Originally Posted By jonvn "Here they ever the cream of the crop and a higher standard?" Yes. They used to pay better too, compared to other places that is. You get what you pay for.
Originally Posted By ophellia and also Union, was a dirty word at Rancho, anyone Union active was 'terminated'. Fact.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Yes. They used to pay better too, compared to other places that is. You get what you pay for.<< Exactly. Disneyland is supposed to be a premium experience. I'm in the customer service industry, and if I had a dollar every time some manager or executive told a story about Disney or referenced Disney as a top tier customer service provider, I'd be able to stay at the Grand Californian every time I went to the parks. Disney earned a reputation as a top notch customer service provider. Now they seem to want the best of both worlds - they want that reputation but they don't want to pay for it. It's like I said before - corporate greed. The pressure to drive up profits year in and year out is enormous. So the costs to get into the parks goes up and up, but wages don't. And Disney is hardly the only company guilty of it. It's a common pattern: Employees are paid less and less, experienced people are laid off and replaced with kids who are barely trained, and when customer service drops, the employees are somehow to blame for being "lazy" or "not taking pride in their work." IMO, companies and customers can blame only one thing: the corporation.
Originally Posted By Socrates #79: You know, TheHoop, perhaps that's the best argument for not bringing back the draft? Socrates "Death may be the greatest of all human blessings."
Originally Posted By DisneyFreak96 The fact my library will hire someone to shelve books, that is no interaction with customers, at the same pay as Disneyland CMs is simply scary. Start interacting with students and you obviously are paid more. Wow, starting pay at our college library for an untrained clerk is twenty cents more than Disneyland, with a guaranteed eighty cents raise in 4 months. Walk in with knowledge of skills and the college pays nine-fifty to start and get a raise to over ten dollars the next semester. I got my raise after a month of employment, due to the fact I came on late in the semester. Yes, it does make a difference how much you pay someone. I know people that would be great at Disneyland but prefer to work at a cashier at my local gas station because "Disneyland pays *crap*". It is also important how the President and managers on down respect you. If they come into the workplace once in a while, acknowledge the importance of your work, ask you to hold yourself and those around you to higher standards, it makes a huge difference. If you see those around you on the cell phone ignoring customers, you may begin to wonder why you should push yourself to the limit? Example: I just took a pay cut in another job because I could work for a professor who is highly respected. I would like to be known and associated with him. That is important to me as a person. If I can survive on less money and be proud of what I do, great. Since it is my second job (as it is for more and more Disneyland CMs) choosing the job I am proud to be associated with is an option. Disneyland used to be the same way. The park did not pay a lot more, but if people knew you worked there then *wow* you had respect.
Originally Posted By Hans Reinhardt "$8.20hr!? Yikes that's horible" It is horrible, but compared to the BLS statistics provided by alexbook, those numbers are are in line with pay for similar jobs in the region. Of course, since Disney is supposed to be offering a premium experience (and charging for it at the front gate) it isn't unreasonable to expect its staff members to be paid a slightly higher than average wage. Post 80 is scary. I hate hearing stories like this about Disney parks.
Originally Posted By jonvn It's sort of like this. Used to be that minimum wage was like around $3 an hour. And Disney would be paying twice or three times that or more. Now, minimum wage is like $5+ an hour, and they aren't paying that multiple anymore. That is how it is different. Meanwhile, the entrance fee has gone up from $10 to $60. What is that? 500%? Anyone who would work there has to realize that they are being played, and that is not going to engender a lot of good attitude on the part of the employees.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj Aside from raw wages, what has been the increase in cost for employee benefits? Health care, worker's compensation, etc. I don't think that $8-10 an hour is a living wage, but I think you also need to consider the hidden costs that an employer bears as well when comparing wages from different times in history. The cost of health care has accelerated well beyond the costs of raw salaries over the past 20 years. Additionally, the cost of employee lawsuits, disability insurance, and worker's compensation plans have also increased faster than raw wages in the marketplace. Just a few things to consider when comparing apples to oranges with respect to wages today and 20 years ago. Should DL wages be higher? Probably. Would employees accept lower benefits in terms of health care and disability in exchange for higher wages? Probably not.
