The New SPFPA Local 1955 Disneyland TA is a JOKE - NO Pay Raises in 2027 - Senior Officers Get Screwed Again!
- 3 days ago
- 19 min read
Disneyland 3rd Tentative Agreement Reached see the FULL Red Line Agreement below - Download Below to Read it.
SPFPA Local 1955 Members thoughts we just received.
Does this “negotiator” on our behalf, even know how to negotiate? Asking seriously
Did they skip 2027 on that little pretty breakdown and also is this still an actual four-year contract when we voted no for a four-year contract?
Wouldn’t the 2027 increase be 26.93 according to the chart?? Not 28? Why do I feel like they are trying to trick us?
exactly!!! It’s all a wording game
We want 28$ now, not by October 1st and a dollar raise every year with no years skipped
We're only getting shorted out 6 months of the increase. Why not just agree to the full 7.55% increase as of April 01, 2026 all together instead of making it seem like its a better deal then the previous one? Essentially its the same BS deal as before if not even worse. Cause we are getting .45% less than the previous contract. Longevity was decreased and still starts till 2028, and premiums, some decreased by .25 cents.
Did we not ask for at least $28 upon ratification? They’re just trying to give our 2027 raise early if we vote yes.
Kale Pelekane how was this the best version so far you lost a dollar premium for hotels and in parks longevity is still a fraction and doesn’t start until 28 and your second year went from a 4% to a 3.55%
Premium diminishes air roll, no matter where you work and it makes it the manager. The manager can select who there’s want to have in those locations. I’m not in favor of anybody having a premium for where they work put it into the Pay. Everybody gets a fair share I do have a problem with the loss in longevity and you will too when you’ve been here 10 years.
So if this contract passes by majority of votes of members, does it means that we still attach to international and not able to get rid if them for another 3 years?
Contract is 4 years. April 1, 2026 - March 31, 2030
After a quick read through of the contract I noticed the Step 1 clause is still there, not good, and this is still a 4 year contract, also not good. On the plus side, congratulations to those who got assigned lockers 🎉
Don’t even think about building a long-term career with this company. Longevity means absolutely nothing anymore. This is now the FOURTH contract where employees of 10 or more years have been left behind, and somehow this third proposal is an even bigger joke than the first two.
Meanwhile, other unions across the company are walking away with strong contracts while ours continues to set the bar lower and lower. That’s not “hard bargaining” — that’s failure.
Great job, negotiating team. I hope you all enjoyed your meals, and your time in Florida while the membership continues to get sold out at the table.
People are tired of excuses. We’re tired of being told to settle. And we’re tired of watching our value disappear while being expected to smile and accept less every single contract cycle.
The first contract was giving cash members in our department, an extra $.75 an hour starting this year. At least that’s what I thought.
Dru Lirios Johnson
Karen Chapman yes and a three year contract.
I don’t like this one either. If we say yes to this contract, we’ll get $28 in October but no raise and 2027 if I’m reading that right.
“Confidence without knowledge is just arrogance wearing a disguise.”
I will pray for you brother to find peace in your beautiful heart!
With that said,
I’M STILL VOTING ➡️NO⬅️‼️
Thefirst TA was 3 years not 4. I dont believe that this crap about about paying new hires/transfers only 90% of the minimum rate for 52 weeks was in the first one. The longevity pay in the first one was $.75 for 10+ years and $1.50 for 20+ years. The hotel/park premium was $1.
In plain English:
Raises calculated
2026 = $2.00 $26.00 + $2.00 =$28.00
2027 = $0.0. $28.00 + $0.0 =$28.00
2028 = $1.12. $28.00 + $1.12 =$29.12
2029 = $1.16. $29.12 + $1.16 =$30.28
2030 = ?????
Contract is a 4 year contract.
Nothing has changed from the last contract we all voted. If I am wrong with my assessment please let me know.
I believe it's...
4/1/26 - 9/30/26 = $27.04
10/1/26 - 3/31/28 = $28
4/1/28 - 3/31/29 = $29.12
4/2/29 - 3/31/30 = $30.28
Last TA was
4/1/26 = $27.04
4/1/27 = $28.12
4/1/28 = $29.25
4/1/29 = $30.42
Parks and Hotels get $0.25 premium now and $0.50 in 2028.
Any other differences from the last TA we voted down?
Based on how it’s being done the next contract will give us 30.00 in a year and no raises for the next 5 lol. We are screwed lol
Nothing!!!
No you’re right, they are just acceleration a dollar more in October.
