Disgruntled Disney Workers Give Leaflets At OIA

[SpaceRacer2003]

You've been told what the dues are, as for what the lawyers make and the leadership makes, that is A. not the issue, and B. I didn't ask. If you really want to know... email Morty Miller, president Here362, maybe he'll share it with you. And why does the word union appear more often the cast member.... oh I don't know I'd have to say it has something to do with "One Voice", the cast members are the union, the union represents them.

And another thing (going back to page 1)... are a lot of WDW CMs college kids... YUP, its called the College Program (they don't count in the bargianing process, but they too get the short end of the stick). Are there a lot of retired folks, YUP, but most of them are part time (unionized) or seasonal (not represented by a union). But there are a lot more "non-management" WDW CMs working there, just because you don't know them doesn't mean they don't exist. There are people that have been doing this for 30 years, 10 years, 5 years, etc..

If you have never spent a day in another mans shoes....

 

[HennieBogan1966]

No, YOU are mistaken. I HAVE NOT been told what the union dues are. And WHY isn't what the leadership makes an issue? If that's the case, why is what Michael Eisner makes and what upper mgmt. makes an issue? Why should it matter to anyone except them.

You're right, if you haven't walked in MY shoes, don't assume anything. Another thing, don't attempt to preach about college kids and elderly people, trying to gain the sympathy vote here. IT WON'T WORK!!! They ALL knew what they were getting into the day the were hired on. And NO, the UNION is not ONE voice. It's a suit, speaking on behalf of a majority which represents the overriding opinion or view being negotiated at the table. IT IS IMPORTANT to know what they pay in monthly dues and what the due gets them in return. To say otherwise is to say that I'm just going to pay someone a monthly fee for nothing, but not require a return on my investment, no matter what that investment is. THAT IS BAD JUDGEMENT!!!

Your comments speak to something at the heart of this whole matter. You ASSUME that these cms NEED the union. That their lives would never improve without it. YOU ARE WRONG!!! Doesn't matter how you slice it, YOU ARE WRONG!!! SORRY that's just fact. Now, I know, the reality is they are part of a union. Okay then, here we go once more.

(1) How much for the dues?

(2) How much for the attys?

(3) How much for the union leadership?

(4) What is the union proposal?

(5) How much money is in the union till right now?

(6) IF a strike were recommended, how long could the union pay its members?

Let's get it ALL out on the table.

OR have you got something to hide? Hmmmmm???!!

 

[SpaceRacer2003]

Does anyone else get that "But Why Mommy?" feeling??

So much for freedom of opinion.. Hennie it is clear that you will persist in this anti-union banter.... and again as stated before the CMs are represented by the union, that is not going to change nor is it the issue at hand. If you want to talk pay rates and insurance those are the sticking points right now, not should we keep the union around.

And the college kids and retired folks are not a sympathy ploy, it was just a statement of fact it response to an earlier post stating that most of the WDW "non-management" CMs are college or retired.

 

[se8472]

if your so smart hennie, why have you not thought up the fact that maybe no one knows?

 

[mwc1996]

Leaflet at the airport is a low blow and ineffective. Who will suffer the most if those tourist don't come back. The CM's will because hours will get cut. Health insurance has skyrocketed. 2 years ago my paycheck went down because my portion of the health insurance went up by more than my raise. I did look for another job after that but found that this was happening at several places. I hope the CM's get paid what they deserve as everyone should but if they don't like it then find a better job. If enough people leave then Disney will suffer and will then be forced to increase pay in order to compete for good employees.

 

[thedisneyfan]

Some of you are a little too passionate about this, especially for not working in Orlando, and maybe not having any experience in the Orlando job market as either an employee or as a manager.
The point I was trying to make at the top is that one will never make a ton of money in entry-level service industry positions. If people really need to make ends meet, they need to work hard and get promoted.......the 5% per year you want (or whatever the number is) is never going to get you ahead, and never going to make you wealthy (in money). If people really want to work for WDW, they need to accept the fact that they will have a tough time making ends meet, or they need to take responsibility to make their situation better.

