The Miscellaneous Thought Thread

[TP2000]

I guess a state representative (Barbara Lee) has given a number. Says a living wage for California is $50/hour.

She is running for US Senator, to replace the deceased Diane Feinstein.

And yes, she's serious and thinks the Federal Minimum Wage should be raised to $50 per hour. Can Ms. Arceo raise her 4 children on $50 and hour I wonder?

And just how fast do you think donut icing jobs will be replaced with robots if Washington DC mandates a $50 minimum wage? What other theme park jobs go away at a $50 per hour federal minimum wage?

California Dem defends call for $50 federal minimum wage: 'Just barely enough'

Rep. Barbara Lee, who is running for US Senate, wants to significantly boost the amount minimum wage workers nationwide are paid.

wgme.com

 

[TP2000]

Next time you see him, inquire about this please.

Inside the Hidden Poverty Crisis at Universal Studios

Many workers at the profitable theme park say they are underpaid, struggling to pay rent and even buy food as they await a new contract: “It’s a constant battle, tearing at us mentally.”

www.hollywoodreporter.com

I was thinking about this after the $50 an hour idea floated by Senate candidate Ms. Lee. I remember previous discussions about Disneyland CM's, and how the people interviewed were often union shop stewards who mysteriously failed to disclose that (and the extra money they make for that from the union) in their media interviews painting their employers in a bad light.

So I Googled. And right away, Ms. Arceo, the opening personality in the Hollywood Reporter story, has been interviewed before to complain about her wages. In June, 2023 she was the opening personality for an article about the cost of rent in the LA Times. It shows Ms. Arceo's small apartment, including the towering shoe collection of stilletos and strappy heels kept in the bedroom, on the front page.

Renters dominate California — but they are struggling to survive

New census data reveals over a quarter of U.S. households had solo occupants in 2020, more than three times the 1940 estimate and more than twice the 1960 level.

www.latimes.com

Ms. Arceo also appeared before the LA County Board of Supervisors later in 2023 to speak in support of raising the LA County minimum wage to $25 per hour for "theme park workers". Her testimony to the County ended with “No one working 40 hours or more a week should have to choose between feeding their children or keeping a roof over their heads.”

Based on her LA Times article, I might add... "or buying another pair of fun slingbacks with a 3 inch heel for spring."

UNITE HERE LOCAL 11: Supervisors Hahn, Horvath and Solis Move Workplace Protections and Higher Wages at Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Tourism workers spoke to the County Board of Supervisors yesterday in support of a motion authored by Supervisors Lindsey Horvath and Hilda Solis to a

www.businesswire.com

Now I only Googled for about 30 seconds and I haven't looked to see if Ms. Arceo is a shop steward or foreman for the Unite Here Local 11 union, but she has been used by that union repeatedly for media interviews and political statements for the past year or so at least.

That Google search brings me back to the thought that I raised here a few days ago...

If the union can take Ms. Arceo's dues money for 8 years, and get her to County Board meetings to speak and somehow put her in touch with journalists from the LA Times and The Hollywood Reporter, could that union leadership also get Ms. Arceo more engaged with the tuition reimbursement program, financial planning, and career advancement resources that Universal Studios offers to its employees?

Makes you wonder what else we don't know about Ms. Arceo and her career path for the past 8 years beyond donut icing.

 

[mickEblu]

I'd agree that there's no signature DCA item. If there's anything I personally associate with DCA, it's a Ghiradelli Sundae, but that's hardly something I can't get elsewhere.

No doubt, Flo's died a long time ago and probably will never come back to its glory days.

Agreed on the DCA Table Service restaurants. Carthay has a cool setting, but has been very inconsistent for me. I've never eaten at WCT, nor have I heard anything that has made me feel like I need to. The entire concept of LLL is a turnoff for me. By contrast, Cafe Orleans has the Monte Cristo and Carnation & BB have atmosphere for days even if the meals sometimes aren't what I'd want them to be-and lower price points than Carthay.

So I guess it’s settled then. Disneyland has the better food. If it has the better table service AND the more reliable counter service items how can DCA have better food? Are we saying the revolving/ seasonal counter service at DCA is so good that it negates all of that?

Anyway just felt like challenging the notion that DCA has better food today as it seems so universally accepted. I think part of it is that DCA started out as the park that was focused on better dining and it just continued on with that reputation. It’s like the one bone people want to throw to DCA when they compare it to Disneyland because it’s the only category that’s remotely close. It’s kind of sweet actually. Haha.

It also gives the park an identity.

 

[Consumer]

I guess a state representative (Barbara Lee) has given a number. Says a living wage for California is $50/hour.

