WDI Layoffs

[Horizons78]

I'm hearing that is the bulk of it.
Not unusual after a big project wraps up.

I had wondered.

I remember reading Steve Alcorn's "Building a Better Mouse" and specifically his opening description of the sense of loss after being let go following the completion of Epcot Center.

*Great read by the way for anyone interested!

 

[pheneix]

Someone should check and see if their favorite celebrity imagineers still work there.

The answer is probably no.

 

[BernardandBianca]

Aside from extremely high-level execs, I believe these are very hard to enforce. Not sharing confidential information is one thing, but prohibiting someone from gainful employment is another.

Particularly in a state like California. They have some of the most stringent requirements for enforcing non-compete clauses in the country.

 

[radiohost]

Remember when we all read this book with wonderment and awe?

Let's get back to that...

 

[asianway]

Someone should check and see if their favorite celebrity imagineers still work there.

The answer is probably no.

Crickets over on twitter...yet Slater seems to have dodged the Axe

 

[TP2000]

You mean imagineers won't be able to fly all over the world to select the correct items for an attraction/queue? Good! Maybe now, attraction construction/renovation costs won't spiral out of control.

And I thought I was the only one who felt that type of thing was ridiculously wasteful and decadently stupid. And WDI has the gall to tout that sort of travel expedition publicly as if it's something to be proud of.

 

[Rteetz]

Someone should check and see if their favorite celebrity imagineers still work there.

The answer is probably no.

Well I'd guess Joe is still there but what other big imagineers would they have gotten rid of? Kathy? Fitzgerald?

 

[HauntedMansionFLA]

Well I'd guess Joe is still there but what other big imagineers would they have gotten rid of? Kathy? Fitzgerald?

Scott Trowbridge ? Zsolt Hormay ? JK

 

[JoeCamel]

Universal Studios Beijing is their next focus.

I think they have more than one focus. They just opened a building overlooking the IDrive property with a Universal Creative logo on it. I would think they will fill it with people that are going to "imagineer" a brand spanking new theme park there in the next few years

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think they have more than one focus. They just opened a building overlooking the IDrive property with a Universal Creative logo on it. I would think they will fill it with people that are going to "imagineer" a brand spanking new theme park there in the next few years

Disney (Weis) had tried to approach Shanghai Disney Resort in a manner more typical of Universal Creative. Trying to avoid some of those problems Universal Creative is going to take a more hands-on, Disney style approach to Universal Studios Beijing. The third Orlando park is not that far along.

 

[Stripes]

I think they have more than one focus. They just opened a building overlooking the IDrive property with a Universal Creative logo on it. I would think they will fill it with people that are going to "imagineer" a brand spanking new theme park there in the next few years

Not in the slightest. It's coming...eventually. But not for quite a while.

 

[Bairstow]

And I thought I was the only one who felt that type of thing was ridiculously wasteful and decadently stupid. And WDI has the gall to tout that sort of travel expedition publicly as if it's something to be proud of.

Yeah, Harambe and Anandapur are decadent as hell, but I kind of love them for that. The world will probably never see such ludicrously over-researched themed architecture and design ever again. Animal Kingdom is like the "Heaven's Gate" of theme parks.

 

[TP2000]

Yeah, Harambe and Anandapur are decadent as hell, but I kind of love them for that. The world will probably never see such ludicrously over-researched themed architecture and design ever again. Animal Kingdom is like the "Heaven's Gate" of theme parks.

And yet any and all of that could be researched via Google by a good research librarian for a tiny fraction of the cost of flying a handful of Celebrity Imagineers in British Airways First Class (the executive handlers/managers are back in Club World) around the world and putting them up at the Serengeti Four Seasons for a week. Guides, cars, travel wardrobe, food, drink, spa treatments, souvenirs, etc. all included of course.

 

[Bairstow]

And yet any and all of that could be researched via Google by a good research librarian for a tiny fraction of the cost of flying a handful of Celebrity Imagineers in British Airways First Class (the executive handlers/managers are back in Club World) around the world and putting them up at the Serengeti Four Seasons for a week. Guides, cars, travel wardrobe, food, drink, spa treatments, souvenirs, etc. all included of course.

Yes, and I'm sure it would have been no less than 96% as good as what they built.

 

[TP2000]

For fun I just researched the 2015 average salary for a professional Research Librarian with a Masters degree. Average salary is $51,000 per year. For fun, lets' say WDI has a really good one they pay $75,000 per year. (And I know they have those on staff)

For fun I just went to the Four Seasons website and priced a week in a mid-range Terrace Suite with a nice view. With an extra night free because they are staying a week, it's $15,460 per room this October. A quick check on British Airways shows a First Class ticket from LAX to Tanzania and back is running $18,400 round trip. For the Celebrity Imagineer handlers slumming it back in Club World, that will be $7,200 round trip.