The point isn't to see every worker at Disney become a Rockefeller. The point is to get a better wage to help meet the everyday basic needs of living. Your success story is nice, but it is not possible for everyone, if it were then everyone would be a manager and you wouldn't have any lower workers. Like I said before these workers aren't asking for 10%, 25%, or 50% yearly pay increases, but they are asking for decent raises say in line with the increases that we as fans see in ticket, hotel, and souvenier increases each year. These low-level workers are ABSOLUTELY VITAL to the success of Disney World and deserve some respect. If you say that the multi-billion dollar company can't eat an equal or slightly greater portion of the increased health care costs than the lowly hourly workers, then how are these lowly hourly workers supposed to eat all the increased costs?

To those that say these workers can easily just quit and be replaced, I say good luck with that happening any time soon. Sure a Wal-Mart cashier can become a cahier at a gift shop, but are your experiences with Wal-Mart workers on any comporable level with those at Walt Disney World? I dare to say I DO NOT THINK SO!!! If Disney (which needs this level of worker to maintain its level of satisfaction with guests and hence its profits) hopes to maintain its superiority, then they better start paying and treating those lowly people who cook, serve, and clean up the fries that we eat, launder, clean, and dust the rooms we sleep in, and stock, sell, and package those pricey Disney trinkets in which Disney's profits rely upon MUCH MUCH BETTER.
Disney can't survive without these lowly workers, but according to YOU PEOPLE these lowly workers can survive without Disney. Just think about that!

 

[thedisneyfan]

Your comments speak to something at the heart of this whole matter. You ASSUME that these cms NEED the union. That their lives would never improve without it. YOU ARE WRONG!!! Doesn't matter how you slice it, YOU ARE WRONG!!! SORRY that's just fact.

Let's get it ALL out on the table.

OR have you got something to hide? Hmmmmm???!!

Apparently someone has forgoten history 101. For it was the unions that were responsible for the 40 hour work week, the ability to make overtime, safety in the workplace, health insurance, no child labor, the list goes on and on and on. But I guess that I must be wrong and these things just aren't important.

 

[Hakunamatata]

1. The issue I have is not with the CM's making more money. If the CM's performance warrents an increase, then they should be compensated appropriatley based on their individual merit.
2. We are not born into this world with the right to have a job. No where in the constitution does it state that we have to take any job and jobs are not forced onto us, we can be lazy bums if we choose. No one at Disney, McDonalds, Wal-Mart, etc, was forced at gunpoint to apply at any of these establishments. Furthurmore, at some time during the process of application, interview, negotiation of salary, you new exactly what your starting wages are going to be and what you have to do to merit an increase.
3. And as far as photosdaves comments. Mr. I contribute at minimum 15k a year to the Disney company and if I wanna come to WDW with an attitude I will darn sure do it.

 

[cherrynegra]

Apparently someone has forgoten history 101. For it was the unions that were responsible for the 40 hour work week, the ability to make overtime, safety in the workplace, health insurance, no child labor, the list goes on and on and on. But I guess that I must be wrong and these things just aren't important.

I agree. It really surprises me how people have forgotten that it is the unions and the labor movement in this country that have helped to make our working environments safe and comfortable. And let's not forget the eight hour work day and equal pay for equal work.

No matter where you work and no matter what type of profession you're in, whether it's unionized or not, you have directly benefitted from the blood, sweat, and work equity that unions and their members have put out. I am definitely a white collar professional, but I have no delusions at all about unions. I know that it is my union that has fought hard to ensure that I have a job.

 

[wannab@dis]

if your so smart hennie, why have you not thought up the fact that maybe no one knows?

If I were a CM being represented by this union, I would know. It's simply a matter of making smart decisions. Something that bothered me about an article I read is the percentage of CMs that voted against the contract. The union supposedly represents 20,000 CMs, but less than 20% voted. That little fact should weigh heavy on this discussion. If this is such a HUGE matter, why didn't they have 85, 90, 95% of the affected people voting?

