Bloomberg - No Disney Fun for Orlando Workers as Poverty Nears 20%

[WDW1974]

@WDW1974 I should have stipulated that I wasn't questioning why you used the number. My comment was more a rhetorical observation given that is a number that is thrown out by many supporting an increase in the minimum.

No worries. ... I just use that as I said because I know I could live in Central Florida on $15 an hour if I had to. I know that if I had to live on $8-10 an hour in Central Florida that I'd be dead or in serious trouble very quickly. And since I am a savvy shopper and can live life without Siri, I think it's safe to say I am easier to satisfy than many.

 

[KevinYee]

In 1987, I started at Disneyland at $4.50 an hour. This was far in advance of the $3.15 minimum wage of the day, so I was happy.

In 1987, Disneyland paid more than more places, so it could afford to be discriminating.

Using Westegg's inflation calculator, this is $9.09/hour in 2013. So WDW now paying $10 an hour is actually a bit generous.

Just one data point among many for the discussion!

 

[KevinYee]

I should add: this $4.50 was my STARTING wage. Within a few years I was earning the rate for Working Lead, $8.75 by 1989. This is $16 in 2013 dollars.

 

[jt04]

I should add: this $4.50 was my STARTING wage. Within a few years I was earning the rate for Working Lead, $8.75 by 1989. This is $16 in 2013 dollars.

That was back when merit was rewarded. We be nice to go back to that.

 

[Nubs70]

WDW practices Theory X management and paying poverty wages perpetuates this management style. If WDW payed more they would be able to be more selective in hiring thus allowing to manage by Theory Y which will make managing easier and provide a superior experience for guests.

 

[Hakunamatata]

In 1987, I started at Disneyland at $4.50 an hour. This was far in advance of the $3.15 minimum wage of the day, so I was happy.

In 1987, Disneyland paid more than more places, so it could afford to be discriminating.

Using Westegg's inflation calculator, this is $9.09/hour in 2013. So WDW now paying $10 an hour is actually a bit generous.

Just one data point among many for the discussion!

Please don't bring logic to a minimum wage discussion......

 

[raven]

In 1987, I started at Disneyland at $4.50 an hour. This was far in advance of the $3.15 minimum wage of the day, so I was happy.

In 1987, Disneyland paid more than more places, so it could afford to be discriminating.

Using Westegg's inflation calculator, this is $9.09/hour in 2013. So WDW now paying $10 an hour is actually a bit generous.

Just one data point among many for the discussion!

The point of the article is that the cost of living in the Orlando area is so high that even $10/hour isn't enough to get these employees out of the poverty level. Most CM's I know can not affot to live on their own and live in households with additional income or they have to get a 2nd job.

 

[raven]

Disney does have higher paying roles (besides leadership) but a lot of those roles are only part time.

 

[KevinYee]

To add data to the discussion, when I was making $4.50 an hour at Disneyland in 1987, I was living at home. I wasn't supporting myself.

Living on my own didn't happen until a few years later, when not only had the Disney wage increased (I think $11.75/hour), but I also had a teaching assistant job at the university which essentially duplicated by Disney income. I was a somewhat rich grad student, actually.

 

[Macca250]

Having lived in Orlando for a while on a Disney wage (albeit having a bit of savings on top) I completely sympathise with those people who are in financial struggle; the cost of living in the tourist capital of the world is by no means cheap, I certainly found day-to-day living expensive. But the negative tone this article takes toward Disney is transparent; blame the big corporation despite their overall decent employment record and comparatively generous pay - the article itself even pointed out Disney pays more than most employers in the area. I mean, honestly; first Maelstrom, now they're causing poverty by employing 70,000 people?! That's it, get the place shut down.

 

[eddy21]

Disney has an apprentice program for mechanics and electricians. Those jobs pay $28.00 an hour and up topped out.

 

[raven]

Disney has an apprentice program for mechanics and electricians. Those jobs pay $28.00 an hour and up topped out.

