Originally Posted By trekkeruss Of course they do not receive no maintanence. I think it's implied though that Disney has gotten away from some of the preventitive maintanence, i.e overhaul, and have substituted a more lax standard of service, perhaps with longer intervals between services, or more repair instead of replacement.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << When CMs have gone to management with their concerns they've been told basicaly to shut up or lose their jobs >> You'll have to come up with more than just this general conjecture to convince me that anything of the sort has happened. Having managed a safety program in an industrial environment, I can tell you that it would be absurd for anyone to be told they would lose their job for raising a safety concern. I know that WDW has an active safety program, and it is effectively managed -- not just a hollow program. In any industrial safety program there are multiple avenues for even the lowest level workers to bring their concerns up directly with the safety manager, and those concerns are typically addressed in as quick a manner as possible. They are tracked from cradle to grave until the hazard is eliminated or abated. That is, if an item is truly a safety hazard. There are lots of occasions when disgruntled employees provide complaints and tack the word "safety" onto it in order to gain visibility. There are also lots of occasions where workers grumble about safety concerns, but never introduce them into the formal process to be dealt with and corrected. I was amazed during my time as a safety officer how many safety hazards I identified on a daily basis that were known to the workers but never brought to the attention of anyone. As the safety "nazi," everyone lived in fear of my presence because I would often generate a long list of items that needed to be corrected before work could continue. I suspect the sources for your maintenance gossip might be among that lot of folks who either cry "safety" about items that are not hazardous, or like to complain about safety items but don't actually report them, as opposed to the kind who are actually trying to correct an important deficiency.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<You'll have to come up with more than just this general conjecture to convince me that anything of the sort has happened.>> You know I wouldn't try and convince YOU of anything. I'm just putting out what I have been told. <<Having managed a safety program in an industrial environment, I can tell you that it would be absurd for anyone to be told they would lose their job for raising a safety concern.>> Really? You've never heard the term 'whistleblower'? Right? Companies never cut safety corners to reach financial goals, right? <<I know that WDW has an active safety program, and it is effectively managed -- not just a hollow program.>> Do you work for WDW? Do you work with the rails? <<I suspect the sources for your maintenance gossip might be among that lot of folks who either cry "safety" about items that are not hazardous, or like to complain about safety items but don't actually report them, as opposed to the kind who are actually trying to correct an important deficiency.>> No , my 'sources' include CMs with years of experience. They aren't crying wolf. They ARE actively anti-management ... and IMHO they have every reason to be. I have told them what I'd tell anyone, find someone you at least think you can trust in the media and expose the company. You'll lose your jobs, but have a helluva lawsuit if your claims can be proven true.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << No , my 'sources' include CMs with years of experience. They aren't crying wolf. They ARE actively anti-management ... >> That explains an awful lot. People who are "anti" anything are usually part of the problem, not the solution. If you want to be a force for change, you have to generate positive solutions instead of just carping about a litany of problems. Of course, that would require actually understanding the nature of the problems -- which a lot of people fail to do. It's easier to just take the "anti" stance and complain a lot. Let someone else figure out the solutions, and if you don't like the ones they come up with you can just continue to complain about those, too.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 ^^No, you're wrong. You're comparing these CMs to ... gasp ... the Democrats (all complaints, no solutions). But the bottom line is really simple, WDW needs new management as does Disney's entire parks and resorts unit. Jay Rasulo is utterly clueless. Talk to the man, if you don't agree. And his execs are held on a tight leash to meet his projections and promises to Bob Iger. That's why these folks may be ANTI-management, but they're PRO-WDW and PRO-Safety and PRO-Exceeding guest expectations and PRO-Good show. You know, the important stuff!
Originally Posted By Lewis Goofy <<WDW needs to stop treating the monorails as if it was another D-ticket ride and be awared of it's operational demands and customer needs it provides. Not until they fully assess the merits of this service, will they ever be able to operate it in a reliable way.<< I think we do meet guests expectations with the monorails. Our monorails carry over 50 million guests a year...thats about 7000 guests an hour...with very few delays. Very rare to hear a complaint about our monorail service.
