Trending blog post: "What it's really like working at Walt Disney World"

[Disneyhead'71]

This is going to sound harsh, so don't take it the wrong way. I'm just going to give you a sense of what I feel is reality. You may disagree, but I think I'm right.

People might like your post and it sure sounds good, but this is America, not a communist country. Pay scale is generally commensurate with job responsibility. This applies to CEO of a top 50 company.You don't like Iger? I don't either, but he's helped lead the way in making shareholders billions and billions of dollars. He's the big dog, so gets most of the credit and yes, the money.

With tens of thousands of hourly employees, an extra couple bucks an hour just for charity is real to the bottom line. Companies still exist primarily to make money. Don't like it? Find another job. Sorry, but that's life and it's not Disney or any other company's responsibility to pay you a wage that you feel is right. You have freedom and other options. Again, this is absolutely not just Disney.

Don't like evil corporations, their hiring practices, and rich management? Boycott their products and start with A for Apple.

I think pay vs responsibility/phisical danger have very little to do with each other.

Take a wild stab at what a professional photographer gets paid to drive a $300,000 Satellite Truck into the most dangerous neighborhoods at 3:30am.

 

[FettFan]

Well that's funny because everyone else here was able to read it just fine. Pointing out typos and spelling mistakes as a way to discredit what someone posts is so incredibly archaic. You sound like old farts

Here we go again, snorting pixie dust, protecting the brand. "Oh no, he said negative things about Disney and made some errors (on a freakin' Tumblr blog, not a professional website), better discredit him and label him as an idiot and a bad worker than risk negativity about my precious corporation getting spread!"

Ah....No. If you've paid any attention to any of my posts for any length of time, you'd know that I'm as critical as anybody else of the way WDW has been run since Iger took over. From the broken yeti to Meg Crofton's Comedy of Errors, I've criticized it all.

No, sport, Walt said "Quality will out."

In which case, Walt was the one who dropped the verb. "Quality will out" is one of the strangest single sentence fragments I have ever encountered. It has about as much meaning as "Notary Sojac".

 

[BrerJon]

There is no such thing as a free lunch. Mandating companies to pay certain wages simply does the following:

1) Makes things more expensive
2) Creates unemployment
3) Ships more jobs overseas
4) Reduction in benefits for existing employees
5) Reduction in hours of existing hourly employees
6) Only marginally increases the standard of living for the person earning the "higher" minimum wage, and if their hours are cut or they are laid off, ends up hurting the people it was intended to help.

Or... in Disney's -and most other big corporations- case it could take less than 1% of the billions in stock buybacks that just raise the company's cash reserves to pay for the increase, without needing don't need to make anyone unemployed, cut any benefits, ship any jobs overseas etc.

Oh, and now the employees are happy and healthier, so your churn is less and your recruitment bill drops, as do absences due to sickness. And they do a better job, because their financial worries are reduced and they can focus on their work instead of the roof over their heads.

By your logic, the richer the company, the lower the wages should be, but if you look at many of the most successful companies in America, they pay way higher than the minimum.

 

[LAKid53]

I think pay vs responsibility/phisical danger have very little to do with each other.

Take a wild stab at what a professional photographer gets paid to drive a $300,000 Satellite Truck into the most dangerous neighborhoods at 3:30am.

Or a police officer or fire fighter. CEO contracts/compensations are determined by the Board of Directors who are typically those individuals/institutions with a controlling interest in the corporation, e.g., those holding at least 15 to 20% of the issued stock or those individuals with good image for the company. And most BOD members hire those individuals they know well, i.e., buddies. And CEO compensation can have little correlation with competency, like Bob Nardelli at Home Depot. And those shareholders making billions of dollars through their Disney stock? Done through the toil of front line cast members.

 

[LAKid53]

Why? So you can complain about ticket prices increasing and more unemployment? You can't mandate minimum wage folks. Well, you can, but the consequences will be real and much more damaging.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. Mandating companies to pay certain wages simply does the following:

1) Makes things more expensive
2) Creates unemployment
3) Ships more jobs overseas
4) Reduction in benefits for existing employees
5) Reduction in hours of existing hourly employees
6) Only marginally increases the standard of living for the person earning the "higher" minimum wage, and if their hours are cut or they are laid off, ends up hurting the people it was intended to help.

