LA Times: Is Disney Paying Its Fair Share In Anaheim

[SuddenStorm]

Due to Fair Use rules, I am only going to list the Paragraphs Titles, the details for each point at the link.

http://www.anaheimblog.net/2018/03/...ing-anaheim-resort-unions-18-wage-initiative/

>>Good Reasons For Not Signing Anaheim Resort Unions’ $18 Wage Initiative

The Union Initiative Will Destroy Existing Jobs And Suppress Hiring.

It Would Give Anaheim The Highest Labor Costs In The Nation

It’s Unnecessary

It Won’t Make Housing More Affordable

This Initiative Turns The Anaheim City Manager Into A Labor Cop

It Arbitrarily, Unjustly and Unfairly Changes Contracts After The Fact

What value is a contract if one party can unilaterally change the terms to the detriment of the other party? That’s what the union’s “living wage” initiative does. It targets Anaheim Resort businesses that have any sort of economic assistance agreement with the City of Anaheim. These businesses entered into these agreements in good faith that both parties would abide by the mutually agreeable terms of the agreements. The union initiative would unilaterally and retroactively impose on those businesses wage floor requirements that would have been rejected if they had been part of the original negotiations.


UNITE-HERE and its union comrades want to abuse the ballot box to re-write existing contracts without the agreement of the parties to those contracts. Even Councilman Jose F. Moreno – an ardent opponent of the 4-Diamond hotel TOT rebate agreements – has said the city would be in breach of contract if it tried to unilaterally alter them. Yet that is what the union coalition initiative would do. That is how governments in banana republics operate, not in nation’s founded on the rule of law.


It Is The Camel’s Nose Under The Tent

The Coalition of Labor Resort Unions’ $18 minimum wage initiative is a cruel hoax. There are many reasons not to sign it and none to recommend its support. It makes false promises to the workers it professes to benefit because it is based on magical thinking and discredited economic theories. Politicizing Anaheim’s economy and injecting city government into labor disputes will hobble rather than help economic opportunity and growth in the city.<<

Once again, the detail for each point is at the link.

I agree. All this is about is the Unions trying to avoid direct negations with the companies, both Union and Non-Union, to convert even more members to be unionized.


And why does the proposition say that you can’t take into consideration tips to see if they are making a “living wage”?


Why should we give a wage increase to the Hotel Valet? An average Valet can easily make over $50 a hour in Tips. (Park 10 cars in a hour, get a $5 tip on each one, sometimes more, sometimes a lot more) And that money is hard to track for income tax purposes and goes underreported by many. So it is worth more than the equivalent in wages. Plus they get the full state minimum wage. Now this proposition would give that person an extra $3 per hour. Same for the Bell Hop, Concierge, Front Desk person, the server, the bartender, the maid, etc. Why shouldn’t we look at their TRUE income, instead of the way the Union wants us to look at it? The proposition is flawed.


How is increasing wages for some going to reduce homelessness? There are only so many housing units in the area, due to supply and demand, those with the extra revenue will be willing to pay more for an apartment, so they will take away apartments from other lower income earners working for someone not receiving city subsidies.


Also, due to changing/voiding contracts already signed by the city, this proposition could cost the city Millions in legal fees, and possibly be one the hook for the increased wage amount, which could bankrupt the city.


So why place it on the ballot, which would cost the city money due to the Register of Voters?

As with all politics...

 

[Darkbeer1]

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/03/...e-for-disneyland-resort-several-other-hotels/

>>A coalition that includes Anaheim Councilwoman Kris Murray, the Orange County Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the county chapter of the California Restaurant Association launched a campaign Friday to block a measure that would raise the minimum wage for some hotel and restaurant workers.<<


>>Disneyland Resort spokeswoman Liz Jaeger said the company is proud to be Anaheim’s largest employer and taxpayer, but “if this measure is passed, we believe it will have severe unintended negative consequences that could harm working families and our community.” Disney, with the coalition, will help fund the opposition campaign, she said.


Ballot measure proponents must turn in signatures by June.<<

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Disneyland Resort spokeswoman Liz Jaeger said the company is proud to be Anaheim’s largest employer and taxpayer

LOL... they're still repeating that old nonsense? One of the reasons local wages are depressed is because ONE COMPANY has the monopoly on hiring service employees in the county.

but “if this measure is passed, we believe it will have severe unintended negative consequences that could harm working families and our community.”

