In a stunning legal setback, a California appellate court dealt another significant blow to Disney as it ruled against the company, accusing it of unlawfully circumventing a living-wage law. This latest courtroom defeat follows Disney’s recent loss at the Supreme Court on a separate matter involving first amendment rights. This court ruling grants Disneyland Cast Members a much-needed win in the fight for fair wages.
Why Disney Lost Wage Case
The ruling centers around an Anaheim city ordinance, Measure L, enacted in 2018 after being approved by the city’s voters. Measure L mandates a minimum wage for companies in the Anaheim Resort area, potentially raising the pay for Disneyland Resort workers to approximately $20 per hour. However, Disney had contended that it was exempt from the law since it did not receive any subsidies from the city.
In an unexpected turn against Disney’s stance, a group of judges from California’s 4th District Court of Appeal has ruled in favor of workers in a class-action lawsuit representing a staggering 25,000 employees. Their decision hinged on a crucial clause extracted from a 1996 agreement between Disney and Anaheim, where the city was bound to reimburse the company if bond payments needed covering. This particular provision proved pivotal, effectively compelling Disney to acknowledge its responsibility in adhering to the living-wage law.
The court’s decision marks a significant milestone for Disneyland employees in California, who have long struggled to make ends meet on their current wages. Should Disney now be required to adhere to the living-wage law, it could potentially lift the income of theme park workers to nearly $20 per hour, a significant improvement in their financial well-being.
Disney Dodged the Law
In a prior ruling by Judge William D. Claster of the Orange County Superior Court, the judge ruled in favor of Disney. He determined that the subsidies provided by the city of Anaheim were not applicable in relation to the living-wage law. According to the Los Angeles Times, Judge Claster’s decision was based on the interpretation that the city did not provide a colloquial form of “subsidies” to Disney. However, the recent appellate court ruling has overturned Judge Claster’s verdict, placing greater emphasis on the provision established in the 1996 expansion agreement. This development reinforces Disney’s obligation to comply with the living-wage law.
While Disney could still appeal the appellate court ruling to the California Supreme Court, the workers’ attorneys hope this decision will compel Disney to comply with the law, thus ending the protracted legal battle. Moreover, as attention shifts toward the next steps, this could potentially set a precedent for wage standards in the Anaheim Resort industry.
Disney Cast Members on Strike
This isn’t the only legal battle the Walt Disney Company is having with employees at the moment. Cast Members at Disneyland Paris have been on strike since May 30, 2023, demanding higher wages and improved working conditions. They request a €200 monthly salary increase, a stronger travel stipend, shorter hours, schedule flexibility, better health insurance, and more affordable childcare. Furthermore, the strikes have caused disruptions to Park operations, with canceled shows, longer wait times for rides and mixed reactions from Guests. While Disneyland Paris management is committed to resolving the issues with the unions, no agreement has been reached thus far.
Disney’s court loss in evading the living-wage law has brought renewed attention to the company’s legal battles and its treatment of its workforce. The ruling challenges the idea that a corporate powerhouse can sidestep local ordinances and highlights the ongoing struggle for fair wages and labor rights. It is a great victory for Cast Members in California. However, the fight for adequate compensation and treatment is not over. Employees in Disneyland Paris are still striking against Disney. Furthermore, growing living costs in Florida have also caused major struggles for Disney World Cast Members. These issues reveal that the company still has a long way to go to satisfy its workers.
