For many Disney jobs, the future is part time

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
For many Disney jobs, the future is part time
Company strategy comes amid bid to slash costs, increase profits

By Sean Mussenden | Sentinel Staff Writer
Posted December 5, 2004


Walt Disney World is in the midst of a major expansion of its part-time work force, a cost-cutting measure that will make it harder for low-wage tourism workers to build a full-time career at the giant resort.

In the past decade, the number of part-timers at Disney's parks and hotels has grown nearly 10 times faster than the number of full-timers, part of a national trend toward temporary work.

Now, in an effort to increase profits in its rebounding theme-park division by reducing labor costs, the region's largest employer has signaled plans to bring in even more part-timers to operate rides, dress up as Mickey and Minnie, and clean hotel rooms.

"You want to have a good mix of full-time and part-time workers. Obviously full-time workers cost more than part-time workers, and you don't need everyone who works for you planning to work five or six days a week," said Disney World Senior Vice President Jerry Montgomery.

Disney, like many companies, does not offer its part-timers health coverage or a retirement plan, and worker advocates fear the company's strategy ultimately will deprive thousands of full-time-job seekers of those benefits.

An increase in part-time jobs, the advocates argue, also will leave Disney with a less committed work force that turns over more frequently, something they say could hurt the company's bottom line.

"These are the people who are supposed to be presenting the smiling face of the parks," said Joe Condo, president of the Service Trades Council, a group of six unions representing 22,000 hotel and theme-park workers, about 40 percent of all Disney employees.

Part-timers at Disney put in less than 25 hours per week, or work more than 25 hours per week less than seven months of the year. They include students in Disney's College Program and seasonal workers.

The federal government's definition of part-time workers -- a person working up to 35 hours per week -- would cover some full-time Disney employees, the bulk of whom are guaranteed only 32 hours per week.

As Walt Disney World has grown during the past 33 years, the balance of full-time and part-time employees has constantly evolved, with the number of part-timers increasing during peak times of the year.

Since 1994, Disney has added 9,400 part-time employees -- an increase of 140 percent -- while adding 5,000 full-timers -- an increase of 15 percent. A decade ago, part-timers made up 17 percent of Disney's work force. Today, 30 percent of the 53,800 employees are part-timers.

Now, their ranks are poised to grow even more.

Under the terms of Disney's new employment contract with the Service Trades Council, the company is allowed to use part-timers for 35 percent of all hours worked in union jobs.

Last year, though, the company used part-timers for only 21 percent of those hours, according to union officials with access to company data.

During negotiations for the new, three-year employment contract with the unions earlier this year, company officials signaled to union leaders their intention to move much closer to the 35 percent cap in the next few years.

Disney also pushed to increase the part-timer cap to 40 percent. Company negotiators backed off that demand only after the unions promised not to file a federal labor complaint against Disney if the company went above 35 percent in the last year of the contract.

Disney declined to comment on specific percentages, but there are signs that the increases already have begun.

Between mid-June and the start of the holiday season this year -- two of Disney's busiest times -- the total number of employees increased by 200 to 53,800. During that period, the company added 1,200 part-timers while cutting the number of full-time jobs by 1,000.

Disney executives said they had no plans to lay off full-timers as they increase the number of part-time employees; part-timers would fill newly created positions or replace full-timers who leave, they said.

Ultimately, that could make it harder for full-time job seekers to do what Barbara Williams did 30 years ago -- begin a long career at Disney's Contemporary Resort.

Her job -- serving food alongside Mickey Mouse at character breakfasts -- isn't always glamorous, she said. But it offers health care, a pension and decent tips.

"You don't go around bragging that you wait tables, but it's an honest living," she said. "Once we're dead, there will be fewer full-timers, that's for sure."

Human-resource experts said Disney is not alone in its part-time push.

National labor statistics show the number of people working part time has increased 22 percent in the past 15 years, while full-time workers have gone up 16 percent. The growth in the number of part-time jobs could be even larger, because someone working two part-time jobs could be considered a full-timer.

And overwhelming anecdotal evidence shows that more and more companies are going Disney's route, said John A. Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, a human-resources consulting firm.

"If you think back 20 years, it seemed that most everyone worked for a company on a full-time permanent basis. The way people work with organizations has been transformed," he said.