What else would a greedy global multi-billion dollar corporation say? On this issue Disney is no different than Exxon, banks, Walmart, McDonald's, etc., and I find it disgusting.

Disney, with the coalition, will help fund the opposition campaign, she said.

Of course. This kind of BS from Disney makes my blood boil. They will fight this to the death claiming it's a financial burden, dump millions to overthrow the legislation, and then hike ticket prices right on schedule immediately after they win. Meanwhile their employees will continue to make sh*t for pay.

 

[Darkbeer1]

Open Letter from Trevor O’Neil, who is a candidate for Anaheim City Council, District 6.

>>Anaheim voters will soon be asked to sign a petition for a ballot measure that would increase the minimum wage in the Resort District to $18 per hour. Don’t do it. Masked by the notion of securing a living wage for hard-working men and women trying to raise a family, this initiative is really part of a grand scheme to force the unionization of thousands of hotel, hospitality, and restaurant workers in Orange County’s tourism hub. Labor unions are not getting what they want, so they are now threatening to exact their vengeance on the entire Resort economy through the ballot box.

At $18 per hour, Anaheim would have the plaintive distinction of having the highest minimum wage in the country – more than even the “progressive” enclaves of San Francisco, Berkeley, Oakland, and San Jose. As the minimum wage policies of those cities demonstrate, these sorts of mandates exacerbate the very problem they set out to address. They do nothing to improve housing affordability or lower the cost of living; instead, they have the reverse effect due to the inflationary cost of providing goods and services due to the mandate itself, killing jobs in the process. Further, an artificially high minimum wage floor takes away the incentive for workers to improve their skills and move up the career ladder and punishes those workers who have worked hard to do just that.


The unions argue that the City of Anaheim has provided economic incentives to some Resort area businesses, such as sales and room tax rebates, and because of that they should be forced to pay more to their workers. These economic incentives are not uncommon among cities and are used as tools to grow the economy and create new jobs. In Anaheim, these incentives have brought in and will continue to bring in millions of dollars in net new revenue to the City, which goes to fund public safety, parks, utilities, and other vital city services without the need to raise taxes on residents.


As a business owner myself, I am no stranger to these sorts of strong-arm union tactics. In 2014, the Service Employees International Union tried to force the unionization of California’s private in-home care industry by threatening us with a similarly extortive ballot measure. I led the statewide coalition to fight it, and we prevailed. That’s the kind of experience and leadership we need in Anaheim. Our economic prosperity, and therefore the health of our entire city, depends upon it.


Don’t sign the petition.<<

 

[Deleted member 107043]

They do nothing to improve housing affordability or lower the cost of living; instead, they have the reverse effect due to the inflationary cost of providing goods and services due to the mandate itself, killing jobs in the process.

So Berkeley and other "progressive" California cities no longer have jobs? Is Disneyland going to pack up and leave Anaheim if this passes?

 

[Disney Irish]

So Berkeley and other "progressive" California cities no longer have jobs? Is Disneyland going to pack up and leave Anaheim if this passes?

No I think you missed the point, the Bay Area for all the increases in minimum wage has not had any effect on the living situation. The region still has all same issues with affordable living conditions that it did before the minimum wage increase. In fact it can be said that the region costs even more because of the increased cost to consumers. This is because of the cost of the minimum wage increase is passed directly onto the consumer.

So in turn increasing the minimum wage in the Resort District will only have one affect, increase in prices for consumers, and do nothing about the cost of living in the region. That is the point.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

So in turn increasing the minimum wage in the Resort District will only have one affect, increase in prices for consumers,

Oh brother. One thing I can guarantee you: Disney will raise prices regardless of whether they increase worker compensation or not. The primary reason it doesn't want to offer its workers better wages is because it wants to keep as much revenue for itself as possible.

 

[Disney Irish]

Oh brother. One thing I can guarantee you: Disney will raise prices regardless of whether they increase worker compensation or not. The primary reason it doesn't want to offer its workers better wages is because it wants to keep as much revenue for itself as possible.

Except this doesn't affect just Disney, it affect the entire Resort District. I know the focus of this board is Disney, but you have to think about the rest of the businesses in the Resort District, hotels, restaurants, etc. All of those businesses will have to raise their prices to offset the cost of the increase. So you think the cost of a hotel room near the park is expensive now.....

