Abigail Disney vs Bob Iger

[Baduist]

Companies should have a larger responsibility than making money for investors.

If ANY company in the world fits that description it’s Disney. One look at an annual report will tell you just how much so.

 

[Baduist]

Btw

Since 2009, Bob Iger created 67,000 jobs.

I wonder how many jobs Abigail (or for that matter, Bernie... sorry) created in her lifetime to be looking into somebody else’s plate.

#teamIger

 

[Sandeep1]

Companies should have a larger responsibility than making money for investors.

You are free to start your own company and run it the way you see fit.

 

[Hikergirl]

I guess instead of going into the film industry she should have taken over the Disney herself that way she could make decisions for them.
Of course, it seems her last name and career have been very beneficial for her financially, according to Forbes she has a net worth of $500M, had she run Disney her networth would only be $350 like Iger's.

 

[NotUrsula]

Here's your basic case study: Costco https://www.fool.com/investing/gene...wal-mart-higher-wages-mean-superior-retu.aspx

In situations where brand loyalty depends heavlly on satisfaction with the customer experience, case studies have shown that higher pay for line employers usually increases profit margins.

 

[Baduist]

Here's your basic case study: Costco https://www.fool.com/investing/gene...wal-mart-higher-wages-mean-superior-retu.aspx

In situations where brand loyalty depends heavlly on satisfaction with the customer experience, case studies have shown that higher pay for line employers usually increases profit margins.

I think Disney is in a unique position. My argument is not only entry point jobs at Disney can pay as little as possible, it HAS too.

The idea is getting only the people who are willing to go through some time of low salary - necessarily lower than what the competition offers - in order to weed out those who jump ship for a better pay.

People who stay at Disney are people who care deeply about Disney. In return they get things out of their careers that they can’t get anywhere else.

You’ll find many policies at Disney align with this thinking.

 

[soccerdad72]

It won't hurt my feelings if someone corrects my math but according to the article, the top six executives combined made $62 million in bonuses and the lower ten percent of employees consisted of 200,000 people.

If the top six employees give if half of their 62 million bonuses and give the money directly to the bottom employees, they wold each receive $155.

This is a non story to me.

Team Iger

Total employees is 200,000, which would mean the 10% she's talking about is 20,000 people, thus $1,500 a person.

Still not enough to offer, as she's quoted as saying, "a ticket out of poverty or debt". Not that the lowest paid employees would mind an extra $1,500.

 

[tcufrog]

So I'm guessing you don't own a business...

We co-own a business that is nowhere near as big as Disney but is successful and growing rapidly. My dh is always talking about how difficult it is to find good employees who can accomplish the specialized work his company does. Because of this, he and his business partner consider employee retention to be extremely important and treat their employees well. There have been times during economic downturns when they’ve gone without pay so they could pay their employees and avoid layoffs.

 

[Scifidiner]

We co-own a business that is nowhere near as big as Disney but is successful and growing rapidly. My dh is always talking about how difficult it is to find good employees who can accomplish the specialized work his company does. Because of this, he and his business partner consider employee retention to be extremely important and treat their employees well. There have been times during economic downturns when they’ve gone without pay so they could pay their employees and avoid layoffs.

My wife has had a successful business for 35 years. She too has had to go without paying herself at times. My point is that if you've never run a business, you have no idea of the challenges. The PP basically said "screw" everything. You can't "screw" the business plan. At the end of the day you need to understand basic economics and turn a profit or no one has a job.

 

[NotUrsula]

I think Disney is in a unique position. My argument is not only entry point jobs at Disney can pay as little as possible, it HAS too.

The idea is getting only the people who are willing to go through some time of low salary - necessarily lower than what the competition offers - in order to weed out those who jump ship for a better pay.

People who stay at Disney are people who care deeply about Disney. In return they get things out of their careers that they can’t get anywhere else.

You’ll find many policies at Disney align with this thinking.

Eh, perhaps, but as you say, there are many policies in place to find those people and reward them. As someone who has spent decades in a profession where we are often expected to work even for free because we love and believe in the work so much, let me tell you it gets old, and I even warned my children against going into it.

Vows of poverty are all well and good when your employer is giving you a place to live at a reduced rent that eliminates a commute, but the rest of us have to have enough to keep a roof over our heads, wheels under our butts to get to work, and insurance premiums to keep us more than one nasty fall away from homelessness. Genteel poverty is a crock, and no loyalty test is worth putting people through it. Have you looked at what it costs to live anywhere near WDW or Anaheim? No one not independently wealthy can manage it without a passel of roommates or a soul-crushing (and pretty expensive) commute on anything less than $15/hour, and $17 is probably closer to reality.

 

[mummabear]

If the top six employees give if half of their 62 million bonuses and give the money directly to the bottom employees, they wold each receive $155.

This is a non story to me.

Team Iger

Yeah I mean why give it to people so poor they are going without food when you can give it to the super rich guy.
I mean is $155 enough to make a huge difference, no, but it would make more of a difference to them than Iger, yeah it would.

I think Disney is the very embodiment of the American capitalist dream in the best way possible:

a company that is extremely profitable due to putting values above money, and creates unparalleled value in every aspect.

At the end it all comes down to wehther you believe in the American way imho - if you think there should be any kind of limit on a man’s income, then... what can I say?

Personally I want whoever’s at the top of the Disney company to always be the richest person in the world.

Team Iger all the way

Wow I'm not sure if i have ever laughed so hard, the bolded is way off base of the Disney of today. That is the Disney Abigail is ooking for.
I dont think there should be a limit on a person's income, but I do think there should be a limit to the disparity between the top and the bottom.

I think Disney is in a unique position. My argument is not only entry point jobs at Disney can pay as little as possible, it HAS too.

The idea is getting only the people who are willing to go through some time of low salary - necessarily lower than what the competition offers - in order to weed out those who jump ship for a better pay.

People who stay at Disney are people who care deeply about Disney. In return they get things out of their careers that they can’t get anywhere else.

You’ll find many policies at Disney align with this thinking.

Scratch what I said above about never laughing so hard, now I've done it twice in a few minutes.

Total employees is 200,000, which would mean the 10% she's talking about is 20,000 people, thus $1,500 a person.

Still not enough to offer, as she's quoted as saying, "a ticket out of poverty or debt". Not that the lowest paid employees would mind an extra $1,500.

Obviously you haven't ever been poor. $1,500 is the difference between say kids getting Christmas and birthday presents or not. Or being able to buy a car or not.
Is it going to get them all the way out of debt, again no but it can actually make a huge difference, and imagine both parents get that extra money.

 

[china mom]

Obviously you haven't ever been poor. $1,500 is the difference between say kids getting Christmas and birthday presents or not. Or being able to buy a car or not.
Is it going to get them all the way out of debt, again no but it can actually make a huge difference, and imagine both parents get that extra money.

As I said in my first post here, I am not offended if someone corrects my math. I read the number as 200,000 but have since been corrected as 10% of 200,00. This moves my decimal point and now we are talking $1500 rather than the 150 I calculated.

$1500 can be a lot of money when you are making ends meet eating Ramen noodles with egg every day like I once did.

But, I still am on team Iger. If his contract says that he should get bonuses when certain benchmarks are met, that is the contract. He did his job and got the bonuses he is due per his contract.

Disney has the option of negotiating a different contract with the next CEO but if they want the best, they will have to make it a pretty offer.
Bob Iger doesn't make the top 15 list of highest paid CEOs according to: https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/12/21/highest-paid-ceos-2018/38756663/

He comes in at #18

 

[Sandeep1]

Hard to believe the CEO of Weight Waters received $30+ mil. That is absolutely laughable given the company's performance.

 

[Hikergirl]

It isn't the company you work for's responsibility to make sure you aren't poor- it is yours. If you feel cheated out of bonuses find another place to work. (I know, I know, it isn't always that easy. Well that is life- sometimes things aren't easy, you are't guaranteed easy.)
It isn't any company's responsibility to give you a bonus just because you make under a certain amount of money. You agreed to that salary when you took the job. You argreed to be paid X amount for X kind of work. If those terms didn't include bonus' then you don't get one.
These CEOs negotiate their wages, they include bonus, that is why they get them, end of story.

 

[NotUrsula]

It isn't the company you work for's responsibility to make sure you aren't poor- it is yours. If you feel cheated out of bonuses find another place to work. (I know, I know, it isn't always that easy. Well that is life- sometimes things aren't easy, you are't guaranteed easy.)

I'd agree that it isn't, but making sure you are not poor when you do have F/T employment is more about making proper spending choices with the money that you do have, so that you can stretch it. When you are working what the US considers full-time but cannot manage basics (small-place rent, low-price groceries, home utilities without extras, a basic transportation vehicle, and health insurance premiums), then your pay is out of whack with the cost of living in your community, and it needs to be adjusted.

I don't think that anyone here is advocating that a "living wage" should include enough to cover luxuries (however small) and/or reckless spending.

It isn't any company's responsibility to give you a bonus just because you make under a certain amount of money. You agreed to that salary when you took the job. You agreed to be paid X amount for X kind of work. If those terms didn't include bonus' then you don't get one. These CEOs negotiate their wages, they include bonus, that is why they get them, end of story.

Yes, CEOs negotiate their salaries and bonuses (technically they do not work for wages at that level), but when the gap gets absurdly high, it is the fault of the company's Board -- they are the ones agreeing to those terms, and they should not be; it is bad stewardship. It's one thing for a CEO to make 100X the median pay of all company workers, heck, even 300X is fair if the CEO brought in a lot of money, but 3000X, as was the case at McDonald's in recent years? Should not have been approved by the Board.

Where it gets insulting is when you have a situation where the negotiated bonus is a range tied to profit, and the board votes to give the CEO the top of the range, while at the same time the lower ranks are told that wages are frozen because money is short. I once quit a job because my boss refused to let me give 2 of my best line employees a $.10/hr raise. These were part-time workers; the yearly cost of that raise would have been less than $200 including increased FICO contributions. We could EASILY absorb it, and that tiny little increase would have truly meant something to them mentally, but no, we couldn't possibly pay one penny over what we were required to do by law. It was morally repugnant.

 

[tex1989]

When I hear these discussions I tend to look and think of it in very different ways. I will admit I am more on the capitalist side. i work for a large energy company. I was a trader for a large part of my career and can tell you in every trading role I have ever seen or been in you get compensated basis your contribution. Never have seen a share the wealth approach. I also am a person that came from an extermely poor background. We did not have money as I was growing up and vacation for us was camping in a tent for two weeks at a lake. So now I have been fortunate enough to have a successful career and had to work hard and struggle to earn an undergraduate degree and two Masters Degrees. I have never attended a day of school since the 10th grade where I did not also have a job. I know better than many what financial struggle is. Here's the reason I feel the way I do today. If you do not have to work for something, how much do you value it? I mean when I go to Disney there are what I consider great CM's and lousy CM's. We encounter both. Is anyone suggesting that a small incremental hourly raise to the not so nice CM's will make them better or more friendly? I know that is seemingly absurd example, but is it really? I mean isn't that what everyone is really talking about? Raising minimum wages to a "living" wage has always been a battle cry, but if it is and folks can live on it then will they be incented to strive for more?

The other interesting observation is that we as a society are heavily invested in the value and increasing value of stocks. Yeah a lot of lower income to middle income families are not in a position to buy and maintain their own stock portfolios but look at pension funds, 401(k')s, etc. They are heavily invested and heavily dependent upon stock value. I mean Abigal can make all the statements she wants but her financial position and welath is directly related to the value of Disney stock. While she can seek economic justice and give to charitable causes the reality is that without Disney hiring the right CEO and that person maintaining the value of the company then she would not have the money she has.

Yes the amount they pay CEO's is outragious, but the same can be said of the odds or winning the lottery. They are astronomical but the reality is millions of tickets are sold everyday with everyone who buys one hopping they will be the winner. While winning the lottery and becoming exceedingly wealthy is pure luck, at least winning the CEO lottery is at least somewhat controllable to the extent that education, dedication and hard work might land anyone in the CEO role.

You have to have goals, you have to have drive and you need to have to pay at least some price to succeed. That is what America was built on. We as a society are living better lives than anyone before us in the history of the world. We seldom stop to consider that very often because we are always looking for more. And more is better bt at least there needs to be an appreciation for what it takes to get there as opposed to just wanting to give to all for nothing in return.

 

[ChrisFL]

I understand Abigail's point, and I really sympathize with her message overall, however I also know that these things are much more complicated than Bob Iger just deciding to pay employees a lot more money.

It's a massive, public company that's arguably the #1 name brand. Anyway, the point is, the shareholders and the board help decide, and they do it when the court of public opinion REALLY wants it to change. That's what they did when they decided to offer the $15 wage, but they still have a LOT of employees in many areas of work.

I do think government needs to step in when corporations don't offer a living wage, whether it's local, etc. based on the other things in the area, expense wise.

 

[NYDisGuy]

The other interesting observation is that we as a society are heavily invested in the value and increasing value of stocks. Yeah a lot of lower income to middle income families are not in a position to buy and maintain their own stock portfolios but look at pension funds, 401(k')s, etc. They are heavily invested and heavily dependent upon stock value.

Who's they? Only 32% of Americans have a 401K and pensions are all but extinct unless you're in a union. Disney released that 6% of it's workforce opt into the employee stock program. The whole point of this discussion is that people don't make enough to take advantage of these programs.

 

[Dancind]

Disney's profits last year were crazy, especially considering they probably didn't pay taxes on any of it. Does Bob Iger work harder than the CM's in the parks? Our society is becoming very top heavy, and something needs to be done or things will fall apart. That's Abigail's point. If the workers can't make a living wage, and more and more workers are in that position due to debt, medical bills, student loans, falling real estate values etc, while the top 1% gets richer, things get bad.

Did no one here pay attention while watching Hunger Games?

 

[soccerdad72]

Disney's profits last year were crazy, especially considering they probably didn't pay taxes on any of it. Does Bob Iger work harder than the CM's in the parks? Our society is becoming very top heavy, and something needs to be done or things will fall apart. That's Abigail's point. If the workers can't make a living wage, and more and more workers are in that position due to debt, medical bills, student loans, falling real estate values etc, while the top 1% gets richer, things get bad.

Did no one here pay attention while watching Hunger Games?

Two things:

1. Disney did, in fact, pay a significant amount of taxes. Somewhere in the range of $1.6 Billion in income taxes is what I read. Not to mention property taxes, sales taxes, payroll taxes...

2. I am in no way minimizing the work that CM's do, but do you honestly believe that CM's work as hard as Iger?