-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Cast Member Wages
- Thread starter Madison Kozlowski
- Start date
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I'm having a little trouble understanding solidly your point of military promotion being longevity and mediocrity. When I was in the service, back when we still road camels into battle, it started out as a good old boy system. That in many ways was a lot like civilian organizations are now. It was who you know. Someone like me that was probably in for one enlistment had no chance of getting anywhere. When I went in standard enlistment was 4 years. If you made E-4 in that time you were very lucky. About mid-point in my enlistment they changed that into not only performance documentation but also testing in your specialty career. I assume that it still is that way now. Because of that I made E-5 in under 4 years. The testing made all the difference. When I took my next level test I came in with the highest grade on the base where I was stationed. That put me on the top of the promotion list and received that promotion almost immediately. In some cases way ahead of some that had been in the service for up to 10 or more years.
I saw nothing like that in civilian life. Here it was and still is, I'm sure, eat or be eaten. Promotion did, usually, depend on some performance, but, being in the right place at the right time and knowing the right people also played a very large role in how well you did. And it didn't always have to do with rewarding those that were the brightest, most motivated or most productive. In the real world, you could sit in a cubicle your entire working life and never be recognized or even given the opportunity. At least, the military did have a system where if you applied yourself you would be recognized and therefore had the opportunity to be stepped up the ladder if you performed and measured up to standard expectations. In the world of CEO's it isn't a matter of individual talent. It is having a group of people advising you on the proper course of action and you being able to take credit for it if it turns out good and blaming others if it didn't. There is no standard test out there to measure the quality of a CEO as an individual. Just how things worked out in the company.
I still preferred civilian life simply because there was a freedom of action that just doesn't exist in the military. The ability to think for yourself without fear of not following the manuals and thus be considered a non-player. The promotion system was fine, it was the life that wasn't. The ability for me to tell my boss where to place his stupid suggestion and only lose my job and not my freedom was all the incentive I needed. That didn't mean that I did stupid things or didn't try at all, it just meant that I was free to make those decisions.
Disney.Mike
Well-Known Member
@Goofyernmost ,
I cant speak for the Army, Marines, or AF. In the Navy promotions are based strictly on a point system. Your "final multiple" needs to be 220 for example. These points are based off your Evals, test score, education points, award points, time in rate(rank) points, and past test but not advanced (PNA). I made E5 in under 3 years (E4 first time and E5 first time up). However, I hit a bottleneck at E6. It took me taking the exam 5 test cycles to advance (this is still much faster than average for my rate/mos).
My primary issue was the Eval system. there are 5 tiers of evals int he navy. The bottom 2 are reserved for people with legal troubles. The top 3 are P, MP, EP in that order.
40% of the people in your department could get a P, 40% an MP, and 20% an EP. Going for E6 you almost need an EP average (past 5 evals to have a shot at advancement). At both Commands I was at the ONLY people that got an EP were people who were at the 12+ year mark and were in danger of being put out at 14 years for failure to make rank.
I was fairly lucky and never got stuck with a P (may as well be called career killer) but I seen several good sailors get a P eval because the senior enlisted and officers didnt want to see X get put out in 2 years...
I NEVER saw a sailor get an EP who deserved it, only mediocre workers who the COC was trying to help advance so they could stay in.
My issue is that these mediocre performers would walk in with a 40+ point advantage simply because they have been around, doing a decent but not exceptional job. PNA, award, time in rank all come from just being in, nothing to do with merit. and when the COC gives the best evals to people just so they dont get processed out at 14 years, it becomes greatly unfair and harms morale to the hard workers.
The test portion can only give you 80 points, less than a 3rd of total points where an EP eval can give you over 100 points.
I cant speak for the Army, Marines, or AF. In the Navy promotions are based strictly on a point system. Your "final multiple" needs to be 220 for example. These points are based off your Evals, test score, education points, award points, time in rate(rank) points, and past test but not advanced (PNA). I made E5 in under 3 years (E4 first time and E5 first time up). However, I hit a bottleneck at E6. It took me taking the exam 5 test cycles to advance (this is still much faster than average for my rate/mos).
My primary issue was the Eval system. there are 5 tiers of evals int he navy. The bottom 2 are reserved for people with legal troubles. The top 3 are P, MP, EP in that order.
40% of the people in your department could get a P, 40% an MP, and 20% an EP. Going for E6 you almost need an EP average (past 5 evals to have a shot at advancement). At both Commands I was at the ONLY people that got an EP were people who were at the 12+ year mark and were in danger of being put out at 14 years for failure to make rank.
I was fairly lucky and never got stuck with a P (may as well be called career killer) but I seen several good sailors get a P eval because the senior enlisted and officers didnt want to see X get put out in 2 years...
I NEVER saw a sailor get an EP who deserved it, only mediocre workers who the COC was trying to help advance so they could stay in.
My issue is that these mediocre performers would walk in with a 40+ point advantage simply because they have been around, doing a decent but not exceptional job. PNA, award, time in rank all come from just being in, nothing to do with merit. and when the COC gives the best evals to people just so they dont get processed out at 14 years, it becomes greatly unfair and harms morale to the hard workers.
The test portion can only give you 80 points, less than a 3rd of total points where an EP eval can give you over 100 points.
Disney.Mike
Well-Known Member
Sorry for the lengthy explanation i just wanted to get the point across on what i was talking about.
