englanddg
One Little Spark...
"hundreds of years", eh? Also, to be frank, it isn't Ford or GM who "take a stand"...rather they are beholden to union pressures, and have been for a long time.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Trending blog post: "What it's really like working at Walt Disney World"
- Thread starter thelookingglass
- Start date
flynnibus
Premium Member
What? The ideas of paid holidays, paid overtime, double and triple time, paid pensions for all workers, union arbitration, etc are not 'hundreds of years old' - and why the rise of unionized labor came up in the early 20th century after workers had been treated as disposable tools throughout the industrial revolution and beyond. The 'fat' period with all the ideals idolized by many that formed post WWII has collapsed. The ideas of underfunded pensions, forcing all new employees into 401ks instead of pensions, reducing medical benefits, and other steps are all black and white examples of how the old model failed to be sustainable.
Do you even read the stories behind your 'successes'? The GM point is because they know they are entering another round of negotiations... it's trying to buy negotiating power. Did you also miss how these employees are also going day to day with benefits a FRACTION their parents had in the same jobs?
Re the Ford story... you are celebrating this story maybe?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/05/b...truck-means-higher-wages-for-500-workers.html
Where we are talking about 500... out of 50,000 workers.. and they are doing it not because they 'found it to be unacceptable' but because the contract demands they do it because only so much of the work force can be at the lower tier of the two tier system that was negotiated. That same two tier system that introduced a lower scale that again REDUCED the pay and benefits ALL employees used to get. Why? Because the old model wasn't sustainable.
In 2008, for every one UAW worker, the industry was paying benefits to THREE workers. For GM, the rate was 4.6
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB122809320261867867
That number continued to increase the longer the system was in place. It's numbers like that why the industry's model was NOT sustainable and why they have since changed it.
Do you pay attention to things like union rules on wages and what it means to costs? Like when you go grocery shopping on a Sunday... do you realize the senior employees (who get first dips at the schedule) can be making 2x-3x their normal top tier wages for doing the same exact work they do on any other day? Do you think a cashier should be making $30+/hr ? Are you willing to pay for that in everything you buy?
Ever notice when you goto a store, the Sunday morning crew is always the most senior staff??? They want their 4 or 8hr shift as early in the day as possible and want those shifts because they pay the most.
Nearly every round of union negotiations means lower benefits for new workers... because the union voters are willing to sacrifice the future workers to try to save their own benefits. But all negotiations tend to end up reducing benefits for the new guys... the old models of 3x holiday pay, etc aren't sustainable.
Don't cite emotional propoganda that doesn't scale or is taken out of context to support an agenda.
Monkee Girl
Well-Known Member
Very interesting read and very sad also.
This clip on youtube from an ex employee is rather amusing
Love Swoozie; he's the best
LOL. I just couldn't let this one go, because Flynnibus is so wrong for this. I will not allow him to disrespect the working poor.Just curious...did you just find this thread, or was your response slowly percolating over the past 4 months?
You can tell by his arguments that he is all about "winning", so he just jumps into a discussion all ultracrepidarian-ish and takes a side -- without really taking time to think things through -- and he certainly doesn't care about who he is hurting. It's just another conquest for him but he picked the the wrong topic and the wrong poster this time.
The union has lost a lot of bargaining power, so Ford and GM are not beholden to the unions or their employees. I'm sure that all of the other industries would gladly welcome the auto industry to adopt their embarrassing model of doling out low wages and hiring permanent temporary part time.
Please spare me your history lesson. I've enjoyed my share of history lecture(s) from some of the most highly cited professors. And likewise, I am sure that you have, as well. With that said, I will not be held hostage to your historical *perspective*, as it has no relevance to this discussion. History is always subject to someone else's bias, which is why it is never an effective tool in attempting to leverage an argument.
I don't know what bothers me more -- your wanton disregard for acknowledging the bias confined within the historical context you wish to pass as fact or that you view your *audience* as not being refined or sophisticated enough to notice.
Regardless, it's a novice attempt to undermine my argument and compromise the platform by molding this discussion into a such a form, where only your ideology fits.
Your approach is pedestrian and all of your statements are comprised of anecdotal data. You've made it so convoluted, to the point where it is quite tedious. You are literally across the board with unions, arbitration, pensions, World War II and baby boomers, etc.
It's challenging to grasp the core sentiment of your argument -- when it is essentially void of any cohesiveness. What should amount to a relatively simple dialogue on underpaid employees, has amassed into a pedantic mess of words. So, get it together...
