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

[el_super]

The janitor “agreed to the wage” and so should be happy (aka shut up and comply) but the CEO needs to be bribed to actually stay and do his job well.

Have you seen what CEOs can go through though? Being public figures means a different type of lifestyle altogether. Imagine someone like Chapek, who may never be able to find another position again. It's rough.

How do you know this is true? We know that corporations aren’t legally required to maximize profits.

I think this article is jumping to the wrong conclusion. That because there is no legal definition of "shareholder value" and so many executive decisions can be very subjective, that a company cannot be legally held responsible. Of course shareholder lawsuits are still a thing though.

Disney's responsibility to their shareholders is just as strong as it is to their customers, and yes, their employees, even when no technical legal obligation exists. Giving more in wages to the employees effectively takes money away from the customers and the investors, so if it must be done, it must be done with a clear understanding that it was absolutely necessary.

I actually do think that the employee unions are probably in their strongest position ever. The stock is weak, the CEO is in transition, and the parks are as busy as ever. They absolutely could force the issue of wage increases by calling a strike and making it absolutely necessary that Disney pay the employees more.

Will they though? Probably not. If Disney can drag negotiations until they hold more of the cards, Disney will absolutely do that and the union will do nothing to stop them.

 

[el_super]

Disney needs people. A lot of people.

Maybe.... they don't?

 

[Lilofan]

Have you seen what CEOs can go through though? Being public figures means a different type of lifestyle altogether. Imagine someone like Chapek, who may never be able to find another position again. It's rough.




I think this article is jumping to the wrong conclusion. That because there is no legal definition of "shareholder value" and so many executive decisions can be very subjective, that a company cannot be legally held responsible. Of course shareholder lawsuits are still a thing though.

Disney's responsibility to their shareholders is just as strong as it is to their customers, and yes, their employees, even when no technical legal obligation exists. Giving more in wages to the employees effectively takes money away from the customers and the investors, so if it must be done, it must be done with a clear understanding that it was absolutely necessary.

I actually do think that the employee unions are probably in their strongest position ever. The stock is weak, the CEO is in transition, and the parks are as busy as ever. They absolutely could force the issue of wage increases by calling a strike and making it absolutely necessary that Disney pay the employees more.

Will they though? Probably not. If Disney can drag negotiations until they hold more of the cards, Disney will absolutely do that and the union will do nothing to stop them.

CMs if they walk out and go on strike - they get fired.

 

[el_super]

CMs if they walk out and go on strike - they get fired.

If they are under contract. If the contract has expired and they are in negotiation for a new contract, they can strike and be legally protected from being terminated.

 

[Lilofan]

If they are under contract. If the contract has expired and they are in negotiation for a new contract, they can strike and be legally protected from being terminated.

Disney is no fool, after consulting with their legal team they extend the contract like they always have

 

[el_super]

Disney is no fool, after consulting with their legal team they extend the contract like they always have

They can only extend it with the union's agreement. It sounds like they've currently extended it thru some point in January with negotiations picking up again prior to that.

The union could, if they are not satisfied with the results of the current talks, not extend the contract again. That would put them in position to authorize a strike.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Maybe.... they don't?

So Disney is wrong? That’s your positionally finally? Because they’re looking.

 

[Lilofan]

They can only extend it with the union's agreement. It sounds like they've currently extended it thru some point in January with negotiations picking up again prior to that.

The union could, if they are not satisfied with the results of the current talks, not extend the contract again. That would put them in position to authorize a strike.

My bet is the union won’t pull that card. The cast cannot afford to not be without a paycheck.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Imagine someone like Chapek, who may never be able to find another position again.

If only the world could be so lucky.

Giving more in wages to the employees effectively takes money away from the customers and the investors, so if it must be done, it must be done with a clear understanding that it was absolutely necessary.

This is a weird over-simplified take. A company like Disney has salaries all over the map.

Is it absolutely necessary to have equity dancers on the castle stage? I mean six flags hires dancers right out of high school so why shouldn’t Disney?

The idea that the BOD is going to question a few dollars per hour raise when turnover needs to be kept down and new hires need to be rolling in is silly. Especially at the one division of the company that is making money.

 

[Lilofan]

If only the world could be so lucky.

This is a weird over-simplified take. A company like Disney has salaries all over the map.

