So what gives with 2000 Disney Californian employees being transferred to Florida?

[fabfemmeboy]

A few reasons:
1) FL has far fewer regulations and a governor who lets Disney do whatever they want, whereas California doesn't.
2) Cost of living is much lower in FL than in CA, thus so are salaries.
3) If you get senior people to quit because they don't like the move, you can hire junior people who cost less (and BTW, firing people costs a lot more money than having them quit does, because they're not entitled to severance/benefits/etc. if they quit)
4) If most of your projects are in FL, then why have people designing it in CA and then needing to relocate temporarily to complete the build/installation? It's as much a sign of investment in WDW - and lack of investment in DL - as anything else.

 

[lazerprincess]

No, that would cost far more money.

A layoff in California would involve severance and unemployment benefits. Some of the employees they are losing have been there for decades and would receive quite the nice exit package.

I know people affected. None of them want to move. They are being forced to leave the company AND they receive no payouts or benefits. The people Disney wants to retain are being given dispensation to stay in CA.

So it’s a layoff in effect and Disney doesn’t have to pay out a cent. Quite diabolically genius.

This is the actual "inside scoop" on what's going on with this move. Disney Parks fans should be outraged- they are letting go a ton of senior Imagineers and the parks will suffer because of this. It is diabolical- these Imagineers have dedicated their lives to the Disney parks and they are being let go without any of the benefits they earned.

 

[KYMickey]

This is the actual "inside scoop" on what's going on with this move. Disney Parks fans should be outraged- they are letting go a ton of senior Imagineers and the parks will suffer because of this. It is diabolical- these Imagineers have dedicated their lives to the Disney parks and they are being let go without any of the benefits they earned.

They really are not letting them go, they are offering them a transfer. Only if they don't take the transfer are they being "let go". So in reality it's their decision to be let go. Of course it's Disney who is creating the conditions that require them to make a decision.

 

[Tigger's ally]

This is the actual "inside scoop" on what's going on with this move. Disney Parks fans should be outraged- they are letting go a ton of senior Imagineers and the parks will suffer because of this. It is diabolical- these Imagineers have dedicated their lives to the Disney parks and they are being let go without any of the benefits they earned.

I dont blame disney at all for leaving CA. Everybody has a choice here. Disney chose better working climate. They didn't move out of the country like so many other companies.

 

[Chumpieboy]

They really are not letting them go, they are offering them a transfer. Only if they don't take the transfer are they being "let go". So in reality it's their decision to be let go. Of course it's Disney who is creating the conditions that require them to make a decision.

That's a pretty horrific justification for this.

I really am not mugging you. I am offering you a choice. Only if you don't hand over your wallet are you being "shot". So in reality it's your decision to be shot.

 

[Tigger's ally]

That's a pretty horrific justification for this.

I really am not mugging you. I am offering you a choice. Only if you don't hand over your wallet are you being "shot". So in reality it's your decision to be shot.

Nope, still a decision. My old company came in and shut down our plant that had over 1200 employees. Didn't get a chance to move or nothing. Could have went back to school at age 57. I rebounded better than before so I was lucky. Got a great job with a 40,000 raise with better benefits. But I would have died for the choice of moving to a place like Lake Nona at the time.

 

[bsmcneil]

That's a pretty horrific justification for this.

I really am not mugging you. I am offering you a choice. Only if you don't hand over your wallet are you being "shot". So in reality it's your decision to be shot.

I mostly agree with this (yet I hear Tigger's ally's point that in this situation, there's certainly far more agency and ability to transfer). I agree that the loss of creativity and institutional memory will be huge and largely we will realize what we've lost because that's hard to measure - but these are largely jobs where people will be able to find some similar work in the general SoCal area. I think it's a really crappy thing as an employer to do with short notice: people have families and schools, lives have already shifted significantly due to covid - so let's throw this other big huge thing at you! But this isn't a large group en masse just deciding to give up their jobs - move 3000 miles or leave the company (especially when we just demonstrated so much can be done remotely) isn't a clear-cut easy "choice". There was no significant thing forcing the company to move to save money; they're not at risk of going bankrupt.

 

[middlechild]

There was no significant thing forcing the company to move to save money; they're not at risk of going bankrupt.

Would you have a source for this comment? Based on my understanding, there are significant issues around staying put. Ability to hire new talent for one. None of us, including me, have insight as to how many applications were received in the past year for normal turnover. Tax burdens at the city, county, and state level can reach crisis proportions for a group that competes with many talent pools world-wide. Restrictions and lock downs may hamper the ability of a team to perform to a normal rate of output and communication from political figures may lead one to consider these restrictions are not going away. The idea that the Disney theme park was treated differently by politicians could be a crisis for the company. To signal the TWDC is not agreeing anymore to the status quo, that TWDC is not to be taken for granted by the city, county or state could be a factor in forcing the company's hand. Building restrictions, as another example, could be hampering efforts to create a better working environment that feeds into employee workers' comp claims. Look, there is no specific proprietary insights here. I am the first one to resist change, even when the change leads to something better.