I invite all people struggling with this to read Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman.

There it is, the argument that paying hourly employees a decent wage will result in the death of capitalism. So tired of that argument. Paying employees a decent wage INCREASES their discretionary income. Which means they can buy those products/services of companies like Disney. Which fuels our consumption driven economy. Remember what Bush said after 9/11? Shop, shop, shop.

Btw, no free lunch is a reference in the US tax code with regards to allowable deductions. Should never be used in the context of wages.

Edit. Have you actually read Friedman? Because what you list is counter to his theory of monetarism. According to monetarism, the correlation is between inflation and the money supply, i.e., actions of the Fed to control the supply of money through the manipulation of interest rates by the Federal Reserve. Friedman was countering cost-push inflation, i.e., inflation due to certain commodity prices and wages. Think of the stagflation during the 1970s, high interest rates, low economic growth and high unemployment.

 

[Chef Mickey]

There is no thing contradictory about greater investment in employees, especially when you are selling customer service, and big profits.

Disney has some of the greatest people working for them, I agree with the that. They just do an excellent job overall.

 

[Chef Mickey]

There it is, the argument that paying hourly employees a decent wage will result in the death of capitalism. So tired of that argument. Paying employees a decent wage INCREASES their discretionary income. Which means they can buy those products/services of companies like Disney. Which fuels our consumption driven economy. Remember what Bush said after 9/11? Shop, shop, shop.

Btw, no free lunch is a reference in the US tax code with regards to allowable deductions. Should never be used in the context of wages.

Edit. Have you actually read Friedman? Because what you list is counter to his theory of monetarism. According to monetarism, the correlation is between inflation and the money supply, i.e., actions of the Fed to control the supply of money through the manipulation of interest rates by the Federal Reserve. Friedman was countering cost-push inflation, i.e., inflation due to certain commodity prices and wages. Think of the stagflation during the 1970s, high interest rates, low economic growth and high unemployment.

The myth that more money for low income works and boosting the economy is widespread, but misunderstood. I don't have the energy to enumerate all the reasons its a myth, but suffice it to say the bump in spending would be so negligible to be meaningful and any benefit would be eaten up by the consequences I mentioned.

With regard to Friedman, I have an MBA from University of Chicago where Friedman taught, so yes, I've read him. My comments related specifically to his stance on minimum wage and programs designed to help the poor. You're trying to complicate matters by bringing in other elements of his writing, but I can assure you I'm speaking very simply on his stance. Friedman by no stretch would ever be in favor of a minimum wage and actually said it had no benefits whatsoever.

 

[Chef Mickey]

Or... in Disney's -and most other big corporations- case it could take less than 1% of the billions in stock buybacks that just raise the company's cash reserves to pay for the increase, without needing don't need to make anyone unemployed, cut any benefits, ship any jobs overseas etc.

Oh, and now the employees are happy and healthier, so your churn is less and your recruitment bill drops, as do absences due to sickness. And they do a better job, because their financial worries are reduced and they can focus on their work instead of the roof over their heads.

By your logic, the richer the company, the lower the wages should be, but if you look at many of the most successful companies in America, they pay way higher than the minimum.

How much of an increase would you propose?

Disney already has increased hourly wages at WDW to $10 by 2016. Is that good or do you think it should be more? That will affect around 70,000 workers.

You guys must really hate companies that skip hiring Americans, which is $0/hr, and choose to pay a Chinese worker $2/hr to build iPhones that I bet 80% of you own.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Let me guess, Chef Mickey, you're a business owner.

 

[LAKid53]

The myth that more money for low income works and boosting the economy is widespread, but misunderstood. I don't have the energy to enumerate all the reasons its a myth, but suffice it to say the bump in spending would be so negligible to be meaningful and any benefit would be eaten up by the consequences I mentioned.

With regard to Friedman, I have an MBA from University of Chicago where Friedman taught, so yes, I've read him. My comments related specifically to his stance on minimum wage and programs designed to help the poor. You're trying to complicate matters by bringing in other elements of his writing, but I can assure you I'm speaking very simply on his stance. Friedman by no stretch would ever be in favor of a minimum wage and actually said it had no benefits whatsoever.

