PDA

View Full Version : Don't go to Disneyland tommorrow! (CMs & Disney Benefits Dispute 11/12/05)



Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

Disnerd
11-11-2005, 09:22 PM
Besides it being very busy. Park hit capacity. The Cast Members are staging a sick out or to be more accurated a dependent out. Thanks to the next phase of presentism call dependant days for CRs are ending on November 13th. So Cast Members are calling off dependant as to not lose the days off. Some are also doing this as a protest to Disneyland breaking off negotiations with the 3 unions. So on top off record crowds we have no Cast at our locations. My area is even pulling people i.e. managers from TDA, Parking, entertainment, Tickets, custodial and other locations like DelivEars to fill positions. Expect another wave of seperations as CM fall victim to presentism or just quit.:(

potzbie
11-11-2005, 09:41 PM
[...] or to be more accurate a dependent out.
[...] the next phase of presentism call dependent days [...]
[...] Cast Members are calling off dependent as to not lose the days off.
[...] as CM fall victim to presentism or just quit.


Please refresh my memory of what those terms mean.
• dependent out?
• presentism?

And which unions?
UAW? Teamsters?

Disnerd
11-11-2005, 10:12 PM
Presentism is a program that Disneyland rolled out to deal with Cast Members who had racked up too many points for calling sick or showing up late. Too many points and you are fired. Dependant Days are time off allowed to care for family members which don't earn you any points for taking the day off. Phase two of this program in cancelling out these day for Cast Members who don't get benefits. So about 3 days ago people started using these days. The last day to use them will be tomorrow, Saturday the 12th. So that is expected to be the worst day for call outs throughout the resort. The new contract the company is try to get us to accept will do away with CRs and CR25s and divide the work force into fulltime and part time. The new part time CMs will get no vacation or sick time. They will never be able to easily convert to fulltime. And there will be no pay increases. Fulltimers will get 30 to 40 hours a week. If you fall below 30 you lose your benefits. In time no one will find it easy to keep their benefits. Disneyland is trying to become more like Walmart in the way they treat CMs. During the union negotiations with the UFCW, Teamsters and SEIU the company reps would show up 1 1/2 hours late to the meetings, ask if the unions had agreed to the new contract. Then when told no they would state," then we have nothing more to disscuss" and walk out. Now many of you may not care, but in the long run this means worst service for you the guest. Walt once said "You can build the most wonderful place in the world, but it takes people to make the dream a reality." What's going to happen to that dream when the people are gone?

olegc
11-11-2005, 10:58 PM
note - presentism is not a DLR program...

Presenteeism is (opposite of absenteeism) - and it's not new - it's reinforcing the previous rules that were allowed to lapse under the previous management..

Now - i am not saying they are good or bad - just want to point out what it should say in the initial post...

Laffite
11-12-2005, 03:52 AM
note - presentism is not a DLR program...

Presenteeism is (opposite of absenteeism) - and it's not new - it's reinforcing the previous rules that were allowed to lapse under the previous management..

Now - i am not saying they are good or bad - just want to point out what it should say in the initial post...
thats very interesting

Klutch
11-12-2005, 08:00 AM
Disciplinary action for poor attendance? Imagine that. What's next? Enforcing grooming standards? Obviously, Disneyland has been taken over by fascists.

Whatever the reasons for the sick-out, thanks for the heads-up, Disnerd.

MyBeast
11-12-2005, 08:33 AM
Disciplinary action for poor attendance? Imagine that. What's next? Enforcing grooming standards? Obviously, Disneyland has been taken over by fascists.

Whatever the reasons for the sick-out, thanks for the heads-up, Disnerd.

Disneyland has a tendency of overworking their employees. 12 hour days, 7 days a week sometimes. They also like to call you on your few days off to come into work cause others called off but then only give you a few days a year as sick days and are very anal about it. And mostly, its young adults there who want to make money, but get worn out very quickly from working so much. They are finding it hard to keep castmembers, those that aren't getting fired - are quitting. So if they are losing so many, something they are doing is wrong.

Bolivar
11-12-2005, 08:35 AM
Nevermind.

