Universal fires another shot over Disney's bow

[nytimez]

The real key point and why I posted this is that it is Universal grabbing the headline in Orlando. From the beginning it has always been WDW leading the way with the wanna be's following suit as they've really had no say so. It just appears to me that Universal is the one feeling confident right now and setting the standard (as NYTimez says, based on their own need).

Many of you seem to want to defend Disney on any level. I agree this isn't earth shaking, huge or even indicative of things to come but don't you think it's at least an interesting and relevant development?

I agree. And also, I think it's increasingly less true that people want to work for Disney simply because they want to be part of the magic.

Not saying it's isn't true for some, because I'm sure there are still plenty of workers who do it purely because they love Disney -- but more than ever, many of the people who work there look at is as a real-world job, not some magical daily trip into Pixie Dust Land. And those of you who think they do are delusional.

"But the nice cast member told me how much he loves working for Disney!!!"

Of course he did. Would you expect him to say anything else?

 

[TisBit]

The real key point and why I posted this is that it is Universal grabbing the headline in Orlando. From the beginning it has always been WDW leading the way with the wanna be's following suit as they've really had no say so. It just appears to me that Universal is the one feeling confident right now and setting the standard (as NYTimez says, based on their own need).

Many of you seem to want to defend Disney on any level. I agree this isn't earth shaking, huge or even indicative of things to come but don't you think it's at least an interesting and relevant development?

I have issues with media bias' anyway, regardless of if it is left/right, anti this or pro that. The media will spin the story however they want.

As for anyone that defends Disney on any level, there are just as many people that will line up to bash disney on any level....

I agree. And also, I think it's increasingly less true that people want to work for Disney simply because they want to be part of the magic.

Not saying it's isn't true for some, because I'm sure there are still plenty of workers who do it purely because they love Disney -- but more than ever, many of the people who work there look at is as a real-world job, not some magical daily trip into Pixie Dust Land. And those of you who think they do are delusional.

"But the nice cast member told me how much he loves working for Disney!!!"

Of course he did. Would you expect him to say anything else?

Yep, at the end of the day, a miserable employee is a miserable employee, regardless of what the company name is. If you treat your employees like dirt, while a competitor treats them better....expect to lose your employee at some point!

 

[lovemickeyshouse]

This job would work as a 2nd income aka parttime gig to go with there fulltime job which is the most likely case with the younger Disney CM'S

 

[buzzCMlightyear]

Disney is still paying more.

 

[skier_pete]

In order to really figure out if this is relevant you have to actually compare the wages to begin with. If Disney already paid a similar employee .75 to a dollar more than Universal, Universals .50 raise is still behind Disney, but just closer in the hopes of being competitive.

This is the best point of this thread. Without knowing Disney or Sea World's based pay for seasonal workers, any discussion is meaningless. If universal is now paying more than Disney, that's one story. If universal is raised pay just to match Disney, that's a different story.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

This is the best point of this thread. Without knowing Disney or Sea World's based pay for seasonal workers, any discussion is meaningless. If universal is now paying more than Disney, that's one story. If universal is raised pay just to match Disney, that's a different story.

Agreed. But it's been common knowledge (in the past) that all three companies ALWAYS followed the leader. In other words, Disney would set their price and Uni and SW would follow. So this is my basic premise and what the conversation is predicated upon. buzzcm has indicated that WDW pays more but offered nothing more.

 

[tjkraz]

Agreed. But it's been common knowledge (in the past) that all three companies ALWAYS followed the leader. In other words, Disney would set their price and Uni and SW would follow. So this is my basic premise and what the conversation is predicated upon. buzzcm has indicated that WDW pays more but offered nothing more.

Common knowledge in what circles? I've never read anything definitive on how Disney's compensation stacks up to the others. Is there any reliable resource which compares the three?

Wages are only a small part of the story. I've been working in HR/employee benefits for 20+ years. Payroll deductions for healthcare or minor variances in deductble / out-of-pocket / copay can have a dramatic impact on one's take home pay. Other benefits which vary from one employer to include ancillary health benefits (dental, vision, ortho, FSA, HSA, STD, LTD), retirement contributions (employer matching), stock purchase programs, freebies (in this case, free park passes), and so on.

I do know that Disney has its own medical clinic on site and that they offer affordable housing to CMs.

