New Disney World President shares his thoughts... Especially about treating cast members right.
A Walk Around with Josh D'Amaro
- Thread starter GrandpaD
- Start date
"treating cast members right" except they won't pay them more. He literally wants to improve everything except paying them more and giving them steady hours. >__> y'know what would improve morale? Knowing you'll have the money if shit goes sideways.
Having worked in a place that literally had no break room, and our district manager wanted us to eat next to massive health violations. Do you wanna know what would have improved my morale? A pay raise. Having normal hours. Acknowledgement that we aren't little ants that can be gotten rid of and replaced.
Yeah a break room is nice but that's just a "well we did something nice for you!" Bandaid to get you to shut up.
Disney can 100% afford to give steady hours and pay but instead they chose to go with a new break room and "lower priced" food options. ?????
Having worked in a place that literally had no break room, and our district manager wanted us to eat next to massive health violations. Do you wanna know what would have improved my morale? A pay raise. Having normal hours. Acknowledgement that we aren't little ants that can be gotten rid of and replaced.
Yeah a break room is nice but that's just a "well we did something nice for you!" Bandaid to get you to shut up.
Disney can 100% afford to give steady hours and pay but instead they chose to go with a new break room and "lower priced" food options. ?????
Disney is currently in the middle of a massive multi year pay increase. They announced it in 2018 and have been moving their minimum wage up every year. They will be at $15 by next year.
Also Disney has a lot of employees who work full-time in all positions. It just isn't every employee that you see. Some of them are only part time. I think it's unfair to say that they aren't giving employees steady hours when they are only hired as part-time employees and not full-time employees. You can't be hired to work part-time and then complain that you don't work enough hours.
Yeah a pay increase that still ultimately doesn't solve the problem.
And I never said anything about working part time or full time. I said steady. It means knowing the hours you're going to work, and knowing it'll be regular. Not 7, 12 hour shifts in a row, to having 3, 5 hour shifts in the following week. If you say you're able to only work 15 hours a week, then fine. But there's a difference between saying how much you can work, and then being handed scraps.
And, 100% you can complain that if you're hired part time that you don't work enough. There are many places, including bgw from my understanding, where the position is ONLY part time. You and everyone around is part time. If you don't work enough hours, you don't work enough hours. Plain and simple. All the jobs I've had were all part time, simply bc that's the only thing that exists. You want full time? LOL what a funny joke. Work here for 25 years and sell your soul and we might consider it.
The idea that because somebody agreed to part time doesn't get the right to complain that they don't get enough hours is honestly laughable.
And I never said anything about working part time or full time. I said steady. It means knowing the hours you're going to work, and knowing it'll be regular. Not 7, 12 hour shifts in a row, to having 3, 5 hour shifts in the following week. If you say you're able to only work 15 hours a week, then fine. But there's a difference between saying how much you can work, and then being handed scraps.
And, 100% you can complain that if you're hired part time that you don't work enough. There are many places, including bgw from my understanding, where the position is ONLY part time. You and everyone around is part time. If you don't work enough hours, you don't work enough hours. Plain and simple. All the jobs I've had were all part time, simply bc that's the only thing that exists. You want full time? LOL what a funny joke. Work here for 25 years and sell your soul and we might consider it.
The idea that because somebody agreed to part time doesn't get the right to complain that they don't get enough hours is honestly laughable.
I know I always considered part time as you were filling the gaps in a work day. I know where I am some part time people some weeks get zero hours and then some weeks they get 50 or more hours. As for Disney I see some cast members complain about not having enough hours but then some that complain they work too many and never get a day off.
@WDWRLD If you're working like an office job, then sure part time may mean that. But in customer service, the industry theme parks are in? It hasn't meant that in an extremely long time. Part Time is the start. You don't get a full time position unless you're lucky. Very lucky. They give you part time because it means they don't have to schedule you as much, which means they don't have to pay you as much, and because of that it means you get zero benefits. Part Time isn't guaranteed shit.
As for Disney, I've seen both as well, they complain they don't have enough hours: which means they're not getting paid as much. But when it comes to "Too many hours" it's probably more like the hours that their working in shifts. I've had friends work 7-10 days in a row with no day off, but their shifts were all over the place. So they may work a "normal" or "short" shift (Though I doubt any shift is actually 'short' at Disney) but when you work X days in a row with no time off, it's valid complaint to have that they "work too much". That after a while is extremely rough on you. I had weeks at a previous job where on paper I was only working ~25 hours, but my schedule? 7 days working random shifts with no rhyme or reason as to scheduling. That eventually wears you out, especially in a physically and emotionally demanding job. Which Disney is.