And again it still does nothing to take care of the real issue which is affordable housing.

 

[Travel Junkie]

While Disney is fighting against paying their lowest paid employees more, Mr. Bob Iger may get as much as $423 million in his latest deal.

http://deadline.com/2018/03/disney-ceo-bob-iger-compensation-423-million-iss-analysis-1202339376/

"A majority of Disney shareholders — 52% — opposed Iger’s compensation and that of other executives in a non-binding advisory vote. The vote tally was reported during Disney’s March 8 annual shareholder meeting in Houston."

Perhaps Disney should be looking to shave money off the top instead of the bottom. A majority of shareholders seem to think so at least.

 

[Darkbeer1]

Maybe Mr. Iger is getting more because he made one of the biggest business deal in history in getting most of the Fox assets, plus the Sky deal, setting Disney up for the long term, protecting many jobs, and the opportunity for new ones.

Remember that Mr. Iger was about ready to retire and walk away from the company, but the board wanted to keep him for a few more years.

As for shaving off things, In Anaheim, where plenty of jobs are open, Disney has offered in increase in pay, plus the new educational funding available, plus I presume an increase in the costs of benefits the company will be paying. But still, there are plenty of folks applying for jobs currently at the parks, so many would be happy to accept the current offer, if the current employees prefer to work elsewhere.

If Disney didn't think they could fill the new positions for Galaxy Edge and Marvel Land, they would raise the wages offered.

 

[Darkbeer1]

Let's look at the basic housing situation in Anaheim. There is a limited amount of rental units available, and only a few projects that have been approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. And due to all the regulations and red tape, very few in the pipeline in requests to be allowed to bill.

So it is a Landlord's market.

If this proposition passes, a select group of Resort area employees will get more pay, while many other worker's won't.

So that means some current renters will be forced to move, as the typical rent amount will go up slightly due to the higher demand.

So this proposition would hurt those at the bottom of the ladder, and why the government should stay out of increasing some select group of people. Let the free market work. If those currently in the Anaheim area can't find a job that matches their skill level, then maybe they need to follow the path chosen by many other Californians, especially the middle class, and move to an area where the percentage of housing costs is lower, many places, much lower than in Anaheim.

For decades, people have talked about a "Sunshine Tax", and that is true today. But the extra costs related to living near the coastline are true, since not everyone can live there, due to limited space.

A local radio station recently read an e-mail from a social worker who works for Los Angeles County, and how she was so frustrated that the homeless she was trying to help turn down housing/shelter voucher for many parts of the city, only willing to accept the Venice Beach/Santa Monica area. She stated she has an over than 3 hour daily commute to work to afford her housing, and then to see folks refuse help just because they didn't want to be relocated to Burbank......

Anyway, it looks like it will cost the unions a lot more than originally expected to find the 20,000 signatures, based on the phone polling of Anaheim Registered voters, since most of them have no desire to sign the petition. Plus the current likelihood of passage if it qualifies for the ballot, which is currently at a 60% + chance of failure.

 

[The Mur]

Here is a interesting article that popped up on my feed - Outside Disneyland, a Reminder for Governments to Be Careful What They Wish for

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Here is a interesting article that popped up on my feed - Outside Disneyland, a Reminder for Governments to Be Careful What They Wish for

A fantastic in-depth article and a great find. Thanks for sharing. A few takeaways:

Moreno [Anaheim City Council member] doesn’t deny that Disneyland and the resort area that encompasses it are net contributors to Anaheim’s budget. The city’s budget office estimates that in 2017, the city netted $81.6 million from the resort district, primarily in the form of hotel occupancy taxes. But he worries that Disney revenues are “a drug” that has hooked Anaheim on low-skill, low-wage jobs.

It’s a perspective that urban writer Joel Kotkin says is well-founded. “Disney really contributes very little given the size of the company relative to the city.” Where it has spent freely, Kotkin adds, is on politics. “It’s a problem when you have a gigantic company in a poor town and you can buy the politicians,” he says. “Disney has done a very good job of buying politicians.”

This times 1,000.