Once had a woman who worked for me that left for what amounted to a $1 per hour pay raise. Turned out that her health care contributions were about $100 more per paycheck at the new employer, and the work conditions weren't as good as she had anticipated. She started calling me to get re-hired 6 months later.

Many studies have shown that actual wages are pretty far down on the list of priorities for workers. Things like the quality and cost of healthcare, quality of workplace, employee perks/benefits, treatment by superiors, advancement opportunities and other factors tend to be valued by the masses over compensation. I'm sure many Orlando area workers have their own opinions on how Disney and others stack-up in these areas.

 

[SimonCharles]

No... not sure 50 cents extra an hour is worth it, but it is tempting

 

[nytimez]

Common knowledge in what circles? I've never read anything definitive on how Disney's compensation stacks up to the others. Is there any reliable resource which compares the three?

Wages are only a small part of the story. I've been working in HR/employee benefits for 20+ years. Payroll deductions for healthcare or minor variances in deductble / out-of-pocket / copay can have a dramatic impact on one's take home pay. Other benefits which vary from one employer to include ancillary health benefits (dental, vision, ortho, FSA, HSA, STD, LTD), retirement contributions (employer matching), stock purchase programs, freebies (in this case, free park passes), and so on.

I do know that Disney has its own medical clinic on site and that they offer affordable housing to CMs.

Once had a woman who worked for me that left for what amounted to a $1 per hour pay raise. Turned out that her health care contributions were about $100 more per paycheck at the new employer, and the work conditions weren't as good as she had anticipated. She started calling me to get re-hired 6 months later.

Many studies have shown that actual wages are pretty far down on the list of priorities for workers. Things like the quality and cost of healthcare, quality of workplace, employee perks/benefits, treatment by superiors, advancement opportunities and other factors tend to be valued by the masses over compensation. I'm sure many Orlando area workers have their own opinions on how Disney and others stack-up in these areas.

Seasonal workers don't really get many perks or benefits, and certainly not housing. I don't think there are perks to seasonals at all any beyond some free passes and merch discounts.

 

[TisBit]

Seasonal workers don't really get many perks or benefits, and certainly not housing. I don't think there are perks to seasonals at all any beyond some free passes and merch discounts.

Actually this isn't true. The college program at Disney does help with housing, those positions would be considered seasonal. Yes, the passes, dining, merch discounts apply and are probably higher up on the ladder. Number of hours in a pay period also matters quite a bit too. A seasonal job that only has 20-25 hrs a week work vs one that offers a full 40 is a big deal. There are lot of things to compare between two positions....plus the opportunity for advancement (ie getting a full time position is a big deal too).

I have met more than one waiter/waitress that actually did seasonal/part time at both Universal and Disney to make a full work week, hoping for a full time position to open up. They were hopeful the position would be at Disney, but would have jumped to Universal if it was a guaranteed full time. Especially with servers the tips are a big deal. If the tips at Disney are better than Universal that is their bread and butter (this is based on clientel of the restaurants, cost of meals at a restaraunt, etc). You can imagine being a server at Rainforest Cafe will get completely different tips than a waiter at Yachtsman Steak House or another signature restaurant.

 

[nytimez]

Actually this isn't true. The college program at Disney does help with housing, those positions would be considered seasonal. Yes, the passes, dining, merch discounts apply and are probably higher up on the ladder. Number of hours in a pay period also matters quite a bit too. A seasonal job that only has 20-25 hrs a week work vs one that offers a full 40 is a big deal. There are lot of things to compare between two positions....plus the opportunity for advancement (ie getting a full time position is a big deal too).

I have met more than one waiter/waitress that actually did seasonal/part time at both Universal and Disney to make a full work week, hoping for a full time position to open up. They were hopeful the position would be at Disney, but would have jumped to Universal if it was a guaranteed full time. Especially with servers the tips are a big deal. If the tips at Disney are better than Universal that is their bread and butter (this is based on clientel of the restaurants, cost of meals at a restaraunt, etc). You can imagine being a server at Rainforest Cafe will get completely different tips than a waiter at Yachtsman Steak House or another signature restaurant.

College program and seasonal are two different categories at Disney. In fact, CP grads are often "invited" to return as seasonal workers if they're not going back to coursework right away (or even the in the year following their CP work) -- and if they do return/remain as seasonal, they lose that housing perk.

Also, I take issue with your contention that "Many studies have shown that actual wages are pretty far down on the list of priorities for workers."