What a terrible idea. She clearly does not care about the American people. The minimum wage should be $5,000,000 an hour.

 

[CaptinEO]

Do we know, other than personal conjecture, that these people just stuck around like passive lemmings? We don't. I do think we as a culture are a bit too eager to blame individual workers rather than the company that employs them. Companies should have some sense of responsibility to people who have been around for awhile beyond a negligible raise and a cookie once in awhile, no?

I mean in both this Universal and last year's Disney article it talks about longtime workers. It's not like Anaheim/OC is lacking jobs. We are all responsible for ourselves.

I'm not siding with Disney co, which is a greedy company. I'm saying to help these people my advice would be about career improvement and career growth. I would not tell them to wait and hope for better in their current spot.

If a student loan isn't viable, use that Disney education program, do some online courses even if working full time. Even if it's a slow burn as it was for my wife, online schooling while working full time is a possibility.

Again, we don't know that they're sitting there doing nothing to improve their situation. Instead, people are making assumptions based on one article.

That's true. The article mentions 8 years in the same role but did not mention if they were trying to change jobs.

If your general position is to assume that these people are sitting there doing nothing and therefore deserve what they get,

It's not about deserving, it is just reality. I am sad these people are struggling and they need someone to help them work towards finding a nice paying career.

can you say you want them to succeed beyond a vague, generic statement of goodwill that is often followed by a stated or implied ", but..."?

Again what advice would you give them if you care and want to help them? The best way to help them certainly isn't by telling them to keep working at Disneyland and hope they one day get paid properly.

They need information, options, possibly motivation and encouragement as well.

I guess I'm a realist and regardless of whether it's right or wrong for Disney Co or Universal to not pay its themepark workers a living wage, the fact is they are not and likely never will in the future.

If for some reason that changes then it is a different story. I hope anyone in a job even if it seems dead end or hopeless one day realizes how many options there are for them for career growth. I'm not saying it's easy or instantaneous (education and job searching is a slow process) but anyone can improve their skillset, I was once a themepark front line worker too.

As I said, I wasn't sure that you specifically made such comments (hence the disclaimer), but such statements were definitely expressed by a few people in this thread over the past day or so. Perhaps some were deleted, but some are still there as of now.

Oh got it. I did not say anything in that regard.

 

[Alanzo]

What a terrible idea. She clearly does not care about the American people. The minimum wage should be $5,000,000 an hour.

If we would have listened to Barbara Lee on 9/14/2001 we could have saved $6,400,000,000,000 US taxpayer dollars and millions of lives lost.

$50/hr is a good starting point, I'm sure it will be reduced.

 

[SuddenStorm]

She is running for US Senator, to replace the deceased Diane Feinstein.

And yes, she's serious and thinks the Federal Minimum Wage should be raised to $50 per hour. Can Ms. Arceo raise her 4 children on $50 and hour I wonder?

And just how fast do you think donut icing jobs will be replaced with robots if Washington DC mandates a $50 minimum wage? What other theme park jobs go away at a $50 per hour federal minimum wage?

California Dem defends call for $50 federal minimum wage: 'Just barely enough'

Rep. Barbara Lee, who is running for US Senate, wants to significantly boost the amount minimum wage workers nationwide are paid.

wgme.com

 

[Phroobar]

If we would have listened to Barbara Lee on 9/14/2001 we could have saved $6,400,000,000,000 US taxpayer dollars and millions of lives lost.

$50/hr is a good starting point, I'm sure it will be reduced.

You do realize that $50/hr on a 40hr work week for 52 weeks a year is $104,000 gross for a job with no education or skills needed to put out prepared food from the fridge. But she is making MAGIC! Don't forget the health care, pension and 401k benefits.

Let me know when the one day park admission prices are $2000 to cover this.

 

[Phroobar]

My mom is like this lady. My mom is 77 and working at Macy's as a cashier making minimum wage for the last 25 years. She complains about the lack of any raises but refuses to look for work any where. She doesn't want more responsibility and she won't go to school because she says she is too old and didn't like it the first time around. She is only a high school graduate. So she complains but won't try to better herself even when she was younger. To me her job is just to get out of the house and be social. It doesn't pay for mortgage or really anything. My sister pretty much takes care of the bills and lives there taking care of her.

 

[PiratesMansion]

So I guess it’s settled then. Disneyland has the better food. If it has the better table service AND the more reliable counter service items how can DCA have better food? Are we saying the revolving/ seasonal counter service at DCA is so good that it negates all of that?