Also this:

Cities everywhere have become increasingly focused on doing whatever it takes -- handing out massive tax breaks, land deals and other subsidies -- to attract large corporations and the jobs they provide. (The best and most recent example, of course, is the municipal arms race over the second headquarters of Amazon.) But the battle taking place in Anaheim is not just about when or how to provide economic assistance packages. Rather, the situation raises profound questions about governing multinational corporations that dominate a locality’s economy, especially at a time when a Fortune 500 company’s annual revenue can easily dwarf a city’s budget. It’s a reminder that sometimes cities should be careful what they wish for. Once you land a corporate giant, it’s not always easy to know what to do with it.

Finally this:

To Moreno, it was a deal that symbolized everything that was wrong with the status quo. “You are talking about a corporation that has the resources to buy the Star Wars film franchise for $4 billion,” he says, “and then turns around and says, ‘We want to build a hotel to expand our business, but to do that we don’t want you to ever tax us.’”

It was a position that struck Moreno as ridiculous. “That’s where you say, ‘Wait a minute.’”

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

If you can't afford to pay a livable wage, you can't afford to be in business. It's that simple.

California has a high livable wage bar due to high cost of living. If you can't afford to pay livable wages, you're asking your employees to live in poverty to subsidize your desire to own a business. This is entitlement on a level that in other situations, makes conservatives regularly scream. But when it's a corporation, it's fine?

If a job is worth being done, even a menial one, it's worth getting paid enough to live.

And sure, Iger is worth a lot to the company and should be paid accordingly. But no one is worth $423 million, especially when members of the "Disney family" live in their cars.

Pay. Your. Cast.

 

[Disney Irish]

A fantastic in-depth article and a great find. Thanks for sharing. A few takeaways:

Moreno [Anaheim City Council member] doesn’t deny that Disneyland and the resort area that encompasses it are net contributors to Anaheim’s budget. The city’s budget office estimates that in 2017, the city netted $81.6 million from the resort district, primarily in the form of hotel occupancy taxes. But he worries that Disney revenues are “a drug” that has hooked Anaheim on low-skill, low-wage jobs.

It’s a perspective that urban writer Joel Kotkin says is well-founded. “Disney really contributes very little given the size of the company relative to the city.” Where it has spent freely, Kotkin adds, is on politics. “It’s a problem when you have a gigantic company in a poor town and you can buy the politicians,” he says. “Disney has done a very good job of buying politicians.”

This times 1,000.

Also this:

Cities everywhere have become increasingly focused on doing whatever it takes -- handing out massive tax breaks, land deals and other subsidies -- to attract large corporations and the jobs they provide. (The best and most recent example, of course, is the municipal arms race over the second headquarters of Amazon.) But the battle taking place in Anaheim is not just about when or how to provide economic assistance packages. Rather, the situation raises profound questions about governing multinational corporations that dominate a locality’s economy, especially at a time when a Fortune 500 company’s annual revenue can easily dwarf a city’s budget. It’s a reminder that sometimes cities should be careful what they wish for. Once you land a corporate giant, it’s not always easy to know what to do with it.

Finally this:

To Moreno, it was a deal that symbolized everything that was wrong with the status quo. “You are talking about a corporation that has the resources to buy the Star Wars film franchise for $4 billion,” he says, “and then turns around and says, ‘We want to build a hotel to expand our business, but to do that we don’t want you to ever tax us.’”

It was a position that struck Moreno as ridiculous. “That’s where you say, ‘Wait a minute.’”

So in your opinion how much of the Anaheim tax burden should Disney be paying? Its been reported they already pay something like 48%, should it be more? How should it be calculated? Number of residents divided by the amount of their revenue? Then what about impact that would have on the rest of the company?

Then the following should be asked, if Disney is then suppose to be covering more of the Anaheim tax burden shouldn't they have a larger say on how that money is spent? Shouldn't they then have a permanent seat on the city council?

 

[Deleted member 107043]

So in your opinion how much of the Anaheim tax burden should Disney be paying? Its been reported they already pay something like 48%, should it be more? How should it be calculated? Number of residents divided by the amount of their revenue? Then what about impact that would have on the rest of the company?

Then the following should be asked, if Disney is then suppose to be covering more of the Anaheim tax burden shouldn't they have a larger say on how that money is spent? Shouldn't they then have a permanent seat on the city council?

In all seriousness I have a lot of respect for you, and I frequently find your contributions on this site worthwhile, but IMO the post above is total BS. There's nothing you can say that will change my opinion. No need for you to engage me any further here if this is what you're going to throw my way because, as you can tell, I have very strong opinions on this subject.