While part-timers allow more flexibility -- a crucial element for the seasonal theme-park business -- Challenger said companies need to be aware of the tradeoffs. "There are issues of quality of work, commitment of people to the organization," and pay issues, he said.

Walt Disney World President Al Weiss, in a brief interview last week, said such issues are not as pressing to Disney's "unique" part-time work force.

The bulk of Disney's part-timers, he said, are people who want to work shorter hours for personal reasons or are students in Disney's College Program angling for a permanent management position with the company.

"We find them to be among our most motivated workers," he said.

Weiss said there were no current plans to extend health-care benefits to part-timers.

A Disney spokesman suggested that typical Disney part-timers do not need health-care benefits because they are students covered by their parents' insurance or adults covered by their spouses' plans.

Nationally, 28 percent of all part-time workers are covered by a family member's health plan, according to census statistics.

Another 28 percent are covered by their own employers. Most of the rest are on government health-care plans or are uninsured.

Gina McCormick started out at Disney as a part-timer last year to earn extra money for her family. She didn't need health insurance because she was covered by her husband's employer. When they split, she suddenly needed full-time work and health coverage.

She found it quickly, a full-time slot working on the train at Disney's Animal Kingdom.

"Most people couldn't believe I got a full-time job so quick," she said. Since then, she has seen a number of former full-time positions in her work area remain open. "They're filling the time with part-timers. It does cut their costs, which is why we don't understand why they don't want to pay us more," she said.

Disney executives have told Wall Street that overcoming increases in labor costs will be key to expanding profit margins in the parks and resorts division.

Last month, Disney significantly increased health-care premiums for 22,000 Service Trades Council union workers -- more than doubling weekly payments in some cases.

"The company has made promises to Wall Street," said Paul Kim, an analyst who tracks the Walt Disney Co. for New York-based Tradition Asiel Securities. "One way they [make good on those promises] is to significantly trim their biggest expenses through increased health premiums or cuts in full-time costs."

Sean Mussenden can be reached at smussenden@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-5664.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
As a quick comparison:

WDW Currently has:

37,700 Full-Time Employees
16,100 Part-Time Employees

Tokyo Disney Resort has:

2,195 Full-Time Employees
17,986 Part-Time Employees
 

General Grizz

New Member
Ah, yes, another reason why I'm not fond of the College Program growing. From what I hear, the majority of the kids just don't care, and when it takes away from those who know and love Disney the best, we lose the magic.

This is all part of Disney's attempt to save money. The opportunity cost? MAGIC and GOOD SERVICE. I'm not saying that all part-timers are bad, but I've known many seasonal workers who just go to Disney to "get tickets" and "goof off;" if this is at the expense of our favorite magical Cast Members, Disney's headed into the wrong direction. Save money? Sure. Disney also saves some money from outsourcing animation to India, making Walt Disney Imagineering per-project and unstable, and putting cost-cutting measures on animation. What is their result?

CRAP, to put it nicely.

This could also parallell the recent cutbacks at the Magic of Disney Animation (PLEASE READ LINK ON SIGNATURE).

Disney should know that decreases in the magic will result in poor Cast and Guest sentiment, and when it comes time, the guests will respond, I'm sure even if it takes a massive protest effort.

Oh yeah: HAPPY BIRTHDAY, WALT DISNEY
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Does it not make sense for WDW to ahve a significant part-time (seasonal or whatever) workforce?

It is not like business levels are the same every day of the year......the park does not need the same level of staffing in September and October as they do in June and July.

Sure, they could fill all of the positions with full-timers, but then they would need to lay-off a ton of people during each slow period.

The union wanted "guranteed hours"....well, in the hospitality business, where there is not the same amount of work to be done every day/week/month of the year....THIS is a byproduct of their demand.
 

General Grizz

New Member
speck76 said:
Does it not make sense for WDW to have a significant part-time (seasonal or whatever) workforce?

Yes, it does make sense. Keep in mind I'm not objecting to the entire article. My argument is, and this is not necessarily 100% true right now, but it could be in the future: I won't be cool with College Program kids or other "uncaring" (this is in GENERAL, please don't get me wrong) Cast Members displacing those (fulltime, seasonal, or parttime) more "magical" Cast Members -- who have had a longterm position at Disney.