Anyway just felt like challenging the notion that DCA has better food today as it seems so universally accepted. I think part of it is that DCA started out as the park that was focused on better dining and it just continued on with that reputation. It’s like the one bone people want to throw to DCA when they compare it to Disneyland because it’s the only category that’s remotely close. It’s kind of sweet actually. Haha.

It also gives the park an identity.

Well, DL has great standbys that have been time-honored, but I've gotten burned there more frequently than DCA anytime I've deviated from the old favorites. Docking Bay 7 was a great new discovery this past trip, but I feel like I haven't said that about anywhere else in DL proper in ages. The number of new discoveries that have been great tended to have been at DCA for me. Now, that's only worth so much if DCA menus continue to be a revolving door, but I do think there's a template for long-term success there.

I do think it's fair to say (based only anecdotally in my case, because I didn't visit DCA until 2013) that there was a downturn in food quality post-DCA's opening, but I do think it is on an upswing in general. And you're right: it's pretty much the only area where DCA is on par with, or better than, DL.

DL table service is also kind of hit or miss, TBH, and I say that as someone who likes a good TS meal. Cafe Orleans for me is all about the Pomme Frites and Monte Cristo, and BB has the atmosphere and cheaper overall price (and the Fantasmic dining package, if it works out) vs. Carthay. But is it consistent? I personally can't say, since I've only eaten there once, but it seems to Yo-Yo in quality if these boards are any indication. Carnation is good and has a nice, laid-back feel to it, but I don't feel like I'll die if I don't eat there every time. Nothing about RBT has ever tempted me into eating there. Perhaps the merits of TS inside either park are kinda nebulous and situation-dependent. I mean in both this Universal and last year's Disney article it talks about longtime workers.

I'm not siding with Disney co, which is a greedy company. I'm saying to help these people my advice would be about career improvement and career growth. I would not tell them to wait and hope for better in their current spot.

In saying that they deserve their lot in life for sticking with Disney or Universal long term, you are effectively siding with those companies.

The best way to help them certainly isn't by telling them to keep working at Disneyland and hope they one day get paid properly.

They need information, options, possibly motivation and encouragement as well.

Which is why I don't understand how you seem to put so much of this just as individual responsibility. Someone/something needs to exist in order to allow them to easily and accessibly find, and potentially interpret, this information, but that's not how this situation is being framed. This is being framed as "this person is a failure as an individual because they're refusing to leave a job that they obviously should have known is low income no advancement, and obviously there are no situations where people end up unable to leave these jobs for something better."

I agree with your last sentence. It just seems to go totally against what you otherwise said in your last post, which generally trended towards "these people are at fault if they're unable to leave for greener pastures."

I guess I'm a realist and regardless of whether it's right or wrong for Disney Co or Universal to not pay its themepark workers a living wage, the fact is they are not and likely never will in the future.

Depends on how badly they want to be fully staffed. Everyone seems to be hurting for staff, and there is a point where you do need more people working for you to make more money. As one example, if Disney had more people available to work at Carthay, they would be able to have it open for lunch AND dinner, thus enabling them to make more money than they are making right now.

Additionally: everything at the parks costs significantly more now than it did in the past, and there's no indication that they're not making record profits. Yet they could never afford to give their employees a living wage because there's no money available to do so? For Disney, one of the richest companies in the world?

If for some reason that changes then it is a different story. I hope anyone in a job even if it seems dead end or hopeless one day realizes how many options there are for them for career growth. I'm not saying it's easy or instantaneous (education and job searching is a slow process) but anyone can improve their skillset, I was once a themepark front line worker too.

But that's the tricky thing: a lot of people don't have (or feel they don't have) time to go through the slow process that training for a new career can be. It also assumes that people are basically covered in terms of bills, childcare, don't have anyone sick or elderly to care for, etc. Many people don't have much of a cushion to wait for such a change to come to fruition. And, of course, such education programs are almost never free and could open another can of worms by introducing some student loan debt into the process. There are costs, monetary and otherwise, to all of those options.

My mom is like this lady. My mom is 77 and working at Macy's as a cashier making minimum wage for the last 25 years. She complains about the lack of any raises but refuses to look for work any where. She doesn't want more responsibility and she won't go to school because she says she is too old and didn't like it the first time around. She is only a high school graduate. So she complains but won't try to better herself even when she was younger. To me her job is just to get out of the house and be social. It doesn't pay for mortgage or really anything. My sister pretty much takes care of the bills and lives there taking care of her.

Someone more or less saying "My elderly mother is entitled and lazy and kinda deserves her present situation" is not something I expected to read here, TBH.

 

[CaptinEO]

In saying that they deserve their lot in life for sticking with Disney or Universal long term, you are effectively siding with those companies.

