IT Workers at Walt Disney World

AndrewJackson;2459596 wrote: But someone else, not you, commented that Disney did this to offer less and charge more. "Offering less" implies that these H1B visa workers are less skilled, qualified, etc

Indeed. I don't know how likely that is w/ H1-B Visa issues. I'd say it is very common when jobs are offshored completely.

Several have cited that Disney's actions should not surprise us because businesses all over the country have been doing this for years. We know that. The problem is, we thought Disney was better. We held it to a higher standard. We never imagined that the company that told us, "When you wish upon a star, your dreams come true" would pull the American Dream right out from under its employees feet. We believed.

EtteDMS;2459629 wrote: We believed.

I've been there and am in recovery. All of that is clever marketing meant to sell tickets, merchandise, and timeshares. It is absolutely nothing more than that.

AndrewJackson;2459581 wrote: Why is it assumed that these foreign IT employees are less capable or skilled than their American counterparts?

It's better than outsourcing these jobs oversees. In the case of H1-B visas, the local economy still benefits from the employees paying rent, buying gas, eating out, etc.

Working in IT for multiple companies all using h1-B visas I can say from experience they are less capable and less skilled then their U.S. Counterparts. They are not brought on for their skill set at ANY company. They are cheaper and companies don't have to provide benefits, along with the ability to quickly cut their contracts.

Butters;2459791 wrote: Working in IT for multiple companies all using h1-B visas I can say from experience they are less capable and less skilled then their U.S. Counterparts. They are not brought on for their skill set at ANY company. They are cheaper and companies don't have to provide benefits, along with the ability to quickly cut their contracts.

That is my husbands experience as well.

Butters;2459791 wrote: Working in IT for multiple companies all using h1-B visas I can say from experience they are less capable and less skilled then their U.S. Counterparts. They are not brought on for their skill set at ANY company. They are cheaper and companies don't have to provide benefits, along with the ability to quickly cut their contracts.

Lindsey;2459807 wrote: That is my husbands experience as well.

It has depended on the contracting company they came from for their skill level in my case. I have had the least success with the workers assigned to my team from the company Disney is using, as well as another company whose workers are from the Ukraine area. I very much dislike the company that Disney is using as the workers aren't that good. Current company that management is using for my division (most other divisions still use the company Disney is using) the contractors are more solid in IT skills, at least the majority of the time.

I highlighted that last line as that is the trend for most major corporations, sadly.

AndrewJackson;2459581 wrote: Why is it assumed that these foreign IT employees are less capable or skilled than their American counterparts?

It's better than outsourcing these jobs oversees. In the case of H1-B visas, the local economy still benefits from the employees paying rent, buying gas, eating out, etc.

Okay, Im sure this is going to make someone here mad....but I have to reply. I work in I.T. and watched my former employer lay off a couple hundred highly skilled developers, only to hire cheap Indian labor both here and abroad. The question of "are they less capable" isn't even a question. They were absolutely less capable. I am not at all saying they werent intelligent people, they were. They just lacked the education and experience that the people they were replacing had. I watched as that program at my company floundered, and the turnover rate for these imported employees was incredible.

On top of that, there was also the cultural problems. There were very few women working in that group, and those that did were treated horribly by their own countrymen. They didnt respect boundaries for anyone. Hygene was a problem. Theft was an issue. The men would use the womens washroom because they didnt think women deserved their own separate one.

The work ethic was appalling. They thought they had it made here, working for this huge American company, so they slacked off. Managers were constantly having to scold them for wandering around and chatting. They would surf the web all day, often to...um...NSFW websites (yes, at work). They didnt adhere to the rules for internet usage and would often find ways around our firewalls and security so they could go to Indian betting sites and find ways to watch cricket matches....resulting in a horrible amount of viruses and malware.

I have heard people defending the practice of "outsourcing", here and on other websites. I dont think anyone who works directly with these H-1B workers can honestly justify it once they see how awful the entire practice is.