You base your arguments on what you *imagine* to be the "cause and effect" of why employers give raises. You are free to speculate all you want -- but, it doesn't change the fact that GM, Ford and Costco are paying their employees substantially more than what Walmart employees earn. And, I'm fairly certain the employees who can pay their bills on time and not starve, are more than grateful.
Unlike you, I have put forth a strong, passionate and objective argument, complete with sources that reflect what is current in today's work climate. I have drawn conclusions based on comparisons, observations, and other data that is relevant to the topic -- instead of being relevant to me "winning" or wanting to be number 1 or whatever. I feel that companies like Walmart can do better.
Now, what's really interesting is that Walmart (yeah, the company that you champion) and their shareholders agree with *me*. Just as of last month, Walmart is giving all of their employees a much deserved raise. As the economy slowly recovers, Walmart has begun to experience losses from high turnover in employment -- so they are hoping to attract new employees and while also keeping their current employees, in tact.
Also, some of the of the largest Walmart shareholders feel that even the raises are not enough -- from what I can gather they want Walmart to adopt an incentive based model that draws from performance metrics.
Walmart giving raises is a total game changer, and other companies like TJ Max and Marshall's have already followed suit. We can expect all the others to join in.
When a company increases wages or decides to invest in their human capital, whether it be the union or some PR thing or whatever, we should applaud and encourage these decisions and support companies that do this.
Again, I don't see how you can find it acceptable for taxpayers to subsidize low wages earners with subsidized housing, gov't food stamp program, welfare and healthcare while their employers net billions in profit. It's not cool.
Isn't it kind of wrong to argue that higher pay is not sustainable to low wage earners a when even Walmart and all the other corporations agree, that their own workers deserve much more by finally agreeing to increase wages????
You asked whether I would be willing to pay more for everything I buy? I'm sure as a taxpayer, I am
paying much more for subsidized housing, gov't food stamp program and welfare then I would if employees salary were increased. I know I will have to pay more regardless, but at least the money will help to pay a more decent salary for workers instead of extra billions for corporations.
As an aside, this headline caught my eye. "New Restaurant Gets Rid Of Tipping, Pays Every Employee $15 An Hour"
"The William Street Common restaurant pays all of its employees, from the servers to the dishwashers, at least $15 an hour plus paid sick leave and health insurance benefits." I see a new trend for the better!
Okay Flynnibus, this whole "it's not sustainable thing" is over for you -- it is and has always been and will always be sustainable in some form.
Last edited:
wdwjmp239
Well-Known Member
I haven't had a chance to read the article, yet, but when I read this part of your post it got me thinking about the issues my wife and I were having with the smartphone app and copying Fastpasses from one magicband to the other. We had to explain this to a couple of different CMs and they let us through, but I remember the CM at Seven Dwarfs Mine Train ride who rolled her eyes when we mentioned the issue we were having with the app. She sighed, said, "I know....", and let us go. Poor girl must've been having a bad day with the numerous complaints from other guests. To some extent, I do feel bad for the people who work countless hours at Disney to make their guests feel welcome, and I get it because after spending 10 years in the hospitality field (restaurants, mostly.), they almost have to go as far as licking boots to make some people happy. It's a thankless job, but it's a job nonetheless. Without the folks who work at Disney that make the magic happen, there would be no Disney. So with that, I close this reply with a huge "Thank You!"
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
How can companies be praised for promising to increase wages in a year or two or more? Yes they are pegged at or near popular numbers for today, but by the time these increases are implemented inflation will have knocked out most of the benefits.
polynesiangirl
Well-Known Member
I used to be close to a number of former CMs, so this didn't surprise me. I'm sure it's only gotten worse in the last 10 years.
While I do question the accuracy of some, not all, of the statements in the original blog post, I'm sure a lot of it was at least partially based in reality.
I am positive that the public at WDW is horrible to work with; I'll say that much. Other guests are my least favorite thing about WDW by a mile. (See also: "why is there more garbage everywhere at WDW?", "why did people scam the GAC program?", "why can't we have nice things?")
While I do question the accuracy of some, not all, of the statements in the original blog post, I'm sure a lot of it was at least partially based in reality.
I am positive that the public at WDW is horrible to work with; I'll say that much. Other guests are my least favorite thing about WDW by a mile. (See also: "why is there more garbage everywhere at WDW?", "why did people scam the GAC program?", "why can't we have nice things?")
wdwjmp239
Well-Known Member
My sister-in-law works at DHS in costuming. She mentions what she does has to do with costumes and she says she loves it! So, after I read this former CM's blog post this evening, I couldn't help but thinking if this person just had a bug up his for Disney because he didn't get what he wanted from the start.