I too have a business degree, with a minor in economics, from a Tier One Research institution and disagree with many of Friedman's assumptions. And understand the benefits of a minimum living wages in a consumption driven economy. We could argue Keynesian economic theory of macroeconomics vs. the Chicago school all night long and probably madden many of the posters on this thread.

What did Keynes say about the number of economists in a room relative to the number of opinions expressed?

 

[LAKid53]

How much of an increase would you propose?

Disney already has increased hourly wages at WDW to $10 by 2016. Is that good or do you think it should be more? That will affect around 70,000 workers.

You guys must really hate companies that skip hiring Americans, which is $0/hr, and choose to pay a Chinese worker $2/hr to build iPhones that I bet 80% of you own.

A living wage, based upon the cost of living in the Orlando area when taking into consideration the cost of those basic needs, like housing, food and transportation. Remember, you get what you pay for....

 

[lazyboy97o]

How much of an increase would you propose?

Disney already has increased hourly wages at WDW to $10 by 2016. Is that good or do you think it should be more? That will affect around 70,000 workers.

You guys must really hate companies that skip hiring Americans, which is $0/hr, and choose to pay a Chinese worker $2/hr to build iPhones that I bet 80% of you own.

Its not just pay, but also the culture and environment created by the employer.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Its not just pay, but also the culture and environment created by the employer.

 

[Chef Mickey]

I too have a business degree, with a minor in economics, from a Tier One Research institution and disagree with many of Friedman's assumptions. And understand the benefits of a minimum living wages in a consumption driven economy. We could argue Keynesian economic theory of macroeconomics vs. the Chicago school all night long and probably madden many of the posters on this thread.

What did Keynes say about the number of economists in a room relative to the number of opinions expressed?

Lol....fair enough. As with everything, hardly ever one simple answer. I happen to believe simply putting the burden on corporations to pay more is too simple an approach. I understand the spirit of what they attempt to do but not the execution.

We've probably already have annoyed people in the thread and I certainly have done so and upset many. I think I'll retire now...lol.

 

[Chef Mickey]

Let me guess, Chef Mickey, you're a business owner.

No, I'm in finance for a Fortune 20 company.

 

[LAKid53]

No, I'm in finance for a Fortune 20 company.

I just retired after nearly 40 years in the business. And believe in the distribution of wealth, which nearly got me thrown out of b-school... "who let that socialist in? lol

 

[Disneyhead'71]

No, I'm in finance for a Fortune 20 company.

Ooooo, even better.

 

[LAKid53]

Ooooo, even better.

Hey, while I may disagree with Chef Mickey on the concept of a minimum wage (and individuals who hold the Noble prize in economics disagree on this issue), there's no need to be snide. Wanna discuss macroeconomics, monetary vs. fiscal policy, supply/demand curve, monetarism, supply side economics, should we have a central bank as constituted by the Fed, etc.? Don't be snide.... Or I might quote the Monetary Control Act of 1982 at you. Along with the stupidity of repealing Glass-Steagall. Yeah, Bill Clinton, I'm talking to you....

 

[natatomic]

In which case, Walt was the one who dropped the verb. "Quality will out" is one of the strangest single sentence fragments I have ever encountered. It has about as much meaning as "Notary Sojac".

https://www.google.com/search?q="wi...l=en&client=safari#hl=en&q="will+out"+meaning

More like Shakeapeare. But never mind who did it - it's actually a well-known phrase.

 

[englanddg]

There it is, the argument that paying hourly employees a decent wage will result in the death of capitalism. So tired of that argument. Paying employees a decent wage INCREASES their discretionary income. Which means they can buy those products/services of companies like Disney. Which fuels our consumption driven economy. Remember what Bush said after 9/11? Shop, shop, shop.

Btw, no free lunch is a reference in the US tax code with regards to allowable deductions. Should never be used in the context of wages.

Edit. Have you actually read Friedman? Because what you list is counter to his theory of monetarism. According to monetarism, the correlation is between inflation and the money supply, i.e., actions of the Fed to control the supply of money through the manipulation of interest rates by the Federal Reserve. Friedman was countering cost-push inflation, i.e., inflation due to certain commodity prices and wages. Think of the stagflation during the 1970s, high interest rates, low economic growth and high unemployment.

Instead of you two debating it, why don't we just ask Friedman himself how he feels about minimum wage?



I like and agree with a lot of Freidman, though Sowell is my personal favorite.