Show me the many studies. I can believe that some -- even many -- people prioritize things other than wages alone. But pretty far down on the list? Sorry... I just don't buy that... unless you were exaggerating for effect.

And, again, when it comes to seasonal work... it's pretty much wages alone that sets one gig apart from the others.

 

[tjkraz]

Also, I take issue with your contention that "Many studies have shown that actual wages are pretty far down on the list of priorities for workers."

Show me the many studies. I can believe that some -- even many -- people prioritize things other than wages alone. But pretty far down on the list? Sorry... I just don't buy that... unless you were exaggerating for effect.

Go pick up a couple college level Management textbooks.

Cash incentives are generally successful at motivating current employees--particularly performance bonuses. When companies offer bonuses for meeting sales incentives or other achievable goals, employees do tend to respond with increased performance.

Raises, not so much. Psychologically raises are viewed as something that is owed to the worker rather than a reward, and the promise of a $.50 raise for superlative performance often isn't worth the effort to someone who can skate by and still get $.25.

But as for the topic at hand--hiring--compensation tends to run in the middle to lower half of criteria which are important to workers considering multiple positions. Most workers give higher consideration to the name recognition of the company (is it a company I want to be associated with; will they be around in ___ years), chances for advancement, perks, benefits, location, working conditions, and so on.

Most workers will not take a dramatic reduction in compensation in picking one employer over another, but when the compensation is close, very few will live or die by that one aspect. Other aspects play a far greater role in the decision process.

A worker is more likely to take less pay for what they perceive as a better overall situation than they are to accept marginally better pay for a less promising situation.

 

[Killer Fish]

The real key point and why I posted this is that it is Universal grabbing the headline in Orlando. From the beginning it has always been WDW leading the way with the wanna be's following suit as they've really had no say so. It just appears to me that Universal is the one feeling confident right now and setting the standard (as NYTimez says, based on their own need).

Many of you seem to want to defend Disney on any level. I agree this isn't earth shaking, huge or even indicative of things to come but don't you think it's at least an interesting and relevant development?

I would agree it is interesting and it is news...

 

[nytimez]

Go pick up a couple college level Management textbooks.

Cash incentives are generally successful at motivating current employees--particularly performance bonuses. When companies offer bonuses for meeting sales incentives or other achievable goals, employees do tend to respond with increased performance.

Raises, not so much. Psychologically raises are viewed as something that is owed to the worker rather than a reward, and the promise of a $.50 raise for superlative performance often isn't worth the effort to someone who can skate by and still get $.25.

But as for the topic at hand--hiring--compensation tends to run in the middle to lower half of criteria which are important to workers considering multiple positions. Most workers give higher consideration to the name recognition of the company (is it a company I want to be associated with; will they be around in ___ years), chances for advancement, perks, benefits, location, working conditions, and so on.

Most workers will not take a dramatic reduction in compensation in picking one employer over another, but when the compensation is close, very few will live or die by that one aspect. Other aspects play a far greater role in the decision process.

A worker is more likely to take less pay for what they perceive as a better overall situation than they are to accept marginally better pay for a less promising situation.

Defensive much? No interest in reading textbooks -- just would love to see the studies you mentioned, because I'd be real surprised if it turned out that wages are "pretty far down on the list of priorities for workers."

And if that's the case, and if you can back it up with "many studies," I'd happily consider myself educated on the matter.

But again, none of this really applies to the seasonal workers at issue here. They're deciding between some measly amount of money and all the Harry Potter they can stand, or some other measly amount of money and all the Space Mountain they can handle...

 

[tjkraz]

Defensive much? No interest in reading textbooks -- just would love to see the studies you mentioned, because I'd be real surprised if it turned out that wages are "pretty far down on the list of priorities for workers."

And if that's the case, and if you can back it up with "many studies," I'd happily consider myself educated on the matter.

Not defensive at all. As I said, I've been doing this for 20+ years. Went to school for it. Have day-to-day experience with it.

Frankly I view your questioning about the same as a doctor who is asked "are you sure my Appendix is on the right????" With all due respect, I don't feel the least bit compelled to spend time digging up Google links in order to validate myself here.

But again, none of this really applies to the seasonal workers at issue here. They're deciding between some measly amount of money and all the Harry Potter they can stand, or some other measly amount of money and all the Space Mountain they can handle...

