Local 1's statement -- are they serious?

[BroadwayBen]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 1:55pm

I just read it. Are they serious? Revenue from "Film Sales"? How many shows have been made into movies recently? 3, 4? Everyone knows that B'way doesn't make a lot of money from films. Secret merchandise revenue? C'mon. I don't think they're recouping $12 million musicals from T-shirts. I'm sure CAROLINE, OR CHANGE didn't. I thought they would have better arguments than "those rich people are lying!" Don't they know class warfare is dead? I'll bet many a stagehand has a second home. At $150,000 a year, they have a lot. I just don't have a lot of sympathy...Everyone knows most shows lose money, and that the unions have a stranglehold, and like the auto companies 20 years ago, it has to stop so we can stop the ticket price inflation and have a thriving Broadway 10 years from now. Go ahead flame away. By the way, I'm a school teacher, in a union, and I don't have what these guys have.

[bially0822]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 2:07pm

in NYC 150,000 is practically survival salary for a family

[BroadwayBen]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 2:21pm

I'm SURE it's more than teachers make. Probably police and firemen too...

[JustAGuy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 2:26pm

"I'm SURE it's more than teachers make. Probably police and firemen too..."

All of which have the option of looking for more lucrative employment, if they are dissatisfied with their current income.

[Ed_Mottershead]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 2:27pm

Sad comment on the state of affairs, isn't it?

[umgeoboy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 2:33pm

Actually a lot of teachers in NY make ~100K a year.

Posted: 11/11/07 at 2:35pm

and over 10 weeks' vacation.

[umgeoboy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 2:41pm

That's irrelevant when 100k a year is middle class!

[JustAGuy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 2:42pm

"Actually a lot of teachers in NY make ~100K a year."

According to Payscale.com the median salary for a NYC High School teacher is about 52,000, for an Elementary and Middle School Teacher 50,000.

Updated On: 11/11/07 at 02:42 PM

[One NYC StageHand]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 3:02pm

As a union member you should recognize that all that you read in the paper might be news but not the truth.
As for you statement that class warfare is dead, I would suggest that this is a point of view of someone would is engaged in a defensive position. Are you better off than your parents were? Is your salary going further? Do you have, say, six months of living expenses in savings? Are the politicians and ideologues telling you what to teach? Do you find the mass media stimulating? The NEA's budget was cut by 40%. Is art easier for children to reach and experience?
Did the American automakers, in moving their operations overseas, lower the cost of their vehicles? If the League gets a 38% reduction in their labor costs, do you really think they will lower ticket prices? If you read their earlier press releases you will find that the driving motivation behind their position is to return investors money sooner. Does this sound to you like they want to reduce ticket prices? When the Producers forced the musicians to strike over the size of the orchestra and artificial music, were they talking about lowering ticket prices? No. They were talking about recouping investors’ money sooner.
As far as a thriving Broadway, in 1986 the BO grosses ranged in the vicinity of $426,236,764. In ten years grosses grew to $1,198,400,658, more than double. Last year the grosses were $1,393,491,253.Those big numbers that were not achieved by lowering ticket prices. And I can guarantee you that the salaries of the actors, musicians, stagehands, ushers or BO personnel did not go up in the same proportion.
Shows lose money because they are not very good. We can’t help that it’s the nature of the business. The straw man argument is that 4 out of 5 shows lose money, ergo it’s the stagehands fault. I know of no show that got bad reviews and closed because of the set, lighting or props. The saying backstage is that if the audience is looking at the lighting, your show in trouble.
As far as what the stagehands have compared to what you have, the vast majority of us don't make what you have. We live from job to job, event to event. That's the nature of the business and we knew this from day one. The fact that teachers are so underpaid is a stinging confirmation that class warfare is indeed going on in this country. We entrust our children, the future, in your hands. They deserve the best as well as those who teach them.

[Rymes_With_Witch]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 3:03pm

$150,000 is more than a lot of Broadway actors make...unless they're big names.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 3:33pm

Hey Just A Guy

The same thing applies to Local 1 members. If things are so bad for them, maybe they should look elsewhere for employment. I am quite sure many out of work, with proper training, would take the jobs Local 1 seems to hate & would be ecstatic.