As for Disney, I've seen both as well, they complain they don't have enough hours: which means they're not getting paid as much. But when it comes to "Too many hours" it's probably more like the hours that their working in shifts. I've had friends work 7-10 days in a row with no day off, but their shifts were all over the place. So they may work a "normal" or "short" shift (Though I doubt any shift is actually 'short' at Disney) but when you work X days in a row with no time off, it's valid complaint to have that they "work too much". That after a while is extremely rough on you. I had weeks at a previous job where on paper I was only working ~25 hours, but my schedule? 7 days working random shifts with no rhyme or reason as to scheduling. That eventually wears you out, especially in a physically and emotionally demanding job. Which Disney is.
That all makes business sense to me.....maybe im seeing it wrong though.
From a business stance, sure it makes sense. It makes the company more money.
From an employee stance? It makes you the devil they sold their soul to just to survive, and they can't even do that because they don't work or get paid enough to do so.
Companies would benefit from treating their employees like people and not replaceable robots. And don't seem to grasp the very, very simple concept, that hey if your employee has working good hours, has money to afford to survive - hell even enough to have a social life because going places costs money- that it would improve the morale of everyone more than a stupid break room, which is the equivalent of this picture.
From an employee stance? It makes you the devil they sold their soul to just to survive, and they can't even do that because they don't work or get paid enough to do so.
Companies would benefit from treating their employees like people and not replaceable robots. And don't seem to grasp the very, very simple concept, that hey if your employee has working good hours, has money to afford to survive - hell even enough to have a social life because going places costs money- that it would improve the morale of everyone more than a stupid break room, which is the equivalent of this picture.
I wish I could pick up a part time job making $15 a hour in a year or so when I retire.
I can retire at age 50 with 27 years of service in public safety....I work a 52 hour work week and dont make much more than $15 a hour now.
I will prelude this post with the fact that I have worked at multiple theme parks literally my entire livelihood. My opinions are based on my experience as well as what I have learned from others.
When it comes to part-time positions versus full-time positions, it is dependent on the park and its individual needs. Regional/Seasonal parks offer more part-time positions and less full-time positions because they simply can't offer full-time. They don't have an operating schedule to where they can offer 30-40 hours each week to a large mass of employees. It's just impractical for their business needs.
Destination/Year-Round parks offer more full-time positions and less part-time positions. Their operating schedules demand that the majority of positions are filled all year. Meaning, they easily can offer 30-40 hours each week for most of their employees. It can also be cost-effective in the end to hire more full-time positions because that means you can retain more people and spend less on re-training and hiring new people.
In the case of seasonal employees, those are typically college interns (international or US-based). Seasonal employees are brought in to supplement the workforce so they can handle larger crowds at a cheaper cost. The exception to this would be in the case of Epcot. Those employees are specifically imported from their county of origin to create an authentic experience in the park. For most other parks, it is truly to supplement the workforce that way you don't have to constantly have a For Hire sign on the front door, metaphorically speaking.
At a regional/seasonal park like BGW, yes part time make up the majority and they work long hours in the summer, with minimal hours in the winter. At a destination/full year park like Disney or Universal, part time is definitely used to fill in the gaps. The destination parks have more full time positions open and their not as hard to get because the need positions filled year round, and they have the hours to provide 30-40 hrs/week. Seasonal parks just don't simply have the hours to give year round, so their full time positions are much harder to achieve and there are fewer. But as I reiterate, it all comes down to the business need.
With specific individual steady scheduling, that is also dependent on business need. The parks don't always operate the same schedule every day. Some days they may close at 8pm, other days they could potentially close at 1am based on events and the time of the year. Scheduling for that kind of operation needs to be flexible. You can't expect someone to work 2pm to 10pm every day when some days the park closes later and you may need them until midnight or later. With the seemingly random events popping up all the time at WDW, this is definitely the case. You have randomly placed After Hours events, Extra Magic Hours (sometimes in the AM, other times in the PM), Halloween Parties, Christmas Parties, and anything else. A straight steady schedule just isn't the cards for such an event-based business.
The renovated break rooms, I am positive are greatly needed. I mean, there are other things like a pay raise that would be nice, but improved working environments are not something to just glance over. What is even more substantial is the amount that is being invested in them. It is a nice and warm gesture. If you want to see a terrible employee morale booster look no further than an insulting gift that an infamous park decided to give away for free. In return for getting high guest satisfaction scores, team members were given a pair of socks simply because they (this is a true quote), "Knocked the socks off guests". Truly, that is horridly insulting and the fact it was for a prop comedy joke makes it sting even worse. In my experience, I will take a refreshed break room any day.
Pay increases are trickier to hand out. The purpose of a business is to make as much profit as possible with the lowest expenses possible. So to blame a business for simply being a business is just a bit ridiculous. Continuing on the business route, if you are to offer significant pay raises, then you are committing to higher operating expenses. As a business and especially with shareholders, you need a plan that would offset the imbalance you created. Any major significant expense would require major significant profit in return, which could mean even more astronomical prices or it could mean severe budget cuts like taking away all overtime which some people desperately need to survive. In a sense by making a drastic change you upset the order of things. The easiest way to offer pay raises are small bumps over time that equate to a significant bump which can be planned and budgeted for easily. This is something that WDW has already committed to doing, slowly raising pay rates over time with it totaling to a significant pay increase by a specific deadline.