Agree there. We don't even know how the two compare. Universal may actually be offering more compensation than Disney.

But unless someone with first-hand knowledge of the situation can assist, it feels like another tempest in a teacup.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

But unless someone with first-hand knowledge of the situation can assist, it feels like another tempest in a teacup.

I've already told you and you don't believe me (why you think I would fib about this is beyond me), so do want me to research it for you? As a local and a Park follower, I see this article every year. Disney announces their seasonal hiring requirements, SW and Uni follow suit. This year the headlines screamed "Universal is planning on blah, blah, blah" meaning they've, for the first time I can remember, are out front with their intentions. This is what caught my eye. Every year it's WDW announcing, WDW announcing ... This year it was different and I thought it interesting.

Probably not too much can be read into this but it does add to Universal's aggressive posture of late contrasting WDW's sitting on their thumbs.

 

[nytimez]

Not defensive at all. As I said, I've been doing this for 20+ years. Went to school for it. Have day-to-day experience with it.

Frankly I view your questioning about the same as a doctor who is asked "are you sure my Appendix is on the right????" With all due respect, I don't feel the least bit compelled to spend time digging up Google links in order to validate myself here.

The difference here is that I know my doctor. His degree is on the wall -- and even then, I ask questions when he tells me something that I'm skeptical of or something I don't fully understand.

But, with all due respect, I can't simply believe someone on the Internet just because s/he says so.

You could be the world's greatest business genius for all I know, and I hope that you are, and I hope that it's made you wealthy no matter how low that is on your list of priorities. But if in the course of a debate with a complete stranger you say there are studies to support your point, you should at least be prepared to back yourself up... or not mention them at all.

 

[tjkraz]

The difference here is that I know my doctor. His degree is on the wall -- and even then, I ask questions when he tells me something that I'm skeptical of or something I don't fully understand.

But, with all due respect, I can't simply believe someone on the Internet just because s/he says so.

You could be the world's greatest business genius for all I know, and I hope that you are, and I hope that it's made you wealthy no matter how low that is on your list of priorities. But if in the course of a debate with a complete stranger you say there are studies to support your point, you should at least be prepared to back yourself up... or not mention them at all.

Sorry, I had temporarily forgotten that we are living in an age where education and experience are meaningless unless backed up by copious Google links.

I did some cursory searches and couldn't find anything worth noting, aside from companies offering to conduct employee surveys for a price. If you choose to believe that a 6% difference in base wages trumps all other factors for those with multiple options available, then we can agree to disagree.

I'll step aside now while you similarly take PP to task for basing his entire argument around his own recollections rather than hard evidence.

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Sorry, I had temporarily forgotten that we are living in an age where education and experience are meaningless unless backed up by copious Google links.

I did some cursory searches and couldn't find anything worth noting, aside from companies offering to conduct employee surveys for a price. If you choose to believe that a 6% difference in base wages trumps all other factors for those with multiple options available, then we can agree to disagree.

I'll step aside now while you similarly take PP to task for basing his entire argument around his own recollections rather than hard evidence.

LOL, I was trying to have a discussion about an article I found interesting. You brought argument into the discussion. But if your so called "expertise" counts for more than my "personal recollections" then I stand rebuffed.

 

[nytimez]

Sorry, I had temporarily forgotten that we are living in an age where education and experience are meaningless unless backed up by copious Google links.

I did some cursory searches and couldn't find anything worth noting, aside from companies offering to conduct employee surveys for a price. If you choose to believe that a 6% difference in base wages trumps all other factors for those with multiple options available, then we can agree to disagree.

I'll step aside now while you similarly take PP to task for basing his entire argument around his own recollections rather than hard evidence.

He said it was his recollection. I don't have to ask him to show me his memory. I believe him.

You made an argument that seemed counter-intuitive to me, and said "many studies" back you up. If that's the case, they should be easy to find -- and I'd love to see them.

You're being awfully defensive here -- but I wasn't trying to pick a fight. I would have been fascinated to see all these studies that show people rank wages way down on their list of work priorities, because it wasn't something I had heard before.

If I made a claim about what many studies have found, I certainly wouldn't take offense if someone asked for references. I'd provide them. That's how you make a solid argument -- and that approach predates Google.

But if you want to take the approach that you can simply declare yourself to be an expert and take offense at anyone who asks you to back it up, there's really not much of discussion to be had here.