I’m like 90% sure the pay raise is exactly
The same as last contract and all they did was reword it and be deceptive about it 😂😂
Once again the backbone of security (Screeners) get overlooked lmaoooo
What is th structure rate for new hires. What does that even mean. Is it really true for new hire will only get paid 90% and if so what would keep the company from replacing our hours with new hires
This is exactly what Costco does. Sundays when they make 1.5x pay they schedule all the newer people that don't make as much.
And who would be considered a "New Hire". Everyone hired after contracted voted and approved in a few days or everyone hire after April 1, 2026? There currently is a class of about 22 Security Hosts who were hired at $26.00. If they drop to $24.34, they won't be happy.
Look, we need to talk about this flyer.
The "$28.00 in 2026" headline looks great on paper, but if you actually sit down and do the math, the numbers tell a completely different story. We’re being sold a "big raise" this year by sacrificing our entire raise for next year.
Here is what is actually happening in the fine print:
1. The 2027 Raise is Disappearing
The Union is claiming we get a $2.00 raise this year. We don't. We get a 4% raise in April ($1.04 if you’re at $26). The only way we hit $28 is by "pulling forward" our 2027 raise to October.
The Result: From October 1, 2026, all the way until April 1, 2028 a full 18 months we will see ZERO increase in our paychecks. They are just front-loading our own money to make the deal look better than it is.
2. The Ratification Pressure
Notice the deadline? They are saying we only get that "pulled forward" money if we vote YES by May 12th. Why the rush? Because they don't want us realized that by voting for this, we are essentially voting for a 0% raise in 2027.
3. The Max Pay Cap
If you are at the top of your pay scale, you don't even get the full hourly raise. Anything over the "Max" gets paid as a lump sum. That sounds okay until you realize that a lump sum doesn't increase your base pay for overtime or future percentage raises. It’s a one-time check that saves the company money in the long run.
4. A Two-Tier System
They are introducing a "Structured Entry Rate" where new hires start at 90% of the minimum. This is a classic move to lower the standards of our contract. Once you start letting them pay people less than the minimum, the "minimum" doesn't mean anything anymore.
The Bottom Line:
Don't let a flashy headline distract you. We are being asked to take a "bonus" now in exchange for a wage freeze all through 2027. We deserve a real raise this year and a real raise next year.
Read the chart. Do the math. Don't be pressured by a deadline that only exists to keep us from thinking this through.
Look at the 'Example' versus the 'Table.'
The example says we hit $28.00 in October 2026. But look at the table for 2027 it says the minimum is only $26.93. How can the 2027 minimum be lower than what they claim we will be making in 2026?
It’s because the $28.00 is a 'promotional' number they reached by combining two years of raises. By the time 2027 actually rolls around, you aren't getting a raise to $28.00 you're already there, and you're stuck there until 2028.
They are effectively using a rounding error (the extra penny in the 2028 table) to distract us from the fact that 2027 is a dead year for our paychecks
I don't see how this pay scale is any different overall from the last TA we voted down. (4% raise every year). Don't be fooled by tricky wording. Disney has a budget they want to go by and are rearranging it every time they negotiate.
6 months of 3.55% raise (Oct 2026 - March 2027). Then 0.45% lower for the next 12 months (April 2027 - March 2028). Then years 3 and 4 its a 0.42% decrease.
Our hours can and will be cut and the cherry on top is that new hires will take some of our hours to only be paid 90%. Just so the company can save a dime. We really need better pay. Better pay to match the raise of gas, which is above $5.50, groceries, insurance, and rent. I thought it’s a union fight for every one and every one equally. Why are new hires treated differently. Whether it’s new hires barely entering the Disney Company or Cast Members who have been here for 10+ years, all should be treated fairly. How is a 25¢ (25 cent!) raise for 10+ years and 25¢ more for 20 years an incentive to stay in this department.
Why did we not remove the Step 1 clause? To me it looks like we are giving managers the ability to punish people asymmetrically.
Contract isn’t getting any better!… just saying!🤘🏻
I’m agree with Amir on this one, the money has been shifted to give a higher pay. No seniority pay and park/hotel premium has been CUT by 75%. I really hope Everyone has time to read everything to see. No baker premium or screener premium. The year of having no progressive raise could back fire. it just seems to me that by giving the raises earlier is to entice the audience.
I didn’t ask to be bent over without the ky. Vets get boned again. Took us 25 years to get to that rate
youre 100% right. And when theese newer officers stick around they'll always be lower. Oh wait you'll move on and not stick around, that's what alot of us said well the hiring outside virtually slowed and it was at a much lower rate. So you'll understand then when you stick around
October 2026 to April 2028, 18 months without a raise… that’s wild. If anything, we should be starting at $28-$30 by April 1st, 2026 and get more as the years go.