The insurance at our company goes up on the 15th of next month. That's a fact for most working people. I know for a fact that our company picked up the majority of the increase. Can anyone tell us the percentage that Disney is picking up or the percentage that the union is requesting to be picked up?

One other question that I would like to see answered. If an employee is eligible to be part of the union, but they are not, could they get a raise for merit? Has anyone received a raise for merit if they were not part of the union?

 

[thedisneyfan]

What I do find interesting is one common thread throughout this conversation. The word UNION is much more prevelant in the comments of the union supporters, than the words cast members is. Point here is that those of us against the union views TRULY support the cast members, and not the IDEA of a union. Those of you for the union here, seem to support the IDEA of a union, more so than the economic FREEDOM of the cast members.

First, those of us favoring the CMs do have to mention the union, because it is the union that is working for the CMs. I think that I have mentioned CMs much more than union. People should be careful when they say the other side uses the word union much heavier than CMs before looking at their own messages. Some people seem to support the idea of "economic freedom" more than the PEOPLE that they claim to TRULY support, and yet these PEOPLE, whom don't have the money or resources of a multi-billion dollar corporation, are supposed to get help HOW? How free are the CMs going to be when their take home pay is less this year than it was last and going to be less next year than this? But this point is really pointless and not worth any more attention.

Second, you say that you are TRULY for the CMs, then explain how the CMs are ever to negotiate with the multi-billion dollar corporations without the assistance of a union? The point is that with a union the CMs are almost put on an equal footing with the multi-billion dollar corporation when it comes time to negotiate, and without the union they lack this footing and leverage. People that make a few bucks an hour can't compete with a multi-billion dollar corporation at the negotiation table on their own. The union here gives the CMs or PEOPLE some much needed power in this process.

Third, I know your answer is if they don't like it, then go find another job. In case you haven't noticed, there aren't that many jobs all over the place for people to just go to nowadays. Furthermore, it's never simply as easy as this notion attempts to make it appear.

 

[se8472]

If I were a CM being represented by this union, I would know. It's simply a matter of making smart decisions. Something that bothered me about an article I read is the percentage of CMs that voted against the contract. The union supposedly represents 20,000 CMs, but less than 20% voted. That little fact should weigh heavy on this discussion. If this is such a HUGE matter, why didn't they have 85, 90, 95% of the affected people voting?

This has already been talked about. We all know that CM's can't just up and leave there job and head the the polls.

As for what I said before...maybe no one who has read this topic knows. I am not saying that there isn't a CM on earth that knows, I know people who I could go to and ask....but I really don't care all that much.

Also as for asking CM's that arn't in the union, it seems to me that most people here don't know that Disney does reward CM's many things and its not based on the union. I know personally that T-Land attrations was holding a contest for its CM with the best magical momments. Colletivly at the end result was food but I did win some tickets to AMC for my little (let this kid help set up the spectro / give personal tour of space mt / set parade up and down again / have his sis turn off the lights for both spectro / let him sit in the emergancy exit CM only section)

 

[PhotoDave219]

Part of the expectation of a Cast Member is, no matter what your problems at home, with pay, co-workers, to leave all your problems behind and make magic for guests no matter how you feel or you are treated.

While this is true, and i do adhere to it (despite my torrettes moments) i just wish other fourm members (not you brent) would try to treat others as they wish to be treated by the CMs at wdw.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Third, I know your answer is if they don't like it, then go find another job. In case you haven't noticed, there aren't that many jobs all over the place for people to just go to nowadays. Furthermore, it's never simply as easy as this notion attempts to make it appear.

Hello, this is one of the main driving elements of economics. If there are more people than jobs, the value of the job goes down, because there is likely allways someone out there who will do the job for less. If there are more jobs than people, the value of the job goes up, because it is less likely that there is anyone out there who will do it for less.

Yes, economics matters reguardless if its a billion dollar corporation dealing with a union, or the local dry cleaner down the street hiring someone of the street...

