How Long Might The Strike Last?- Page 2

[JustAGuy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 3:48pm

"Please give contact info for Local 1 as they are the ones who walked out."

Knock yourself out Roxy, here's where you can leave comments.

http://www.iatselocalone.org/feedback.html

[xalexx543x]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:03pm

Im going up on the 3rd!
It better not be going on then!

This is Broadway's busiest time of the year!

[ashbash1990]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:06pm

I too hope for a quick resolution, but I sense ticket prices will sky rocket soon... not good...

[xalexx543x]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:09pm

Because they are already Sky High!!

[musicalangel12]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:34pm

I know Bloomberg offered mediation during the talks. Does anybody think that if the strike goes on, more city officials may step in to end it?

[BroadwayBound86]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:35pm

I too hope for a quick resolution, but I sense ticket prices will sky rocket soon

Unfortunately I don't see an end in sight for the increase in ticket prices. Supply and demand. If people are willing to pay those sky high prices then so be it. Me, I'll stick to lottery, rush, and discount codes.

Although perhaps that should be the next wave to hit Broadway. And audience boycott to lower ticket prices....just a though.

[MaronaDavies]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:47pm

It's overly optimistic, but I'm wondering if they are doing the strike now to try to force a resolution by or soon after Thanksgiving. If the producers suffer major losses over Thanksgiving it might be an impetus to make sure the same thing doesn't happen over the Christmas holidays.

[BroadwayBound86]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:52pm

I would imagine even with the amount of people entering the city for Thanksgiving it would force them to continue talks. It could have been worse. I was expecting them to strike around Christmas / New Years. That would have had an even bigger blow. I guess only time will tell what happens on a day to day basis.

[whatever2]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:54pm

> Does anybody think that if the strike goes on, more city officials may step in to end it?

the laws governing organized labor are all Federal. except where the city is an *employer* and negotiating with a union representing its own employees, it has no authority to resolve a strike. it can make offers of assistance ... it can exert behind the scenes pressure ... but the city cannot "step in" to end a strike in the private sector.

[BroadwayBound86]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:57pm

How long does anyone think it will be before there's pressure put on both parties to settle this matter?

[maliatkb8]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:03pm

Some of the guys at Hairspray said it could last until Christmas, but obviously everyone wants it to be settled ASAP!

[MovieGuy1031]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:10pm

Though i'm holding out hope to hear of the strike's end by Thursday evening, I honestly don't see an end by this weekend.

I have a feeling i'm going to miss Cyrano and Mermaid... which were the two shows I was mainly going to the City for.

Luckily, I still get the other 4 shows in my sig, and maybe can scrounge up a ticket to Cymbeline, and all hope won't be lost.

[Bobby Maler]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:19pm

I think it will be at least a week, mebbe two. It's going to get ugly, and the Producers can't--they just can't--cave on this one. The future of Broadway depends on them standing strong. If IATSE gets their demands, plays on Broadway will be a thing of the past. To demand three lighting board ops when all you need these days is one? To demand having fly ops at every theatre even when the show doesn't have flying scenery?? They already get paid much more than actors, median salary is $200,000.

To express your frustration with IATSE for doing this to Broadway, please contact:

JAMES J. CLAFFEY JR.
Address:
320 W. 46TH STREET
NEW YORK, NY 10036
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Website: www.iatselocalone.org

[tazber]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:22pm

In all seriousness I can't see it lasting until christmas. But really, I have no idea what i'm talking about and and basing the totally my assmption that the producers simply can not afford to miss the tourist season.
And also there is the PR aspect. Bway does more than just sell out for most of the holiday months, it generates word of mouth that spurs ticket sales in the future. Just another consideration.

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:24pm

They already get paid much more than actors, median salary is $200,000.

... seriously?

[Bobby Maler]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:31pm

Yup. That includes benefits, but still. These are not the "middle class working man" they would have you believe. Also, some heads of departments, like Head Electricians, make 6 figure salaries but under their contract, can only work a maximum of 80 MINUTES a week. That's a little over an hour, people. It's ridiculous that they expect to be paid these ridiculous sums of money for NOT WORKING!
They are highly skilled labor and should get compensated well for their work, and I think everyone on Broadway respects their skills, but they need to be realistic and stop ruining it for everybody else, including their sister unions (who they have never supported--if they did, they would refuse to work on non-union tours).

[JustAGuy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:36pm

Bobby you continue to quote that $200,000 as the median salary for stagehands, without ever offering proof. Where's the proof? Because quite frankly I don't think any stagehand makes $4,000 a week.

