return. They might do so by trying to keep wages as low as possible. On the other hand, they might take a strategy of paying above market wages to improve the quality of their staff and reduce turnover. There are publicly traded companies that pay very well and are run by people fulfilling their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholder owners.

In my opinion, it's up to Disney's managers with the approval of the board of directors and shareholders to decide how well Disney will pay. It is up to each employee to decide whether stay or leave. I don't think that it is anyone else's business.

Agreed - at my place of employment we take several steps to ensure that we offer competitive salaries and benefits, but it is all part of a plan to maximize profits. Depending on the training required to do a job, we do more/less to minimize staff turnover. We also rely on exit interviews to determine policy successes and failures.

A comprehensive employment strategy attempts to minimize the total cost of staffing, but this is sometimes best accomplished by paying staff more to create stability and continuity.

I suspect that the people in WDW who suffer from the worst pay/increase conditions are those in high turnover areas, with minimal training required upon replacement.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

Wow. Count your lucky stars. DW and I have our degrees and 30 years in our jobs and don't make $60k, that is amazing for an entry level job.

A lot depends on your degree. A lot of kids with Pet Eng BS degrees are starting with total compensation packages over $100K these days.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

What do you think would happen right now to Disney stock if CNBC reported this: "Disney Management voluntarily raises all CM wages by 50%."

A press release like that would come with an ROI of some sort. It would very much depend on the context.

 

[Dis4]

A press release like that would come with an ROI of some sort. It would very much depend on the context.

I'm a professional trader and I would can tell you I'd be shorting the bejeezus out of it.

 

[bicker]

These people made a decision to work for a company that has been known for their low pay and long hours. I feel for the employees but I do not feel responsible.

Folks who place getting service for low prices over workers being able to make ends meet better are indeed responsible. As mentioned before, this is a matter of values, and people don't necessarily need to apologize for their values. They don't have to feel guilty - surely - but there is no escaping the fact that if Americans were, as a group, seriously concerned about people working for such low wages, those situations wouldn't exist.

The converse is also true: Since these situations exist, Americans don't generally value service workers getting better wages.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

What do you think would happen right now to Disney stock if CNBC reported this: "Disney Management voluntarily raises all CM wages by 50%."

Obviously, the stock would probably take quite a hit. But what is the point of an extreme hypothetical like that?

I could easily see the stock rising on the news that "Disney has decided that turnover is too high at its theme parks and inexperienced employees are holding back several innovated ideas. To compensate, they have decided to review the salary structure and increase compensation in many areas to reduce turnover and build staff quality."

I'm not saying that they should. I'm just saying that it is entirely plausible for a company to increase pay to improve the bottom line.

The company I work for is very focused on shareholder return (which is OK with me, since I'm a shareholder). We had a terrible spring and summer. Management responded by giving us a one-time bonus opportunity if we met certain challenging targets. They offered us the money not because of some sense of fairness or because they are nice. They were trying to maximize shareholder value by avoiding turnover and motivating us to work through the tough times.

My point is that it is Disney's owners and their representatives that should make the decision on salary levels. They should make the decision that maximizes total shareholder return. That decision could result in good or poor pay depending on a lot of factors, but I think it should be their decision to make.

Incidentally, I think that one reason that Disney will pay poorly for a long time is that they have such a great reputation. People are more inclined to accept a job with them for less money than they would working for someone else. Prospective employees think that they'll enjoy working at Disney more than they would enjoy working at other companies. People also believe that Disney looks good on a resume. Because people want to work at Disney more than they want to work at Disney's competitors, Disney doesn't need to offer as much pay to attract and retain employees.

It reminds me of advice I got from a friend's father. He told me to find market niches that no one likes. If you do the popular jobs, you'll be competing with a lot of other people. If you do the jobs that no one else considers, you'll have less competition and can earn more money.

 

[bicker]

Personally I advocate the idea of capping upper management wages to no more than 10X the amount of the lowest wage offered at the company.

That's a cop-out. Executive salaries aren't why people get paid so little:

Low prices is what causes low pay for workers.​

If you want to attack someone, attack greedy consumers, who ignore all other consideration and ramifications of their miserliness.

If a countrywide law states that CEO's and their entourages could only top out at $150K per year including perks and stock options, and it applied to any business no matter what that business does, I believe we'd start to see some changes in how the bottom level is paid and treated.

No, you'll see a lot of big companies moving their executives to other countries. You'll see the best and brightest leave the United States for greener pastures, just like we currently see the best and brightest move from the public sector to the private sector. They have to do what's best for their family, and if you make it so that leaving the United States, and coming back as a foreign national, is what's best, a great number, perhaps a vast majority, of executives will do that. Remember, many of them are motivated more so by the big money than by what passport they hold.

Did you know that there is a special visa for company executives paid abroad?

So the challenge is really to change the entirety of the world economy, to fit your view. I would support that, but I think it is going to be very hard for you to achieve that. And half-measures will be counter-productive.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

I'm a professional trader and I would can tell you I'd be shorting the bejeezus out of it.

Well, with your extreme example, maybe - but that isn't going to happen.

 

[David80]

Disney's management is responsible for maximizing the shareholders return. They might do so by trying to keep wages as low as possible. On the other hand, they might take a strategy of paying above market wages to improve the quality of their staff and reduce turnover.

Not really. Managements(as in the first level, those who deal directly with the ticket takers, shelf stockers, etc) job is to make the guest happy. Disney bends over backwards in the most crazy ways. Have you ever seen a restaurant manager call engineering to come with a ladder, and take out a light bulb because a guest thinks its to bright? Try that at an Apple Bees, and see how well it goes over.

The first level of management only cares about that(making teh guest happy) and playing the politics to hopefully get promoted.

 

[WDSearcher]

I'm not including imagineers in my CM category. I'm referring to food workers, ticket checkers, security guards, purse checkers, store people, restaurant servers, gardeners, people who check fastpass times.. lol.

Instinctively, I know this. But when you say "Being a CM is not a high skill job, anyone can do it." you're plopping down a very generalist comment that both over-simplifies the issue and doesn't take into account the vast diversity of jobs at Disney.