Similarly, it is NOT cool to have regular operations Cast Members to replace Disney Artists, for example, just because it is cost cutting.

You just have to wonder, WHERE will they go next? At this rate, how far is the College Program going to GROW a few years from now? And what will the effects be on the longterm (seasonal, fulltime, or parttime) Cast?
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
General Grizz said:
Yes, it does make sense. Keep in mind I'm not objecting to the entire article. My argument is, and this is not necessarily 100% true right now, but it could be in the future: I won't be cool with College Program kids or other "uncaring" (this is in GENERAL, please don't get me wrong) Cast Members displacing those (fulltime, seasonal, or parttime) more "magical" Cast Members -- who have had a longterm position at Disney.

Similarly, it is NOT cool to have regular operations Cast Members to replace Disney Artists, for example, just because it is cost cutting.

You just have to wonder, WHERE will they go next? At this rate, how far is the College Program going to GROW a few years from now? And what will the effects be on the longterm (seasonal, fulltime, or parttime) Cast?

Part of the problem is that it is hard to find "Disney Quality" for $7/hour.

Even though a small minority of CP kids "don't care", I would rather see an attractive, well maintained CP kid doing custodial work in the parks than some 40yr old redneck.

The labor pool is very small for unskilled labor....and most of the people in that pool either don't speak English, or you would not want to see them in the parks anyway.

I believe CP kids are the better of the two options here.....they just needto be more selective.
 

General Grizz

New Member
speck76 said:
Even though a small minority of CP kids "don't care", I would rather see an attractive, well maintained CP kid doing custodial work in the parks than some 40yr old redneck.

OUCH. :D

Actually, correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority of CP kids are at attractions, food and beverage, etc. I'm not trying to attack all of the College Program students; all of the ones I know on this forums I consider the biggest Disney fans I know. But from many recounts, I haven't heard the majority have a true passion for Disney/truly care for the job as a longterm employee would (Vista L-I mean-Bay? :zipit: ).

Seriously, though, I don't know if this has happened yet, but if the CP increases, I don't think it would affect the "40yr old redneck," but rather the traditional Disney "magic maker" Cast Member. We already see it in animation.
 

speck76

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
General Grizz said:
OUCH. :D

Actually, correct me if I'm wrong, but the majority of CP kids are at attractions, food and beverage, etc. I'm not trying to attack all of the College Program students; all of the ones I know on this forums I consider the biggest Disney fans I know. But from many recounts, I haven't heard the majority have a true passion for Disney/truly care for the job as a longterm employee would (Vista L-I mean-Bay? :zipit: ).

Seriously, though, I don't know if this has happened yet, but if the CP increases, I don't think it would affect the "40yr old redneck," but rather the traditional Disney "magic maker" Cast Member. We already see it in animation.

I see your point, I really do, but the labor pool in Orlando is not the greatest, and until it gets better, I think the options are very limited.

And again, one example (Animation) does not create a trend.

On the other hand, many of the current FT's are not masters of magic either......I guess to employ 55K people in any city.......some "crap" is going to slip through in the process.
 

se8472

Well-Known Member
I find it so odd that people see the CP as something that is taking away from FTers.

From what I have seen. We are there to do things that the FT's don't want to do. They don't want to be there on Christmas/New Years or other holidays. Nor do they want to be there at night.

This is where the CP's come in. We keep the magic open late.

And once again I must say. that there are just as many bad FT CM's as there are bad CP, PT, Seasonal and everything else. There are good and bad CM's in a ll the pools in equal numbers.
 

sj03gcs

New Member
I'm joining the CP in January and I'm in the program till Aug. I will make sure that each and every one of you get the magic that you want. So come and find me someplace doing merch.


Scott
 

WDWCPbrandon

New Member
From what I have seen. We are there to do things that the FT's don't want to do. They don't want to be there on Christmas/New Years or other holidays. Nor do they want to be there at night.


I agree with this...CP's definitely do a lot of things that FT's usually do not work, such as the later shifts and the events such as Grad Nite. When I was a CP I could remember only mostly CP's working in my area during Grad Nite and maybe one or two FT cast memebers.