[bardolator]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 3:57pm

Just wanted to comment on these remarks regarding teachers:

"Do you have, say, six months of living expenses in savings?"
Nope.

"Are the politicians and ideologues telling you what to teach?"
Yep. And, to some extent, how to teach it.

"The fact that teachers are so underpaid is a stinging confirmation that class warfare is indeed going on in this country. We entrust our children, the future, in your hands. They deserve the best as well as those who teach them."
Thank you! Yes, I knew coming into this field that I would be underpaid. I did it anyway because I love kids, I love literature, and I love to help others learn to understand what I love. What I DIDN'T sign on for is the kind of disrespect I've begun seeing all of us experience recently. A colleague was actually told several years ago by a parent whose child was being defiant in class, "Well, why should he listen to you? You only make 35k a year!" A lawyer told another teacher friend "I'm tired of hearing that word thrown around: 'profession.' Teaching isn't a profession."

And, frankly, that's what bothers me about the proposed new work rules from the League. I'm not arguing whether the stagehands are or are not overpaid. But they (and all of us) should be treated with respect...and should not expect their salary to be CUT without something else being offered as compensation (again, I could be wrong, but my understanding is that Local One were willing to continue under the old contract. I haven't seen any other evidence to the contrary).

Here's hoping both sides come back to the table, and soon, because the people being hurt the most by the strike right now are the ones who have no bargaining chips in all of this (actors, musicians, other theatre employees, for example)--plus the public are starting to lump all Broadway entities together.

[Mr. Tuttle]

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

$500 to mop the stage?

Well, that certainly sounds like a fair wage.

And that's on top of their hourly wage.

Teachers make more than that in one day.

Go Union!!!

[JustAGuy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:05pm

"Hey Just A Guy

The same thing applies to Local 1 members. If things are so bad for them, maybe they should look elsewhere for employment. I am quite sure many out of work, with proper training, would take the jobs Local 1 seems to hate & would be ecstatic."

Hey Roxy,

You're sort of twisting words here a bit aren't you? I don't think I ever said, nor do I recall hearing or reading any Local 1 member saying they hate their job. But, it's nice that you're trying to put words in their mouths. Since when does striking mean, you hate your job?

Now would be the perfect opportunity for the League to bring in all those out of work untrained people that your speaking of. Of course who's gonna train them to do the job? You wouldn't expect Local One to do that would you? Maybe one of the Producers can. I'd pay money to see one up in the grid setting a spot line or rigging a 3 ton truss. Fun Times!!!

Updated On: 11/11/07 at 04:05 PM

[billynj]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:14pm

if you don't like the job quit

the same with the old overweight cocktail waitresses its a job not a career if you want a career go to school and get a sheepskin

its not your right to get a raise year after year, no more than the old llady serving drinks should be looking for tips in a casino 23 years past her prime. leave some good jobs for the kids if you dont like your pay rate RETIRE

blood sucking union leaches

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:15pm

Well, there's the silver lining to this whole thing! It's not only brought us all of these new BWWers, but brought people back from the message board grave!

[Calvin]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:24pm

Christ, did I accidentally log on to FreeRepublic?

[BwayJerry]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:43pm

JustAGuy, you continually contradict yourself. In one breath you said that if someone wants more lucrative employment, they should go get it. Well, why would they need to go get more lucraive employment if they could just dictate to their bosses what their pay would be?

Please remember this isn't about pay cuts, it's about unnecessary pay for unnecessary labor.

You then say you'd pay money to see the producers up in the grid setting a spotlight. Well, I would personally like to see you get cash out of someone for an investment that you have 80% surety will fail? No one is claiming they can do your job better than you, but trying to pull the wool over someone's eyes and telling them that A)producers in general have 3 or 4 houses, B)that stagehands are currently horribly underpaid and treated unfairly, C)that stagehands care a lick for anyone but themselves and their wallets is ludicrous and downright whiny.

I just don't buy it. And who was it that said $150K is "survival salary" for a family in NYC? $150K is an extraordinarily good living. Imagine what happens when OMG BOTH PARENTS ACTUALLY WORK??? You might even double that, then you can afford groceries AND cable.
Updated On: 11/11/07 at 04:43 PM

[shesamarshmallow]

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

It's also a matter of the jobs the stagehands fulfill are both highly skilled and highly dangerous. That's a combination that leads to a big salary. If you have a problem with that, become a stagehand.

[Yawper]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:49pm

I think this country's headed for a class war.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 4:51pm

A class war has been going on for years already.

[Yawper]

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

well, yeah, I realize, but I think the ****'s really gonna hit the fan unless things start changing soon.

[Bobby Maler]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:00pm

"But they (and all of us) should be treated with respect...and should not expect their salary to be CUT without something else being offered as compensation"

That is just plain wrong. I'm sorry, no offense, people, but please do your part and educate yourselves on this issue. Nobody is cutting salaries; Wages is not what this debate is about. The producers are simply looking to pay people for the work they do and not have to pay extra people to sit around and do nothing. If you were a business owner, would you tolerate paying an employee to sit around and do nothing? Currently, if producers need carpenters for 10 weeks, they have to hire electrics and props for 10 weeks as well, regardless of whether there is work for them to do. If they need electrics to work overtime, everyone has to get paid overtime as well. IATSE's final proposal included mandates that producers hire a Fly Person at every show, regardless of whether a show had scenery that needed to be flown in. Does that seem fair to you?

I am an Equity actor, and I urge all my union brothers and sisters NOT to support IATSE in this selfish tirades. They are ruining the credibility of unions for everyone. IATSE has never bothered to support Equity in their fight. If IATSE members had refused to work on non-union tours, there would now be more union tours and more Equity members working.

The producers seem to respect their skilled labor and unions in general. They recognize that Broadway unions are among the most skilled and talented labor in the world. $150,000 is on the low end of what stagehands make. The median is more like $200,000. I WISH I could make that much as an actor! They need to stop whining and do what is best for the entire industry.

[JustAGuy]

Posted: 11/11/07 at 5:28pm

"JustAGuy, you continually contradict yourself. In one breath you said that if someone wants more lucrative employment, they should go get it. Well, why would they need to go get more lucraive employment if they could just dictate to their bosses what their pay would be?"

I see no contradiction in saying that if someone is dissatisfied with their job that perhaps they should look elsewhere. I'd say that to the stagehands as well. As far as I can tell, no Local One member is saying that they are dissatisfied with their job. And the unions hardly dictate to the producers what they're wages should be, they are negotiated, and when they go back to the bargaining table they will continue to negotiate, that's a big difference from dictating the terms.

"Please remember this isn't about pay cuts, it's about unnecessary pay for unnecessary labor."

To be determined by who? Just because the producer says that something is unnecessary doesn't mean that it's true. Sorry, but I trust the union over safety issues more than I trust a producer who is trying to save a buck.

"You then say you'd pay money to see the producers up in the grid setting a spotlight. Well, I would personally like to see you get cash out of someone for an investment that you have 80% surety will fail? No one is claiming they can do your job better than you, but trying to pull the wool over some one's eyes and telling them that A)producers in general have 3 or 4 houses, B)that stagehands are currently horribly underpaid and treated unfairly, C)that stagehands care a lick for anyone but themselves and their wallets is ludicrous and downright whiny."

I've never said A,B,or C and if you can find where I have, I'd love you to point it out to me.

And I think it's also a bit disingenuous of the Producers to be collecting a "strike fund" from the ticket buyers and calling it a service charge, without tell the buyer what the service charge is really for, or giving them the option of not contributing to their "strike fund". But hey, that's just me. I'm sure everyone who's complaining about the price of tickets doesn't have a problem with it. Let alone the trust issue involved, of bilking money out the unsuspecting ticket buyer. And people wonder why producers aren't trusted.

Updated On: 11/11/07 at 05:28 PM