Also, why is that the union unanimously recommends that we vote yes?
Still a hard “NO”. The team ignored the membership’s multiple requests for a three year contract as opposed to the “non-customary” four year deal. The wage increase is not what the members desired.
No matter how it’s drafted, we still failed.
Of course the negotiations committee is going to recommend a “YES”. They’re supposed to.
Who writes this crap to be so confusing and misleading.
Ain’t no way you guys are about to settle for the scraps (bump if you’ll call it).
If they took screener premium pay right now to increase the bump, you guys wouldn’t be so happy/settled, now would you?
I’ve done my time at the tables, I understand the Company recognized it as an entry level start in Security operations and emergency services.
The whole point of the premium back then was an incentive to move from security 1 over to 2
Not Because of the Job Itself.
If that’s the case, Us Park Officers and Hotels could’ve just voted yes on the last proposal and leave everyone else in the dust but We Didn’t.
We voted No to help fight for Everyone. And now that little scrap is coming from Your own co workers pockets and not the company, says a lot about where the head space is at. No one is saying it but I will, Damn right some positions are premium pay worthy while some(entry level is not) this ain’t a dis but a reality that is. The company says so, and bet ya lots of security ops will say so too. Learn the radios, learn the calls, learn about judgment making, and importantly learn to help each other.
Those of you saying “We don’t make the company money so be realistic 🤓”
Security and emergency services isn’t supposed to be a revenue for the company, we’re a Bill for them that they’ll pay for.
If you want to make money for the company then by all means, go join sales, servers, any commission positions for the company.
If you want to be the part of the Security team then act like it
This proposal is an obvious No
1600 officers shouldn’t settle because you’re struggling now and want fast money now
We’re All struggling and making ends meet
Stand strong and unite - Not settle and cower.
Is anyone else appalled by the way the board talks to paying members? I have serious concerns about the contract and I get called slow and dense by a board member. This should be unacceptable and as members we should be standing together to hold the board accountable for this.
it’s really disappointing that Alex constantly feels the need to talk down to people
Oh I agree. I've dealt with it when I called out the gross behavior by another voted out member who was again given a seat. I was called a liar. Also when I called out possible conflict of interest and demanded clarification one way or the other.
And mocking by Alex, it's kinda his MO at this point.
Not to mention again, Monique who isn't a board last I remember always trying to push these TAs through.
I'm done trying to fight for people. I'm gonna let them do whatever they want. I'll just happily be the guy saying "I told you so" when they start complaining when other departments actually fight for shit and get it.
he does the same thing on the clock, not surprising he does it online too
it really sucks when it feels like the board is actively working against its members
it is just grossly inappropriate. To me it feels like a vote of no confidence is needed.
I said this in the disney let's get real page and I got suspended 🤣
excuse me? Talk about an abuse of power! Who gets to decide that kind of action? Talk about protecting themselves from any kind of accountability. These people need to be voted out next go around they clearly don’t know how to be in a union let alone have any position of power.
This is one I can agree with you on. A board member(s) should be held accountable for their actions. Belittling a member on a public forum is highly inappropriate and unacceptable. NO ONE deserves to be ridiculed for asking questions.
Candice Williams
I would just like to point out that nearly every post has included negative attacks toward the negotiation committee members and the board. So please, if you can’t take it, don’t dish it out. Respect goes both ways — if you want it, you have to give it as well.
When people repeatedly belittle the committee and the board, it’s important to remember that we are people too, and eventually there comes a point where the line is crossed. We can disagree, debate, and question decisions without tearing each other down personally.
Please keep in mind that mutual respect is not a one-way street. You do not get to say i expect more from you than you should expect from me. It does not work that way.
I understand you would like to defend your boyfriend and fellow board member, however I had a genuine question regarding the Step 1 process that I do not agree with. Nothing I said warranted an attack on myself by referring to me as dense just because I do not agree with it. If you do not see an issue with attacking the members you are supposed to represent than I am very concerned about the future for our members.
Candice Williams I challenge you to go back to any of my posts and find where I called Alex dense or insulted him in the same manner in which he is attacking me
she won’t be able to. They just have massive egos that can’t be checked. That’s the offense you dished out to them. You dare to say I’m not okay with this and that’s enough for these two. Absolutely appalling behavior from people who were voted into office.
There is a process thats in the bylaws if you REALLY wanted to go that far..
I’m already starting down that route. The don’t dish it if you can’t take it is a really lame excuse from a board member. They were elected to represent us not belittle us.