Sending a half dozen Imagineers to Tanzania for a week for "research" so they can get the fake advertising in the Kilimanjaro Safari queue just right could pay for several good research librarians for a year. But then it wouldn't be as much fun for Rhode and his groupies, I'm sure.

Then there's the Inconvenient Truth for many of these types of creative folks who espouse that carbon is killing the planet and causing Manmade Global Warming. So they have British Airways fly them around the world in decadent luxury using tens of thousands of gallons of kerosene jet fuel atomized into the stratosphere per flight, instead of getting Barbara down in the library to just Google it.

 

[DManRightHere]

My whole understanding of imagineers may be flawed. I thought they were coveted highly skilled artists that would require very specific contracts before hiring.

Doubt that a non compete applies after being laid off. Unless there's some sort of clause in a severance package. If they quit, that's a different story.

If they are contracted and the scope of the contract was met (including how long they may be employed for Disney, or at will), why not? That is the purpose of a non compete, after employment.

I am sure they do, as @ABQ said I have no idea how or when it would kick in but I am sure they have one. It really depends on how long the Non Compete is in affect. But I am sure UNI will get the ones they want.

I am thinking 12 months, I just kind of assume Disney would directly name Universal Studios as someone they could not work for, or at least a park in the same state. Actually now I have read non competes are not enforcable in CA.

Ex-Imagineers helped build Islands of Adventure at Universal.

I mean ex imagineers can work for Universal, but I would think they would have to wait 12 months or so before actually gaining employment.

Aside from extremely high-level execs, I believe these are very hard to enforce. Not sharing confidential information is one thing, but prohibiting someone from gainful employment is another.

I just assumed Disney would directly name Universal, at least in FL as someone they could not work for until at least 12 months. They could likely go out of the country and work for Universal, or stay in the states and work for Six Flags or Cedar Fair. There is probably many more options besides theme parks for their employment anyways..

 

[Gringrinngghost]

Aside from extremely high-level execs, I believe these are very hard to enforce. Not sharing confidential information is one thing, but prohibiting someone from gainful employment is another.

I have a buddy in Television. She was let go from The Weather Channel; they laid her off and still tried to get her to sign a non-compete cause.

 

[ABQ]

If they are contracted and the scope of the contract was met (including how long they may be employed for Disney, or at will), why not? That is the purpose of a non compete, after employment.

If that was the case, then I agree with you, however, I was going more along the line of they were laid off as part of a reduction in force, not terminated due to failure to meet an obligation. How each of these are handed post employment could differ greatly.

 

[danv3]

We discussed imagineering non-competes on here a while back, and it was suggested that Disney and Universal don't impose non-competes on imagineers (and whatever Uni calls them) because of the understanding that creatives can bounce between employers pretty regularly since some of the work is essentially project-based.

Could they have non-competes? In Florida at least, the answer is clearly yes, and the fact that an imagineer was laid off (vs. resigned vs. terminated for cause) wouldn't have an impact on whether the non-compete would be enforced. It would be pretty easy for Disney to require imagineers to sign agreements that would effectively prevent them from taking a creative position at Uni for 6-12 months post-termination. But, as noted above, there is some thought that Disney chooses not to do so.

California is a different animal. Non-competes are unenforceable except in connection with the sale of a business. So in this context, there would be no prohibition on a imagineer being fired by Disney Thursday morning and starting work for Universal the next day.

 

[Rodan75]

We discussed imagineering non-competes on here a while back, and it was suggested that Disney and Universal don't impose non-competes on imagineers (and whatever Uni calls them) because of the understanding that creatives can bounce between employers pretty regularly since some of the work is essentially project-based.

Could they have non-competes? In Florida at least, the answer is clearly yes, and the fact that an imagineer was laid off (vs. resigned vs. terminated for cause) wouldn't have an impact on whether the non-compete would be enforced. It would be pretty easy for Disney to require imagineers to sign agreements that would effectively prevent them from taking a creative position at Uni for 6-12 months post-termination. But, as noted above, there is some thought that Disney chooses not to do so.

California is a different animal. Non-competes are unenforceable except in connection with the sale of a business. So in this context, there would be no prohibition on a imagineer being fired by Disney Thursday morning and starting work for Universal the next day.

Disney can force folks to sign agreements in FL, but it gets pretty silly pretty quickly if they try to enforce them. As long as the employee informs Uni of the Non-Compete and Uni is willing to go Lawyer to Lawyer if anything comes up, you end up with a stalemate and everyone just moves on. I think the only real danger is if you share NDA-level information while also under a non-compete and could get yourself in trouble.

Edit - I have seen where you could risk your severance if you go work for a competitor in standard non-competes...since that is really their only legal hold on you outside of NDA info.