IA-AMPTP Negotiations TENTATIVE AGREEMENT REACHED

[Richard Lightstone, CAS]

From 695 web site:

Contract Negotiations

4/13/2012, 12:10 am - TENTATIVE AGREEMENT REACHED

Producers DROP many of their demands, including the requirement that all classifications and departments will be interchangeable... and there will be NO reduction in Health Plan benefits... but there were trade-offs, too. Much more information will be posted here very shortly.

[old school]

Thanks R L. I can't wait to read it.

CrewC

[Richard Lightstone, CAS]

Since the 80's there have always been "trade offs". Nothing new here folks. Waiting for the other shoe to drop. Hoping the I.A. hasn't given away the Basic to be supplanted with the Video-Tape Agreement.

[RPSharman]

Since the 80's there have always been "trade offs". Nothing new here folks. Waiting for the other shoe to drop. Hoping the I.A. hasn't given away the Basic to be supplanted with the Video-Tape Agreement.

Yes. The whole "video tape agreement" conceived of for non-narrative work shot on tape, has somehow found its way into narrative work that happens to shot on HD vs. film. The distinction of format is no longer relevant, since the difference in quality seems to no longer be considered an issue.

The idea of different rates for film vs. HD is ridiculous.

Robert

[RPSharman]

At first glance... Just got Loeb's email.

Everything remains the same in terms of conditions and turn-around, except we are now permitted to drive even further on less sleep, with the expansion of the studio zone.

We get a 2% raise, instead of 3%, which is still under inflation, and far less than the increase in corporate profits. And we are giving up $ .30/hr of retirement savings to shore up the health care shortfall. So for many folks, that's about 1% of their wage.

People with 1 dependent will pay $25/month to insure them and $50/month for two or more dependents. That seems fair enough.

So where's the stuff we're getting? Where's our protection from long hours and short turn-arounds. Wouldn't that be a better way to fix the shortfall in the healthcare system? Fewer sick people! Preventative medicine. Not reactive.

Ugh!!

[studiomprd]

of course, it could have been worse...

[Richard Lightstone, CAS]

From Matt Loeb:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

I am pleased to announce that the IATSE has reached a tentative agreement with the Producers represented by the AMPTP for a successor Basic Agreement.

Our goals going into these negotiations have been met. We were successful in maintaining the pensions of our retirees. We achieved wage increases in each year of the agreement of 2%. The health and pension benefits that we have worked so hard for over the years have been protected and will not be reduced. As you are aware, our benefit plans faced a staggering shortfall that threatened the stability of our pension and health plans. We have closed that shortfall with an impact on the participants that is as minimal as possible. The MPIPHP will continue to provide the best health benefits in the industry with no premium for you, the member. For participants with one dependent the premium will be $25 per month and for those participants with 2 or more dependents in the MPIPHP the premium will be $50 per month, payable quarterly. The employers have agreed to a $1 per hour increase to the Health Plan contribution which is a 20% increase over the current hourly contribution rate of $5 per hour.

In exchange for closing the deficit of over $400 million and annual wage increases of 2% in each year, we agreed to an expansion of the Studio Zone consistent with other industry unions and guilds. Productions made for home video will be budget based and we agreed to confirm our long standing practice of promoting basic cable TV production in Los Angeles. We also agreed to re-allocate thirty and one-half cents per hour from the Individual Account Plan to the Active Health Plan in order to help stabilize that plan during this national health care crisis. Moneys have been moved from health to IAP in the past and it was necessary to do this to rebalance contributions since the health plan is now suffering.

These negotiations lasted over three weeks and broke off once, due to disagreement on the premium structure. The second round of negotiations has resulted in a fair deal that will provide employment stability, protect our health and pension plans and provide for wage increases in a fragile economy. The Bargaining Committee consisted of the committees of each of the West Coast Studio Local Unions, Officers and Representatives of the IA, attorneys, and pension and healthcare experts. The committee was unanimous in its support for this tentative agreement. I would like to thank each of them for their commitment to act on your behalf in participating in these negotiations.