That's true but a lot of those positions require a degree as well.

 

[Ranch Dressing]

Disney is not the only employer in the Orlando area. People tend to forget this fact.

 

[slappy magoo]

@WDW1974 I should have stipulated that I wasn't questioning why you used the number. My comment was more a rhetorical observation given that is a number that is thrown out by many supporting an increase in the minimum.

If many people are using that number, maybe it isn't as "arbitrary" as you think. Maybe people who study economics have determined that $15/hr is a wage that would result in people being able to support themselves without any social assistance.

 

[Hakunamatata]

If many people are using that number, maybe it isn't as "arbitrary" as you think. Maybe people who study economics have determined that $15/hr is a wage that would result in people being able to support themselves without any social assistance.

I didn't realize all the people holding signs picketing for $15 were economists.

 

[slappy magoo]

I didn't realize all the people holding signs picketing for $15 were economists.

I'm just guessing myself. But I've heard the number $15/hr bandied about in a lot of discussion on the MW, not just for WDW and not just in Orlando. General consensus from what I'm seeing is that in order to get workers and their families off needing assistance beyond their income, $15/hr is closer to where an income needs to be, but since too many people consider that number so high that it's an automatic deal breaker, fighting for 10.10/hr is the safe compromise. The fact that so many big employers are fighting that number too makes me think they would fight any increase so workers should have shot for the moon and fought for $15/hr. Or fought for $25/hr and "compromised" on 15.

 

[Hakunamatata]

I'm just guessing myself. But I've heard the number $15/hr bandied about in a lot of discussion on the MW, not just for WDW and not just in Orlando. General consensus from what I'm seeing is that in order to get workers and their families off needing assistance beyond their income, $15/hr is closer to where an income needs to be, but since too many people consider that number so high that it's an automatic deal breaker, fighting for 10.10/hr is the safe compromise. The fact that so many big employers are fighting that number too makes me think they would fight any increase so workers should have shot for the moon and fought for $15/hr. Or fought for $25/hr and "compromised" on 15.

If we are simply shifting the source of funds to get people out of poverty from coming from the govt (taxpayer) to coming from the private sector ( which is still the taxpayer after businesses raise prices ) then you have not solved the real problem.

 

[njDizFan]

If we are simply shifting the source of funds to get people out of poverty from coming from the govt (taxpayer) to coming from the private sector ( which is still the taxpayer after businesses raise prices ) then you have not solved the real problem.

Didn't we just have this arguement about 3 months ago?

Anyway federal pay deductions are mandatory, private sector price increases you can make an individual choice whether it was worth it as a consumer.

and of course there's the WalMart study...it shows the average consumer would pay about $12 a year to give their 1.4 million employees a living wage(granted that was using $12/hr). Not to mention how this would stimulate the economy and bring in more tax revenue.

Lets wait a few years and see what happens in Seattle.

 

[slappy magoo]

If we are simply shifting the source of funds to get people out of poverty from coming from the govt (taxpayer) to coming from the private sector ( which is still the taxpayer after businesses raise prices ) then you have not solved the real problem.

Seems to me the "problem" is - people who are willing to work a job that contributes to the company making money deserve to eat, and have a place to call home with a modicum of dignity.

 

[BigTxEars]

Seems to me the "problem" is - people who are willing to work a job that contributes to the company making money deserve to eat, and have a place to call home with a modicum of dignity. Now if YOU would rather they get paid a substandard wage and be compensated by the government, it's slightly more admirable than the Ayn Rand acolytes who secretly know that when people are desperate enough they'll work for any wage, so they pretend that capitalism will shake itself out if you let the employers and employees agree upon the wage the employee will earn.

I think a modicum of dignity comes from working hard and advancing in pay, responsibility and position where you work not from someone handing out money based on pity. Look at the modern welfare system in this country and tell me it builds dignity, it does not IMO.

Am I the only one that thinks entry level jobs are there as a stepping stone and that hard work still pays off in America? It certainly has for me and others I know.