I never even worded thing this way and have been nothing but understanding. If it makes me a villian to say people should do what they can to move up in their profession I guess I'm a villian.

Are you saying people aren't responsible for their own choices?

Which is why I don't understand how you seem to put so much of this just as individual responsibility.

Because it does come down to individual responsibility since only an individual is going to change their own outcome. Not saying we all can 100% get what we want in life but we can do our best to try for it.

Someone/something needs to exist in order to allow them to easily and accessibly find, and potentially interpret, this information, but that's not how this situation is being framed.

Yes I am saying these people need motivation information and help and encouragement, I literally said all these things.

This is being framed as "this person is a failure as an individual because they're refusing to leave a job that they obviously should have known is low income no advancement, and obviously there are no situations where people end up unable to leave these jobs for something better."

I agree with your last sentence. It just seems to go totally against what you otherwise said in your last post, which generally trended towards "these people are at fault if they're unable to leave for greener pastures."

At the end of the day people that are stuck can be helped today by being empowered to further their education, skillset, or job search. I earlier mentioned people I personally know that literally are at fault and have had plenty of advice and help but refused to take it. But everyones case is unique.

My solution is to educate and empower stuck employees. What is your solution? I don't think legislation is ever going to fix this, and if it somehow did it would take years and years of work.

Depends on how badly they want to be fully staffed. Everyone seems to be hurting for staff, and there is a point where you do need more people working for you to make more money. As one example, if Disney had more people available to work at Carthay, they would be able to have it open for lunch AND dinner, thus enabling them to make more money than they are making right now.

Not sure the staffing shortage is still a thing. Most companies are doing layoffs in both corporate and front of the line workers. As for Carthay they changed the menu during covid after their amazing Korean Chef left and the new chef took away literally all their former signature items (duck wings, fried biscuits). I know I have no interest in the new menu which last I checked was bad sounding mediterranean fare (and I usually like mediterranean).

They instead are making money serving drinks and appetizers in the patio for lunch and dinner.

Additionally: everything at the parks costs significantly more now than it did in the past, and there's no indication that they're not making record profits. Yet they could never afford to give their employees a living wage because there's no money available to do so? For Disney, one of the richest companies in the world?

Oh I agree Disney when they were doing well could afford to do way more, and their ceo makes an insane amount of money for running a failing company. Bob Chapek even axed them buying Gardenwalk which would've been an employee childcare center.

I literally said in my above posts I'm not defending Disney. The fact is today and tomorrow they can and will continue to pay as little as they can.

The people sticking around are worse off if they keep working for Disney unless they stay just to take advantage of the college program and jump ship. The employees can then take advantage of Disney for once by doing this program and moving on to bigger and better things.

But that's the tricky thing: a lot of people don't have (or feel they don't have) time to go through the slow process that training for a new career can be.

Yes. Again one to two online classes at a time is realistic even for parents or full time workers (or both).

It also assumes that people are basically covered in terms of bills, childcare, don't have anyone sick or elderly to care for, etc.

Disney and Universal pay tuition and loans are also a thing. Again one to two online classes at a time is realistic and don't require child care.

Many people don't have much of a cushion to wait for such a change to come to fruition.

Yes 100%.

And, of course, such education programs are almost never free and could open another can of worms by introducing some student loan debt into the process. There are costs, monetary and otherwise, to all of those options.

Sure. But all the risks of these will situate you better than sticking around and a minimum wage job forever and hoping it transforms into a living wage job.

Again what is the solution if not for personal empowerment and improvement to advance? What advice would you give to a struggling themepark employee?

Someone more or less saying "My elderly mother is entitled and lazy and kinda deserves her present situation" is not something I expected to read here, TBH.

From personal experience I have members of my family that have had decades of opportunity to do something and literally chose not to and then try to pass their financial burden onto other family members.

Someone being an elderly mom buys them compassion but at some point we are all adults and we can't be everyone's bank account. I don't know about this poster's case. From my own experiences, it has nothing to do with lack of compassion or lack of trying. I have at many points given a lot to relatives all for it to be in vain and unappreciated without a chance for turnaround.

There's a difference between someone being down on their luck and someone purposefully continually making bad choices and depending on others to pull themselves out.

It can be heartbreaking seeing someone you know struggling and not being able to help, but at some point again we can only do so much and people are responsible for themselves.

If I could comfortably support everyone of my friends and family I would but I'm not in the position to do so, and helping them with advice and opportunities to try to reach financial independence is all I can do.

 

[Consumer]

You do realize that $50/hr on a 40hr work week for 52 weeks a year is $104,000 gross for a job with no education or skills needed to put out prepared food from the fridge. But she is making MAGIC! Don't forget the health care, pension and 401k benefits.

