News Disney World Cast Member unions to begin week of negotiations for wage increases, healthcare costs and more

[TrainsOfDisney]

Difference jobs, different salaries. flipping burgers at cosmic rays 12/hr. Cybersecurity analyst?? 55/hr. pumping gas at your local wawa 10/hr or the minimum wage.

So you think CM’s at Cosmic Rays are over paid then?

You think that working a full time job at Disney should equal $25k per year?

 

[eliza61nyc]

So you think CM’s at Cosmic Rays are over paid then?

You think that working a full time job at Disney should equal $25k per year?

what's wrong with 25K a year? I don't know how much cm's at cosmic rays are actually paid, I just compared it to what I know a local mcdonald's is offering for it's crew members starting salary. If they make more than that, that's wonderful.

 

[RobWDW1971]

What do you think is the minimum that someone should be paid for working a full time job?

Easy - The dollar/hour I have to offer the person who's skills/experience I need to get them to accept the job X 40.

So if I offer $15/hour for a ride operator and I can get a person who can do the job to my requirements to accept at that rate, that is the going rate - times 40. If I can get them for $12 even better, if I have to pay $17 to get them, then that is the going rate. The worker chooses to accept the rate the employer is offering.

Also, unfortunately, front line cast members have chosen a very volatile, seasonal industry in which to work so most likely our hypothetical 30 year old with wife and kids won't be getting 40 hours a week consistently from the start so even if he gets the mythical "living wage" per hour, he still will not make that annually so he will have to take another job and we will be right back to people hyperventilating about "CM's can't eat, have to work multiple jobs to survive, and must be paid a living wage!!!". The entire concept is nonsensical.

Again, if you are trying to raise a family working at a theme park in a frontline role, you must be mature and honest enough to understand the industry you have chosen and its inherent tradeoffs.

 

[KeithVH]

The same argument could have been made for keeping slave labor, and later child labor.


What do you think is the minimum that someone should be paid for working a full time job?

That's a good question. As always, it depends. My youngest DD, with maybe 8 hours of college credit, makes $70/hour. One of her older sisters, with a college degree, makes more like $25/hour. The difference? The older has a graphics arts degree and is a good artist. The youngest is a gold-level figure skater who coaches other skaters (and works for USFSA). Somewhat rare skill compared to being able to draw.

But if I put either in the control pod of IASW to push stop/start buttons, or on the deck to load/unload boats, none of those skills matter. It's not about assigning an individual a value of worth. It's about what that individual offers in a skillset to an employer versus what the employer is willing to pay for that skillset. Not for that individual.

They way your question is structured assumes that every individual is worth AT LEAST the same dollar value, regardless of their capability or capacity to learn and improve. If everyone believed that way, besides having a better federal minimum wage, you'd get people pigeonholed into buckets they'd have a hard time getting out of. I'm in no way near smart enough to determine what that value is. Logic makes me think your value is too low by 5-10K based on living costs in the Orlando area. Don't forget 35-40K is really 22-25K after withholding.

 

[flynnibus]

The same argument could have been made for keeping slave labor, and later child labor.

Uh… no it can’t. Slaves were not being compensated and children were deemed inappropriate. There is nothing in those conversations that are about wages vs value delivered. You keep trying toss these these boogie man arguments out hoping something sticks. It really undermines your position and makes it all about hand waving.

 

[KeithVH]

The same argument could have been made for keeping slave labor, and later child labor.

No. There are ethical, moral, and legal constraints to supposedly prevent such a thing. Besides, what does that have to do with how much an employer is willing to pay for work done? Conflating multiple, non-related arguments into a single issue is something I was taught to avoid in Philosophy class.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

They way your question is structured assumes that every individual is worth AT LEAST the same dollar value, regardless of their capability or capacity to learn and improve.

Yes, every individuals time is worth something - and I beleive that something is worth more than the minnimum wage. Which thankfully is pretty much not a thing anymore. If you’re working for minnimum wage you’re really crazy cause everybody is paying more than that!

Uh… no it can’t. Slaves were not being compensated and children were deemed inappropriate. There is nothing in those conversations that are about wages vs value delivered.

My reply was connected to the argument that if we raise entry level salary to “living wage” than it will mess up the economy.