 

[bsmcneil]

Would you have a source for this comment? Based on my understanding, there are significant issues around staying put. Ability to hire new talent for one. None of us, including me, have insight as to how many applications were received in the past year for normal turnover. Tax burdens at the city, county, and state level can reach crisis proportions for a group that competes with many talent pools world-wide. Restrictions and lock downs may hamper the ability of a team to perform to a normal rate of output and communication from political figures may lead one to consider these restrictions are not going away. The idea that the Disney theme park was treated differently by politicians could be a crisis for the company. To signal the TWDC is not agreeing anymore to the status quo, that TWDC is not to be taken for granted by the city, county or state could be a factor in forcing the company's hand. Building restrictions, as another example, could be hampering efforts to create a better working environment that feeds into employee workers' comp claims. Look, there is no specific proprietary insights here. I am the first one to resist change, even when the change leads to something better.

Those are the, and there may be more, issues but there isn't a direct, sizable concrete thing - they weren't literally forced out or given orders to move, is my point. There was no Prop 10 banning Disney from working in Burbank. They, as a company, made a choice. Wanting to cut overhead by consolidating is a real thing for a business - but it's not as though all similar jobs in the field around the country are moving to another country because of a huge shift in labor or production costs, right? That's what I mean. From what I've read, this will affect their bottom line - but absolutely none of the articles I've read suggested that without this move happening imminently, the Walt Disney Company would shut down in 6-12 months (I haven't even seen articles that say without this move, they'd have to shut down). So, I think it then seems clear that there was a cost/benefit analysis and choice made. Is there a thing you've seen that said Disney's hand was forced and if they hadn't ____ in ___ days, they'd have to close?

 

[AvidDisReader]

Those are the, and there may be more, issues but there isn't a direct, sizable concrete thing - they weren't literally forced out or given orders to move, is my point. There was no Prop 10 banning Disney from working in Burbank. They, as a company, made a choice. Wanting to cut overhead by consolidating is a real thing for a business - but it's not as though all similar jobs in the field around the country are moving to another country because of a huge shift in labor or production costs, right? That's what I mean. From what I've read, this will affect their bottom line - but absolutely none of the articles I've read suggested that without this move happening imminently, the Walt Disney Company would shut down in 6-12 months (I haven't even seen articles that say without this move, they'd have to shut down). So, I think it then seems clear that there was a cost/benefit analysis and choice made. Is there a thing you've seen that said Disney's hand was forced and if they hadn't ____ in ___ days, they'd have to close?

And do you have knowledge that Disney's hand was not forced? This is a very loud shot across the bow to State Legislators to stop over regulating. Disney is not the first to start relocating, the news is full of companies getting out of the California Perceived anti business attitude. This could just be the start of many more Disney relocations.

 

[mom2rtk]

Those are the, and there may be more, issues but there isn't a direct, sizable concrete thing - they weren't literally forced out or given orders to move, is my point. There was no Prop 10 banning Disney from working in Burbank. They, as a company, made a choice. Wanting to cut overhead by consolidating is a real thing for a business - but it's not as though all similar jobs in the field around the country are moving to another country because of a huge shift in labor or production costs, right? That's what I mean. From what I've read, this will affect their bottom line - but absolutely none of the articles I've read suggested that without this move happening imminently, the Walt Disney Company would shut down in 6-12 months (I haven't even seen articles that say without this move, they'd have to shut down). So, I think it then seems clear that there was a cost/benefit analysis and choice made. Is there a thing you've seen that said Disney's hand was forced and if they hadn't ____ in ___ days, they'd have to close?

And? They're a private company. They can do whatever they perceive is in their best business interest.

 

[bsmcneil]

And? They're a private company. They can do whatever they perceive is in their best business interest.

Of course they can - what is your post meant to say or prove? I didn't have anything that related to their not being a private business, in any of my posts. There had been a brief discussion about how this must stink for the Imagineers who have given a lot and make up a key part of the Parks success and someone said, "oh well, they made a choice not to relocate." Same PP mentioned their former job relocating to another country, as some key industries have done lately. That's simply not the case with Disney right now. They clearly are making business decisions which is their right and I never said anything remotely contrary to that - so, .

