"Reality TV Workers Are Really Fed Up"

[OmahaAudio]

http://gawker.com/a-twisted-industry-reality-tv-workers-are-really-fed-1601137605

[Stillweii]

Maybe things would be different if workers called the department of labor instead of writing to gawker. [emoji12]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mulluysavage]

My understanding is that the reason for the rise of reality is that it's economics is built on a union-busting premise. No writers, no actors. Can we all work together to undermine this premise to the benefit of workers and the viewing public alike?

[johnpaul215]

Yeah, "no writers". For whatever reason the shooting crew unions haven't been able to do too much about this. The others seem to think their jobs don't exist on reality sets.

[Nick Ray Harris]

Hmm, a bunch of people fed up with terrible working conditions getting together to make it better? Where have I heard this before...

[old school]

Fed up?  I'd be more than fed up to work as described. This is what the race to the bottom looks like.

CrewC

[Laurence]

This is a bit of an over-simplification but it's still worth saying.... The title of that article is misleading because if it were really true that the crew was completely fed up, then the problem could be solved tomorrow morning at 7 am by simply not showing up.  But, as we all know, if one crew failed to allow themselves to be abused in that manner, another crew would.  And so, who's really to blame?  The greedy producers create the problem and the hungry crew enables them.  Somebody's gotta stop the madness.

[old school]

IMO, Laurence frames up the the issue well. At some point it is ones own fault for eating shit. Wake up and do something, or do nothing and quit bitching seems to apply to working like this. Every person on earth is hungry, but what are we willing to do to make changes?

CrewC

[geordi]

I think in a large way, the overall suffering of the economy can be blamed for a lot of this. When the job market is tight and employers are suffering to find the people they need, then the employee's situation and benefits start to improve. When the job market sucks and employers don't need to search for talent... Then the overall situation gets worse.

[johnpaul215]

IMO, Laurence frames up the the issue well. At some point it is ones own fault for eating shit. Wake up and do something, or do nothing and quit bitching seems to apply to working like this. Every person on earth is hungry, but what are we willing to do to make changes?

CrewC

 

Isn't that why unions exist today? They do a lot of the negotiating of wages and working conditions and set a baseline minimum of what's acceptable. There are VERY few union reality shows (I mean camera and sound etc, not producers/writers/consultants etc), so it's not really an option to hold out for organized jobs if that's your usual world of work. 

 

I recently did a few days of pickups on an indie and the first time we hit OT, and knew we had hours to go, somebody from camera came to me and said "we are all 600, what's the deal with OT here, none of us have ever had to negotiate that stuff". It turned out ok, but it was something completely foreign to them. 

 

Offhand thinking of how much reality TV is show in 52's territory, if the sound mixers did something, this could change pretty quickly. Then again, maybe production would just replace the crew because we know that's very possible. To be honest, I have also heard from a bunch of sound mixers that have no desire for reality to be union. They are established enough not to work on crap shows for crap companies. They have a set deal memo before they walk on set and swear up and down that they would take home less on a union show than they normally make. They feel they can do better negotiating on their own, buying their own insurance (or piggybacking on their spouse's plan?) and investing for retirement on their own. Maybe the bulk of the shooting crew community in reality doesn't want to go union. I genuinely don't know, but I hear people talk and people are split for sure.

Almost all these stories are about the broad and somewhat non-specific term "producers" that really seem to work 24/7 for a flat weekly salary.

[studiomprd]

JP: " There are VERY few union reality shows (I mean camera and sound etc, not producers/writers/consultants etc), so it's not really an option to hold out for organized jobs if that's your usual world of work. "

There are very few union reality shows. (period!)

" if the sound mixers did something, this could change pretty quickly. " nope

"swear up and down that they would take home less on a union show than they normally make. " may well be true.

[Henchman]

Whenever I see people talking about how they claim they can make more working non-union, paying all their own benefits and taxes AND be able to save for retirement, I call BS.

Because if that was the case, they would be getting paid so much, tart it would be just as easy for the production to hire a union person.

It reminds me of a handyman I hired once for some renovations. He was in his late 50's and talked about how he worked all his life non-union in construction. And all he did was bitch about how now he was losing his house. Blamed it all on Obama, and had no retirement savings whatsoever.

[old school]

Whenever I see people talking about how they claim they can make more working non-union, paying all their own benefits and taxes AND be able to save for retirement, I call BS.

Yep. 

CrewC

[johnpaul215]

I can't speak from personal experience. He told me the numbers and said he was on a show that flipped and instead of his rate, he got the union minimum. He said about $100 less per day in his case. Yes, some lost cash was going to benefits, but ones he would never work enough days to qualify for (since he didn't work another union job after that). Like I said, he was also in a good place with a good production company and seemed to have years of work ahead of him. I'm just throwing his argument out there.

I never got into the discussion enough, but I wondered what his plan was in 10 or 20 years. I can't see working till you are 70 carrying a bag 5 or 6 days a week with 12 hour days. I sometimes wonder if some of those people plan on getting a very different job in a few years, or maybe working in a production company office. 

Even just as long as I have been doing this, I have seen people go from PA to working as a mixer (and undercutting other mixers), then changing careers and selling their kit. All by the time they are 30. I'm talking about 2 different people with different cases, but that might also shed some light on things. 

 

I'm not on their side, just saying. I am pretty sure I would be very happy if reality shows were union. *most* of the ones I have worked on pretty much follow the rules anyway. No benefits obviously, but in terms of meals, OT, turnaround etc. 

[old school]

My yep was to the guy who said this to you JP. I've heard this argument all my career and those saying it are all out of the biz. Different strokes. Personally I like being in a union so I'm a bit biased I'm sure but...  Back OT, I would be more than fed up working like many of these folks.

CrewC

[Henchman]

Well john Paul, I don't care about people who look at any aspect of what we do in sound as a job, instead of a career.

Wether it's location sound, or audio post.

In fact, people like that actually piss me off. Because they take money out of the hands of people who are doing this for a career.

If they are in if for the short term, then they can't compare their non-union gig to a union gig.

Being in a union, you are in it as a career for the longterm.

And the longterm retirement benefits.

[johnpaul215]

Well john Paul, I don't care about people who look at any aspect of what we do in sound as a job, instead of a career.

Wether it's location sound, or audio post.

In fact, people like that actually piss me off. Because they take money out of the hands of people who are doing this for a career.

If they are in if for the short term, then they can't compare their non-union gig to a union gig.

Being in a union, you are in it as a career for the longterm.

And the longterm retirement benefits.

 

I agree 100%. The 2nd type was a reference to those people I have seen come and go, and help erode our wages in the process. Frustrating as hell. 

[Philip Perkins]

I think a small secret here is that people who start out working non-union reality pack-mule jobs have an inexact but probably finite amount of time they can keep that up before they either start getting better paying (maybe union) gigs or transition out of the business.  This is a tough business to grow old in under the best of circumstances, and a newbie sharing living space with roommates and their new gear is likely to eventually want a place of their own, health care and enough money to raise a family and will start to see the logic in thinking about how they will get along when they can't work so much anymore.  The latter, I recall, often accompanies one's first real injury that forces the turning down of work while you heal…..  Meanwhile, some union locals have made it much harder for video-crew freelancers to get any meaningful benefits from being a member, taking care of a core group who work a lot of union gigs at the expense of the rest.

 

philp

[jrd456]

the union tier system and the side letters [agreements] have definetly made it happen that you can earn less on a union job compared to a non-union job. WE need to re-evaluate the tier system and the "new media" agreements, also these "side letters".

 

                                                                                                                  J.D.

[geordi]

Meanwhile, some union locals have made it much harder for video-crew freelancers to get any meaningful benefits from being a member, taking care of a core group who work a lot of union gigs at the expense of the rest.

 

THIS. It isn't just video crew freelancers. If you are in a smaller local and even have the seniority, but the members of the executive board are all a group of back-slapping-stoner-buddies... Your chances of a square deal or any actual benefits are quite low.

 

Ask me how I know.

[Mirror]

THIS. It isn't just video crew freelancers. If you are in a smaller local and even have the seniority, but the members of the executive board are all a group of back-slapping-stoner-buddies... Your chances of a square deal or any actual benefits are quite low.

 

Ask me how I know.

 

How do you know.

[David Silberberg]

It seems to me that unions get their start when there is a critical mass of misery among workers stuck at a company or industry where the business (production) carries on year after year. You would think by now, with all the abuse that's been going on there would be a reality show union. Workers are often disorganized freelancers. One big problem is that it's very difficult to get into a union- at least it has been for me in my experience . As it is, I'm too old now to gather enough years to make it worth doing. One of the best things that's happened to me are the various groups such as this one, that connect people. Reading and participating in these groups , I have learned about rates and billing and negotiating practices. Things I never learned in school. And it's helped me improve my income. Knowledge is power, and the more we as a group know the value of our work, the more likely we are of getting it . It's not a union but it does make a difference being connected. It would be fantastic if someone would do a workshop on negotiating in the sound business .

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cmgoodin]

the union tier system and the side letters [agreements] have definetly made it happen that you can earn less on a union job compared to a non-union job. WE need to re-evaluate the tier system and the "new media" agreements, also these "side letters".

 

                                                                                                                  J.D.

What no one is saying is that if you were making more money working as Non Union than the same job going Union,  why didn't you negotiate a higher rate to keep you at the same level?  Just because the Union dictates MINIMUN wage scales you are not required to work at that lowest of rates.  With any IA union contract you are free to negotiate your own pay rate higher than minimum scale and are still afforded protection from no pay for overtime and have unemployment insurance, FICA Taxes and other benefits paid.by the employer on your behalf.  If the producer is happy with your work and thinks you are worth the extra pay as a Non-Union worker he should be willing to pay over scale to keep you.  Many Union DPs and some coveted Union Mixers can make Double Union Scale and still have the protection that the Union provides as long as their work is desired over others in the field.

 

Remember if you are driving home after that 19hour day on than Non-union job, unless you are a SAG actor or WGA Writer you can't earn money when you're dead.

[VASI]

Just because the Union dictates MINIMUN wage scales you are not required to work at that lowest of rates.

 

- And that's the problem from Union setting a MINIMUM rate and after leave you to negotiate; which the first and last words belong to production office. The minimum wage scale or rate is a bad idea, because the minimum rate/wage after the years or not come the standard rate; not only for you, but for the whole industry.

[Henchman]

Just because the Union dictates MINIMUN wage scales you are not required to work at that lowest of rates.

 

- And that's the problem from Union setting a MINIMUM rate and after leave you to negotiate; which the first and last words belong to production office. The minimum wage scale or rate is a bad idea, because the minimum rate/wage after the years or not come the standard rate; not only for you, but for the whole industry.

No. It's the opposite.

It keeps even the lowest rate at a decent level. Even for non-union jobs.

Wood you rather they set a maximum rate?