Is it absolutely necessary to have equity dancers on the castle stage? I mean six flags hires dancers right out of high school so why shouldn’t Disney?

The idea that the BOD is going to question a few dollars per hour raise when turnover needs to be kept down and new hires need to be rolling in is silly. Especially at the one division of the company that is making money.

Trying to compare six flags entertainment to the Disney entertainment is like night and day.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Trying to compare six flags entertainment to the Disney entertainment is like night and day.

Others have compared Disney CM salaries to regional theme park salaries in this thread.

 

[Lilofan]

Others have compared Disney CM salaries to regional theme park salaries in this thread.

Do the regional theme parks open 365 days a year like WDW ?

 

[eliza61nyc]

So Disney is wrong? That’s your positionally finally? Because they’re looking.

But they are also managing to operate daily, so the need is not great enough where they feel they should increase the salary.
And it's a national problem, stores, restaurants, hotels all around the country have been chronically short staffed very few if any have moved the dial much on wages

 

[eliza61nyc]

Others have compared Disney CM salaries to regional theme park salaries in this thread.

I did, I lumped them all into the hospitality/entertainment industry. Only because I can't think of any other "industry " to stick them in. I would have compared them in the "media" category but I don't think the parks really are media.
Often companies will have "comparables" when discussing compensation. They will say "our salaries are competitive with others in our industry". So the question is not could a ride loader live off his salary but is his salary competitive to a ride loader at universal.
If a business is looking for a receptionist they are asking "what is the average salary for receptionist in my area" usually they are not asking can the receptionist live off of this wage.

 

[eliza61nyc]

This is a general question,
Back in the dark ages when I was a senior there was an occupational book from the government that listed a crap load of jobs and their salaries along with what you had to do to get that job.
Anyone remember what it's called?

 

[lazyboy97o]

But they are also managing to operate daily, so the need is not great enough where they feel they should increase the salary.
And it's a national problem, stores, restaurants, hotels all around the country have been chronically short staffed very few if any have moved the dial much on wages

They’re operating at reduced capacity. Venues are still closed because the staffing is not there.

Disney is not some small business, they have the means to do something.

 

[eliza61nyc]

They’re operating at reduced capacity. Venues are still closed because the staffing is not there.

Disney is not some small business, they have the means to do something.

No one is disputing the size or profitability of Disney as a company. The basic question is, is the labor shortage bad enough where the company feels the need to add extra incentives to get workers.
This labor shortage has been going on since we've reopened the world from covid. No one that I've heard has significantly increased their wages especially at the entry level

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

This labor shortage has been going on since we've reopened the world from covid. No one that I've heard has significantly increased their wages especially at the entry level

So the solution is to continue operating with a shortage of labor?

There are ineeed 2 conversations happening in this thread. 1. Is specific to WDW, the other is part of the larger question on what is fair compensation for a full time job.

Some suggest that Disney CM’s are not worthy of higher pay because they are “unskilled” and aren’t smart enough to “get a real job.” It seems to genuinely upset some that Disney may consider paying more.

 

[el_super]

So Disney is wrong? That’s your positionally finally? Because they’re looking.

It's an assumption on your part, and one that is quite possibly incorrect, that they NEED to be fully staffed. It's a further assumption that increases in labor would have a dramatic increase on revenue, and additional that they can just throw money at the labor issue and resolve it.

Even if Disney thought they were "understaffed" by some small percentage, the idea of throwing $100M-$200M to resolve it might not make financial sense.

The idea that the BOD is going to question a few dollars per hour raise when turnover needs to be kept down and new hires need to be rolling in is silly. Especially at the one division of the company that is making money.

The operating costs at the parks have absolutely been questioned. Not just by the board but by investors as well. They've actually been noting the increase in operating costs since Galaxy's Edge opened at Disneyland, so it's definitely been mentioned. The margins still, overall look pretty good, but it's important to remember that they look good because of of their current cost control efforts, of which the labor budget is one.

 

[el_super]

So the solution is to continue operating with a shortage of labor?

To what degree is there a shortage of labor? Just simply stating this as fact isn't really helpful to the discussion.

Disney knows exactly where they want their labor levels at, and exactly at what wages they want to offer to get there.

They're also not afraid to offer incentives and bonuses outside the purview of the contract if they think it will help get them where they want to be. They could be (and probably are- I haven't looked) offering incentives right now. If those are not working, what makes you sure that an increase in wages would?