I mean there’s a board member who used AI to put his face onto the body of Jeffrey Epstein, what do you expect
Alex Martinez not only do you need to review the group rules, you also need to review yourself and your display of unprofessional behavior.
Do better.
i only fire when fired upon, I hope you send this to others as well
Alex Martinez no one fired upon you and the members can see that
did ypu personaly not post, Alex would get mad if asked about wdw money expense and post that I would be spending money on lightning lanes passes and restaurants. Correct me if im wrong
Alex Martinez what does that have to do with asking about Step 1?
Alex Martinez if you cannot articulate the benefits of the contract you are advocating for why are you on the board?
I get that people are worried about their pay, family, bills, rent etc. I fully get it. I understand living paycheck to paycheck. What I don’t understand is devaluing oneself to the point of accepting this contract just because the company rearranged raise dates and hope your fear and lack of attention to it hooks you. All that payscale really does is frontload 2027’s raise. Thats really it. It gets you a raise faster yes, but leaves you high and dry with only $30 bucks in this ever climbing cost of living and horrible economy. You're really going to tell me you'll sacrifice 4 years worth of increased pay and work contditions so you don't have to go on strike for a week?
For many of you, you are being told that if we turn this contract is rejected, its an automatic strike. Unless there is an impasse, the committee can once again go back to the bargaining table. The company can then offer a final offer, but thats it. We then would strike (we already voted to do so) if the International approves it.
The company is absolutely sowing fear and anxiety on purpose to make you vote yes on this contract. The talk about instant strike if not passed is one, parading the outside companies around our locations is another. They know exactly what they are doing and are doing it on purpose to influence you, don’t buy into it.
In the end of the day, do what is best for you and your needs. I personally won’t be voting yes for this and you can see why below. If you feel you need to vote yes, I’ll understand, I wont agree with the outcome in regards to our work conditions and pay, but I’ll understand.
To the committee and board, I know I and others give you guys a lot of push back. I just want to acknowledge that I know what you all do is a thankless job and you guys probably don’t deserve all the hate you guys get (i reserve that for a higher organization than you).From the bottom of my heart, thank you all for putting in the hours to at least attempt to get us a deal we would approve of. I know you will never be able to say it publicly, but I will always feel you guys are being strong-armed and forced to do the bidding of International when this SHOULD be completely our show, but it's not. I also feel this whole thing was rushed, but not by you.
I'll post my reasons and take aways of the TA as a response to this.
MY TAKE AWAYS ON THE TENTATIVE AND WHY ITS A NO FOR ME IF YOU CARE:
*4 years is a death sentence with the cost of living and economy.
*It locks us with international for 4 more years at least and for those who want to decertify, you now have to wait 4 years if passed. This is the one International is probably hoping you all dont know.
*I don't agree with the 90% base pay for new hires. We are saving the company money for nothing in return. Each new hire would save the company $3+ and theres really nothing stopping them from being used instead of you.
*That pay scale is skewed to look good. It isn't. $30 in 2030 is going to be nothing. All that happened is they will front load the 2027 raise if approved by the date.
*The contract reduced premium pay and longevity pay from first and 2nd attempts. I don't think we should have premiums minus lead and trainer at all and that pay should be thrown at increased base personally..
*They're going to kill that TTO pilot program as soon as possible, especially if people start abusing it to keep benefits of discount, self entrance and sign ins without working..
*That 60 days after to bargain scheduling should have been part of the contract negotiations to begin with, not after the ratification.
*Juneteenth technically isn't new but is marked as a new / change item. It was an MOU. Not a complaint, just a note.
* The wording on page 42 of the full TA states sick pay accrual is maxed at “fifty six (56)(80) while the formula only shows it caps at 80. This could and probably will be used against us because the wording states cap is 56 and not 80.
The union says they delivered on what we asked
We asked for a better sick pay leave forumla
They did nothing
We asked for a pay bump
They did nothing
What did they do? Manipulate how information is given to you with things like
“$28 in 2026!!” Hoping you wouldn’t see they moved your raise from 2027 to late 2026
“New base pay from 52,000 to 63,000” when you wouldn’t actually reach that amount for 4 years
“Vote yes for your family” when your family wants you to choose something fair
No union should be trying to manipulate your vote. This is the same contract we just voted no to, just with our raise on April 2027 moved to October 2026 so they can say they got you $28 in 2026.
Company won’t move off 27.00. We don’t have any leverage.
