Understaffing at Cedar Point hits nightmarish levels...

XS NightClub said:

Also, I notice that CP has disabled the facebook reviews and star rating section on their page.

I did find this link from CP's Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/whoitis77/posts/1920925994586418?hc_location=ufi

Lots of other fed-up people, too.

Nothing has changed since the disaster known as last year's Halloweekends.

I agree with her to an extent. $72 for half of the rides operating really is not fair. I understand that. I just wish I could stress to people like that to visit Guest Services to see what they can do for you. I really thought opening day was going to be staffed with more employees this year than years past.

I’m not looking. Did those FB comments tell Cedar Fair that their park was starting to look and act like Six Flags?
And, if so, are we sure that enthusiasts aren’t making at least some of those comments? They’re everywhere, you know.
Once again, to be clear, I’m not trying to say that those who were disappointed have no right to be. If it had been me I’d be hopping mad. I was merely wondering why you should necessarily equate this kind of failure with Six Flags and particularly why the general paying public would make that connection.

CP Maverick said:

The bigger problem is lack of applicants. The few that do apply, probably don't want to work 60 hours a week.

They actually get far more applicants than you'd believe. Far more than the positions they have available. The issue, believe it or not, is many applicants are not even good enough for the simplest positions the park offers and are not hired. I've seen a my fair share of applications over the years and every hiring manager has their never ending stories of unbelievably bad candidates. When I started working there, I always heard that as long as you had a pulse you could get hired at Cedar Point. I came to learn that was not true.

Another issue that's always been around are the "no shows" when it's time to process in. Many get hired in February/March and then when they're supposed to report in May, they just don't bother showing up. Presumably they've changed their mind, found a better opportunity, etc. And of course they don't bother telling the park anything. No shows are nothing new and something the hiring managers deal with year after year and even plan for it. However, I've heard this year in particular was the worst it's ever been.

Staffing isn't just an issue now, it's been an issue for a long time. I'm a bit worried that the lack of serious effort to solve the issue over the years will lead to a too little too late scenario. I sincerely hope I'm wrong. But I never would have guessed we'd have a situation where rides open and close for parts of the day aligned with the shift change. Maybe that'll be the new norm. Limited ride availability on weekdays and/or parts of the day. I don't know.

I liked the idea a page or two back of being completely upfront and honest about what rides will/will not be open during the first one or two weekends on their website and everything - just like they do for Fridays in October. Under-promise, and if some extra rides happen to be available that they didn’t think would be, then great. It won’t help 100%, but give people as much warning as possible.

Kings Island posts limited or delayed availability certain days/evenings. It’s usually in the spring and the fall when school is in session. They try to have the majors running and closed rides include most of the flats. It’s also common to see several food stands closed as well. The also post that all rides and attractions should be available eventually, and my experience says that usually hits around the 4-5 pm range.
The situation may be different and more acceptable when it’s a park that relys on high schoolers for the staff.

Mr. Potato said:

Staffing isn't just an issue now, it's been an issue for a long time. I'm a bit worried that the lack of serious effort to solve the issue over the years will lead to a too little too late scenario. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.

Interesting post and all of your comments make sense. On the above though, I'm inclined to give management a bit of a free pass as none of us are in meetings when this is discussed. I'm willing to bet that a lot of effort was put into trying to find a solution, it is just a daunting task I'm sure. I know someone who works for the State of Ohio in Columbus and he is constantly complaining that he can't find staff and the younger staff they do have seems unmotivated and not smart about a lot of things. I have to give the seasonal staff at CP that are working at the park a lot of credit. They do seem smart and hard working for the most part, probably the cream of the crop of what is out there. If people you hire in February/March just don't show up, well you're just screwed. What can you do? You can't repeat the hiring process from months ago in a matter of days. They are trying things like increasing pay a bit and allowing tattoos, but I wouldn't know what else to do. I'm glad I'm in IT and not a CP manager, what a headache.

To quantify things a bit...

Cedar Point hires 5,000 people for the season. Assuming 17 weeks, and 50 hours per employee per week (resulting in 55 paid hours accounting for overtime)... They're looking at 4.675 million man-hours per season (17 x 55 x 5,000).

So, every dollar increase in the average wage means an additional $4,675,000 of wage cost (assuming my math is correct... and it may not be... I'm running on fumes today).

Cedar Fair's total net income for 2017 was $178 million. So, every dollar increase means a net income reduction of about 2.6%. And keep in mind that's for the entirety of Cedar Fair, so it would be even worse looking at the effect on just CP.