Klutch
11-12-2005, 10:16 AM
Disneyland has a tendency of overworking their employees. 12 hour days, 7 days a week sometimes. They also like to call you on your few days off to come into work cause others called off but then only give you a few days a year as sick days and are very anal about it. And mostly, its young adults there who want to make money, but get worn out very quickly from working so much. They are finding it hard to keep castmembers, those that aren't getting fired - are qlyuitting. So if they are losing so many, something they are doing is wrong.

Obviously, this is a very big issue with multiple sides. From my point of view, the previous DL management was very slack about attendance and professionalism. Therefore, many employees became slack and unprofessional. Now that the current management is clamping down, obviously, people are going to think the new situation is awfully strict, unfair and "anal".

I have indeed read that DL is losing many employees. I would argue that the vast majority, but certainly not all, of these employees fall into the slack and unprofessional category. Therefore, the remaining employees have to work harder and longer to make up the difference. I would say the situation for the remaining employees is indeed unfair, but not for those who were fired for poor attendance.

Eventually, DL will get a better crop employees who are true, traditional Castmembers. Although, DL should raise their wages. This is So. Cal. we're talking about and labor doesn't come cheap there. There's only so many competent folks who are willing to work at DL just for the experience and free admission. At some point they have to consider compensation, and I get the impression DL is far behind area wages.

Losing sick time is a bummer. Consider that many employers, including mine, have eliminated it altogether. Unfortunately, it's due to major abuse by unprofessional employees. Without sick time, people tend to think twice about calling in sick when it will cost them a vacation day or a day without pay.

adriennek
11-12-2005, 10:36 AM
Losing sick time is a bummer. Consider that many employers, including mine, have eliminated it altogether. Unfortunately, it's due to major abuse by unprofessional employees. Without sick time, people tend to think twice about calling in sick when it will cost them a vacation day or a day without pay.

Klutch's employer and Disneyland are far from the first companies that I've heard of who are doing away with sick time or tightening restrictions on sick time.

(Rant about unions making CMs feel dependent on them in the face of big scary mean Disney deleted)

Adrienne

DianeM
11-12-2005, 10:41 AM
Losing sick time is more than a bummer. It's a disservice to the park guests. Think about how many people pass through DL doors, and the potential for the spread of disease? Companies that pay decent waqes and have decent working conditions don't have to worry much about employees taking excess sick time (at the place I work, they have to fight to keep people from coming in and spreading germs when they are sick - we like our jobs, and wages, and benefits). I realize that it must be difficult to manage having numerous people off sick at a time, as would happen at a place as large as DLR, but it makes more sense to encourage people to stay home than to have them spreading their illness to other employees and to guests. I'm a bit suprised that Disney is so shortsighted.



Losing sick time is a bummer. Consider that many employers, including mine, have eliminated it altogether. Unfortunately, it's due to major abuse by unprofessional employees. Without sick time, people tend to think twice about calling in sick when it will cost them a vacation day or a day without pay.

Klutch
11-12-2005, 10:52 AM
Losing sick time is more than a bummer. It's a disservice to the park guests. Think about how many people pass through DL doors, and the potential for the spread of disease? Companies that pay decent waqes and have decent working conditions don't have to worry much about employees taking excess sick time (at the place I work, they have to fight to keep people from coming in and spreading germs when they are sick - we like our jobs, and wages, and benefits). I realize that it must be difficult to manage having numerous people off sick at a time, as would happen at a place as large as DLR, but it makes more sense to encourage people to stay home than to have them spreading their illness to other employees and to guests. I'm a bit suprised that Disney is so shortsighted.

If people took sick time only when they were sick, it wouldn't be a problem. Unfortunately, many people, like a few bank tellers who work for my wife, treat sick time as extra vacation and call in sick whenever they want a paid day off. Then they complain they have no sick time when they actually are sick. Again, rampant abuse, not mean and nasty management, is what's driving companies to eliminate sick time.

Of course, employees could get 100 days a year sick time, 200 days a year paid vacation, and be expected to only show up whenever they wanted and do absolutely nothing on their remaining 65 work days and, from a union perspective, these employees would be overworked and exploited by mean, greedy management.

AVP
11-12-2005, 11:07 AM
Losing sick time is more than a bummer. It's a disservice to the park guests. Think about how many people pass through DL doors, and the potential for the spread of disease? Diane, there is actually a Human Resources term for this situation - it's actually called "Presenteeism," and it's generally taught as a Bad Thing.

The fact that Disney would try to call their increased enforcement policy something "non-treatening" is not surprising, the fact that they would use this particular term is ironic.

AVP

DianeM
11-12-2005, 12:37 PM
If a person repeatedly lies to their employer, then they should be fired. Taking sick leave away punishes honest employees and customers, and is a foolish thing to do. I maintain that employers who treat their employees well do not have much of a problem with absenteeism, because their employees want to not only keep their job, but also want to impress their employer by being present and working hard, and they want to show respect for their employer - becasue the employer has earned it. Too many employers maintain poor work environments, don't treat their employees with respect, and then complain because employees don't treat them with respect and they can't find "good" workers. There are lots of good workers out there, but the good ones won't stay with an employer who doesn't respect them.

I hope that if Disney is moving down this path, then they will change their ways. A big part of the magic of DL is the "cast members". Employees at DL are so friendly and warm, it's hard not to feel good about being there. I've only had one CM be rude to me, and I won't forget it. It felt like a slap in the face. If this had been my first visit to DL, it would definitely have effected the way I felt about the park. DL is doing quite well right now, with it's 50th anniversary visit, but if Disney Corp. thinks it can maintain that kind of attendance without keeping it's employees happy, they are going to be in for a nasty suprise.


If people took sick time only when they were sick, it wouldn't be a problem. Unfortunately, many people, like a few bank tellers who work for my wife, treat sick time as extra vacation and call in sick whenever they want a paid day off. Then they complain they have no sick time when they actually are sick. Again, rampant abuse, not mean and nasty management, is what's driving companies to eliminate sick time.

DianeM
11-12-2005, 12:39 PM
They use what I call "The Lysol Technique" here. If you show up sick, one high level employee follows you around with a can of lysol, spraying everything you touch as soon as you leave. It's quite effective at making it clear that sick people are not welcome here. Of course, sometimes we have deadlines that must be met, and we come in anyway.


Diane, there is actually a Human Resources term for this situation - it's actually called "Presenteeism," and it's generally taught as a Bad Thing.

annieb727
11-12-2005, 02:37 PM
I hope that if Disney is moving down this path, then they will change their ways. A big part of the magic of DL is the "cast members". Employees at DL are so friendly and warm, it's hard not to feel good about being there. I've only had one CM be rude to me, and I won't forget it. It felt like a slap in the face. If this had been my first visit to DL, it would definitely have effected the way I felt about the park. DL is doing quite well right now, with it's 50th anniversary visit, but if Disney Corp. thinks it can maintain that kind of attendance without keeping it's employees happy, they are going to be in for a nasty suprise.

I agree with you Diane! On our trip in October, we spent 9 days at DL, and one at Knott's Berry Farm -- the employees were AWFUL at Knotts...the ones that weren't downright rude had a laziness and apathy about them -- we may go back someday b/c they have great coasters, but we'll know well in advance that the employees are horrible. I couldn't imagine going to DL with employees like that. You must treat employees with respect if you want them to treat the company and GUESTS with respect.

Klutch
11-12-2005, 03:09 PM
I really don't think disciplining, or even firing, employees for poor attendance is disrespectful. On the contrary, constant absenteeism is disrespectful to supervisors and fellow employees. I think it also shows a lack of self respect.

I suspect DL management may have to work on how they treat employees in other ways. Indeed, Castmembers must feel they are appreciated.

Staging this "sick-out" is quite ironic. Let's see; we're upset because Disney is enforcing long-on-the-books policies which bring consequences to calling in sick too much. OK, let's all call in sick! That'll show 'em! :rolleyes: Seems to me such action will help management decide who to fire next time.

nursemelis374
11-12-2005, 03:27 PM
Disneyland has a tendency of overworking their employees. 12 hour days, 7 days a week sometimes.

Is this even legal?

I must say that I am shocked to hear that DL even offers benefits to their hourly people. I think they should be grateful that they even get sick time. I know a lot of people that our working in similar hourly jobs that do not have ANY benefits. I also know of a lot of jobs that require college degrees and substantial training that do not have benefits.

DianeM
11-12-2005, 03:39 PM
I didn't say it was. What I said was that employers who treat their employees with respect don't have problems with absenteeism.


I really don't think disciplining, or even firing, employees for poor attendance is disrespectful. On the contrary, constant absenteeism is disrespectful to supervisors and fellow employees. I think it also shows a lack of self respect.
.

DianeM
11-12-2005, 03:46 PM
It's legal if they pay overtime, and if it's voluntary. Here is a site that summarizes California Labor Laws. People can work as much as they want.

http://www.workforcesoftware.com/labor-laws/ca_laws.html

A lot of entry level positions don't have benefits, but any employer who wants to keep quality employees knows they have to offer benefits, or the best employees will move on to employers who have benefits, leaving only those who are not good enough to work for a better employer. Sadly, a lot of employers seem to prefer to employ only people who can't get work anywhere else. Customer service suffers, but their bottom line is okay, and that is all that matters, isn't it?



Is this even legal?

I must say that I am shocked to hear that DL even offers benefits to their hourly people. I think they should be grateful that they even get sick time. I know a lot of people that our working in similar hourly jobs that do not have ANY benefits. I also know of a lot of jobs that require college degrees and substantial training that do not have benefits.

AVP
11-12-2005, 03:51 PM
This is how I've seen the whole thing happening:

Disney opens a new park in Anaheim.

Lots of new people are hired into both Disneyland and DCA. They don't quite hire as many people as they wanted to, and they probably were not as selective as they would have liked. These new people aren't quite as... devoted as they could be, and the resort begins to experience a real attendance problem.

Disneyland begins to enforce attendance policy, which results in widespread terminations.

Disney can't hire people fast enough to fill these positions, which results in staffing shortages.

The new union contract says that employees from one park can't be used to work in the other park unless every single person who could pick up that shift at the other park has declined the shift. So DCA or hotel employees can not be used to fill the gaps in Disneyland shifts without Disney jumping through a lot of hoops.

Disney begins to schedule Disneyland employees to their maximum availabilities, including lots of overtime. Disney also denies vacation requests and even cancels previously approved vacations.

Cast members start calling out sick more frequently. SOME are sick. Others use "sick" days to keep appointments they would otherwise miss because they are scheduled an overtime shift. Others use their sick days to take the vacation time that Disney denied or cancelled. (Yep, I heard about someone who used 5 sick days to take a honeymoon)

Disney sees the increase in sick calls, and cracks down even more.

Lots more people quit, or are terminated. And the cycle continues.

It seems to be simple supply and demand. Disney seems to have a greater demand for cast members than a supply of people willing to work under those terms. So either Disney changes the terms of employment, or finds a way to make due with less employees.

AVP

K & S
11-12-2005, 03:52 PM
I really don't think disciplining, or even firing, employees for poor attendance is disrespectful. On the contrary, constant absenteeism is disrespectful to supervisors and fellow employees. I think it also shows a lack of self respect.

I suspect DL management may have to work on how they treat employees in other ways. Indeed, Castmembers must feel they are appreciated.

Staging this "sick-out" is quite ironic. Let's see; we're upset because Disney is enforcing long-on-the-books policies which bring consequences to calling in sick too much. OK, let's all call in sick! That'll show 'em! :rolleyes: Seems to me such action will help management decide who to fire next time.

I think you are missing the other main issue. Disney wants to create a two-tier employee system. I don't have a problem with part-time employees not receiving benefits, depending on the definition of "part-time."

In my opinion, part-time should included those who work 20 hours a week or less. When “part-time” is pushed to include 30 hours, companies often try to push everyone into the lower tier. It then becomes far cheaper to have 40 employees provide 1200 work hours than 30 employees provide those same 1200 work hours.

tink360
11-12-2005, 06:13 PM
Losing sick time is more than a bummer. It's a disservice to the park guests. Think about how many people pass through DL doors, and the potential for the spread of disease? Companies that pay decent waqes and have decent working conditions don't have to worry much about employees taking excess sick time (at the place I work, they have to fight to keep people from coming in and spreading germs when they are sick - we like our jobs, and wages, and benefits). I realize that it must be difficult to manage having numerous people off sick at a time, as would happen at a place as large as DLR, but it makes more sense to encourage people to stay home than to have them spreading their illness to other employees and to guests. I'm a bit suprised that Disney is so shortsighted.

I couldn't agree more, it does everyone a disservice when employees come to work sick. At my workplace, we have adequate sick time, are allowed to call in to care for sick dependents, and *still* there are those who insist on coming in sick for days or even weeks, exposing others needlessly. They might have recovered sooner if they had stayed home & rested. The result is other workers getting sick, taking it home to their families, and the worst thing is exposing clients who are likely already ill or debilitated....
Years ago we had a disneyland trip spoiled somewhat by the dental hygienist treating my son. She was coughing up a blue streak, she wore a mask but I should have just grabbed my son up out the chair & said "we'll be back when you are well." He came down with a high fever and virus 3 or 4 days later, in the middle of a trip we'd planned & payed for 6 months before. :mad:

Don't know what to say about the problem of people abusing their sick time, it happens & it's wrong. Better to fire the ones who abuse the system than take away benefits from the majority who are responsible.

AVP
11-12-2005, 06:21 PM
OK, I was curious to know exactly what changed with Disneyland's attendance policy, so I called a friend who was kind enough to explain the whole thing to me. Any errors in what I relate here are my own. Here is roughly what the policy was last year:

Cast members accumulate "points" for attendance issues. Absences are worth 3 points per "instance," tardies are 1.5 points per day. Cast members can call out for four reasons - "Call Sick," "Call Transportation," "Call Personal" or "Call Dependent."

If a CM is sick, they earn 3 points for the first day missed, but can call out an additional 4 consecutive shifts without earning additional points. In other words, if they are out for one day or five, it's three points. If the CM is out for more than 5 days, they need to have a doctor's note before they can return to work.

CMs can call out for "transportation," which means they can't get to work. Again, this is worth 3 points, and again, this can be continued for up to five consecutive days.

If a CM calls out for "personal" reasons, they don't have to tell Disney why they aren't coming in, and their manager can't ask. These are also continuable.

Finally, CMs can take a day off to care for a dependent. CMs get four of these calls per year, and DO NOT accumulate points for them. Technically, CMs are only supposed to use these days to care for registered dependents, but the number of days is not based on the number of registered dependents the CM has - CMs with 7 kids get the same number of "dependent" days as unmaried, childless CMs. Further, the policy includes "parents" as dependents, where they are not considered dependents in any other policy.

CMs receive discipline when they accumulate 9 points in one month, 18 points in three months, or 24 points in a year. The discipline is progressive, starting with a verbal warning, then a written warning, then a one-day suspension before the CM is terminated.

I did a quick calculation of the old policy, and it appears that a CM could have called out sick for 35 days in one year, AND taken an additional 4 "dependent" days, without receiving so much as a verbal slap on the wrist.

When a CM did receive a disciplinary action, they were given a "grace" call before the next step. So, if a CM accumulated their 9th point for a month, they would get a verbal warning. Say that CM already had 6 points from the prior month. The very next time that CM called out sick, they would hit 18 points, which would mean a written warning. Under the old policy, that written warning would actually not be issued until the subsequent absence, or at 21 points.

In fact, depending on how long it took a manager to get to a CM to administer a warning, CMs could rack up far more than 24 points before they would receive all of the warnings necessary to terminate them.

When "Presenteeism" went into effect this spring, the major policy change was to eliminate the two grace calls. Managers still need to discipline CMs before taking the next step for additional points, but they got rid of the freebies at each step.

The new policy, the one that goes into effect tomorrow, makes more changes. Sick days are still continuable, but transportation and personal calls are not. CMs who are elligible for benefits still receive dependent call days, but those who are not (casual regulars and casual temporaries) will not.

The new policy doesn't reduce the length of sick instances - CMs can still be out five days at a time. The new policy does not reduce the number of points a CM can receive before they are disciplined.

In fact, it appears that a benefit-elligible CM can still call out sick for 35 days in one year, AND take an additional 4 "dependent" days, without receiving so much as a verbal slap on the wrist. A CT or a CR won't get the 4 dependent days, but can still take the 35 sick days without any discipline.

I guess I don't see why this is considered to be a draconian policy, except that 18 year-olds who have never worked anywhere else may not realize exactly how generous this is.

AVP

tink360
11-12-2005, 06:32 PM
35 sick days in a year???? Hmmm, maybe the sick leave at my workplace isn't so adequate after all! ;)