Let me know when the one day park admission prices are $2000 to cover this.

If popping popcorn makes $104K a year, what should teachers be making a year? $300K? What about computer scientists? $750K?

 

[Alanzo]

If popping popcorn makes $104K a year, what should teachers be making a year? $300K? What about computer scientists? $750K?

You're right. We should be paying teachers more.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I never even worded thing this way and have been nothing but understanding. If it makes me a villian to say people should do what they can to move up in their profession I guess I'm a villian.

Are you saying people aren't responsible for their own choices?

It's not what you literally said, but is it not what you implied?

Because it does come down to individual responsibility since only an individual is going to change their own outcome. Not saying we all can 100% get what we want in life but we can do our best to try for it.

So there's no responsibility for the government, community, family members, etc. to assist those who are struggling or may not be aware of the resources that exist out there?

Yes I am saying these people need motivation information and help and encouragement, I literally said all these things.

But then you undercut those same things by still basically blaming these people for their lot in life, and put all of the fault on the individual.

At the end of the day people that are stuck can be helped today by being empowered to further their education, skillset, or job search. I earlier mentioned people I personally know that literally are at fault and have had plenty of advice and help but refused to take it. But everyones case is unique.

While I agree, education requires time and money, something you seem to be assuming everyone has, when that is not the case.

Perhaps this is a personal failing, but I understand, to some extent, why some people refuse good advice. For one, advice is often given when it's not solicited, or the advice is outdated, condescending, or otherwise not delivered well. People think they can just throw advice in the air like confetti and it will automatically reach its intended target and have its intended effect, unless the person is a moron, but effective advice is:
1) advice the person receiving it is actually receptive to. This is key. If the person you're giving advice to isn't ready to hear it, there's a 99% chance the other person won't take it. And
2) advice that is well-delivered, and tailored to the person receiving it, at least in how it's approached.

Perhaps your life has been different than my own, but I literally have family members whose basic form of communication is to shout unsolicited advice at me continuously without taking any time to learn about my interests, my circumstances, etc, and I have to be honest, after a lifetime of this, I just tune it out. They may be well intentioned, but it comes off to me as patronizing, like there's nothing I can possibly do to ever win this person's approval or get them to understand my circumstances, so their advice gets tuned out. So even though their intentions, on paper, are good, because of how they deliver their advice, I'm unlikely to receive the good advice they DO occasionally give. I imagine I can't be the only person in the world that has made a habit of rejecting condescending, unsolicited advice, and so I understand, on some level, why this happens, even if it can be against one's own best interest. Does it mean I absolve those individuals of responsibility? No. But on some level, I get where some of them may be coming from.

My solution is to educate and empower stuck employees. What is your solution? I don't think legislation is ever going to fix this, and if it somehow did it would take years and years of work.

I think we have the same solution, it just comes across to me like you're undercutting your own solution to play the blame game. Perhaps not your intent, but that's how it reads to me. I do think legislation and a strong government COULD do something; what is the point of a government if they're not going to make an effort to help anyone achieve things, especially when there are documented shortages in key industries? That would seem to be a win-win for everybody, and yet there are so few things (at least that I'm aware of) that seem to be making an effort, especially for older workers.

Not sure the staffing shortage is still a thing. Most companies are doing layoffs in both corporate and front of the line workers. As for Carthay they changed the menu during covid after their amazing Korean Chef left and the new chef took away literally all their former signature items (duck wings, fried biscuits). I know I have no interest in the new menu which last I checked was bad sounding mediterranean fare (and I usually like mediterranean).

They instead are making money serving drinks and appetizers in the patio for lunch and dinner.

Nonetheless, while staffing shortages around the park have improved, it is still glaring to me that pre-covid, Carthay was open for lunch and dinner. Yet since park reopening, Carthay has been dinner only. The only explanation for this in my head is staffing, because even if the menu has changed for the worse, if Carthay was open for lunch, people would eat there. So it's literally Disney leaving money on the table because of their inability to fully staff Carthay.

Oh I agree Disney when they were doing well could afford to do way more, and their ceo makes an insane amount of money for running a failing company. Bob Chapek even axed them buying Gardenwalk which would've been an employee childcare center.

I literally said in my above posts I'm not defending Disney. The fact is today and tomorrow they can and will continue to pay as little as they can.

The people sticking around are worse off if they keep working for Disney unless they stay just to take advantage of the college program and jump ship. The employees can then take advantage of Disney for once by doing this program and moving on to bigger and better things.

Is it not defending Disney if you're basically saying that these people are idiots for sticking around? The implication there is if people are going to be suckers and keep staying there for dirt pay, what incentive does Disney have to change?