And this is conservative, looking only at wages. Total employee cost is significantly higher than the wage alone.

2.6% decrease in net wages seems like a no-brainer to me, especially if it means creating a more robust brand and increased loyalty and allegiance. Am I to believe that a billion+ dollar corporation prioritizes $4.6 million over guest experience?

I wonder if CP ran a few free buses per day to Toledo to pick up and return employees to the city would help. As of November, they had a higher unemployment rate than many other cities in Ohio.

Urumqi said:

2.6% decrease in net wages seems like a no-brainer to me, especially if it means creating a more robust brand and increased loyalty and allegiance. Am I to believe that a billion+ dollar corporation prioritizes $4.6 million over guest experience?

That decrease would, in some years, completely erase any YOY net income increase, which is not a minor deal to unit holders.

And it's easy to say that the product would be better as a result of the investment (especially for us, who have no access to the relevant data), but can that product "betterment" be quantified in dollar value? And if so, does it meet or exceed the investment?

I'm not arguing against a wage increase. I'm just playing devil's advocate - it's easy to spend someone else's $5 million.

Maybe a little off topic, but . . . I think that it would also help if the employees they did hire really wanted to work. I'm lucky enough that I've never really had to deal with any sort of understaffing that affected my visits. I've learned what days and times to avoid over the years, and for me it's been a non-issue. I've encountered thousands of great, happy, helpful employees over the years. But, there is also a large number of employees who want the paycheck without the job. There were several at food locations that kept their head down, mumbled, walked as if there were bricks tied to their feet. Last year, there were a couple of ride hosts on Tiki Twirl who were the same way. I swear he only took ten steps a minute. The amount of time it was taking between cycles was ridiculous. It's as if we're wasting their time.

As a teenager, I remember wanting to put my best foot forward and be great at what I did. I wonder if that spirit is dwindling?

We make 30 or more trips during the season. I've often joked to my family that I should always check in with someone and see if they need a volunteer here or there for a couple of hours. I'd be more that willing to help out.

If the corporation is concerned about 2.6%, I'm happy that I decided not to invest. Let me know when the corporation begins showing 10+% yoy growth so I can reevaluate my position. Reading these justifications is like watching the automotive apologist in Detroit bitch and complain about alleged bias against Midwest corporations when their stock values never increase. Allowing bean counters to squabble over 2.6% will always result in a stagnant and uncreative culture.

Referring to a post 10 posts back about ride availability,CP used to post on the website 'today in the park' about what rides are 'down'. Could be as long as 10 years ago on their site.

djDaemon said:

Cedar Fair's total net income for 2017 was $178 million. So, every dollar increase means a net income reduction of about 2.6%.

Not necessarily. You are assuming that there is no return on that investment of higher wages (which translates into more employees). More food stands open, higher per-cap spending, and a better guest experience could all theoretically erase part of the higher wage expense. There's no way for any of us to quantify that obviously, but to say it would only drive costs up without affecting the revenue side is not correct IMO.

MaverickLaunch, it is also not correct in my opinion. Simply looking at expenditures without calculating increased benefits (even assumed benefits), is foolish.

My thing about the applicants not being qualified enough...everybody has the potential to be trainable. If you train them, shadow them, and watch them, they will do the job you have trained them to do. Is this always the case? No. Are there still those select few that think they’re too good to perform a certain task? Absolutely. But not hiring someone because they are “not good enough” is absurd.

MaverickLaunch said:
Not necessarily. You are assuming that there is no return on that investment of higher wages (which translates into more employees).

I should have been more clear that I was simply quantifying the "solution," in a vacuum so to speak. Yes there would potentially be some ROI.

But that's the thing - how much more per cap spending does $1/hour create? That's really difficult to answer, since we have absolutely no data. But it's not unreasonable to assume the park does have enough data to infer that the ROI isn't justified, or else they would have already done it. After all, if it were that easy to increase revenue, why wouldn't they have done it already?

Like I said, it's easy to spend $5 million when it isn't yours.

Urumqi said:

Let me know when the corporation begins showing 10+% yoy growth so I can reevaluate my position.

This irrational expectation is arguably toxic and counterproductive. It's also likely a major reason places like Fridays sell microwaved crap. If their only goal was to operate a moderately-profitable restaurant chain, rather than satiate irrational growth expectations, they wouldn't have to cut costs by doing "any means necessary" things like microwaving chicken.