Goofnut1980
Well-Known Member
Hey.. At least people had a job. Jobs can be hard to come by. Plus who really likes working. We all complain about something at our job. Can anyone honestly say they have never once said anything negative about their job. If it was puppies and roses, we wouldn't earn money for it! lol
copcarguyp71
Well-Known Member
Not trying to argue but I really think comparing a frontline face to face employees experience to a position of behind the scenes support staff is like comparing apples and Tuesday. One deals with a good number of self important sanctimonious people who think that their park ticket entitles them to walk on water without getting their feet wet while the other works behind the scenes and probably rarely has guest interaction.
Both jobs are equally important and both are hard without a doubt but I just am not sure it is any kind of accurate comparison of one to the other in terms of employment experience. I for one know that I would never be able to be a facetime cast member and I think it takes a special kind of person to have that kind of patience, perseverance and drive to be successful in that position and yes, this person might not have been right for the job but I still have to say that the two jobs are so vastly different that to compare one to the other in terms of employment experience is flawed at best.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Anyone who thinks Ford was ok because they didn't need the TARP bailouts needs to their homework. The reason Ford didn't go into TARP was because they were imploding PRIOR to the recession. Ford simply was in a nose dive ... so in 2006 Ford went on a massive restructuring and recapitalization plan that including laying off 30k workers, shutting down 14 plants, divesting BILLIONS in partnerships, and the gutting of product lines in an attempt to return to profitability. Ford raised over 34 BILLION to fund their plan. (researchers can look into 'the way forward' plan for Ford). They simply lucked out in timing by being able to sell stuff off and get loans in the market before the market free fall in 2007/2008. When the other guys (Chrysler and GM) did not slit their wrists prior to 2007... they were caught in this horribly weak position and the capital markets were in no shape to help them.. hence the government intervention.
TLR version: By failing SOONER, Ford got lucky in they were able to restructure before the markets collapsed. Their restructuring was also a really good plan - but they were lucky in they simply got started before the market implosions that locked up anyone's ability to restructure debt or offload undesirable divisions.
But please... lets focus on Ford giving 500 people raises as a sign of how the auto industry is such a great model for wages and sustainability...
TL
R version: By failing SOONER, Ford got lucky in they were able to restructure before the markets collapsed. Their restructuring was also a really good plan - but they were lucky in they simply got started before the market implosions that locked up anyone's ability to restructure debt or offload undesirable divisions.But please... lets focus on Ford giving 500 people raises as a sign of how the auto industry is such a great model for wages and sustainability...
flynnibus
Premium Member
Like how he/she can tell you just how beat down you were or need for recovery? haha Maybe they should change their handle to Gaston...
Or just TWDC. Cut to the chase....
SoccerLover100
Member
Swear to me!!!!!!!!
flynnibus
Premium Member
Yeah, but how do they pay their employees? Do they get benefits?
hunnybelle
New Member
My husband works in security for Disney. He likes it a lot. The benefits are really good. Our health insurance is the best we've had in years. He also has a 401k and a health share account. While the pay isn't great, with overtime, my husband makes more per month than he did working in the prison system for the state of Georgia-and he much prefers his work at WDW. All jobs require work. Working at WDW is a job, not a vacation. If you go into it with the right mindset, you just might enjoy it. My husband said there are many, many people he works with who have been there for 10+ years and plan on retiring with Disney. Oh, and I am a teacher, and my husband, daughter and I have spent nearly 10 days this year enjoying the parks for free. You can't beat that perk!
FettFan
Well-Known Member
Hmm.... I really want to share this with you.
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-millionaire-pay-cut-20150416-story.html
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2015/04/16/dan-price-takes-bite-out-of-minimum-wage-pay-gap/
"Gravity Payments" CEO Dan Price slashed his salary by $930,000 dollars, so that all of his employees could earn $70,000 a year -- more than double of what they're currently earning.
Why? Because he sees a 'moral imperative to brigde the income gap' and empower his workforce.
OMG! He is so AWESOME. I hope his business more than quadruples and flourishes with record breaking profits *forever*!
You keep saying it can't be done because it's not *feasible* -- but, you are totally wrong. It can be done and it has been done, repeatedly -- just not enough to where it should be.
Also, Universal Studios is raise base wages to $9.50 an hour starting June 1st and to $10 dollar in June 2016. And, they're currently hiring.