As I said in a different post, I do think it's interesting how many companies seemingly cannot understand why they should pay their workers more, to result in a better, more satisfied workforce which would then result in a better experience for guests. But they must have good PR, because there's no shortage of people willing to be like "of course they're still getting dirt pay, didn't they know this was supposed to be temporary employment?!?".

Yes. Again one to two online classes at a time is realistic even for parents or full time workers (or both).

I agree that on paper it should be, but I think you're underestimating how hectic things are for a lot of families and what additional obligations they may have.

Disney and Universal pay tuition and loans are also a thing. Again one to two online classes at a time is realistic and don't require child care.

I'm not a parent, so I probably shouldn't make assumptions here, but I think that some absolutely would require child care regardless. Perhaps a small percentage, but not all children or parents or families are the same.

Yes 100%.

Sure. But all the risks of these will situate you better than sticking around and a minimum wage job forever and hoping it transforms into a living wage job.

If bills have to be paid now and you have a lot on your plate due to family, children, working long hours, etc., some may not be in the best position to act on that advice, even if they accept that rationally, that advice is correct.

From personal experience I have members of my family that have had decades of opportunity to do something and literally chose not to and then try to pass their financial burden onto other family members.

Someone being an elderly mom buys them compassion but at some point we are all adults and we can't be everyone's bank account. I don't know about this poster's case. From my own experiences, it has nothing to do with lack of compassion or lack of trying. I have at many points given a lot to relatives all for it to be in vain and unappreciated without a chance for turnaround.

There's a difference between someone being down on their luck and someone purposefully continually making bad choices and depending on others to pull themselves out.

It can be heartbreaking seeing someone you know struggling and not being able to help, but at some point again we can only do so much and people are responsible for themselves.

If I could comfortably support everyone of my friends and family I would but I'm not in the position to do so, and helping them with advice and opportunities to try to reach financial independence is all I can do.

I don't know the situation fully either, but I was a bit shocked to read that. I do think a 77 year old is a bit disadvantaged looking for new opportunities in the workforce and that it's fair to acknowledge that there's a big difference between someone in their twenties or thirties looking for a new position and someone much older. My own mother got laid off in 2020 in her late fifties, and I know that she really struggled to find any footing in a job market where opportunities that would have appealed to her were limited by retirement-related stipulations, and despite the prohibition on age-related employment discrimination, no company really wants to hire anyone nearing or past retirement age-particularly the "right" companies that offer better pay and benefits. She also saw firsthand how the job application process had changed radically from when she was last looking for a position (around 2000), and not in the job seeker's favor, at least IMO and hers. Ultimately she decided to focus on caring for her aging parents instead of seeking a new position and ride out the next few years until those benefits acrued from her previous job start kicking in. So while I don't know Phroobar's mother's situation firsthand, my first instinct is to have empathy for her situation rather than assume that an elderly woman is simply lazy for not grabbing at better opportunities. I mean, let's be real here: how many better opportunities really exist for 77 year olds? I know that occasionally you'll see those "80 year old grandmother has just earned a PH.D" sorts of articles, but the reason those articles get published is because it's an anomaly at that point for such things to happen. I'd love to be proven wrong, truly, but I'm having trouble at understanding what a person in that situation is really supposed to do. Life expectancy for women in the US right now is 79.3 years. While one doesn't ever really know how long an individual will live, I can understand Mom's refusal at that point to try something else.

 

[Homemade Imagineering]

I have never seen Jungle Cruise looking as rough as I did yesterday. So many static figures (most notably elephants throughout) alongside stiff movements on most other figures

 

[Phroobar]

Someone more or less saying "My elderly mother is entitled and lazy and kinda deserves her present situation" is not something I expected to read here, TBH.

Not entitled or lazy. Just not interested in changing and she is stubborn. The only reason she complains is because other people around her complain. At at certain age, people don't want to change. She is happy doing something. How many here have been working a job for many years and just won't look for something better?

For this lady at Disneyland, the only reason she is brought forward is because the labor union is trying to further their cause. She would have never said something otherwise. Besides I wonder how much of her story is made up.

 

[PiratesMansion]

Not entitled or lazy. Just not interested in changing and she is stubborn. The only reason she complains is because other people around her complain. At at certain age, people don't want to change. She is happy doing something. How many here have been working a job for many years and just won't look for something better?

For this lady at Disneyland, the only reason she is brought forward is because the labor union is trying to further their cause. She would have never said something otherwise. Besides I wonder how much of her story is made up.