 

[RobWDW1971]

Yes, every individuals time is worth something - and I beleive that something is worth more than the minnimum wage. Which thankfully is pretty much not a thing anymore. If you’re working for minnimum wage you’re really crazy cause everybody is paying more than that!

I've had employees over the years whose output was not worth the minimum wage the government said I had to pay them. Since I couldn't lower their wage to properly adjust for their actual output, I had to fire them.

As the old saying goes, "the real minimum wage is zero".

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Also, unfortunately, front line cast members have chosen a very volatile, seasonal industry in which to work so most likely our hypothetical 30 year old with wife and kids won't be getting 40 hours a week consistently from the start

Disney and Universal parks are not volatile or seasonal. They both require large numbers of employees who work full time hours year round.

While they both hire additional seasonal help, that’s a different discussion in regards to pay.

 

[RobWDW1971]

Disney and Universal parks are not volatile or seasonal. They both require large numbers of employees who work full time hours year round.

While they both hire additional seasonal help, that’s a different discussion in regards to pay.

Didn't know the new WDW policy is that all new front-line theme park hourly workers are guaranteed 40 hours/week from day one until forever if they want it. Who knew?

So apparently everybody is now getting 40 hours a week minimum if they want it, getting above minimum wage, getting paid the exact amount they were promised when they accepted the job, and have no restrictions on their ability to leave and go to another employer who values their skills more for better pay (if there is one, of course).

So what's the beef again?

 

[_caleb]

Easy - The dollar/hour I have to offer the person who's skills/experience I need to get them to accept the job X 40.

So if I offer $15/hour for a ride operator and I can get a person who can do the job to my requirements to accept at that rate, that is the going rate - times 40. If I can get them for $12 even better, if I have to pay $17 to get them, then that is the going rate. The worker chooses to accept the rate the employer is offering.

And if the worker, after actually doing the job for a bit, comes to realize that the job doesn’t pay enough, why shouldn’t she negotiate a pay increase? Or if conditions change (say, a global pandemic, pent-up demand, inflation, cost of living increases, etc.), why shouldn’t she negotiate a pay increase rather than simply quit?

And do you know what leverage these workers have? They actually know the job and have proven (most of them, anyway) that they can do it well. If Disney wants good CMs, they’re going to have to pay better. If you (as a guest) want Disney to have the best CMs, you should support a pay increase.

But if I put either in the control pod of IASW to push stop/start buttons, or on the deck to load/unload boats, none of those skills matter. It's not about assigning an individual a value of worth. It's about what that individual offers in a skillset to an employer versus what the employer is willing to pay for that skillset. Not for that individual.

CMs do not simply “push start/stop buttons.” They interact with park guests—they are the font face of the company to paying customers. As a guest, I’d think you’d want the most well-paid, long-term, highly-skilled CMs possible.

They way your question is structured assumes that every individual is worth AT LEAST the same dollar value, regardless of their capability or capacity to learn and improve.

Some of us think basic human dignity is a value we can express through fair compensation. It’s not as though there isn’t enough money to go around (see Exec. salaries and corporate expenses) and it’s not as though there aren’t quality candidates who would do the job if it paid well enough. It’s just a question of values that determines where the money goes.

You cannot complain about poor experiences at the parks or poor customer service while also arguing against better CM compensation—they are directly related.

 

[RobWDW1971]

And if the worker, after actually doing the job for a bit, comes to realize that the job doesn’t pay enough, why shouldn’t she negotiate a pay increase? Or if conditions change (say, a global pandemic, pent-up demand, inflation, cost of living increases, etc.), why shouldn’t she negotiate a pay increase rather than simply quit?

And do you know what leverage these workers have? They actually know the job and have proven (most of them, anyway) that they can do it well. If Disney wants good CMs, they’re going to have to pay better. If you (as a guest) want Disney to have the best CMs, you should support a pay increase.

CMs do not simply “push start/stop buttons.” They interact with park guests—they are the font face of the company to paying customers. As a guest, I’d think you’d want the most well-paid, long-term, highly-skilled CMs possible.