The freedom deal was a large part of why i separated also. If I feel like I'm being shafted at my current company, I can leave. Move anywhere on Earth to work or whatever I want to do.
The freedom deal was a large part of why i separated also. If I feel like I'm being shafted at my current company, I can leave. Move anywhere on Earth to work or whatever I want to do.
TLtron
Well-Known Member
A growing lack of empathy is undoubtedly one of the biggest dangers society can face.
Maybe it's because a certain group of people are getting fed up with being told they are heartless primates because they don't agree with another groups cause of the moment. I would just soon the government, Hollywood, and any number of righteous zealots leave me the heck alone and allow me to live my life the way I want to. Isn't that the true meaning of being diverse and inclusive. Letting those who want to be left the heck alone, alone?
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
If you want to be left alone, go buy an island. Living in a SOCIETY means having to deal with other people and, occasionally, their needs in addition to your own.
Disney.Mike
Well-Known Member
Oh lord... the imaginary social contract...
flynnibus
Premium Member
Pretty much prior to the civil war there was not a strong federal government and very little regulation on financials and banking. The speed of communications, travel, railroad, and the industrial demand of the industrial era that followed the civil war fueled the surge of investing, consolidation, and manipulation that resulted in the 'Robber Barons'. Regulation and enforcement was very thin, segmented (state by state), if at all. This is the period of almost unbridled capitalism that not only lead to great feats.. but great social tragedies as well.
The rise of regulation and federal government really stems from the Civil War, the robber barons, and the great depression. All events heavily tied to financial gain, control, and influence.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Imagine if every sailor operated as if they were the only person that mattered on a ship... where would that get you?
Guess what. I do deal with other people's needs. That's one of the bigger falacies of people who cast judgements on others. You think we are a bunch of Scrooges that have no compassion for others. I would argue that I do more dollar for dollar with my charitable contributions and time than those who sit on high horses and declare injustice.
I guess I think of unbridled as no bridle. My bad.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Is slightly bridled somehow going to go more awry while completely unbridled wouldn't have?
NelsonRD
Well-Known Member
Sure? So if you agree, then why did you feel the need to attack my post to begin with?
In your quest to seem more intelligent, and belittle me at the same time, you were the one who was unable to read the complete sentence. My claim stood that CEO pay had no relevance on Cast Member pay, but your arrogant brain shut down after it read that CEO pay was irrelevant. You were unable, or unwilling to process entire sentence, that finished with the point of relevance to the Cast Member pay, which is what this thread is about. I never made any other broad statements about CEO pay other than the relationship to Cast Member pay.
flynnibus
Premium Member
It DOES have a relevance to cast member pay.. because these are the guys setting the corporate governance, standards and mandates that are ultimately driving employee compensation models. What I am not contesting is some idea of taking out of one guys pocket leads to putting something into another's. That's what I was saying 'sure' to
But you keep going on about how the pay is irrelevant to cast member pay.. ignoring the dudes are still the ones running the company, based on their experiences, moralities, ideals, and justifications. That is the link your broad statement fails to address and why it fails scrutiny.
If you want to say 'taking 10 million from Iger won't make cast members wealthier...' ok - but that's not what your (repeated) statements mean alone... they dismiss the topic of executive compensation when discussing employee compensation. One does not have to be a zero sum process to have an impact.
NelsonRD
Well-Known Member
You are looking at this from the top down, and I am looking at this from the bottom up, that is the difference.
From the perspective of a Cast Member, it should be irreverent.
TLtron
Well-Known Member
Describes today's O-Town perfectly, and why the wage-to-housing-cost gap is widening so rapidly :
http://work.chron.com/can-overpopulation-decrease-jobs-26855.html
flynnibus
Premium Member
No, I'm looking at it from the objective sideline and removing emotion from the 'woe is me', 'they are villians', or 'just get a new job' camps. I'm acknowledging what is there verse judging.
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
I'm just going to say this- go into any of the threads set up to praise Cast Members and read the thread. It's not the executives who make a trip magical, it's the front-line CMs. In fact, I'd say a good majority of what is complained about the boards is a result of executive mismanagement.
aw14
Well-Known Member
I couldn't disagree more. I think the vast majority would "all accept". You make a large assumption that this behavior isn't responsible. It seems your definition of responsible is far different from mine. It is responsible of me to do the ABSOLUTE best I can for my family, not someone else. No where is our founding documents does it mention being someone else's keeper.
Capitalism isn't necessarily for the greater good so to speak. It is to promote opportunity. If the lower end wage earners do not like their lot in life, then DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Don't be a "feel the Bern" supporter and just expect it to be provided to you. That is not realistic and does not teach anyone anything about personal responsibility. Furthermore, I have been that low end earner <golf caddie, cashier, etc...> I knew early that was not the life I wanted. So I made MY OWN CHOICES, and decided on a different path.
There is a growing sentiment about the youth (and others as well) that it is the responsibility of the few who have earned more to pay for more. (I have worked with youth for over 15 years btw)I would suggest many here read the CBO reports on who actually does pay taxes etc... It is not what you think. The costs are being paid for by those who are going to get hit harder, so those with less can get more. Odd
I have had this conversation with my 13 year old DD. She has an A in math. So she needs to drop to a B and bring the kid next to her with a C up to a B with the points she gives back. Does not matter that she earned that grade, its only fair. Same logic
Sorry, rant over