I suppose these were not your exact words, but the direction of the discussion in this thread about this issue could be broadly summarized as "this woman is lazy and entitled for expecting this minimum wage theme park position to give her more than she should have figured she'd get when she signed up for it, and if she's unable to find better, that's her own fault." The assumption that she's acting out of learned helplessness and the like. Then you explicitly compared your mother to her. So I'm not really sure how else I'm supposed to interpret the situation.

Why is the inherent assumption that workers are lying or exaggerating about the quality of their working conditions? Maybe many people here have or had cushy, well-paid salaried positions, but I imagine that anyone who has worked anywhere could give a laundry list of complaints for many of their positions over the years.

 

[Phroobar]

I suppose these were not your exact words, but the direction of the discussion in this thread about this issue could be broadly summarized as "this woman is lazy and entitled for expecting this minimum wage theme park position to give her more than she should have figured she'd get when she signed up for it, and if she's unable to find better, that's her own fault." The assumption that she's acting out of learned helplessness and the like. Then you explicitly compared your mother to her. So I'm not really sure how else I'm supposed to interpret the situation.

Why is the inherent assumption that workers are lying or exaggerating about the quality of their working conditions? Maybe many people here have or had cushy, well-paid salaried positions, but I imagine that anyone who has worked anywhere could give a laundry list of complaints for many of their positions over the years.

We are hearing her through the labor union voice. We may be missing a few facts about her life and labor conditions.

 

[PiratesMansion]

We are hearing her through the labor union voice. We may be missing a few facts about her life and labor conditions.

100%. We are hearing about her situation through one specific lens. There are likely to be inaccuracies in both directions, as that's the nature of these sorts of reports. That said, I tend to trust the workers on the ground over the higher ups to understand what the situation is really like on the ground.

But the single source and the knowledge of potentially missing information is not stopping people from rampantly speculating on how little she's doing to better her lot in life, and how easy it would be for her situation to be immediately easier if she just tried a little harder to go somewhere else.

 

[CaptinEO]

It's not what you literally said, but is it not what you implied?

That is not what I wanted to imply, may be a case of how text is reading vs what an in person conversation would be.

So there's no responsibility for the government, community, family members, etc. to assist those who are struggling or may not be aware of the resources that exist out there?

There is responsibility for lots of entities, I just don't have full reliance in all these systems helping people out and encourage people to do what they can to be self reliant.

But then you undercut those same things by still basically blaming these people for their lot in life, and put all of the fault on the individual.

Some people to get a bad deck of cards stacked against them in life, but I don't see their local governments going to bat for them. So at the end of the day only they can help themselves.

While I agree, education requires time and money, something you seem to be assuming everyone has, when that is not the case.

I mentioned loans, employer funded education programs, and slowly doing online course work already.

Perhaps this is a personal failing, but I understand, to some extent, why some people refuse good advice. For one, advice is often given when it's not solicited, or the advice is outdated, condescending, or otherwise not delivered well. People think they can just throw advice in the air like confetti and it will automatically reach its intended target and have its intended effect, unless the person is a moron, but effective advice is:
1) advice the person receiving it is actually receptive to. This is key. If the person you're giving advice to isn't ready to hear it, there's a 99% chance the other person won't take it. And
2) advice that is well-delivered, and tailored to the person receiving it, at least in how it's approached.

Very true. Certainly no one wants advice if they aren't asking for it. But to the people complaining to LA Times or OC Register about how hard their struggles are, lets hope they are open to some helpful advice. If they aren't then they are just finding an avenue to complain I guess?

Perhaps your life has been different than my own, but I literally have family members whose basic form of communication is to shout unsolicited advice at me continuously without taking any time to learn about my interests, my circumstances, etc, and I have to be honest, after a lifetime of this, I just tune it out.

That sounds very frustrating and definitely isn't helpful at all.

They may be well intentioned, but it comes off to me as patronizing, like there's nothing I can possibly do to ever win this person's approval or get them to understand my circumstances, so their advice gets tuned out. So even though their intentions, on paper, are good, because of how they deliver their advice, I'm unlikely to receive the good advice they DO occasionally give. I imagine I can't be the only person in the world that has made a habit of rejecting condescending, unsolicited advice, and so I understand, on some level, why this happens, even if it can be against one's own best interest. Does it mean I absolve those individuals of responsibility? No. But on some level, I get where some of them may be coming from.

ln my case there are Individuals in my family circle that complain about issues and ask for help regularly but then turn down advice or opportunities that would assist them in the future.

I think it's important to help someone who is drowning but know to stop if they start pulling you under with them.

If these same people refuse your well intentioned advice but then try to go after you for your time and money, at some point you feel less bad for them.

Some predicaments are random or based on luck but some people do regularly put themselves in bad circumstances even when offered a life line.

