actor vs stagehand

[localonedude]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 9:17pm

If you take your basic stagehand working 8 shows a week and you take your basic ensemble actor working the same 8 shows. Guess what the actor makes more. The only difference is the actors are contracted to do rehearsals for free. The stage hand gets paid for rehersals .But per week the actor makes more

[Testing1232]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 11:10pm

And your point is...

?

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 11/24/07 at 11:31pm

They don't rehearse for free, they are contracted to 8 hrs a week for rehearsals.
Now do the math again and add in the hour before for the stagehands.
and another 4 hr call usually on Wed, mornings.

[MaronaDavies]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 12:48am

Actors might have things in their contract that the stagehands don't, and vice versa. So? Why does it have to be a 'vs' situation anyway? Different departments have different talents, contracts and responsibilities on the show. Without any one of them, the show doesn't happen, and that's what is important.

[roadmixer]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 1:16am

Thanks Marona - Let's stop this thread right now...! I would never want to trade places with a performer even if they were paid more. What they do and have to deal with in this business is probably not fairly compensated. You couldn't pay me enough to deal with the audition process alone!

Let's thank them again for supporting the stagehands and support them when they need us and leave it at that.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 1:17am

yup.

[StageFan2]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 8:21am

Just a couple of thoughts from an ignorant bystander.

Correct me if I'm wrong please. They're not making more than you are right now, because you're striking and these people are supporting your Local, along with hundreds of other theater employees, some of whom are not being paid from a strike fund.

Last I read, it was the Union wants vs. the League wants; not stagehands vs. actors. Get a grip please. <-(polite sarcasm)

I don't mean to get in the middle of something I know little about; but as a former Union member, (ours was broken by management and bad representation), this thread struck me all wrong. I've been on both sides of Labor vs. Management disputes. It's not easy for anyone which is why I haven't commented much, but instead have remained neutral. Well, that and the fact that I won't comment on something I have so little knowledge about, such a stagehand's responsibilities and producer's responsibilities. I just enjoy the shows and am grateful to everyone who contibutes to my theatrical experiences. The producers, the actors, the stagehands, and the people manning the concessions. Everyone has value and should be respected for his/her respective skills and/or specialities. I wish everyone; on both sides, the best of luck in reaching a fair and respectable settlement.

[jordangirl]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 8:24am

I'd also add when they're all marching around holding venti Starbucks drinks, they can't be hurting for money that badly.

And yes, I saw that on 45th street the other night. Maybe one guy didn't have one.

[Mooo]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 8:37am

"I'd also add when they're all marching around holding venti Starbucks drinks, they can't be hurting for money that badly.

And yes, I saw that on 45th street the other night. Maybe one guy didn't have one."

You saw someone in NYC drinking a large Starbuck's coffee. Burn them at the stake. How dare they eat and drink. They should be cold and starving. Give us more info about these men and we'll try to get to the bottom of it. I thought I saw another guy going into a bathroom the other day too which you can rest assured we are investigating fully.
Give me a F&*%$#@G break!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jordangirl]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 8:52am

I saw all but about one person on the picket lines drinking them. I'm just saying they're not cheap...so don't go whining about money if you can afford Starbucks.

And yes, I'd say the same if it had been Dunkin Donuts coffee or McDonalds food or anything. Bring your own coffee in a thermos if money is LEGITIMATELY a problem.

Updated On: 11/25/07 at 08:52 AM

[thetheatrekook]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 9:29am

but, jordangirl, how do you know that THEY bought them? ANYONE could have bought them the drinks.

And incidentally, when I walked by about 4 or 5 picket lines yesterday morning, the most these guys had were bottles of water and oranges. Oh, and one line had a bag of Doritos. That's it.

[shesamarshmallow]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 9:41am

And besides, who are you to tell people how to spend their money? People can use it on whatever they want, regardless of how much they're making.

[Bwayfan4]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 9:42am

Seriously, what is the point of this thread?

[bardolator]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 11:09am

I'm guessing that most stagehand work ends when you walk out the door at the end of the day.

Actors in musicals (for example) warm up and exercise their voices at home, take (and pay for) voice lessons, memorize scripts and script changes, and so forth. Many of those who have very physically demanding roles also work with trainers--usually on their own time.

It's not an exact correlation, but in my view actors (and musicians) are akin to teachers who spend many hours preparing for (and later evaluating) a "performance" (classroom time). That public "performance" is just the visible tip of a much larger time-and-effort iceberg that is necessary but often invisible. A friend of mine who used to be a teacher quit a year and a half ago to work for the government. She never takes work home (can't, for security reasons) and gets paid for every minute of overtime she works. (And--and this is off-topic, but I'm saying it anyway to forestall comments on this aspect, which would really take this thread off-topic--she says she doesn't miss the time off in the summer because she never gets tired enough to "need" it). It's true that those of us in teaching--or acting, or other professions that require a great deal off "off the clock, unpaid" work--did know that it would be required of us before we "signed on"; I'm not intending this post as a "poor me" complaint. I'm also not denigrating stagehands and their contributions, just responding to your complaint about the pay differential as you see it.

And why the heck is this thread called "actor vs stagehand"? Is there some kind of war going on somewhere that hasn't been advertised? Last time I checked, they both wanted to get back to work.
Updated On: 11/25/07 at 11:09 AM

[leko2]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 12:05pm

bardolator: "Stagehand work" doesn't end when you walk out the door. Stagehands have cue sheets which they study and update outside of the theater. They take (and pay for) certification and training classes. They also have physically demanding jobs and if they feel like working out, they have to do it on their own time as well.

and again, this post was created by someone who hasn't been around for more than a day. so i think everyone should take it's validity lightly.

[roadmixer]

Posted: 11/25/07 at 12:06pm

Please STOP THE INSANITY-

Did nobody read my post earlier? Actors should be given a gold medal for their work. They aren't paid enough and yes, stagehands ARE paid quite well. Let's thank the actors for supporting the stagehands and stop all of the silly comparisons. We can only survive this with solidarity not divisiveness.