People confuse Disney the company with Disney the man. The two have very little to do with each other, unfortunately. In the lean years after WWII, Walt Disney stated that he often stayed up all night trying to figure out how to create work to keep people busy to avoid layoffs. Clearly this loyalty was returned by most of his employees. Now....well, I guess loyalty is very "old fashioned."

Stu29573;2459928 wrote: People confuse Disney the company with Disney the man. The two have very little to do with each other, unfortunately. In the lean years after WWII, Walt Disney stated that he often stayed up all night trying to figure out how to create work to keep people busy to avoid layoffs. Clearly this loyalty was returned by most of his employees. Now....well, I guess loyalty is very "old fashioned."

Everyone that owns Disney stock and operates the Disney company are riding on the coattails of the brand that the Disney brothers worked so hard to create. Instead of trying to embody that same spirit and ideals, they treat it like an ATM and manage it with the only goal to shake more cash out of it over and over. Some will say, "Isn't that what every business exists to do?" I'd say there were many decades where the Disney company was not about that. It was about getting enough money to complete the next big thing (many times something that had never been done before).

Tekneek;2459973 wrote: Everyone that owns Disney stock and operates the Disney company are riding on the coattails of the brand that the Disney brothers worked so hard to create. Instead of trying to embody that same spirit and ideals, they treat it like an ATM and manage it with the only goal to shake more cash out of it over and over. Some will say, "Isn't that what every business exists to do?" I'd say there were many decades where the Disney company was not about that. It was about getting enough money to complete the next big thing (many times something that had never been done before).

That sounds "romantic' and "nostalgic" to say that about Walt, and that's how we (myself included) like to remember Walt and the Disney Company from the early days. But the truth is, as always, somewhat more murky than that. While Walt was all about creativity and innovation, he was also very savvy when it came to managing the company's stock prices.

"Walt Disney Productions incorporated in 1938. The company issued its 6% Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock to the public in 1940; its common stock began trading OTC in 1946; and the company listed on the NYSE on November 12, 1957. If you study the changes Walt Disney made to his eponymous company before it listed on the NYSE, you can see how he primed the company to increase in price and make sure the listing on the NYSE was successful. Walt Disney, his brother Raymond and their wives owned over 25% of the stock. These shares were later put into the Disney Family Voting Trust which held 46.8% of the common stock in 1959. Having such a large ownership of the shares, Walt Disney had every incentive to drive the price up."

The Disney Company did not become a giant in the entertainment industry by accident. Walt did it intentionally.

Read Married to the Mouse if you want some perspective on how shrewd Walt really was. Disney (maybe more broadly the attractions) runs Florida...

Noone ever said Walt wasn't shrewd. He had to be. Heck, if you crossed him he could be pretty tough. However, he was about loyalty, and he expected (and usually got it) in return. Being shrewd doesn't mean being heartless.

Walt Disney trademarked his own name, and then made The Walt Disney Company start paying licensing fees to us it, much to the chagrin of Roy, and without Roy's prior knowledge. There's some old fashioned loyalty for you.

AndrewJackson;2460035 wrote: Walt Disney trademarked his own name, and then made The Walt Disney Company start paying licensing fees to us it, much to the chagrin of Roy, and without Roy's prior knowledge. There's some old fashioned loyalty for you.

True, but it was on lawyers' advice to protect his family from possible business liability. Probably a more apt example of Walt's business shrewdness in dealing with Roy was when he established Retlaw after Walt Disney Productions filed and won a lawsuit that prevented him from closing on property he wanted to purchase for Disneyland. The creation of Retlaw effectively removed the project from Walt Disney Productions (and Roy). Roy came around later, but there were always hard feelings. In fact, Roy wasn't an ardent supporter of the park until after it became a success (Walt actually got the first bank loan for it by himself). It just shows that if you were loyal to Walt and his ideas, he was loyal back. If not? Well, there are "workarounds." Loyalty has to cut both ways.

By the way, this is a very Middle American view. Another midwesterrner, Johnnie Carson cut off Joan Rivers completely when he felt she had been disloyal to him.

Backstabbing and loyalty can be very similar. ;)