Local 1's statement -- are they serious? — Page 2

> They need to stop whining and do what is best for the entire industry.

Do what's best for the industry? i.e. accept unilaterally imposed cuts and new working conditions from the producers, who, when they couldn't get the deal they wanted, petulantly walked away from the table and told us "hey, forget the negotiating thing, these are the new rules. You're going to follow THESE rules now."

And then when Equity's contract comes up, maybe they can impose a 9th performance in a week for no additional pay. Or maybe impose that they can film a performance for their own profit on DVD or MTV and not pay the actors anything. And then when 802's contract comes up, they can impose that all shows will use two synths, only, and no live instruments whatsoever, and while you're at it, record the cast recording for free, ok? And you ticket buyers, I guarantee you, ticket prices are going to continue to rise, not decline.

"Sorry, but I trust the union over safety issues more than I trust a producer who is trying to save a buck".

That sounds like it comes directly from the stagehands' propaganda. The fact of the matter is that producers have to pay worker's comp, and they are the ones who face litigation if someone gets hurt.
Every show I've ever worked, the producers know that paying a little bit more now is always better than paying potentially millions of dollars later should an accident occur.

You're spinning it. The reality is that Producers have no qualms with hiring four people to move a piano if that is what it takes. What they object to is having to pay those four people for four hours of work when it only took them a few minutes to move it. As a result, many stagehands add about $50,000 a year on top of their whopping salaries just from moving pianos or mopping floors.

If I'm called in to move a piano and there is no other work to perform do you think I should get paid by the minute. Please give me at least $4 so I can pay for the subway.

---

Hi Mooo, I just read your response and want to thank you for that heartfelt statement. You articulated your statement well. I wish that the two sides weren't so contentious, then real negotiations would happen.

Because of the way you've stated your case, the solutions seem so clear to me. I wonder why they're not clear for everyone else.

1) "Everyone should know that the producers and their production people set the crew minimums for the load-in not Local 1. What they want is to be able to lay guys off without notice. They want guys to commit their time and turn down other work to do their load-in then be able to tell them to not come in tomorrow because they got more done today than they expected. Actors sign contracts that guarantee their pay but we don't have that luxury."

The solution here seems to be that production people should be able to set crew minimums for the load-in according to what they feel will be needed (what the producers want) and that Local One members be able to get compensated fairly for their work (what the union wants). The production should be able to say, "we'll need 10 electrics and 10 carps the first two weeks and only 8 carps the third week. For this flexibility, the producers should have to pay more per hour than they currently do now (that would address your main issue in the post, which is that the hourly wage is too low in your estimation), and if they find in that third week that they miscalculated and need more people or they need people to work overtime, then overtime pay should hurt the producers as much as possible. Possibly triple salary. Producers should also be penalized for dropping and then re-hiring union workers, like SAG currently has in their contracts.

2) "Local one is trying to hold on to jobs that have existed for decades. Just because a piece of scenery is automated that doesn't mean you don't need anyone to run it and ensure its safe movement".

I never said that you don't people to run it and make sure things are safe just because things are automated. But could you please explain to me why producers should be required to hire three light board ops when one will do (I've run light boards for plenty of shows)?

3) "The author of this post is incredibly uninformed and should get a history lesson on Local 1's support for AEA"

I'd love a history lesson. Please explain to me why IATSE members don't refuse to work on non-union tours.

Thanks again for the dialogue. Hopefully we can create something through these boards--the establishment of true common ground--that doesn't yet exist.

Thank you Bobby, I agree. I would also love to hear a history of IATSE's ongoing support of AEA- heck, even a few examples would be nice.

And a note on the listing of all the things that could happen to other unions, proposed by bugmenot as well as moo...

First off, there are contracts that already exist which wouldn't allow for such things. And even if the producers were to jump in and say "It's now a 9-show week," or "We're taping this for MTV and you get nothing extra," there would be compensation and it would be illegal to air something on television without the person's written consent. This is where I feel unions made a big difference in the early part of the century, but the employment laws now in place, override many of the fights the unions now think they face.

Additionally, comparing streamlining a crew to 2 people from 4 to do a job they can reasonably and safely do, and cutting chorus parts from a show is like apples and oranges. One is an artistic choice and one is a choice of true necessity. No one has answered the question: why should people be paid for work that is not necessary? I know you can say that you know better what is necessary and what is not, but truly, are producers who are liable for everything that happens in the theater (and thus are taking a far larger risk than anyone) truly going to allow something unsafe to be going on? I am the first one to say that yes, producers are not always concerned with the art first and will gladly have an orchestra on tape if need be, which is why I wholeheartedly supported the musician's strike a few years ago, but this time, it's not about a producer challenging something artistic, it's a producer challenging dollars and cents...which is something they do know about.

"One is an artistic choice and one is a choice of true necessity. "

Yes but producers only care about bottom line... "it's a business"

---

"I never said that you don't people to run it and make sure things are safe just because things are automated. But could you please explain to me why producers should be required to hire three light board ops when one will do (I've run light boards for plenty of shows)? "

THE ARENT!!!!! We gave this up years ago!!!

This is just more propaganda from the league.

i have personally run a lightboard, projection board, and sound cues, by myself! on a local one payrll!! in a bway, local one house!!!

anyone saying that this is still an issue is lying!!!!!

Why bring good sense into the discussion?

---

"You might want to take a closer read, paying particular attention to the dates some people joined this board, and then to their rhetoric. There are indeed League shills about."

Not talking about shills, and I have been paying attention. I don't post blithely - and I'd guess that none of my questions will be answered, which is how it usually works, and, you know, I understand that. I'm talking about at least two or three local one members who have come out and said they are local one members, who post here constantly the local one line, and have been since this whole thing began - and I have yet to find anyone from the league who has said they're from the league, doing the same. I just see a lot of the usual suspects here making with the posts.

You know what? BK's right, this is getting tedious. This won't be settled here and I've got some precious free time that is better spent doing anything else than sitting in front of a computer. Talk among yourselves because I'm outta here.

Mooo, you're misunderstanding me - I didn't accuse you of shilling - you will not find that in any of my posts. Someone else said there was shilling going on by the League, and I responded by saying I wasn't talking about shilling at all - but that several Local One members had identified themselves and were stating THEIR position in every thread that has been started here, and that as far as I could tell not one League person had so identified him/herself to do the same.

And of course it's not going to be settled here, and of course the simple questions I asked in my post will remain unanswered - it is the way these things work.

as for my posting, you will see that it only occurs when either:

there are no scheduled for that time or i just got home from picketing.

the producer shills will never identify themselves as working for the producers. it would ruin what they are trying to accomplish.
i am a stagehand on bway and am happy to identify myself as such.

C'mon all you producer people who joined this board after 10/07.

IDENTIFY YOURSELVES!!

be honest!!

dont be afraid to say who you are, what you represent, and your opinions!

why the secrecy?

what is it that you are trying to hide?

you people must know that they are here! why wont they admit it?

think about it.

BwayJerry - It sounds like your problem is with your own union. I'm happy with mine and happen to think they are doing exacty what is called for here to keep the producers from watering down our business so they can make a little more cash.

---