We don’t have strike fund
We don’t have union backing a strike or work stoppage
Exactly! Don't get why people are all of a sudden falling for Disney's tactics when there were no ADDITIONS OR INCREASES in this latest TA
First SPFPA Local 1955 tentative agreement above
Second SPFPA Local 1955 tentative agreement above
Third SPFPA Local 1955 tentative agreement above
Who READ the contract
Section 1- intent of the parties and recognition.
There is no mention of Guest Screening locations or guest screeners.
It just mentions guest/cast parking lots.
Sounds like they are already looking to outsource guest screeners!!
Jonathan James Mares-nieves
Reminder,
A NO is not an automatic strike. It is an AUTHORIZATION to allow the International to APPROVE a strike. Should it come to one. We have yet to come to an impasse with the company. Meaning they haven’t told us “no, we are done”.
Master Services Longevity:
$1.50 an hour 10-19 years
$2.00 an hour over 20 years
3 year contract $1.00 a year raise not a %
Just throwing it out there: this is Custodial, costuming, main gate, merchandise, attractions, parking, candy makers, (Teamsters, SEIU, Local 50)
Company wanted to give them a five-year contract and then a four year and they consisted that they would only accept a three-year contract
The company also wanted a percent per year as we’re getting, but they insisted that they get a dollar amount so that there was an actual race they could put to it everybody getting the same
Enough back and forth. Let’s solve the problem and move forward.
Here’s a fair and realistic solution:
• April 1, 2026 → $29.00/hr (upfront no games)
• April 1, 2027 → $30.16/hr
• April 1, 2028 → $31.37/hr
• April 1, 2029 → $32.62/hr
With:
• Retroactive pay to April 1
• 4% raises every year
• 3 year contract!
That gives members:
• Real money now — not delayed promises
• Predictable raises that help keep up with inflation
• Stability for both members and the company
• A clear path forward without dragging negotiations out even longer
At some point, both sides have to stop talking in circles and get a fair deal done.
This solution is balanced, respectful, and achievable.
If reducing or removing certain premiums helps finalize a stronger overall agreement for the majority of the membership, then that conversation should happen respectfully and professionally.
The priority should be securing meaningful base pay improvements that benefit the entire group.
Let’s close the deal, take care of the membership, and move forward together.
I was saying on first contract until the 2nd they took it and put it on the base rate went from 3% to 4%.. and our longevity went from $1.50 to what ever it was to .35 cents.. then on the 3rd contract to front load the base rate they took from hotel ane park premium that how I see it..but i can be wrong they moving the same money around to to get the base rate to where everyone it and takin away from the rest..
Whether or not we vote yes or vote no on this contract, I think most All of us are UNIFIED by this.
WE DESERVE MORE. WE DESERVE BETTER.
So how does one quit this union but keep their job with Disney. I believe you still pay some kind of dues but no union representation. Jonathan can you advise on this?
Jonathan James Mares-nieves
I cannot. Per the bylaws. I’m so sorry I cannot give you this. (THIS IS A LIE)
Thanks for the clarification, Jonathan. This cements my no vote. The company wants to scare us, but this fight is not over. At the very least, I believe keeping us in a three-year contract with $28 as our new starting rate and a 4% annual raise, longevity pay matching master services, giving screeners premium or hazard pay, and not allowing the company to bait us by changing the verbiage is attainable.
I feel that International speaks a big game to us and then are very weak when it comes to dealing with other with actual authority (Disney). Just my 2 cents.
Can we PLEASE get the REAL REASON why Johnathan was suspended, we the membership have the right to know
I heard it was because he directed people to call the international and posted a phone number. Apparently it’s against the fine print to do so. So he got suspended. Again this is what I heard I cannot determine if what was shared was factual.
So again he posted a phone number that’s accessible to all members but it’s not allowed due to a clause.
This is interesting because if “the employer and union come to a collective bargaining agreement” we’re STUCK with them for THREE MORE YEARS! Not by November or whatever the hearsay is going around. This is why I believe the union wanted back to the table and disney allowed it. They know we are unhappy with the them and if they can get us to ratify the contract good luck decertifying this union for three more years and them collecting our money. I move that we have a petition to see if we can obtain 30% of security cast to decertify the union. Then we can approach the NLRB for a decertification vote or replacement of the union.
Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976: allowance is made for “fair use” for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
"The views and opinions expressed here are solely my own and do not represent those of my employer, any organization I am affiliated with, or any other individual."
"The contents of this site reflect the personal views of the author and are not intended to reflect the positions or beliefs of any labor organization, nor an endorsement by any labor organization should be inferred."
© 2026 by The Washington DC / NYC PSO's Eyes on SPFPA Watchdog Committee. An Independent Organization seeking Justice & Accountability.