actors during strike — Page 3

Any actors being paid are being paid by reserves from the union (AEA), and not by the producers. And those won't last. Producers have told actors in at least three shows that they don't need to report to the theatres anymore until they recieve a call from the company managers. They don't want the actors there mingling with the stagehands or meeting would-be audience members. However, Equity has urged all members to show up at their regular call (30 minutes prior to curtain) and when no curtain goes up, they may leave. Also, it's a strike, not a lockout--so nobody is stuck outside. And what--are we children--we don't know how to care for ourselves as performers? Equity is not joining the stagehands officially. So if performers show up to work, the producers can't hold anything against Equity when it comes time to renegotiate those contracts.
Ninth Ave. was like a big reunion yesterday afternoon. People you know, but rarely see, because you're always working at the same times. Every place was full of people not performing shows, but hanging out until the evening call. Fun for a couple of days, but it'll be over soon.

Actually jbdc, you need to have an escort to enter the buildings - I think it's just a security/safety thing.

Here's my question -- if the Spring awakening cast sang because they wanted to (it was a hoot, too -- & several tourists went away saying their feel-good impromtu performance made them feel INFINITELY better about missing the show) -- IF They CHOSE to, that's their business. If they were ASKED to, isn't that crossing the picket line? I get the impression that the Grinch performers were REQUESTED to perform outside the theatre. Am I getting that wrong?

Thx.

Touch Me. Accompanies by Jon Gallagher on ukelele.

Sorry Orange but you do sound angry on alot of your posts and it makes me wonder why you even care since you seem to despise so many of the actors and/or their performances so often on this thread and others. I made the same "mistake" reading your rant as other posters did. As for what you just said, alittle harsh, to say the least. Btw, since so many people get so far bent out of shape when their "BFF in ANY show catches a chill" and then has to miss a show, maybe it should be something worth worrying about (actors having to stand out in the cold for however long this strike lasts). Then I'm sure it'll come to, "well, they haven't had to work in however long, why are they out now". It's always something and it generally winds up being the actors "fault".

Updated On: 11/11/07 at 12:43 PM

The actors are getting paid $15 a day...there is a CHANCE that IATSE will match that for the actors. Ooooh...a whole $30 a day.

Many actors are not in support of this strike. In fact, many are pissed off about having to go to the theatre, sign-in and wait around for 30 minutes, appearing to be in support of something they are not in support of.

They have to sign in to get the measly pennies they are getting for strike pay and many can't afford not to.

I think this is so ridiculous and so selfish of IATSE.

Not to mention, the propoganda they are handing out makes it sound as if every producer in New York is out today on their yacht in Palm Beach. Producers, even Broadway producers are NOT raking it in. Example: The Producing Office (Rent, Ave Q, Drowsy Chaperone), are dealing with a foreclosure and the loss of MILLIONS of dollars on 37 Arts.

Union Bullies, don't come back saying "we didn't tell them to buy property and build there" because that's not an argument. You are not taking risks and you are not being paid to take risks. You are being paid to show up to work, press a button and get paid for four hours...at least. Yes, some stagehands work their asses off and deserve to be paid for it, but one of the major sticking points in this negotiation is about "collective bargaining"

The union is insisting that they are agreeing that "Ok, you shouldn't have to pay more people for a job than is actually necessary, but what are you giving us in exchange for that loss?" That's bullsh** It's 2007, jobs are lost because of technology. Why should the producer of a show have to compensate for the loss of a job over technology? Like you all keep saying, producers are business people first. What kind of business owner is forced to hire people they don't need?

I'm just glad that the sentiment in the media and in the public is with the Producers on this one.

drama queens.

I have a friend who lives in Manhattan (just moved there) and he said he saw LBB signing TONS of autographs,as well as Patrick Page.

orangeskittles, i have never met grand, ruprecht or bree in my life *although I do appreciate the support*

If you look back at your posts, you can tell that you obviously have a personal vendetta against me that you can't seem to contain and regardless of whatever character traits you don't like that I possess, it seems that you are the one always attacking me and I am the one not rising to your level.

Just like people are judging you based on your "bitterness" from past posts, you are judging me and assuming things about my posts on this board. Nowhere on this thread did I mention being concerned for my "BFFs" at LB. Yes, I'm a fan of the show, but I never singled it out and why you think I would exclusively feel bad ifor the actors in a show I enjoy rather than all the actors that have to freeze is ridiculous.

And when the actors stand outside in the freezing cold for stage door, once again, it's because THEY chose to. That's the only point I was trying to make.

---

No, I agree on that issue as well and it sucks.

BUt this thread wasn't called "actors at stage door"

---

If you would notice, I only brought up Legally Blonde after I was attacked by BreeDaniels (and Grand Motel in agreement). You can't fault me for the obvious association.

Thank you, for acknowledging my problem is with your actions, not the actors, as I was wrongfully accused of. However, it only became about you personally when you tried to write off my "venomous" criticisms as nothing more than a personal vendetta. I would have reacted to anyone that was more worried about the actors than- I dunno- every.single.other.person. that was out on the streets of NYC yesterday. I respect them, but not to the extent that I believe their personal comfort should be a priority above all other people. They're big boys and girls. If they're cold, they can by a scarf from a street vendor- who set up at 8am, will be there until 9pm and probably make less of a profit than the actors will get in strike pay for their half-hour of "work".

---

Well, I did not attack you. And I promise that their "attacks" were not me sending out the troops on you :-P

And I was worried about others, but this was a thread about the actors and I was merely voicing an opinion. I have posted on other threads, expressing concern for the BC/EFA collection (which really bothers me because of the money for charity being lost) and the people missing out on theatre. I haven't really expressed any concern for the stagehands because, FROM WHAT I'VE read, I don't agree with their point. But I know that not all information is known to the public and it is definitely being spun iagainst them in a lot of articles, so I will just accept that I don't know enough information.

And according to some of the threads on here, the actors aren't getting their full pay. Many different salaries have been thrown out, anywhere from nothing at all to 15 dollars a show, so I don't know if the "they are getting paid" thing is valid. Once again - lack of credible information.

---

You can't actually argue that a pre-recorded track is equivalent to live music. That's not comparable to something technical that can be done with the simple push of a button.

---

My roommate is an actor in one of the Broadway shows affected by the strike. He still has to go to the theater and sign in, and stay for a certain amount of time. He said he will still be paid as long as he does that. Perhaps some of the actors have chosen not to, to show solidarity with the strikers?