 

[wannab@dis]

I understant they can't just up and leave their job, but didn't the voting go for the entire day? Surely that would have left some time to vote.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

Well, since you all asked

I AM SO SMART!!! Hehe. The fact MAY be that no one on these boards knows the answers to any of these questions (by the way, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona I'd like to sell ya), but I tend to believe otherwise. And while unions MAY, and I stress MAY have been responsible for some of these issues over the years, in THIS CASE, the union is NOT providing good ROI. (that's Return On Investment for those of you in Rio Linda). Anyway, I can ASSURE YOU that NO UNION in this world is responsible for MY having a job. You know who IS? Umm, that would be ME. You see, no matter WHAT ANY union MAY have done 50 years ago for the American worker, it's up to us as INDIVIDUALS (clearly a four letter word in this subject), to go out, apply for a job, go to the interview, negotiate the pay, then show up for work each day. NOT ONE union leader helped me do any of those things. NOT ONE!!! NOT ONE union accomplishment HELPED ME with any of those issues. MY initiative, desire to work for a living, and love for the work I do is what motivated me and allowed me to gain employment. Instead of living in the past, maybe some of you would like to discuss the here and now.

I'll start:

(1) How much was the low-end pay rate that the UNION negotiated for this last contract? Hmmmm???!!! And to that end, what benefits did the union GAIN for its membership?

(2) Did the union dues increase after that contract was successfully negotiated? You see this is important for this reason. (since I seem to have to spell things out so much here). If the union negotiated a 10% increase in pay, and the dues increased by the same amount or more, guess what? YOU LOST!!!!! Did anything else change?

(3) What concessions did the union make in this last negotiation, if any?

Some of you out there may THINK that you owe your job to some UNION, but I assure you, YOU DO NOT!!! Please people. Think for yourselves. Stop giving in to the mentality of entitlement and being oppressed by a union. YOU DON'T owe your life to the union.

So, anyone care to answer any of THOSE questions?

 

[HennieBogan1966]

TheDisneyFan

Didn't mean to not answer your comments. You say that the cms NEED the union to be on equal footing with multi-billion dollar company. So, that would hold true with ANY multi-billion dollar corp. then, to follow your model. So then EVERY company in the world should be required to be union so as to level the field. Okay, let me give a scenario.

Let's say that IF that were the case, wouldn't that then de-value ALL jobs across the board? See, the company dealing with the union would know that HEY, I can just get a replacement for the bad employee, without having to negotiate a higher salary for anyone. Because, contracturally, they would be bound by the union-negotiated contract. I don't know about you, but I know I DON'T want that kind of world. Much rather take my own chances on that one, Thanks. See, companies would just low-ball salaries, based on what the unions negotiated as an average for any given field.

You also said that the cms are looking at making less money next year than they made this year. Answer me this. If that's the case, how good could union be for their members? I thought their JOB was to negotiate on behalf of the union members a BETTER CONTRACT?

I'm trying to understand how you can say on the one hand they NEED the union to be better off, then on the other hand that they're looking at making less next year?

And for this they have to pay union dues? Something smells fishy here.

Anyone????

 

[Thelazer]

Ahem. The union can only negotiate what they would like us to be paid.

What "Disney" actually ends up offering is another story. Hence, the reason we've voted the contact down 3 times now. It's not like the union is sitting there saying, "Okay, we give in.. Only pay us $5.00 an hour.. We will accept that low rate"

I thought it was well understood that Disney, as a company is no longer the “All Caring” place it used to be, seems some of us forgot about how bad the company has gotten lately.

 

[jcraycraft]

This has already been talked about. We all know that CM's can't just up and leave there job and head the the polls.

se8472..... Are you saying that not all union CMs have an opportunity to vote? That does not sound right. I would think that voting would have to accommodate all members work schedule, otherwise you not hearing the voice of the membership.

 

[HennieBogan1966]

So why then...

Which is why I find it VERY interesting that only 20% of the union membership chose to vote on this issue? What was the problem with low voter turnout? Lack of interest? Bad planning on the part of union leadership? Had to be one of those 2. So, which was it?