The other factor to consider when it comes to labor is the labor unions that operate with WDW. There are actually multiple unions that exist and negotiate with WDW. Each has their own contract, their own terms and commitments. These contracts can last and be effective for several years. With that being the case, maybe Josh wasn't around for the current contract negotiations. Therefore, the existing contracts may not be able to be altered. So he might not be able to just hand out pay raises out of the blue. While I wouldn't think unions would want to reject higher pay rates, I'm not certain if there legal ramifications or dangerous precedents that could be set due to breaking contracts midway.
When it comes to part-time positions versus full-time positions, it is dependent on the park and its individual needs. Regional/Seasonal parks offer more part-time positions and less full-time positions because they simply can't offer full-time. They don't have an operating schedule to where they can offer 30-40 hours each week to a large mass of employees. It's just impractical for their business needs.
Destination/Year-Round parks offer more full-time positions and less part-time positions. Their operating schedules demand that the majority of positions are filled all year. Meaning, they easily can offer 30-40 hours each week for most of their employees. It can also be cost-effective in the end to hire more full-time positions because that means you can retain more people and spend less on re-training and hiring new people.
In the case of seasonal employees, those are typically college interns (international or US-based). Seasonal employees are brought in to supplement the workforce so they can handle larger crowds at a cheaper cost. The exception to this would be in the case of Epcot. Those employees are specifically imported from their county of origin to create an authentic experience in the park. For most other parks, it is truly to supplement the workforce that way you don't have to constantly have a For Hire sign on the front door, metaphorically speaking.
At a regional/seasonal park like BGW, yes part time make up the majority and they work long hours in the summer, with minimal hours in the winter. At a destination/full year park like Disney or Universal, part time is definitely used to fill in the gaps. The destination parks have more full time positions open and their not as hard to get because the need positions filled year round, and they have the hours to provide 30-40 hrs/week. Seasonal parks just don't simply have the hours to give year round, so their full time positions are much harder to achieve and there are fewer. But as I reiterate, it all comes down to the business need.
With specific individual steady scheduling, that is also dependent on business need. The parks don't always operate the same schedule every day. Some days they may close at 8pm, other days they could potentially close at 1am based on events and the time of the year. Scheduling for that kind of operation needs to be flexible. You can't expect someone to work 2pm to 10pm every day when some days the park closes later and you may need them until midnight or later. With the seemingly random events popping up all the time at WDW, this is definitely the case. You have randomly placed After Hours events, Extra Magic Hours (sometimes in the AM, other times in the PM), Halloween Parties, Christmas Parties, and anything else. A straight steady schedule just isn't the cards for such an event-based business.
The renovated break rooms, I am positive are greatly needed. I mean, there are other things like a pay raise that would be nice, but improved working environments are not something to just glance over. What is even more substantial is the amount that is being invested in them. It is a nice and warm gesture. If you want to see a terrible employee morale booster look no further than an insulting gift that an infamous park decided to give away for free. In return for getting high guest satisfaction scores, team members were given a pair of socks simply because they (this is a true quote), "Knocked the socks off guests". Truly, that is horridly insulting and the fact it was for a prop comedy joke makes it sting even worse. In my experience, I will take a refreshed break room any day.
Pay increases are trickier to hand out. The purpose of a business is to make as much profit as possible with the lowest expenses possible. So to blame a business for simply being a business is just a bit ridiculous. Continuing on the business route, if you are to offer significant pay raises, then you are committing to higher operating expenses. As a business and especially with shareholders, you need a plan that would offset the imbalance you created. Any major significant expense would require major significant profit in return, which could mean even more astronomical prices or it could mean severe budget cuts like taking away all overtime which some people desperately need to survive. In a sense by making a drastic change you upset the order of things. The easiest way to offer pay raises are small bumps over time that equate to a significant bump which can be planned and budgeted for easily. This is something that WDW has already committed to doing, slowly raising pay rates over time with it totaling to a significant pay increase by a specific deadline.
The other factor to consider when it comes to labor is the labor unions that operate with WDW. There are actually multiple unions that exist and negotiate with WDW. Each has their own contract, their own terms and commitments. These contracts can last and be effective for several years. With that being the case, maybe Josh wasn't around for the current contract negotiations. Therefore, the existing contracts may not be able to be altered. So he might not be able to just hand out pay raises out of the blue. While I wouldn't think unions would want to reject higher pay rates, I'm not certain if there legal ramifications or dangerous precedents that could be set due to breaking contracts midway.