 

[Disney Irish]

In all seriousness I have a lot of respect for you, and I frequently find your contributions on this site worthwhile, but IMO the post above is total BS. There's nothing you can say that will change my opinion. No need for you to engage me any further here if this is what you're going to throw my way because, as you can tell, I have very strong opinions on this subject.

I understand you have a strong opinion on the subject, as do others. But when open-ended statement like "Disney should pay more" or "Disney pays so little" is thrown around, you have to expect the questions I posted. Because its these question that never get answered.

Just know, I think Disney should pay their employees more, but done smartly. You can't just raise all wages up to x amount just because. It has to be done in a way that will 1. Will make a difference in the region, 2. Not cause a wage issue with the rest of the region, 3. Not cause job loss, 4. And not have an impact on the consumers of the region.

Its the last point above that is what concerns me the most. What are the unintended consequences that will result if wages are increased across the board? Will it cause price increases that make an already expensive area even more expensive, not just Disney? For example, will the local McDonald's have to increase the prices to offset the wage increase. How will that impact the region? Its these larger questions that have me concerned that this is going to be a bad idea in the long run.

Anyways, I respect your point of view, and hope you respect mine even on this topic.

 

[Darkbeer1]

http://www.anaheimblog.net/2018/03/27/14485/

>>Ament noted that the union’s drive to increase the minimum wage to $18 per hour has caused developers of the GardenWalk hotels project to re-consider plans for a second 4-Diamond hotel. Cancelling the second hotel would kill 2,000 construction jobs, 1000 permanent jobs and the loss of $145 million in city tax revenues over the next 25 years.

Councilwoman Murray also inveighed against the Resort unions’ proposal as a job destroyer, saying it would “kill jobs for employees who are represented at the Disneyland hotel that is being proposed.”

Murray said this fight is not “labor versus business,” noting that the building trades unions supported the hotel projects being targeted by the Resort unions initiative – which could torpedo those projects is approved by the voters. She zeroed in on union leaders, saying “this is about one group who make significantly more than the people they represent, not even picking up a phone to try and represent them before these [4-Diamond hotel agreements] were adopted.”

Ruben Gonzalez of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce said he came as “the Ghost of Christmas Future,” noting the wage increase the Anaheim Resort unions are pushing has been imposed in Los Angeles. A special district was created requiring a much higher wage at 13 hotels than anywhere else in the region.

Gonzalez said that according to a study commissioned six years after passage of this mandatory wage hike, “throughout the LA region the tourism and hospitality industry grew 12% – employment grew 12% – everywhere but within” the aforementioned special wage district – “where employment actually declined 10%.”

“So the reality, straight facts and data, is that you had a 22% swing in employment because this type of policy is truly, by the facts, a job killer,” said Gonzalez.

The resort unions coalition, led by the radical hotel workers union UNITE-HERE Local 11, have until the end of April to gather the estimated 20,000 signatures necessary to ensure they can present 13,000-plus valid signatures to qualify the measure for the November 2018 ballot.<<

 

[flynnibus]

I understand you have a strong opinion on the subject, as do others. But when open-ended statement like "Disney should pay more" or "Disney pays so little" is thrown around, you have to expect the questions I posted. Because its these question that never get answered.

Because they are arguing purly from an emotional position that doesnt have to justify or balance anything. Its about 'should' and they dont have to face anything they don't want to. Consequences or hard decisions dont count in that world.

 

[SuddenStorm]

At the end of the day, businesses view labor as a resource- an unwanted expense (why do you think businesses are quickly making the switch to kiosks and self checkout?). Just like any other resource, supply and demand play a huge role in what a job pays- so I worry that dramatically increasing the minimum wage as quickly as what's being asked would be devastating to those who would want to benefit from it.

Disney isn't going to pay a job more than it's worth. If they're forced to by the unions or government, they'll go into panic mode and do everything they can to keep their costs the same, so their margins aren't effected.

This is a difficult problem with no easy solution- I wish there were an easy way for everyone to have shelter and food, and live a standard of life we deem acceptable, I just worry that what is being asked will do more harm than good.

But hey, I could be wrong. The unions could win this round, get everyone's pay up- and then all of the employees struggling to make rent and buy food will be able to afford it- with no negative effects.