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>TDLFAN, I don't mean to fire up anything here (tee hee) but I am curious. If you dislike the monorails as much as you say you do why do you continue to ride them. I use the ferry all the time and I like the monorails but I enjoy the boat trip across. I guess I just don't understand why you keep subjecting yourself to something you seem to dislike so much. Again, I am not trying to be combative, I am just truly curious.<< The answer was in the first post. Not that I need to explain myself *again*... but G-Fan and I took the monorail because we missed the ferry boat by seconds and noticed the monorail was approaching the station, so we decided to make a run for it. HUGE MISTAKE on this day. But we do the ferry boat more often.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost I understand that is why you took it this time...I'm talking about in general. I know if I disliked something and mistrusted something as much as you seem to I would never set foot on it. They always said that it takes the same time to cross the lagoon on the ferry as it does to ride the monorail, and according to you, less time usually. I can relate to making the wrong decision and how Murphy's law applies to this case. I'm talking about in general. Why would you ever ride it? And please put away your paranoia for a moment. I was not making an attempt to contradict you or cause you to "explain yourself" concerning that instance. I was trying to just have a friendly back and forth. Something I should have guessed wouldn't happen.
Originally Posted By Mr X >>>I think we do meet guests expectations with the monorails. Our monorails carry over 50 million guests a year...thats about 7000 guests an hour...with very few delays. Very rare to hear a complaint about our monorail service.<<< lol. I take it you work in the monorail department, or else guest services or something? Buddy, I must have been riding a different monorail service all those years, or else you and I have a different idea of what "very few" means. I don't know what to say about "very few complaints", other than why would someone bother complaining? I've been stuck "waiting for clearence" on many, many occasions but never bothered to complain about it. I just figured that's the way things were. 7,000 people an hour is not all that much, by the way. There ARE 3 seperate lines, right? So a couple thousand people an hour per line. Meh.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I don't know what to say about "very few complaints", other than why would someone bother complaining? I've been stuck "waiting for clearence" on many, many occasions but never bothered to complain about it. I just figured that's the way things were.>> That is the way things are, and there are many reasons for it other than mechanical failure. There could be a time delay caused during the entry of a disabled person, delay caused by handling an unruly guest, delay caused by a stinking stroller caught in the doors, etc. I can't say exactly how many air flights I've been on in my life, but I know for certain that it is under 100; likely under 70. And during that time I've been delayed at least a half-dozen times by aircraft needing repair at the gate, waiting for replacement aircraft to arrive at the gate, having aircraft return to the gate after departure to have mechanical problems addressed, and once even returning after take-off to have mechanical problems resolved. The difference of course is that for the most part the mechanical problems of one aircraft do not delay the departure/arrival of all other aircraft at the airport. The major downfall of the monorail system is that it DOES. Until there is an efficient way to move a monorail train from the mainline to a parallel bypass track these types of problems will happen. Seeing how construction of the beam is such a huge expense, I don't ever see that happening.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost >>>Until there is an efficient way to move a monorail train from the mainline to a parallel bypass track these types of problems will happen.<<< I think that the monorail trains operate in both directions so they could get back to the point of origin if held up by another one that absolutely couldn't move.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< lol. I take it you work in the monorail department, or else guest services or something? ... I don't know what to say about "very few complaints", other than why would someone bother complaining? I've been stuck "waiting for clearence" on many, many occasions but never bothered to complain about it. I just figured that's the way things were. >>> But this is the way that WDW is managed these days. Rather than setting a standard based on what is determined to be a minimum acceptable level of guest service, endless surveys are conducted, and standards are allowed to be reduced until just before that issue spikes up on exit surveys or guest complaints. The people responsible for the decision then can "prove" that the cutbacks are not affecting the guest experience, completey discounting anything that doesn't bubble up to a boil as far as making guests angry. So slowly over time, the superior guest experience that Disney has been traditionally known for gets drained away. We've certainly seen this in custodial. I don't think anyone doubts that custodial at WDW has had substantial cutbacks in recent years, and if I recall correctly park management has come out specifically with the "guest survey" defense of this situation.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I think that the monorail trains operate in both directions so they could get back to the point of origin if held up by another one that absolutely couldn't move.>> I think they probably can operate in both directions. But that would still not get anyone to their destinations because the track would be blocked by the disabled train.
Originally Posted By Mr X >>>That is the way things are, and there are many reasons for it other than mechanical failure. There could be a time delay caused during the entry of a disabled person, delay caused by handling an unruly guest, delay caused by a stinking stroller caught in the doors, etc.<<< Funny how none of those things cause delays on the Tokyo monorail system. Of course, mechanical failure would seem to be less of an issue too...BUT you could chalk that up to newer, more sophistocated trains. That's fair enough, but the stuff you mentioned above is, in general, the fault of inefficient cast members who don't work quickly to FIX situations like that. No amount of monorail side-beams could fix THAT, and I think you just pointed out what the major problem really is!
Originally Posted By Mr X Post 70, Post 70, Post 70. People, that is so very true, you gotta pay alot of attention to what SuperDry wrote there!!
Originally Posted By Mr X Another thing about SD's theory (well, I'd call it fact, but just to be PC about it) is the fact that AS this stuff slowly erodes over time, people's standards also decrease accordingly. Perhaps someone who hasn't been to the parks in a LONG time might be shocked, but the family that visited 2 years ago to find things SOMEWHAT worse will probably not be running to the complaint window because it's still "pretty good". And so on, year by year. To the point where you have cast members actually writing arrogant sounding stuff like "our monorails very seldom have delays", and "it's rare to hear any complaints". Well, as a former cast member at WDW I'm embarrassed to hear someone say that. They should know better. I've certainly experienced many delays myself, and frankly the situation stinks. Couple that with the fact that you have WELL RUN Tokyo Disney Resort as a measuring stick...there's just no excuse.
Originally Posted By bobbelee9 One 4th of July my pre-teen son and I were trapped in one room of It's A Small World for 1/2 hour. Love that song, but not for that long. Things happen. Why hasn't Disney extended the monorail to MGM and Animal Kingdom?
Originally Posted By mrichmondj I wonder how many people here have any idea what the expense associated with operating the WDW monorail system might be? The Las Vegas monorail which was manufactured by Bomabardier, the same company that built the WDW MK VI trains, has annual operating expenses in the neighborhood of $40-50M each year. It runs on a track that measures 4.4 miles with 9 trains, so the size of the system is smaller than the WDW system. In comparison, the WDW monorail has 12 trains that transit a 13.6 mile system. Since Disney does not break out specific transportation costs, I would estimate that the WDW monorail system's costs are in the same ballpark as Las Vegas. $50M a year is not a small figure for a theme park transportation system. I have posted here about my understanding of some general maintenance practices in response to others who simply complain about poor maintenance and budget cuts without providing any solutions to those problems. However, I do recognize that the monorail system needs improvement. When I think of WDW, there are really only a few icons that immediately come to mind -- Cinderella's Castle, Spaceship Earth, and the WDW monorail system. The monorail is central to the guest's introduction to the Magic Kingdom and also a central feature at EPCOT. I think solutions need to be found that help make the system more efficient and that also demonstrate that mass transit is an appealing way to get around. WDW is one of the few locations on earth where suburbanites will readily use a mass transit system. Outside of their vacations, I doubt many WDW guests would ever consider boarding a bus or train to get around their towns. The WDW monorail plays a very important role that influences the receptiveness of the general public to mass transit alternatives. If WDW monorail trains are dirty, have poorly function air conditioning, or are prone to delays, the guests riding them for even brief periods of time will assume that all monorail system operate the same may -- maybe even to a lesser degree. All that being said, the WDW monorail is still an expensive system to operate and solutions need to be found to ensure it runs efficiently without becoming a financial liability. The Las Vegas monorail, as an example, loses about $20M each year and has accumulated $450M in debt which is not being effectively paid down. As a public company, WDW cannot afford this sort of liability. However, I do think WDW should explore a few options to make the monorail more efficient: 1) Expand the monorail to the EPCOT resorts and Disney Studios. This is a relatively small expansiion in terms of additional mileage and well within a reasonable capital expenditures budget. Eliminate bus service between these locations if monorail service is available. The cost savings in fuel and maintenance on the bus fleet will be significant over time. 2) Sell advertising to sponsors at the monorail stations and inside the monorail cars. This additional revenue will come nowhere close to paying for the high cost of monorail service, but it will contribute some to the bottom line. Right now, Disney is the exclusive user of advertising space in buses and monorails -- I expect that you don't really need to advertise so much to an audience that has already paid to use your product.
Originally Posted By trekkeruss Was it really a half hour? You looked at your watch? I am just surprised they wouldn't have just evactuated the ride after such a long time. They haven't extended the monorail because there is little to no financial benefit for them to do so.
Originally Posted By mrichmondj << They haven't extended the monorail because there is little to no financial benefit for them to do so. >> When gasoline was $1 a gallon, this was true. The dynamic has changed now that the operating expense of the bus system are beginning to have some impact due to high gas prices. Is it enough to tip the scales back toward monorail? I think the accountants are watching the global crude oil markets closely to make this decision.