If a group of longtime themepark employees want to complain about their cost of living and wages but wouldn't be open to advice on how improve their living situation then I have no idea how to fix their circumstances.

I think we have the same solution, it just comes across to me like you're undercutting your own solution to play the blame game.

Again I'm just being realistic on how someone could take steps TODAY to improve their situation. Waiting for Disney co to triple the pay of their employees so they can buy an Anaheim condo isn't likely to happen any way I see it.

But that doesn't mean I side with Disney. Facts are they are paying what the labor market will take and are responsible for giving returns to their shareholders.

Perhaps not your intent, but that's how it reads to me. I do think legislation and a strong government COULD do something; what is the point of a government if they're not going to make an effort to help anyone achieve things, especially when there are documented shortages in key industries?

I don't see much of our "representatives" actually working on looking out for their people, but it would be nice if they did.

Nonetheless, while staffing shortages around the park have improved, it is still glaring to me that pre-covid, Carthay was open for lunch and dinner. Yet since park reopening, Carthay has been dinner only. The only explanation for this in my head is staffing, because even if the menu has changed for the worse, if Carthay was open for lunch, people would eat there. So it's literally Disney leaving money on the table because of their inability to fully staff Carthay.

But again they didn't have the Al Fresco Dining option back then so it may be an equal trade off. I do think it's the menu though IMO (it has at least stopped me from going back). Either the demand isn't there or it could be staffing like you said.

Is it not defending Disney if you're basically saying that these people are idiots for sticking around?

No because this is not a Disney problem, the recent article isn't even about Disney. It's an issue with people sticking aroung in minimum wage jobs.

These companies aren't forcing anyone to stay in these jobs for extended periods of time. Both things can be true, the companies can be greedy and the people
can be making bad choices by staying around expecting more.

The implication there is if people are going to be suckers and keep staying there for dirt pay, what incentive does Disney have to change?

There is no incentive to change which is why it's not a good career choice.

As I said in a different post, I do think it's interesting how many companies seemingly cannot understand why they should pay their workers more, to result in a better, more satisfied workforce which would then result in a better experience for guests.

Until things like this hurt a company's bottom line they can continue to use minimum wage jobs. Universal and Disney parks though are doing very well.

I agree that on paper it should be, but I think you're underestimating how hectic things are for a lot of families and what additional obligations they may have.

I'm not a parent, so I probably shouldn't make assumptions here, but I think that some absolutely would require child care regardless. Perhaps a small percentage, but not all children or parents or families are the same.

Online coursework is the perfect option, most are only a few hours of work at most a week. A lot of online coursework is self paced and does not require a time
comitment:

I don't know the situation fully either, but I was a bit shocked to read that. I do think a 77 year old is a bit disadvantaged looking for new opportunities in the workforce and that it's fair to acknowledge that there's a big difference between someone in their twenties or thirties looking for a new position and someone much older.

That's very true, the workforce is not kind to senior employees at all and opportunities are limited.

My own mother got laid off in 2020 in her late fifties, and I know that she really struggled to find any footing in a job market where opportunities that would have appealed to her were limited by retirement-related stipulations, and despite the prohibition on age-related employment discrimination, no company really wants to hire anyone nearing or past retirement age-particularly the "right" companies that offer better pay and benefits. She also saw firsthand how the job application process had changed radically from when she was last looking for a position (around 2000), and not in the job seeker's favor, at least IMO and hers. Ultimately she decided to focus on caring for her aging parents instead of seeking a new position and ride out the next few years until those benefits acrued from her previous job start kicking in. So while I don't know Phroobar's mother's situation firsthand, my first instinct is to have empathy for her situation rather than assume that an elderly woman is simply lazy for not grabbing at better opportunities. I mean, let's be real here: how many better opportunities really exist for 77 year olds? I know that occasionally you'll see those "80 year old grandmother has just earned a PH.D" sorts of articles, but the reason those articles get published is because it's an anomaly at that point for such things to happen. I'd love to be proven wrong, truly, but I'm having trouble at understanding what a person in that situation is really supposed to do. Life expectancy for women in the US right now is 79.3 years. While one doesn't ever really know how long an individual will live, I can understand Mom's refusal at that point to try something else.

So sorry to hear what happened to your mother and that sounds so rough, again the workforce is not kind to seniors.

Not sure about the other poster's situation but it could be a case of someone throughout their life making poor choices and it culminating in them living in a bad situation.

Anyways people are probably tired of seeing me go back and forth on this but I appreciate and respect you and your discussion points. I think even if we sometimes have different stances we actually are more or less on the same page and want what's best for people: