WDW to prevent AP holders from visiting parks many mornings

[tjkraz]

If, as is suggested, Disney relies on public perception to increase it's potential labor pool and recruit good people while keeping costs relatively low, then it's unfortunate for them that circumstances, and Disney's reaction to them, caused that perception to become tarnished in the eyes of many. Disney's most valuable asset (and driver of future profits) is our perception of Disney, in my opinion.

There's no question employees leave TWDC in some disillusioned state on a regular basis.

But in the heat of a global pandemic--when we had no idea when or *IF* such entertainment services might return at prior levels--it's difficult to second guess handling of a US parks & experiences workforce that cost somewhere north of $3 billion annually. Especially when government handouts were effectively incentivizing employers to let people go.

Disney did retain tens of thousands of workers in the parks & experiences division. Everyone who was laid off was certainly recalled. Even if Disney had handled things differently, the increased competition for labor gave everyone more options. Some sense of loyalty or appreciation wouldn't have kept everyone around. Disney does still attract good workers, and those workers benefit from having "Disney" on their resume. But to many people, it's still just a job. Keeping everyone on the payroll during the pandemic wouldn't have changed that outlook for 70k+ workers.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Everyone who was laid off was certainly recalled.

Not sure where you heard that but that wasn't the case. Disney did not ask for everyone back that they laid off. Some of the people they called back had moved on to different things so yeah people did get called but it was more of a "casting a wider net" when their initial net was smaller than they probably hoped for.

 

[whiteness]

There's no question employees leave TWDC in some disillusioned state on a regular basis.

But in the heat of a global pandemic--when we had no idea when or *IF* such entertainment services might return at prior levels--it's difficult to second guess handling of a US parks & experiences workforce that cost somewhere north of $3 billion annually. Especially when government handouts were effectively incentivizing employers to let people go.

Disney did retain tens of thousands of workers in the parks & experiences division. Everyone who was laid off was certainly recalled. Even if Disney had handled things differently, the increased competition for labor gave everyone more options. Some sense of loyalty or appreciation wouldn't have kept everyone around. Disney does still attract good workers, and those workers benefit from having "Disney" on their resume. But to many people, it's still just a job. Keeping everyone on the payroll during the pandemic wouldn't have changed that outlook for 70k+ workers.

Yes, it was a difficult situation. And Disney handled things no worse than most other employers.

But not exceptionally better, either. Regression to the mean. Disney is becoming just another employer. And that's not a good thing for Disney if they want to continue to recruit exceptional CMs while paying them unexceptional wages and benefits.

And I agree that some of Disney's current difficulties are unavoidable. But it is a question of degree. This is not a binary outcome: no matter what Disney did or does, they could not and will not entirely avoid any labor shortages.

But they could have done better, too. Rides, attractions, retail, food and beverage that are brought back sooner and more fully staffed all add to capacity and guest experience, which has knock on effects on everything else. It even makes Disney a more enjoyable and attractive work environment. Perhaps, if they had done even 10% better, this discussion thread wouldn't exist today.

 

[tjkraz]

Not sure where you heard that but that wasn't the case. Disney did not ask for everyone back that they laid off. Some of the people they called back had moved on to different things so yeah people did get called but it was more of a "casting a wider net" when their initial net was smaller than they probably hoped for.

Do you have specifics on this?

Admittedly my statement was overly broad. It's logical that they wouldn't reach out to former Bibbidy Bobbidy Boutique workers until recently. I'm sure there are some positions that haven't been fully restored (spa services?)

But if they're understaffed in park operations, housekeeping, custodial and the like, have they not contacted all of those workers to return? Short of a position being eliminated or reasons for not wanting a specific worker back, reaching out to former employees seems like a no-brainer. In some cases, the labor union probably requires it. If not, it strikes me as a failure on the part of a department manager rather than corporate policy.

 

[Jonfw2]

Do you have specifics on this?

Admittedly my statement was overly broad. It's logical that they wouldn't reach out to former Bibbidy Bobbidy Boutique workers until recently. I'm sure there are some positions that haven't been fully restored (spa services?)

But if they're understaffed in park operations, housekeeping, custodial and the like, have they not contacted all of those workers to return? Short of a position being eliminated or reasons for not wanting a specific worker back, reaching out to former employees seems like a no-brainer. If not, it strikes me as a failure on the part of a department manager rather than corporate policy.

I have two clients who are cast members and both were laid off during Covid. Disney absolutely reached out to them several times during the layoff and kept them in the loop. Then, as the possible re-hire date got closer, they notified everyone who was eligible to be brought back.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Not sure where you heard that but that wasn't the case. Disney did not ask for everyone back that they laid off. Some of the people they called back had moved on to different things so yeah people did get called but it was more of a "casting a wider net" when their initial net was smaller than they probably hoped for.

In California, Disney broke cast members into two groups, based on seniority. For those under a certain time served (based on location, job classification, union affiliation), they were notified that they had been laid off.

For those over a certain seniority, cast members were notified that they had been furloughed without pay, but that Disney would continue to pay for health insurance. Disney paid wages for the first month of furlough, and continued to pay both the employer and employee share of benefits throughout the duration of the furlough.

As DLR started to re-open, all furloughed CM's received two calls to ask them if they were willing to accept (at least temporary) positions in different locations (again, based on job classification). Temporary as they could be moved back to their original job location when that position actually opened up again. This initially meant mostly custodial and merchandise as only DTD opened up at first. If the furloughed CM didn't respond to those first two calls, they were placed back into the pool waiting for more jobs to open back up.

When the parks began opening back up, those furloughed CM's who hadn't accepted or didn't fall into the correct job classifications during the first call back, then received an additional two phone calls asking them to come back. At that point, if the furloughed CM still didn't respond, then the CM was terminated.

For some number of CM's who were laid off, the casting office did reach out after reopening to see if they were interested in re-hiring.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

For some number of CM's who were laid off, the casting office did reach out after reopening to see if they were interested in re-hiring.

Not sure you read the comment from the PP

It was "Everyone who was laid off was certainly recalled." That was not the case.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Do you have specifics on this?

Admittedly my statement was overly broad. It's logical that they wouldn't reach out to former Bibbidy Bobbidy Boutique workers until recently. I'm sure there are some positions that haven't been fully restored (spa services?)

But if they're understaffed in park operations, housekeeping, custodial and the like, have they not contacted all of those workers to return? Short of a position being eliminated or reasons for not wanting a specific worker back, reaching out to former employees seems like a no-brainer. In some cases, the labor union probably requires it. If not, it strikes me as a failure on the part of a department manager rather than corporate policy.

Yeah..several CMs we know.

You said "Everyone who was laid off was certainly recalled." No not everyone who was laid off was asked to come back. There are a multitude of positions that are not even available from streetmosphere to dining locations to merch locations and ride operators as well.

Never contested that Disney called back peeps, including our close CM friend, but that is not everyone. The college program wasn't even up and running for a long time and I haven't heard of official sayings that they brought in the normal up to 12K people that the program can hold.

You'd think that companies that are understaffed would be calling any and everyone but that's not realistically how companies operate. Sometimes by choice they slim down their employees either because they lack the oomph to do so, don't want to increase pay or benefits if the workforce is reflecting that's what is desired, don't have those positions available, etc.

Again never contested they reached out you however said everyone laid off was recalled, not according to the people we know who work in the Parks, that was not the case and still isn't the case. It's not a either/or situation either it's a mixture of things but just because we see that Disney is understaffed doesn't mean they aren't fully aware of that nor does it mean they automatically intend to run full steam on their workforce.

 

[DonMacGregor]

Not sure you read the comment from the PP

It was "Everyone who was laid off was certainly recalled." That was not the case.

It is my understanding that the vast majority were contacted.

I didn't say "everyone" because absolutes don't exist. Not even McDonald's is going to try to hire back someone who worked for them for a week and a half. Obviously some percentage weren't called, but most were.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It is my understanding that the vast majority were contacted.

I didn't say "everyone" because absolutes don't exist. Not even McDonald's is going to try to hire back someone who worked for them for a week and a half. Obviously some percentage weren't called, but most were.

Huh? I'm not saying you said everyone. I said that's what the PP said. I specifically quoted your comment that said "Some" because of course that was never under any sort of disagreement. Of course some were asked to come back, duh lol

 

[DonMacGregor]

Huh? I'm not saying you said everyone. I said that's what the PP said. I specifically quoted your comment that said "Some" because of course that was never under any sort of disagreement. Of course some were asked to come back, duh lol

And I'm saying I didn't use "everyone" because it's an unknown, and while OP may have gone a bit too far using the term, it is my understanding that the vast majority were contacted. Not even McDonald's is going to try to hire back someone who worked for them for a week and a half.

Obviously, no one here knows what "everyone" means, or how many that might be, but the fact remains that Disney, at least in California, reached out to EVERY CM who was furloughed (because they were still paying for 100% of their insurance and benefits and needed to know what their intention was). Plus, beyond those who were furloughed, a good number of laid off CM's were also contacted.

"Some referred only to laid off CM's who weren't furloughed.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

And I'm saying I didn't use "everyone" because it's an unknown, and while OP may have gone a bit too far using the term, it is my understanding that the vast majority were contacted. Not even McDonald's is going to try to hire back someone who worked for them for a week and a half.

Obviously, no one here knows what "everyone" means, or how many that might be, but the fact remains that Disney, at least in California, reached out to EVERY CM who was furloughed (because they were still paying for 100% of their insurance and benefits and needed to know what their intention was). Plus, beyond those who were furloughed, a good number of laid off CM's were also contacted.

Don look at the comment again.

Not sure you read the comment from the PP

It was "Everyone who was laid off was certainly recalled." That was not the case.

I never said you said everyone, I don't know why you need to repeat yourself there because nowhere in my comment did I said you said that.

Goodness gracious peeps

DLR isn't the entirety of Disney corp.

 

[tjkraz]

Yeah..several CMs we know.

You said "Everyone who was laid off was certainly recalled." No not everyone who was laid off was asked to come back. There are a multitude of positions that are not even available from streetmosphere to dining locations to merch locations and ride operators as well.

And again, mea culpa. Though I wouldn't expect them to reach out to a streetmosphere performer to fill an opening in housekeeping or food services.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

And again, mea culpa. Though I wouldn't expect them to reach out to a streetmosphere performer to fill an opening in housekeeping or food services.

Hey you said it I responded. We're not really in total disagreement but it's disingenuous to the conversation to act like everyone who was laid off by the Disney company were all asked back. They weren't.

You can't really change your meaning to say well I didn't truly mean everyone.

I'm off to go workout now, enjoy your day!

 

[DonMacGregor]

Don look at the comment again.


I never said you said everyone, I don't know why you need to repeat yourself there because nowhere in my comment did I said you said that.

Goodness gracious peeps

DLR isn't the entirety of Disney corp.

Ok, let's try this again. The OP said "everyone", you took exception to that and said "Disney did not ask for everyone back that they laid off".

I pointed out that your comment wasn't technically accurate either, because there were two groups of CM's: those that were "laid off", and those that were "furloughed". For the furloughed group, absolutely 100% of them were contacted at least two times, and sometimes four. For furloughed CM's, saying "everyone" was called is 100% accurate. I just didn't use the term, but I could have.

For those that were actually "laid off", there's no way for anyone to know whether or not they were all called by Disney, but it's obviously somewhere well south of everyone, or even most. THAT's why I used the term "some" when referring to technically laid off CM's. I do not disagree that some percentage less than 100% were called back from that group.

 

[CarolMN]

The argument re "who was or was not recalled" is officially over. Expect consequences if you continue. Thank you.

 

[lowlight]

We're in here debating all this and Bob Chapek is at home in his Speedo doing a high dive into his vault full of gold coins. He's taking our money, our time, AND our Disboards warning points.

 

[Jonfw2]

We're in here debating all this and Bob Chapek is at home in his Speedo doing a high dive into his vault full of gold coins. He's taking our money, our time, AND our Disboards warning points.

He can’t take your money or time. You can only give it to him.

 

[RoseGold]

Do we have any idea how the CA AP lawsuit is going? Seems like something should have happened by now?

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Do we have any idea how the CA AP lawsuit is going? Seems like something should have happened by now?

Last word at least in the news was mid-May when the judge let it go forward. It can take a while to get through the legal system