BTW, I just got accepted for rehire at Disney as a PT attractions cast member and thought it was kind of odd to see this story on the very front page of Orlando Sentinel this morning. I was just discussing with one of my friends last night how I hope I will have the opportunity to move up to a FT position with the company once I finish school.

A friend of mine decided to stay in Orlando after we completed our college program and stayed with Disney as a PT cast member and moved up to a manager after about a year and half later.
 

CTXRover

Well-Known Member
I think its kind of ironic to put down the CP program as being CM's who are "less nice" or "lower quality". I've read countless threads with lines like "I don't know if its because of the influx of College Program kids, but the friendliness of CM's was better than I remember", etc. I've experience that myself...it does seem that in general the CP workers tend to be more friendly and more eager to strike up a conversation than what I assume are "full-timers". Now this doesn't go for all CP CM's (there's a good hanful of lousy ones too), nor does it mean that the "regulars" aren't better than they are, I just find it ironic that in some threads folks will credit the CP CM's for better, friendlier service vs previous trips and other threads accuse them of being the result of decreasing helpfulness/quality of CM's......

Anyway, in regards to more part-time jobs, it may just be the culture differences between here and Japan or the differences in the way the resorts are run, but TDL has some of the best CM's at any Disney resort. If such a majority of their workers are part-time vs full-time vs what WDW offers, perhaps more part-timers could be better. Don't know.....could turn around and bit them in the 'butt'. Of course, switching to more part-time positions could also mean the ability to hire more CM's total during busier seasons which could mean better service and cleaner parks when they get "swamped" with guests.
 

HennieBogan1966

Account Suspended
So let's see there's the 40 yr old redneck, non-english speaking, uncaring cp cms that we are talking about here?

Let's face facts, that the part-time is less expensive for the bottom line of any company. And as the largest employer in the US, I'm thinking a little latitude might be in order here. They've managed to survive all these years, and something tells me that trend will continue.

There's some truth to the idea that you get what you pay for with regard to pay scales. But if they were to increase the min. to 8$/hr. how much do you think that would cost the guests? And with increased costs comes lower attendance levels. And with that, lower payroll numbers from upper mgmt.

So, pick your poison. Lower wages, with more stable weekly payroll #s. Or higher wages, with no guarantee of min. work hours. Or, keep some FT, sprinkle in some PT, CP, etc, and let the FT get the better hours, (it's called seniority), more stable hours per work week. I think that those who want their cake and to eat it too, do so, at the expense of the majority. So, do they REALLY care about the company or themselves? Don't get me wrong, you have to look out for numero uno. Just don't do it behind the veil of "doing what's best for the company", when what you really want is a better life for yourselves. Again, nothing wrong with that, just admit that's what it's REALLY about.
 

niteobsrvr

Well-Known Member
General Grizz said:
Ah, yes, another reason why I'm not fond of the College Program growing. From what I hear, the majority of the kids just don't care, and when it takes away from those who know and love Disney the best, we lose the magic.

This is all part of Disney's attempt to save money. The opportunity cost? MAGIC and GOOD SERVICE. I'm not saying that all part-timers are bad, but I've known many seasonal workers who just go to Disney to "get tickets" and "goof off;" if this is at the expense of our favorite magical Cast Members, Disney's headed into the wrong direction. Save money? Sure. Disney also saves some money from outsourcing animation to India, making Walt Disney Imagineering per-project and unstable, and putting cost-cutting measures on animation. What is their result?

CRAP, to put it nicely.

This could also parallell the recent cutbacks at the Magic of Disney Animation (PLEASE READ LINK ON SIGNATURE).

Disney should know that decreases in the magic will result in poor Cast and Guest sentiment, and when it comes time, the guests will respond, I'm sure even if it takes a massive protest effort.

Oh yeah: HAPPY BIRTHDAY, WALT DISNEY

Maybe just maybe the cast members will be happier. For those folks trying to support a family on Disney wages, you live for overtime. Not jsut a little bit but in many case 10 to 20 hours a week and in some cases more in overitme to make ends meet. That usually doesnt make for a very happy employee and then consider the fact that over the years the guests have become one heck of a lot ruder with a me, me ,me attitude, makes for fulltime people who are starting to care less and less everyday anyway.

