Thread by @abigaildisney

Let me very clear. I like Bob Iger. I do NOT speak for my family but only for myself. Other than owning shares (not that many) I have no more say in what happens there than anyone else. But by any objective measure a pay ratio over a thousand is insane. fastcompany.com/90333082/disne…

To brush aside criticism of the low wage you pay workers at the company by saying you pay more than the Federal Minimum Wage and that you provide opportunities for education is a dodge. We all know the Federal Minimum is too low to live on. So why must we, at a company that’s...

More profitable than it’s ever been, be paying anything so close to least the law allows at all??? Pointing out the incongruity of pay at the top and pay at the bottom provokes a reaction because it so violates of our innate sense of fairness it is impossible not to wince

What on earth would be wrong with shifting some of the profits—the fruits of these employees‘ labor— to some folks other than those at the top? I’m not saying iger doesn’t deserve a bonus. He most certainly does. He is brilliant and has led the company brilliantly

And yes I am aware that 125K employees got a 1,000 bonus after the tax bill was passed. That was how you spent 125,000M of your windfall. You also spent 3.6 billion on share buy backs. Seriously, are you kidding??

It’s nice to give a bonus to a person pulling down a salary. Everybody loves that. You know what everybody loves more than that? A raise. And if the tax cut makes a bonus possible and that tax cut is permanent doesn’t it stand to reason you could have given a raise instead?

And whom did that buy back benefit? Well, you, and lots of people at the high end of the company. And lots of other wealthy people. 85% of stocks are owned by the richest 10% of Americans so congrats, you just deepened wealth inequality.

There are just over 200K employees at Disney. If you took half that 65 M bonus, along with half the very generous bonuses everyone else up in the C suites got, I am quite certain you could move significant resources down the line to more evenly share in the great success

I’m sure the math is complicated. And no one is complaining about pay at the middle and upper levels of the company. So let’s say you just raised the salaries of those in the bottom quartile. That would be 50K employees who would get, on average, a $740 bump from

Iger’s bonus alone. That alone would be pretty dramatic. Then add in 50% of the rest of the upper tier bonuses. Now we are talking about a DRAMATIC change in living conditions for people who up til now worked full time and yet we’re living at or below the poverty line

What difference would it make in the quality of life for those that gave up half their bonus? None. Zero. Maybe they can’t afford a third home. Or another boat. I’m not being facetious here. That’s the kind of sacrifice we’d be talking about for high level execs.

At the 65M dollar bonus range we are talking about something ridiculous. If you send your kid to an expensive school and we cut your bonus in half, gosh you’d give up 740 years of her education. 7.5 $5M yachts you can’t buy. 3.5 $10M jets.

And please don’t use the education dodge. It’s nice that you offer education, it truly is. But when you say that in response to the question of what you are paying your housekeepers and janitors you are saying that people earn minimum wage are only in that position

Because they haven’t been educated enough. You are shifting blame to them. What if every one of your minimum wage workers took you up on that education opportunity? That’s if they have time to do so since they probably can’t afford the necessary childcare or transportation.

The problem with offering education is that the people most in need of the biggest salary boosts are often least in a position to benefit by it. That’s why they have to take these jobs. Not only can they not afford the childcare to get to these classes, they will be too stressed

Or exhausted to get anything out of them. And do you really intend to offer education tailored to the needs of the diverse people who need it? Some will be barely literate in their native tongue (not a condemnation, just a hard truth) and would need a lot of remediation

Let’s say they all get educated and take “better” jobs. Who’s gonna clean your rooms? Whose gonna get the chewing gum off the immaculate walkways in the parks? Someone else. I guess.

You will always employ housekeepers and janitors etc. And you’re saying that because you make it possible for them to leave these jobs you therefore don’t have to pay them a fair wage. If a person works full time for you, regardless of where they come from or who they are

They deserve the dignity of a living wage. Should there really be a permanent underclass of desperately poor people who clean up the messes we make?

A full time worker—at any job— should be able to afford medicine food housing transportation child care and education. At a minimum! Do not insult them by implying they are not trying hard enough. If you need beds changed and towels washed, and you are unwilling to do so yourself

At least respect the dignity of those you pay in your stead to do so. If what they do is necessary to conducting your business successfully, then they deserve to be paid what they need to conduct their lives successfully. Because they are contributing something

To your success. Anyone who contributes to the success of a profitable company and who works full time to do so should not go hungry, should not ration insulin, and should not have to sleep in a car.