Some of us think basic human dignity is a value we can express through fair compensation. It’s not as though there isn’t enough money to go around (see Exec. salaries and corporate expenses) and it’s not as though there aren’t quality candidates who would do the job if it paid well enough. It’s just a question of values that determines where the money goes.

You cannot complain about poor experiences at the parks or poor customer service while also arguing against better CM compensation—they are directly related.

I have never said the WDW CM's should not get more money if the going market wage for that skill set is currently higher, good for them. But that is why they will get more money, because the market rate to get the skills/experience they want costs that amount, not for any theoretical reasons like "what is right", "what they should do", "human dignity" or "living wage", whatever those mean. That's the great thing about the marketplace, if their skills are more valuable, Disney will have to pay more to get their labor.

However, if they can staff the parks/resorts to an acceptable level (which apparently is less than fully staffed) with a quality level they can live with at the current wage, they will not pay more. If they need to pay more to get that labor/quality, they will. The system works.

If the employees are not satisfied with the wage, they will go another employer who will pay more for their skills/experience (if there is one). Again, the system works.

I do believe, however, you are proceeding from a false assumption that Disney still believes that the quality of their employees is a key factor for guest satisfaction and visitation. The current "Disney Adults" have forever disconnected that relationship and have made it very clear to Disney management that they want their purple Instagram wall, hour wait for the latest popcorn bucket, and selfies in front of (insert whatever is new this week), and the quality of the cast member is not relevant to that decision. I see no evidence that current management believes cast member quality is important and from what I read on these boards every day, I see little evidence it matters, even to the "super fans".

Oh, and I was a Disney attractions host/lead and it was BY FAR the easiest job I ever had before or since, so let's not pretend these are complicated stressful jobs. I'd take a shift on Pirates any day of the week vs. being a busboy at IHOP or working the fryer at McDonalds (and I've done both of those, too). The harsh reality is that these are replaceable jobs a teenager off the street can do with minimal training and that will forever establish the low wages in the marketplace.

 

[eliza61nyc]

And if the worker, after actually doing the job for a bit, comes to realize that the job doesn’t pay enough, why shouldn’t she negotiate a pay increase? Or if conditions change (say, a global pandemic, pent-up demand, inflation, cost of living increases, etc.), why shouldn’t she negotiate a pay increase rather than simply quit?

And do you know what leverage these workers have? They actually know the job and have proven (most of them, anyway) that they can do it well. If Disney wants good CMs, they’re going to have to pay better. If you (as a guest) want Disney to have the best CMs, you should support a pay increase.

CMs do not simply “push start/stop buttons.” They interact with park guests—they are the font face of the company to paying customers. As a guest, I’d think you’d want the most well-paid, long-term, highly-skilled CMs possible.

Some of us think basic human dignity is a value we can express through fair compensation. It’s not as though there isn’t enough money to go around (see Exec. salaries and corporate expenses) and it’s not as though there aren’t quality candidates who would do the job if it paid well enough. It’s just a question of values that determines where the money goes.

You cannot complain about poor experiences at the parks or poor customer service while also arguing against better CM compensation—they are directly related.

we do (for the most part). basic human dignity is actually not expressed through compensation IMO Everyone to a poster has said that every cm regardless of pay or position deserves, respect and a safe, non toxic work environment. they all deserve and should never be subjected to abuse from guest or fellow workers. sadly it does happen.

Next, fair compensation. generally fair compensation is a product of a number of things. One of them is the value society has deemed for the position. whether or not folks here like the terms "unskilled" and "low wage", the reality is those are what we have deemed certain positions. so no I don't think a unskilled fast food worker automatically deserves a certain salary simply because the executive made a bunch of money. It is not a product of spreading the money around "equally".

No one here is arguing that the cm's shouldn't be compensated in accordance with the position and the quality of their work. what I argue against is this nonsense of just because you show up every day, and sorry there use to be a time where showing up is the very least you were expected to do. now it seems like coming to work when you are supposed to be there is some type of major achievement, that you are entitled to a standard of living someone deems acceptable.

the cm's will get more money, a contract will be agreed upon and dollars to donuts they will say it's not enough. Sadly instead of saying maybe these are not jobs I can support a family on, they will again blame greedy Disney.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

generally fair compensation is a product of a number of things. One of them is the value society has deemed for the position. whether or not folks here like the terms "unskilled" and "low wage", the reality is those are what we have deemed certain positions.