Its interesting here. Universal has more part time than full time employees and I find them to be more friendly and genuine than the Disney CM's. It seems every time I go to Disney, the cast members are readin a script and the sincereity is lacking and forced. Is their not something else you can be asked besides "Where are you from?". I have heard that from the wait staff at each of the Disney restaurants I have eaten at in the last several months. Someone please let the creativity begin.

I have had cms doing crowd control get ticked at me even though they were not clear about where they wanted me to move to and a group of freinds and I were litterally told to "move our conversations outside" in a very unfriendly tone at 10 mins till 2 from the Rock and Roll Beach Club because they were closed.

Before every cast member jumps to these folks defense, let me say, I am a cast member and I find much more exciting things to talk about and nicer ways to get guests to do things that what I have encountered form other cast members.
 

Rosso11

Well-Known Member
I worked at the Magic Kingdom in Food and Beverage as a CP and I know first hand how wonderful the CPs are. There are always excepetions but to call the CPs uncaring is ridiculous. The CPs are extremely motivated to be there. Unlike many full-timers we are not motivated by money since we only get $6 an hour with zero chance of a raise. We are there because we love Disney and want to be a part of it. We get the worst hours and the worst jobs in all of Disney World and we do it with a smile. Also a very large portion of full-timers and managers were at one time CPs. The College program is how they recruit us. Disney World needs the College Program and greatly benefits from it in many ways including a highly motivated workforce who love Disney and still believe in the magic.
 

HennieBogan1966

Account Suspended
What I find interesting in some of these threads regarding cm attitudes, union negotiations, pay scales, etc. is how the "happiness" of cms is sometimes tied to the size of their paycheck. Here's my issue with this.

When a person is hired into ANY job they agree to a certain pay rate. They also understand that any pay increases are almost always tied to performance, and NOT, contrary to popular opinion on this and many other Disney pay arguments, the cost of living. Yet, the argument is almost always made by some of my comprades here that "a well paid cm is a happy cm." Like somehow if they aren't then buyer beware.

I believe this speaks to a larger issue within our society today which says pay me before I prove my value to you. You need look no further than the world of sport for proof of that attitude.

So when I hear people comment on getting paid more being tied to being a happier, better cm, I have to laugh. It's an attitudinal and societal issue, and NOT a pay issue.
 

CRO-Magnum

Active Member
This is simply good corporate policy

Regardless of location in the world, it is always in the employer's best interest to manage wages and benefits. As someone who's seen their compensation reduced by over 35% in the past four years while healthcare costs of tripled I have had to recognize the real issue. Skill availability.

It's supply and demand economics. If Disney feels there are adequate people who can perform their job as part-time employees then they have a fiscal responsibility to the stock holders to create the part-time positions and eliminate full-time positions. Only when they can't hire part-timers who meet their criteria, due to availability or turnover, will they consider increasing wages or adding benefits. Once those costs near full-time employment only then should the change be made. I'll bet nobody complains when jobs are moved from part to full-time.

Don't forget it's not about your ability to earn a good living. That is an employee not employer problem. Companies are not welfare institutions. By definition a low or no skill job is a low value service and therefore deserves low wages. Anybody can fill a coke cup regardless of how haggard they become on a hot day. Want to earn a good living? Go train for and get a high value job such as a radiologist or dentist. Don't blame the employer because you have low value skills.

Remember that high skill jobs continuously migrate down the food chain to low or no skill. For example computer programming used to be a high skill job but today has dropped to a medium and will be a low skill job in 20 years (exceptions will always exist). Radiologists are starting to worry about competition from India now that hospitals are moving to electronic images.

Scarcity drives compensation. To be the best waiter in the world you are one of tens of millions and if you don't show up to work someone else will handle your tables and if someone doesn't patrons will go to other restaurants. To be the best cardiologist in the world you are one of thousands and if you don't show up to work somebody may die.
 

Woody13

New Member
speck76 said:
As a quick comparison:

WDW Currently has:

37,700 Full-Time Employees
16,100 Part-Time Employees

Tokyo Disney Resort has:

2,195 Full-Time Employees
17,986 Part-Time Employees
WOW! I did not realize that 70% of the WDW staff is full-time. :eek:
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom