Disney Unions APPROVE contract

[joelkfla]

A second vote was held today on a contract that appears to be substantially unchanged from the one that was voted down 2 weeks ago.

According to the Service Trades Council web site, this time members approved the contract by a vote of 3,056 to 2,676.

That's a total of 5,732 votes cast, up from 5,453 in the first election.

The margin of victory was 380 votes, compared to a margin of defeat of 287 in the first election.

According to radio station WDBO, there were complaints from Teamsters, the member union most vocally against the contract, that Disney had locked them out of the voting location. Disney countered that the location at which the union had told members to vote was not the agreed upon location.

[mttafire]

Good to hear....

[WDWfanatic742]

So out of the what, 29,000 people the union represents, only 6,000 people actually voted yet they keep on complaining about things? Yeah, the pay isn't that good, but why complain if you aren't going to even vote about it?

[Figment!]

Disney Unions Accept Contract

Scott Powers and Willoughby Mariano | Staff Writers
Orlando Sentinel
June 7, 2007

Unions representing about one-third of Walt Disney World's work force approved a three-year contract late Wednesday.

The vote was the second in a month for members of the Service Trades Council, a group of six unions that represents 21,000 full-time workers. It passed 3,056 to 2,676.

On May 18, workers rejected an identical proposed contract by about 2 percentage points, and the two sides extended their 2004 contract through June 20 as negotiations continued.

This time around, voters were more accepting of the contract's provisions, Service Trades Council President Morty Miller said.

"We're looking forward to working under the contract's terms," Miller said.

The results satisfied Disney officials, spokeswoman Kim Prunty said. "We are pleased with how the negotiations process went, and we're pleased with the outcome of the vote."

The contract is effective through Oct. 2, 2010.

The Teamsters Local 385, representing bus drivers, parking-lot attendants, costumed characters and a few others -- about 2,000 Disney employees -- spearheaded opposition to the pact, while leadership of the other five unions endorsed it.

Anxiety over a possible strike may have made workers willing to approve the same contract they rejected a few weeks ago, said Mike Stapleton, president of the Teamsters local. Still, the large number of votes against the contract shows many workers remain unhappy.

"I think a substantial number of Disney workers are disappointed," Stapleton said.

The unions supporting the pact were UNITE HERE 362; UNITE HERE 737; United Food and Commercial Workers; Transportation Communications International Union; and the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts, Local 631, which represent employees as varied as vacation planners, food servers and lifeguards.

Key sticking points included wage scales and medical-plan costs. Many opponents, particularly workers at the higher pay grades, complained that the wage increases in the proposal can vanish after health-care costs are factored in.

Proponents said the overall pay increase, which averages about 4 percent, is a significant boost. They also said the proposed contract adequately controls rising health-care costs for those who need help the most -- single parents and families.

On Wednesday, Teamsters clashed with Disney World officials after they were told they set up their voting station in the wrong location and were asked to move. A Teamsters official said they were in the right place and said that Disney officials were trying to isolate Teamsters from members of other unions.

"They're just being difficult," said Donna-Lynn Dalton, recording secretary and business agent for Teamsters Local 385, as voting took place.

It was a miscommunication, and Teamsters were allowed to stay where they wished, Disney spokeswoman Jacquee Polak said.

[Scar]

21,000 union workers.

2,676 voted no.

"I think a substantial number of Disney workers are disappointed," Stapleton said.

12 ½ % is substantial?

[lockedoutlogic]

21,000 union workers.

2,676 voted no.

12 ½ % is substantial?

The threads about the union contracts at WDW seem to have alot of posts like this one....

you cannot apply Northern or Midwestern thinking to labor contracts in Florida...

Union rules, Labor relationships, and especially monetary figures.....simply don't apply

[Speedy1998]

21,000 union workers.

2,676 voted no.

12 ½ % is substantial?

To me this says 2,676 don't like the contract 3056 like the contract, and 15,268 joined the union because it was expected or required of them (not sure if FL is a right to work state).

[atruman]

Florida is a right to work state.

[DisneyNut2005]

To me this says 2,676 don't like the contract 3056 like the contract, and 15,268 joined the union because it was expected or required of them (not sure if FL is a right to work state).

FL IS a right-to-work state.

Being a Florida resident, I should know that.

[lockedoutlogic]

FL IS a right-to-work state.

Being a Florida resident, I should know that.

Being a former WDW employee...I do know that right to work state's are a complete sham.....those that have using the law to beat down those that have not....

The case is the same at WDW...where a large number of the employees hover near the poverty line.....

[cgriff]

According to the article, the employees previously making the least saw the greatest gains under the new contract... The argument that this is a case of the "have[s] using the law to beat down [the] have nots" doesn't seem to jibe with the facts here.

The "haves" say this:
"Many opponents, particularly workers at the higher pay grades, complained..."

The "have nots" say this:
"Proponents said the overall pay increase, which averages about 4 percent, is a significant boost. They also said the proposed contract adequately controls rising health-care costs for those who need help the most -- single parents and families."

I'm just glad it's settled. All of this backstage/offstage brouhaha is unshowmanly.

cgriff

[mttafire]

All i know is its settled..a good thing!!

[lockedoutlogic]

According to the article, the employees previously making the least saw the greatest gains under the new contract... The argument that this is a case of the "have[s] using the law to beat down [the] have nots" doesn't seem to jibe with the facts here.

The "haves" say this:
"Many opponents, particularly workers at the higher pay grades, complained..."

The "have nots" say this:
"Proponents said the overall pay increase, which averages about 4 percent, is a significant boost. They also said the proposed contract adequately controls rising health-care costs for those who need help the most -- single parents and families."

I'm just glad it's settled. All of this backstage/offstage brouhaha is unshowmanly.

cgriff

Woah...woah...buddy....

I speak from experience here...not conjecture...I was for a brief time a union rep (I didn't care for it....so I quickly excused myself)....but you get the point.
Here are the facts: The Disney payscale...while on par with the local pay scale....pays a new employee somewhere in the area of 12,000 dollars a year. The max out rate for the rank and file when I was there was around $10.50 cents an hour...and you used to get to that level in 7 years...with your first major pay bump (about 2 and hour) coming after 3 years. Under the previous contract, that max out level (higher I'm sure, not particularly significant though) is reached at somewhere near 15 years.....and then you are basically stuck there and will never see a significant raise relative to cost of living. That is a hard pill to swallow.

Now...it used to be that living in florida was cheaper and therefore...the money went farther....but that is simply not the case anymore....We happen to own a house located between WDW and OIA (airport)....and have seen the selling price go from under 100K in 2000 to 240K today. Property taxes have gone from $1100 a year to just over $3000 a year.

The health care was basically included at that time....now they pay some out of pocket (as do most employees in most companies) since the previous union contract had been negotiated....so some of those big 4% raises are gobbled up right there off the top.

Now what's the result....are many people happy to work there? Of course. Is the pay so much less than other comparable jobs in other areas? No.
But the practical result is that there are two basic types of WDW employees: those that have worked other places previously and have the financial capabilities to take a pay cut. And those that have not, can not, and hover near poverty or make themselves into walking zombies by attempting to scratch and claw for OT to attempt to get ahead of the bills.

Not exactly the happiest place on Earth near the timeclock, is it?

Listen, I love WDW and in many ways understand that things aren't so bad and that the pay is what can reasonably be expected.
But the fact is they use it as a cash cow to support there other not so stable business endeavors and some of that burden falls on the people with the nametags on.
Managers are even underpaid by most travel industry standards.

Alot of this is a personal opinion, and I respect everyone's right to their own....
but everyone should, as a conscious member of our society, stop and think about what they are supporting with their habits. That's reality.

[cgriff]

Woah...woah...buddy....

The perception left by the article is that the union agreement was a 'win' for the little guy. If you disagree with my post, then you disagree with the article and need to take that up with the writer of said article.

Everyone should, as a conscious member of our society, stop and think about what they are supporting with their habits.

Huh? Travel to Disney is a bad "habit" that everyone needs to "stop"? No way, dudesky.

cgriff

[lockedoutlogic]

The perception left by the article is that the union agreement was a 'win' for the little guy. If you disagree with my post, then you disagree with the article and need to take that up with the writer of said article.




Huh? Travel to Disney is a bad "habit" that everyone needs to "stop"? No way, dudesky.

cgriff

I agree with you on the first point...though the Orlando press is usually very careful not to offend Disney...even if it was a terrible back breaking deal for the employees....
In that case, the press will still be fairly positive...so you really can't take it at face value...like anything on Foxnews

On the second, I didn't say going to disney was a "bad habit" and we should stop. But when a labor agreement is commented on to the effect of "thank god it's over, it looks bad" then that is over the line...
We go there on vacation...but this is about peoples lives and their own happiness. It is difficult for anything like a union to function in the first place, being that state laws are designed to break them....

So while I admit that I'm a little touchy and miffed on this particular subject.....My point is that the employees should be looked at as separate individuals and not parts of WDW....as you, I or anyone else would want to be treated.
That's my point...it's not a personal attack against you and you are of course completely free to disagree....

Sorry if I approached it the wrong way.

[Cinderelley]

21,000 union workers.

2,676 voted no.

12 ½ % is substantial?

I would say that 2,676 people is a substantial number of unhappy people. They are people after all, not just percentage points.

[lockedoutlogic]

They are...in the end...viewed as cogs in the machine....unfortunately

As many of us are on hold with disney scrambling to get a $250.00 "discount" rate.....a fairly sad commentary, IMHO

[AnnetteFan]

Disney's payrate is not comparable to Universals or SeaWorlds.