Big annoucement for WDW management today.

LuLaSue

Well-Known Member
It's not illegal per se. Often times the people closest to retirement age are making more money than someone who isn't close to retirement, so instead of firing them they ask them to retire early. When companies have mass layoffs, it is much harder to prove age discrimination. But it certainly isn't illegal...employees who are asked to take early retirement are most likely covered by a company's retirement plan, since they might not meet Federal standards.

Ahhh...Thank you for saying what I could not.:wave:
 

Pioneer Hall

Well-Known Member
It's not illegal per se. Often times the people closest to retirement age are making more money than someone who isn't close to retirement, so instead of firing them they ask them to retire early. When companies have mass layoffs, it is much harder to prove age discrimination. But it certainly isn't illegal...employees who are asked to take early retirement are most likely covered by a company's retirement plan, since they might not meet Federal standards.

I think that they already tried that with the voluntary packages. I would think that most of the people closer to retirement age were offered the packages. If they chose not to take them, then what more can Disney really do for them. They clearly said that if people didn't take the packages, then they would possibly be forced to do true layoffs where the offers weren't nearly as good.
 

Ausdaddy

Active Member
hopefully our friend in entertainment management at MK will be spared he is Awesome at what he does. and he is an awesome caring person, who has always brought a lot of magic to others. (I wont say his name as not to embarress him.

Let us know what happens. I'm hoping that they lack of information, means all is well.
 

Iakona

Member
My company has been going thru this every quarter for about 2 years now. Tommorrow is the next notification day for my group. Not fun.
And yes, it is illegal to target those at retirment age for a forced layoff. The force comes into play after the buyout is offered. Then the company evaluates how many took it and the next phase is to be forced out.
 

jt04

Well-Known Member
My company has been going thru this every quarter for about 2 years now. Tommorrow is the next notification day for my group. Not fun.
And yes, it is illegal to target those at retirment age for a forced layoff. The force comes into play after the buyout is offered. Then the company evaluates how many took it and the next phase is to be forced out.

That is why any layoffs will be spread across all demographics including all ages. To do otherwise is illegal and would invite lawsuits. The simple solution is to layoff the most non-productive employees. And that is as it should be if cutting back is absolutely required.
 

SoccerMickey

Active Member
I vaguely remember the buyout Disneyland Resort offered managers shortly after 9/11 and if I am not mistaken if individuals opted not to take the buyout then the majority of them got their walking papers shortly thereafter.
Nobody wants to involuntary lose their job but if I was offered a buyout I with Disney I think I would have taken it otherwise be out on the street with nothing.
That being said, I work part time in Adventureland/Liberty Square attractions and from what I see it begs the question what do all the managers they have there do? A whole other department handles scheduling, coordinators are mostly out in the area handling operations, and very rarely do you see a manager available to provide feedback. Hard times or not it is long over due for WDW to look at the positions they have and time to start trimming the fat.
 

teebin

Member
Original Poster
That being said, I work part time in Adventureland/Liberty Square attractions and from what I see it begs the question what do all the managers they have there do?

I used the term management loosely. There are many many jobs within WDW that are not management at all. This layoff was not just for "management" but other high paying jobs within the WDW property.

My neighbor is not a manager per se. I will cautiously say that he is a specialist. I would have never assumed/guessed WDW had such a department but in hinesight it completely makes sense and is a very very important department. His dept would totally bore most on here, but it has probably saved the WDC's many times and caused them grave headaches at other moments.

That said, I doubt the company will layoff many "show" managers. They are going for the $150K - $350K jobs.
 

Pioneer Hall

Well-Known Member
Expect much more of the "Disney Parks" brand.:(

That was exactly what I was going to say...

The idea of combining infrastructure positions does make complete sense though. The parks are supposed to work together, not as competitors. I just wish they didn't neutralize everything when they were doing that.
 

HMF

Well-Known Member
That was exactly what I was going to say...

The idea of combining infrastructure positions does make complete sense though. The parks are supposed to work together, not as competitors. I just wish they didn't neutralize everything when they were doing that.
They are'nt really competitors. Considering ones in Florida and one is in California. WDW has 4 parks a large international crowd. DLR has 2 parks and several local Annual Passholders. They are two completley different properties and should be run accordingly.
 

TURKEY

New Member
In addition to steering "operating infrastructure" at the Orlando and Anaheim, Calif., parks through Weiss, Disney said that its Walt Disney Imagineering unit would be reorganized into a single practice reporting to Bruce Vaughn, executive vice president and chief creative executive, and Craig Russell, executive vice president and chief design and project delivery executive.