Still, the thread started with why did this happen/what's going on. Lots of different business decisions. No one has demonstrated or given an example of a law that was passed that made them move in 30-60-90 days. There are lots of references to general business issues - which is exactly what I've said. Is there a single immediate business decision that forced their hand? Generally "over-regulating" isn't a specific - it's a general issue. My point had been - Disney made the choice to do this now, they weren't concretely forced by any one person or entity or regarding any one singular issue. So, I think it sucks for the Imagineers who had this happen to them on a relatively short notice. If you think it doesn't, fine? I guess, maybe say that (instead of saying they're a private business which ... really doesn't track with any comment I made).

 

[mom2rtk]

Of course they can - what is your post meant to say or prove? I didn't have anything that related to their not being a private business, in any of my posts. There had been a brief discussion about how this must stink for the Imagineers who have given a lot and make up a key part of the Parks success and someone said, "oh well, they made a choice not to relocate." Same PP mentioned their former job relocating to another country, as some key industries have done lately. That's simply not the case with Disney right now. They clearly are making business decisions which is their right and I never said anything remotely contrary to that - so, .

Still, the thread started with why did this happen/what's going on. Lots of different business decisions. No one has demonstrated or given an example of a law that was passed that made them move in 30-60-90 days. There are lots of references to general business issues - which is exactly what I've said. Is there a single immediate business decision that forced their hand? Generally "over-regulating" isn't a specific - it's a general issue. My point had been - Disney made the choice to do this now, they weren't concretely forced by any one person or entity or regarding any one singular issue. So, I think it sucks for the Imagineers who had this happen to them on a relatively short notice. If you think it doesn't, fine? I guess, maybe say that (instead of saying they're a private business which ... really doesn't track with any comment I made).

OK.

 

[KYMickey]

There was no significant thing forcing the company to move to save money; they're not at risk of going bankrupt.

Actually I have a feeling that bankruptcy was closer than any of us know. With their income reduced so dramatically at least the parks were bleeding a significant amount of money. Also consolidating their resources closest to their biggest asset makes great sense. For all we know they may be actually looking at developing the 5th gate at WDW and it certainly would require a lot of Imagineering resources.

Of course, this also helps the bottom line which as we all know has been the focus of many recent moves.

 

[shawthorne44]

I'm upset about most of Disney's recent decisions, but this isn't one of them. Transferring work locations isn't this weird unusual thing. Before we met, my DH was transferred 7 times in 5 years and each time they swore that the new place would be permanent. The company risks losing good people that won't move, but if they think it is worth it, then fine.
I would think the same even if the direction were reversed. Although I think CA is leading the country to hell in handbasket, so a move to FL just seems logical.

 

[Willow1213]

I'm upset about most of Disney's recent decisions, but this isn't one of them. Transferring work locations isn't this weird unusual thing. Before we met, my DH was transferred 7 times in 5 years and each time they swore that the new place would be permanent. The company risks losing good people that won't move, but if they think it is worth it, then fine.
I would think the same even if the direction were reversed. Although I think CA is leading the country to hell in handbasket, so a move to FL just seems logical.

This was my exact thought too. I'm not outraged. I work in corporate america too, and we've relocated our family twice, in 2018 and again in 2020. As an employee you're given the choice. Your job is moving, do you love it enough to move with it? There are huge incentives involved for employees with corporate relocations, and many will be sitting pretty if they are selling in CA and buying in Central Florida. I totally understand families, kids in school, etc. but these are normal parts of life that are not outside the norm. Planes exist, kids will make new friends. If you're close to retirement, make the move "temporary" with full intentions to come back to CA when you retire.

 

[circus4u]

Join the military and see how many times you move during your career!

 

[mab2012]

Join the military and see how many times you move during your career!

In fairness, most people who join the military know in advance that they are signing up for that lifestyle. Most people who choose employment at a large corporate office probably do not expect to be forced to move across the country as a condition of continued employment.

Which is not to say that I think Disney is not within their legal rights on this, and I personally (even as a shareholder) have no opinion on whether or not it's good corporate move. But I completely understand why it would be upsetting to a lot of long-term employees.

 

[circus4u]

In fairness, most people who join the military know in advance that they are signing up for that lifestyle. Most people who choose employment at a large corporate office probably do not expect to be forced to move across the country as a condition of continued employment.

Which is not to say that I think Disney is not within their legal rights on this, and I personally (even as a shareholder) have no opinion on whether or not it's good corporate move. But I completely understand why it would be upsetting to a lot of long-term employees.

This is true, but I also worked for HUD and was transferred from Tampa to Jacksonville, Louisville, and finally Phoenix where I finally said enough is enough and retired! Guess it didn't bother me that much though after all those military years.

 

[superme80]

I have to go with Disney on this one. I live in California. You could not pay me to run a business here. It keeps getting worse for corporations. I am not surprised they left.