And again… how society has deemed things like this in the past is not how it is deemed in the present and can change in the future.

It’s changing as we speak and yet some are very upset that a “popcorn vendor” is making $17 an hour.

Also…. Why should a burger flipper at Disneyland make less than a burger flipper at in-n-out? It’s all about market value right? (In n out starts at $19 in Anaheim.)

 

[_caleb]

I have never said the WDW CM's should not get more money if the going market wage for that skill set is currently higher, good for them. But that is why they will get more money, because the market rate to get the skills/experience they want costs that amount, not for any theoretical reasons like "what is right", "what they should do", "human dignity" or "living wage", whatever those mean.

These things do have definitions, you know. Dignity is “the right of a person to be valued and respected for their own sake, and to be treated ethically.”

That's the great thing about the marketplace, if their skills are more valuable, Disney will have to pay more to get their labor.

However, if they can staff the parks/resorts to an acceptable level (which apparently is less than fully staffed) with a quality level they can live with at the current wage, they will not pay more. If they need to pay more to get that labor/quality, they will. The system works.

Disney’s current system (as it is now) “works” by exploiting people to do work for less than it’s actually worth on the marketplace.

The price of labor is not set by the market, it’s driven down by using people as a consumable resource.

If the employees are not satisfied with the wage, they will go another employer who will pay more for their skills/experience (if there is one). Again, the system works.

The system works to do what? You keep saying this as though it’s some great way for a society to function. But in the case of Disney parks, it’s resulting in an overall shortage of workers, lower quality CMs (according to you), and a lesser guest experience). Prices are way up. So what, exactly, does this system work to accomplish?

I do believe, however, you are proceeding from a false assumption that Disney still believes that the quality of their employees is a key factor for guest satisfaction and visitation.

I’m saying that higher quality CMs is better for business, cheaper in the long run, and generate more revenue and higher guest satisfaction. See any of the higher-paying quick serve restaurants for good examples of this.

The current "Disney Adults" have forever disconnected that relationship and have made it very clear to Disney management that they want their purple Instagram wall, hour wait for the latest popcorn bucket, and selfies in front of (insert whatever is new this week), and the quality of the cast member is not relevant to that decision.

The only reason anyone would need to choose between the purple wall/popcorn buckets and quality CMs is corporate greed.

I see no evidence that current management believes cast member quality is important and from what I read on these boards every day, I see little evidence it matters, even to the "super fans".

You were just arguing that labor is set by market forces, but now you’re saying it’s about what Disney believes? I’m confused by this, because I do think the company’s “beliefs” about CMs drives their wage policies. And the economies of Central Florida all hinge on this.

Oh, and I was a Disney attractions host/lead and it was BY FAR the easiest job I ever had before or since, so let's not pretend these are complicated stressful jobs.

I'd take a shift on Pirates any day of the week vs. being a busboy at IHOP or working the fryer at McDonalds (and I've done both of those, too). The harsh reality is that these are replaceable jobs a teenager off the street can do with minimal training and that will forever establish the low wages in the marketplace.

I’m not pretending. Just because you phoned it in doesn’t mean all CMs do. My best Disney vacations have been made by CMs who went above and beyond to provide an excellent experience. Customer service is difficult (and increasingly so), and for a company like Disney, the experience is literally what they’re selling.

As a consumer, you should be clamoring for the best CMs money can buy because this would result in the best experience your money can buy.

As a company, Disney should look longer term than immediate labor costs. A park full of experienced, knowledgeable, happy, guest-relations-minded CMs would allow them to sell the best experience possible at the best value long-term.

 

[Lilofan]

we do (for the most part). basic human dignity is actually not expressed through compensation IMO Everyone to a poster has said that every cm regardless of pay or position deserves, respect and a safe, non toxic work environment. they all deserve and should never be subjected to abuse from guest or fellow workers. sadly it does happen.

Next, fair compensation. generally fair compensation is a product of a number of things. One of them is the value society has deemed for the position. whether or not folks here like the terms "unskilled" and "low wage", the reality is those are what we have deemed certain positions. so no I don't think a unskilled fast food worker automatically deserves a certain salary simply because the executive made a bunch of money. It is not a product of spreading the money around "equally".