[keen on kean]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:37pm

The union statement confuses the issue of revenue vs. profit. Broadway can make millions of dollars in ticket revenue, and still not repay the producers whose money makes these productions possible. Not only do producers rarely recoup their original investment; even those that do often have to wait nine months to a couple of years before they see recoupment and begin to make any profit. And the expenses of the show are paid from day one - so stagehands actually get a share in the revenue BEFORE producers do.

And the idea of entitlement - that employees have aright to share in a profitable enterprise is incredibly naive. If I work for a large Fortune 100 company, my salary doesn't go up if the company has a banner year. I get my 2 or 3% raise every 18 months, and I have no grievance. Stagehands are in the same position - if Broadway is thriving, you get more opportunities to work for longer periods, not a chance to share in the profits distributed to investors. Their money is at risk. Like it or not, the Broadway production model is a business model, and it operates the same way whether you are producing widgets or musicals.

[bugmenot]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:51pm

1) the $200k median salary thing is fiction. Please stop spreading it. It's not even fiction. It's a lie.

2) The current contract doesn't require a flyman on all shows. On many (most) plays, there are four employees: House carpenter, house propman, house electrican, and a sound operator. Period. I have worked on many plays where the house carpenter pulls the curtain. Four employees. Total. Period. End of story.

3) there has never been a demand for three lighting board ops. I don't know where you're getting this garbage.

[whatever2]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 6:00pm

> That includes benefits, but still.

one should immediately be suspicious whenever a salary is quoted "including benefits". who negotiates a salary "including benefits"? do the classified ads list salaries including "including benefits"?

i manage a small division of a big company. we have to budget a flat 30% for benefits -- it usually ends up costing less, but for budgeting, we include it. for us, and for most employers, that line includes things like our half of social security taxes, as well as unemployment taxes. i doubt anyone on this board considers their employer's 7.65% share of FICA a "benefit". (it is, trust me -- but who really thinks that way???)

moreover, in this case, the benefit amounts arent being used by management for budgeting; they're being used for propaganda. that phrase is a cynical attempt to inflate numbers and distort opinions.

pay no attention to that man behind the curtain ...

[Yawper]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 6:18pm

I sincerely hope one of the strikes going on now gets ugly enough to totally break the anti-labor attitude dominating this country right now. New York, home to Wall Street, is one of the centers of this attitude, as are DC and Texas.

There was a brief glimmer of hope after the last Congressional election, but Congress's subsequent behavior has snuffed that out, too.

Workers have to rise up and demand fairness. With all the offshoring going on the manufacturing industry can no longer lead the labor struggle. It's going to be up to those whose jobs are like the stagehands - required to be here and impossible to totally eliminate.

[nygrl23]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 6:20pm

Must be weird and difficult to be the ones setting the precedent for this kind of thing.

[MargoChanning]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 6:35pm

From the NY Times:

"Stagehands fall into four wage categories. The highest-paid, like head carpenters and electricians, currently earn a minimum of $1,600 a week on a running show; stagehands in the lowest-paid category make a minimum of around $1,225. With overtime, additional work assignments and certain premium payments, wages can end up being quite a bit higher."


I know those are minimums and some stagehands make more than those figures, but I'm sorry, even with overtime I can't see how those numbers would add up to anywhere near an average of $200,000/year. Heck, I know school teachers who make in the $1200-1600/week range. That's just a middle class income for NYC -- and that's only if you're working on a show for a full 52 week year which most wouldn't (only a small minority of stagehands, actors, musicians, et al are in the long-running hits and most are unemployed for many weeks of the year).

Not taking sides here, but PLEASE stop tossing around that $200,000 figure as if it's gospel, because obviously it's not.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/11/theater/11broadway.html?pagewanted=2&ref=nyregion

Updated On: 11/11/07 at 06:35 PM

[Mooo]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 6:37pm

Bobby Maler you are an incredibly ignorant person. I'm a local one stagehand and you are soooooooo far off on your median salary. You talk like you know something but it is obvious you don't know a darn thing about that which you speak. The median income for active Local one stagehands is probably more like $65,000. You need more than twice that to live a middle class lifestyle in NYC.

[Yawper]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 7:09pm

"Not taking sides here, but PLEASE stop tossing around that $200,000 figure as if it's gospel, because obviously it's not."

It's the same tactic used against the UAW - claims of line workers making $65-$75/hour or more when it was nowhere near that. The claims and comments being made are all the same anti-union bull**** used in previous strikes in other industries.