The company also said it would establish a new "Global Business Development team" headed by Executive Vice President Nick Franklin, which will be charged with combining existing business and real-estate development functions. The unit be will responsible for focusing growth strategies at existing parks-and-resorts businesses and identifying new opportunities around the globe. Vaughn, Russell and Franklin are all based in California.

Disney said other departments will make "appropriate changes" in the coming weeks.

As an example of what it hopes to achieve through the streamlining, Disney pointed to the simultaneous development of Toy Story Mania! attractions at both Disney's Hollywood Studios in Orlando and Disney's California Adventure in Anaheim, which helped hold down design costs.

The corporate overhaul means fewer employees will now report directly to Meg Crofton, president of Walt Disney World, and Ed Grier, president of Disneyland. But the two executives will continue to oversee the functions at their respective parks that deal directly with customers, employees and the local communities.



http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/orl-bk-disney-reorg-021909,0,1094627.story
 

Enigma

Account Suspended
The simple solution is to layoff the most non-productive employees. And that is as it should be if cutting back is absolutely required.

Good. Lets start with Phil Holmes. The guy who burned the flagship park to the ground with his moronic "management" style.

I hope hes ready to start his new career serving customers at red lobster.
 

ChrisFL

Premium Member
That was exactly what I was going to say...

The idea of combining infrastructure positions does make complete sense though. The parks are supposed to work together, not as competitors. I just wish they didn't neutralize everything when they were doing that.

You'd be surprised at how much different even the WDW parks operate in the same types of roles, I was really surprised as contractor there how they don't share information well across the different parks on effeciency, etc.
 

HMF

Well-Known Member
In addition to steering "operating infrastructure" at the Orlando and Anaheim, Calif., parks through Weiss, Disney said that its Walt Disney Imagineering unit would be reorganized into a single practice reporting to Bruce Vaughn, executive vice president and chief creative executive, and Craig Russell, executive vice president and chief design and project delivery executive.

The company also said it would establish a new "Global Business Development team" headed by Executive Vice President Nick Franklin, which will be charged with combining existing business and real-estate development functions. The unit be will responsible for focusing growth strategies at existing parks-and-resorts businesses and identifying new opportunities around the globe. Vaughn, Russell and Franklin are all based in California.

Disney said other departments will make "appropriate changes" in the coming weeks.

As an example of what it hopes to achieve through the streamlining, Disney pointed to the simultaneous development of Toy Story Mania! attractions at both Disney's Hollywood Studios in Orlando and Disney's California Adventure in Anaheim, which helped hold down design costs.

The corporate overhaul means fewer employees will now report directly to Meg Crofton, president of Walt Disney World, and Ed Grier, president of Disneyland. But the two executives will continue to oversee the functions at their respective parks that deal directly with customers, employees and the local communities.



http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/orl-bk-disney-reorg-021909,0,1094627.story
So WDI has given up on it's Imagineering overseers system after only two years. At least that limits more of Fitzgerald's power and of course the executive shake up should lessen the role of the basicly non-existant Ed Grier. Now where do Holmes and Macphee fit into this.
 

Duckberg

Active Member
Latest RIF @ WDW???

Have been reading generalized
WD RIF blurb on Orlando tv web
sites tonight. Sounds like a whole
lot MORE than the original 300 WDW
buyout numbers :veryconfu

Any current CM's view this as coming
LARGE scale layoffs at aLL levels hourly/
salaried CM's throughout the parks???

Duckberg :lookaroun
 

Phonedave

Well-Known Member
My company has been going thru this every quarter for about 2 years now. Tommorrow is the next notification day for my group. Not fun.
And yes, it is illegal to target those at retirment age for a forced layoff. The force comes into play after the buyout is offered. Then the company evaluates how many took it and the next phase is to be forced out.

I live the same life you do. We have a "force adjustment exercize" ever quarter or so.

Somtimes I am in the target group, somtimes I am the one picking the targets. Does wonders for morale.

But, as you said, we can lay off for performance or job function. Not for age, income, or anything such as that.

We can say the person is the low performer, or we can say the person's job function is being eliminated or reduced. We have to put together a business case with lots of documentation for every person that gets let go. It makes a emotionaly difficult process all that harder because of the legal requirements.

I am not familar with Florida law, but in some states, if you take a package, then you have left your job. If you get laid off, then you can collect unemployment. In my company, the incentive packages are very often the same as the seperation packages.

-dave
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom