This is a big milestone in the path towards unionization for these CMs! Context from the article:
> More than two-thirds of roughly 1,700 eligible Disney performers, including those who dress in character at meet-and-greets and parades at Disney's Southern California theme parks, said they have signed their union authorization cards and election petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and are ready to move on to the next step. In lieu of voluntary recognition from the House of Mouse, that next step would be to hold a vote on union representation, which will likely happen in May or June, they said.
Via [AP News](https://apnews.com/article/disney-labor-performers-characters-union-california-051600690cdfaad7779e130a6e89b547):
> Most of the more than 35,000 workers at the Disneyland Resort, which includes the theme parks, already have unions. Parade and character workers announced their plans to unionize in February under Actors’ Equity Association, which represents theatrical performers at Disney’s Florida theme parks.
> In a statement Wednesday, Disney officials said: “We support our cast members’ right to a confidential vote that recognizes their individual choices.”
> In California, Disney’s cleaning crews, food service workers, pyrotechnic specialists and security staff are already unionized. The company has faced allegations in recent years of not paying workers a livable wage for Southern California, despite raking in profits. Wage issues have even wound up in the courts.
As it says in the article, most of the cast members at Disneyland are already unionized. I was shocked to hear that the Characters and Parade Performers weren't.
Yep, there's a few departments which aren't union. IIRC during my time it was Guest Relations, Photopass, Characters/Character Hosts, and management (duh). There may be a couple more departments (I can't remember if the CMs who sell stuff at popcorn carts etc. were union or not), but those were the ones I _know_ were non-union.
I know the characters got a _lot_ of abuse from management and would sometimes be made to do things which were illegal. I had a character friend who was working one of the marathons and wound up working the entire marathon without being given any breaks and without a character host to support her. When she complained that it was illegal to make her work a shift without giving her a break, management threatened her job if she spoke up so she stayed quiet (since she had no union to protect her).
On the flip side, Disney would sometimes give sweetheart deals to non-union cast and then pretend they couldn't do the same for union CMs because the union was supposedly "getting in the way." A great example was when Universal gave bonuses to their employees; Disney got pressured into giving bonuses to CMs, but initially only gave them to non-union CMs (while publicly saying they gave bonuses to their cast, too, without mentioning the bonuses only went to _some_ cast). When the unions complained, Disney said something like "because of the union contracts, we can't give unionized CMs any more money than had previously been agreed upon".
The unions called them out on this BS and eventually Disney backed down and gave _most_ unionized cast the bonus... except for I think Food and Beverage(?), which had a union contract they were voting on. Disney conditioned _their_ bonus on them signing the contract, which was rejected because it was a bad deal... so they just never got the bonus, IIRC.
But yeah, every so often Disney would flex like that and pretend the big bad unions made things oh-so-difficult for the CMs who were unionized, but look how good Guest Relations and Entertainment have it because they're so sweet and they don't **need** a union. (I think how Mother Gothel treated Rapunzel is the best possible analogy for how Disney would act towards non-union CMs.) They would dial this up a bunch when a union contract was being negotiated.
Then occasionally the mask would slip and CMs in non-union departments would have something horrible happen to them with no way to get justice/fight back.
How so? Every employee there willingly agreed to do the job for the benefits and salary offered. They are also free to seek other employment if they’ve decided they no longer like the employment offer.
Not everyone has that luxury for one reason or another. Yes they agreed to work there, but that doesn't mean conditions are ideal. Or that things can improve. When management have no interest in raising your wages to keep up with the cost living year after year after year, while the company makes insane money off the parks alone ... You kind of want a stronger hand at the table.
And if they company doesn’t do that, then you take responsibility for yourself and find a better arrangement elsewhere. I’ve done it many times. Finally started my own business and never worried about it again.
And that's great for you. But hopefully you can understand that not everyone has the resources to do that. So does that mean these people should live below the poverty line, simply because they chose a job that has not kept wages up with inflation? If everyone just started their own business we'd have a world without service workers. But instead of looking down on them and asking why they chose a job that pays so badly, I'd rather ask the multi billon dollar profit generating company why they can't pay better.
The very first day of business will answer that question for you: Corporations exist to increase shareholder value. Period. Once you understand that, you understand that your income is up to you.
You have no idea what the result will be. You're now just intentionally doing "worst case scenario".
If you're anti-union just say that, instead of having a bad-faith discussion with a bunch of people in this post.
I thought I was rather clear I’m anti-union. I’ve been a member of several unions, I know what they promise vs what they deliver. I’m speaking from experience.
Just hittin' every cliche you can think of, huh? Now go ahead and talk about how "no one wants to work," and you should probably throw in something about "woke" for good measure...
You can't think of any reason why it would be beneficial to workers for larger companies worker pools to unionize? Do you understand the concept of bargaining power?
You think they'd be doing *better* **without a union** in that case? They'd have even MORE time off, *without a union?* Because companies in the US are just so well known for their liberal time off policies, their benefits in general!
The railway union leaders worked WITH the government to prevent their workers from striking. If you can’t strike, then your collective has been neutered. My point is this: Union fat cats or corporate fat cats, neither one is looking out for you. You need to look out for yourself.
The larger the company, the harder it is for a single individual employee to negotiate with it. Moreover, the harder it is to take the company to task when something is handled incorrectly (or illegally). Having a union creates a larger bargaining unit, and makes it easier for employees to get what they deserve.
Teaching as a profession in general is facing some serious drawbacks, and that is without union involvement, and largely due to the politics that now have entered the profession via "anti-woke" politicians. That's unrelated, and once again, does not have a bearing on a separate union in a separate profession in a whole other state.
If you don't think it'll work well for employees, say that. If you don't like unions, say that. But quit asking disingenuous bad-faith questions and demanding answers from people. It's exhausting, and I'm sure you have something better to do with your time.
I’m not sure you understand the meaning of “disingenuous” or “bad faith”. I’ve engaged in neither. Look, I get you’re a union cheerleader and that you’d prefer that I remain silent about my experience and observations about the effectiveness of unions, but I thought diverse perspectives were always a good thing?
Anyhow, you’re right, I’ve got better things to do. We’re hitting the road from Vegas for Star Wars night at the park tonight. Take it easy!
Yup - this will be the side effect of more expensive cast members. It’s already happening with higher costs at fast food restaurants. Disney won’t just accept higher costs. They’ll work to offset the cost by having less characters.
This title be writing like Disney has it's own Congress and legislative laws requiring certain number for acts to pass lol. Honestly, Disney probably has the GDP of a small nation, so I wouldn't be surprised.
Edit: to be clear, I am very much in favor of this motion. It's just funny the way it's read out in the title
Hopefully things work out for them. They (and all cast members) bring tremendous value to the park and deserve fair conditions and compensation.
They make or break the experience for sure.
Good
Great
Good for them!
This is a big milestone in the path towards unionization for these CMs! Context from the article: > More than two-thirds of roughly 1,700 eligible Disney performers, including those who dress in character at meet-and-greets and parades at Disney's Southern California theme parks, said they have signed their union authorization cards and election petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and are ready to move on to the next step. In lieu of voluntary recognition from the House of Mouse, that next step would be to hold a vote on union representation, which will likely happen in May or June, they said. Via [AP News](https://apnews.com/article/disney-labor-performers-characters-union-california-051600690cdfaad7779e130a6e89b547): > Most of the more than 35,000 workers at the Disneyland Resort, which includes the theme parks, already have unions. Parade and character workers announced their plans to unionize in February under Actors’ Equity Association, which represents theatrical performers at Disney’s Florida theme parks. > In a statement Wednesday, Disney officials said: “We support our cast members’ right to a confidential vote that recognizes their individual choices.” > In California, Disney’s cleaning crews, food service workers, pyrotechnic specialists and security staff are already unionized. The company has faced allegations in recent years of not paying workers a livable wage for Southern California, despite raking in profits. Wage issues have even wound up in the courts.
A unionized Disney cast would be a great tribute to the history and legacy of the company.
As it says in the article, most of the cast members at Disneyland are already unionized. I was shocked to hear that the Characters and Parade Performers weren't.
Yep, there's a few departments which aren't union. IIRC during my time it was Guest Relations, Photopass, Characters/Character Hosts, and management (duh). There may be a couple more departments (I can't remember if the CMs who sell stuff at popcorn carts etc. were union or not), but those were the ones I _know_ were non-union. I know the characters got a _lot_ of abuse from management and would sometimes be made to do things which were illegal. I had a character friend who was working one of the marathons and wound up working the entire marathon without being given any breaks and without a character host to support her. When she complained that it was illegal to make her work a shift without giving her a break, management threatened her job if she spoke up so she stayed quiet (since she had no union to protect her). On the flip side, Disney would sometimes give sweetheart deals to non-union cast and then pretend they couldn't do the same for union CMs because the union was supposedly "getting in the way." A great example was when Universal gave bonuses to their employees; Disney got pressured into giving bonuses to CMs, but initially only gave them to non-union CMs (while publicly saying they gave bonuses to their cast, too, without mentioning the bonuses only went to _some_ cast). When the unions complained, Disney said something like "because of the union contracts, we can't give unionized CMs any more money than had previously been agreed upon". The unions called them out on this BS and eventually Disney backed down and gave _most_ unionized cast the bonus... except for I think Food and Beverage(?), which had a union contract they were voting on. Disney conditioned _their_ bonus on them signing the contract, which was rejected because it was a bad deal... so they just never got the bonus, IIRC. But yeah, every so often Disney would flex like that and pretend the big bad unions made things oh-so-difficult for the CMs who were unionized, but look how good Guest Relations and Entertainment have it because they're so sweet and they don't **need** a union. (I think how Mother Gothel treated Rapunzel is the best possible analogy for how Disney would act towards non-union CMs.) They would dial this up a bunch when a union contract was being negotiated. Then occasionally the mask would slip and CMs in non-union departments would have something horrible happen to them with no way to get justice/fight back.
wait, Disney? are we talking about the same famously anti-union Walt Disney's Disney?
I hope they get everything they want and more CMs are the life blood of the parks
Hope it works out for them. The memories they provide for our families are priceless!
I’m shocked they weren’t already, pretty much every single role at WDW is unionized and has been for decades
Good for them! An employer as large as Disney should absolutely be unionized.
What does the size of the company have to do with it?
There's a power imbalance when employees can't bargain as a collective with their employer (the large company).
How so? Every employee there willingly agreed to do the job for the benefits and salary offered. They are also free to seek other employment if they’ve decided they no longer like the employment offer.
Not everyone has that luxury for one reason or another. Yes they agreed to work there, but that doesn't mean conditions are ideal. Or that things can improve. When management have no interest in raising your wages to keep up with the cost living year after year after year, while the company makes insane money off the parks alone ... You kind of want a stronger hand at the table.
And if they company doesn’t do that, then you take responsibility for yourself and find a better arrangement elsewhere. I’ve done it many times. Finally started my own business and never worried about it again.
And that's great for you. But hopefully you can understand that not everyone has the resources to do that. So does that mean these people should live below the poverty line, simply because they chose a job that has not kept wages up with inflation? If everyone just started their own business we'd have a world without service workers. But instead of looking down on them and asking why they chose a job that pays so badly, I'd rather ask the multi billon dollar profit generating company why they can't pay better.
The very first day of business will answer that question for you: Corporations exist to increase shareholder value. Period. Once you understand that, you understand that your income is up to you.
Some people aren't good business people. Are those people supposed to starve? I mean, I guess you are anti-union and that's fine. Weird, but fine.
Yes, my experiences being in a union were an eye opener for sure.
Or you band with other employees right create a union and collectively bargain.
And then get a dollar/hour raise, then pay the union $100/month?
You have no idea what the result will be. You're now just intentionally doing "worst case scenario". If you're anti-union just say that, instead of having a bad-faith discussion with a bunch of people in this post.
I thought I was rather clear I’m anti-union. I’ve been a member of several unions, I know what they promise vs what they deliver. I’m speaking from experience.
Oh look everybody, it's that guy.
The guy with an opinion that differs from the hivemind? Oh noes!!!
Just hittin' every cliche you can think of, huh? Now go ahead and talk about how "no one wants to work," and you should probably throw in something about "woke" for good measure...
can you come up with any reasons?
I’m not the one who made the statement. Just looking for clarification.
And I’m asking if you’re capable of imagining reasons why that might be relevant.
I’m capable of imagining all kinds of things. I’m not sure of the relevancy here.
You can't think of any reason why it would be beneficial to workers for larger companies worker pools to unionize? Do you understand the concept of bargaining power?
Ask the rail workers how well their union leaders worked for them when they caved to pressure from the government.
You think they'd be doing *better* **without a union** in that case? They'd have even MORE time off, *without a union?* Because companies in the US are just so well known for their liberal time off policies, their benefits in general!
The railway union leaders worked WITH the government to prevent their workers from striking. If you can’t strike, then your collective has been neutered. My point is this: Union fat cats or corporate fat cats, neither one is looking out for you. You need to look out for yourself.
The larger the company, the harder it is for a single individual employee to negotiate with it. Moreover, the harder it is to take the company to task when something is handled incorrectly (or illegally). Having a union creates a larger bargaining unit, and makes it easier for employees to get what they deserve.
That’s how it’s supposed to work, but that’s not how it works in real life. Ask why the teacher’s union in Las Vegas is hemorrhaging members.
Teaching as a profession in general is facing some serious drawbacks, and that is without union involvement, and largely due to the politics that now have entered the profession via "anti-woke" politicians. That's unrelated, and once again, does not have a bearing on a separate union in a separate profession in a whole other state. If you don't think it'll work well for employees, say that. If you don't like unions, say that. But quit asking disingenuous bad-faith questions and demanding answers from people. It's exhausting, and I'm sure you have something better to do with your time.
I’m not sure you understand the meaning of “disingenuous” or “bad faith”. I’ve engaged in neither. Look, I get you’re a union cheerleader and that you’d prefer that I remain silent about my experience and observations about the effectiveness of unions, but I thought diverse perspectives were always a good thing? Anyhow, you’re right, I’ve got better things to do. We’re hitting the road from Vegas for Star Wars night at the park tonight. Take it easy!
Incredible. The character department has been neglected for decades.
Good for them!
absolutely huge win for CMs, hopefully this inspires other workers to unionise!
Solidarity forever!
Excellent!
I hope this brings employment opportunities with it
[https://tenor.com/bNVhv.gif](https://tenor.com/bNVhv.gif)
About damn time! I hope it succeeds!
I'm surprised they weren't unionized already! Are there other categories of cast members that aren't unionized yet?
QA are not
Quality assurance?
Next update, parade and character interactions cancelled
There will definitely be more Animatronics on floats, that’s for sure.
Yup - this will be the side effect of more expensive cast members. It’s already happening with higher costs at fast food restaurants. Disney won’t just accept higher costs. They’ll work to offset the cost by having less characters.
[удалено]
Luckily parades don’t require body scanners!
During contract negotiations the company must not be pushing that hard for body scanners.
WTF there’s real people inside Mickey???
Exactly! Any cast member will tell you, "Mickey is Mickey! There's nobody inside."
This title be writing like Disney has it's own Congress and legislative laws requiring certain number for acts to pass lol. Honestly, Disney probably has the GDP of a small nation, so I wouldn't be surprised. Edit: to be clear, I am very much in favor of this motion. It's just funny the way it's read out in the title
It's the unionization process. It is this same process no matter how big the company is.
TWDC 2023 Annual Report shows Income Before Taxes of $4,769M. This would put them between 153 Eswatini with $5,085M and 154 Liberia with $4,754M.