Originally Posted By jonvn That's a great argument, until you factor in the higher costs for admission. Or anything else in the park, like $3.50 for a box of popcorn that used to cost 35 cents, when employees were paid more. That is a ten fold increase. They are simply paying less.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj Except that profit margins have decreased during the same period -- so even with the massive increase in admissions, Disney's cost of doing business vs. the amount of money they are bringing in is not going in the right direction. If profit margins were exploding through the roof, the argument that Disney was increasing prices at the expense of employee salaries would hold more water. Again, I think there is a good argument for higher wages, but there are also considerations to be made for why the marketplace has supported the wages that exist today.
Originally Posted By jonvn I believe they make a lot more money now than they used to. But that could be wrong. I do have the distinct impression they are making more money now than they did 20 years ago. Or 10 years ago. Maybe even 5 years ago. But I need sleep. I'm turning into Elvis.
Originally Posted By TheHoop And now we're talking economics-and this topic could apply to almost any/every product, service in the marketplace. And the effects, on the consumer, business owner and suppliers, is the same; we all know where this cycle-circle goes. ... Disney should uphold to what got them here in the first place, high quality people that knew how to make a guest feel like a special guest in a Magic Kingdom. Pay the wages necessary to ensure the quality! Just the same, someone could probably argue the opposite side as to how they'd lose profits money if the wages are increased. And so the cycle continues... One thing I have learned from this topic--be appreciative to the CM's. They aren't making much. Smile back at them, too. Tell them thanks when they help you, etc.
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Disney should uphold to what got them here in the first place, high quality people that knew how to make a guest feel like a special guest in a Magic Kingdom. Pay the wages necessary to ensure the quality!<< I know an organizational behavioral expert who once told me that every large organization, pretty much without exception, will eventually turn its back on the very things that made it great and got it to where it is in the first place. It's inevitable and not necessarily a bad thing as they try and stay relevant in a changing world.
Originally Posted By fkurucz >>They are simply paying less.<< As are many others (unfortunately). Time was, when a company did well, it shared some of the wealth with the rank and file. Its funny how in B-School they still serve the line about how employees are "stakeholders" in a business. I read and article a few months ago that discussed the possibility of a recession in 2007. The article claimed that only consumers could stave off the recession and that there was nothing that businesses could do. I found that statement to be "interesting". It implied that consumers, whose wages have been trailing inflation for the past 5 years and who are already up to their eyeballs in debt have a duty to spend even more money that they don't have. Meanwhile, businesses are making record profits, but its ok for them to be tight fisted with money.
Originally Posted By avromark ^^^ Especially where there is a monopoly, ie, gas, telephones (in many areas), cable (again in most areas), banks (in Canada where there is only a handful of banks), etc. Today's businesses are "Excel and Marketing" driven, and with off-shoring... However -> If Disney can't offer higher wages due to economics, shouldn't they ask/cooperate with OC or a neighbouring area to provide economical domiciles for their employees? A shuttle bus to a neighbouring more inexpensive area? (I know it's socal)
Originally Posted By avromark Does Disney offer free refreshments to their front line CM's on especially hot days? Even little things would make an appreciable difference.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 Couldn't agree more with Post 96. But I think much of that comes from living under an administration that only cares about big business and Wall Street and couldn't care less about the American worker. Yep. They'll say that we simply must take that $80,000 a year job with good benefits and send it packing to India where it becomes a fraction of that in order 'to stay competitive' all the while the companies make record profits. Poor WalMart. Sam Walton's heirs are wealtheir than Bill Gates and the Saudi oil sheiks but you can't expect WalMart to raise pay and give employees health care. How would they compete? And poor, poor Disney. Sure, they're making more $$$ than ever in parks and resorts thru admission, food increases, hotel rates etc ... but pay workers another dollar or two an hour? The stock might go down a nickel. One day we will wake up and realize we have third-world health-care, no middle class and no manufacturing base ... and we'll be China's (female dog). But, hey, ExxonMobil only made $37 billion ... why should they pay to clean up Alaska? To stop ranting and get on back OT, it's pretty safe to say Disney could pay more, but choose not to. And that's why worker turnover is so staggeringly high. There's no cache to working for Disney anymore either ... and people know it.