No one here is arguing that the cm's shouldn't be compensated in accordance with the position and the quality of their work. what I argue against is this nonsense of just because you show up every day, and sorry there use to be a time where showing up is the very least you were expected to do. now it seems like coming to work when you are supposed to be there is some type of major achievement, that you are entitled to a standard of living someone deems acceptable.

the cm's will get more money, a contract will be agreed upon and dollars to donuts they will say it's not enough. Sadly instead of saying maybe these are not jobs I can support a family on, they will again blame greedy Disney.

Wonder if these number of cast that dislike WDW so much , do they use all their full allotment of annual complimentary passes to get their family and friends into the parks?

 

[RobWDW1971]

Also…. Why should a burger flipper at Disneyland make less than a burger flipper at in-n-out? It’s all about market value right? (In n out starts at $19 in Anaheim.)

Because In N Out’s standards for professionalism, personal appearance, grooming, and work ethic is apparently higher than Disneyland’s.

From what I experience as a guest, I can’t imagine a DL food service worker making as much as one at In N Out and Chick-fil-A.

 

[erasure fan1]

the cm's will get more money, a contract will be agreed upon and dollars to donuts they will say it's not enough. Sadly instead of saying maybe these are not jobs I can support a family on, they will again blame greedy Disney.

Of course they will. Because all that ever happens when these type of wage disputes come up is the cost is then passed down to the consumer. There's no chance the executives will erode their margins and bonus potential.

 

[_caleb]

we do (for the most part). basic human dignity is actually not expressed through compensation IMO Everyone to a poster has said that every cm regardless of pay or position deserves, respect and a safe, non toxic work environment. they all deserve and should never be subjected to abuse from guest or fellow workers. sadly it does happen.

It does. And a poorly-trained, inexperienced, disinvested CM is more likely to find themselves in situations where they will be abused, disrespected, or unsafe.

Next, fair compensation. generally fair compensation is a product of a number of things. One of them is the value society has deemed for the position. whether or not folks here like the terms "unskilled" and "low wage", the reality is those are what we have deemed certain positions.

No, “we” haven’t decided this, big corporations have. And they’ve convinced you (and lots of other people) that it’s true. Disney doesn’t HAVE to treat any job as “unskilled” labor. That’s a choice they make to try to save a buck. If custodial staff were also security, or if attraction operations were cross-trained as guest relations and entertainment, they wouldn’t be treated as (or compensated as) “unskilled.”

so no I don't think a unskilled fast food worker automatically deserves a certain salary simply because the executive made a bunch of money. It is not a product of spreading the money around "equally".

You’ve made this clear. But in choosing this philosophy, you’re also choosing to enrich the upper-level management and investors in the company at your expense. You’re willingly paying them more to pay CMs less. That seems like a strange way to live, and not very sustainable.

No one here is arguing that the cm's shouldn't be compensated in accordance with the position and the quality of their work. what I argue against is this nonsense of just because you show up every day, and sorry there use to be a time where showing up is the very least you were expected to do. now it seems like coming to work when you are supposed to be there is some type of major achievement, that you are entitled to a standard of living someone deems acceptable.

If we don’t set a floor, there will not be a floor. Companies will work to drive the cost of labor (and your appreciate for it) down to 0. If you let them replace CMs with robots and smartphone apps, they will. Why not demand good pay for CMs as part of the experience you’re consuming?

the cm's will get more money, a contract will be agreed upon and dollars to donuts they will say it's not enough. Sadly instead of saying maybe these are not jobs I can support a family on, they will again blame greedy Disney.

They probably will say it’s not enough. They probably will eventually find work elsewhere. And Disney will have to pay lots of money to find, recruit, and train their lower-quality replacements until those people learn (the hard way) that the job isn’t worth the pay. And the experience will continue to diminish, the costs will continue to rise, and your experience will be the worse for it.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Of course they will. Because all that ever happens when these type of wage disputes come up is the cost is then passed down to the consumer. There's no chance the executives will erode their margins and bonus potential.

You must be 100% against Disney+ then… because the money lost from Disney+ has had more effect on raising prices in the parks than any raise in pay ever has or will.