More specific details of the agreement will be forthcoming and as soon as specific contract language is drafted this agreement will be sent to the members for ratification.

In solidarity,

Matt Loeb

IATSE International President

[Jeff Wexler]

From Matt Loeb:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

Our goals going into these negotiations have been met. We were successful in maintaining the pensions of our retirees. We achieved wage increases in each year of the agreement of 2%.

So, the goal was to keep our Pension --- that's noble but it is a sad day in any employment agreement when the employer can even work towards getting rid of the pension.

The health and pension benefits that we have worked so hard for over the years have been protected and will not be reduced. As you are aware, our benefit plans faced a staggering shortfall that threatened the stability of our pension and health plans. We have closed that shortfall with an impact on the participants that is as minimal as possible.

Why should we be blamed for this shortfall and why are we having to give things up to help the employer shore up the plan? There has been some really good analysis of how this shortfall came about and nothing is being done to correct those factors.

In exchange for closing the deficit of over $400 million and annual wage increases of 2% in each year, we agreed to an expansion of the Studio Zone consistent with other industry unions and guilds.

I didn't know the "other industry unions and guilds" had already expanded the Studio Zone. So now we will have to drive further to work with less sleep and less compensation.

Productions made for home video will be budget based and we agreed to confirm our long standing practice of promoting basic cable TV production in Los Angeles.

If we are being asked to continue this partnership with our employer, the producers, we should be compensated with a decent percentage of their profits. When we are selling our labor to the employer, we should not be so concerned about promoting their business.

We also agreed to re-allocate thirty and one-half cents per hour from the Individual Account Plan to the Active Health Plan in order to help stabilize that plan during this national health care crisis.

Again, did we create this "national health care crisis"? Why should we have to "stabilize" a rotten system that benefits no one except for the multi-national insurance companies, big pharma and so forth.

The second round of negotiations has resulted in a fair deal that will provide employment stability, protect our health and pension plans and provide for wage increases in a fragile economy.

The economy is "fragile" for US... for THEM, not so much. By agreeing to this we have possibly provided for continued employment in the industry (we won't be on strike) but more importantly it has insured that the economy will be far less fragile for the Producer.

[wolfvid]

Jeff is right - but its worse...

... The Bargaining Committee consisted of the committees of each of the West Coast

Studio Local Unions,

( all make over $ 250K the larger unions over $ 350k)

Officers and Representatives of the IA

(IF YOU CALL THEIR ELECTIONS DEMOCRATIC YOU COME FROM KENIA or BOTSWANA ed.),

attorneys (unelected),

and pension and healthcare experts ( salesmen for insurance companies ed.).

The committee was

unanimous in its support for this tentative agreement. I would like to thank

each of them for their commitment to act on your behalf in participating in

these negotiations.

More specific details of the agreement will be forthcoming and as soon as

specific contract language is drafted this agreement will be sent to the members

for ratification.

In solidarity,

Matt Loeb ( $ 360K per year + expenses ed.)

IATSE International President

follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend

Copyright © 2012 IATSE, All rights reserved.

Note:

so we will get to vote on it... we can get more if enough people vote against this proposal.

NEGOTIATIONS THAT DO NOT INVOLVE THE MEMBERSHIP DIRECTLY ARE ALWAYS A SELL OUT.

Negotiations not backed by rolling strikes to show ones strength are always a

sell out.

Who is the example for good negotiations? in Ca. the nurses. They

have occupied Sacramento before negotiations to show they are for real. The IA

would never risk that.

don't forget the Entertainment industry is the richest industry in the USA. There is nothing about their wealth and increase in profits that is fragile, NOTHING. The IA is totally unaware of the riches amassing in the industries coffers. Stocks are at their maximum these weeks.

If you find a way to get your voice hear let us all know. We are being led by

the obedient and are being kept blind to the facts. Our Union reps let others GREED rule.

wolf

[jrd456]

What about the New Media Contract?

In the future the "New Media" will be a major source of home entertainment.Producers salivate when they talk about the "New Media"because they have figured this out.They can pay minimum wage to the best film crews in the world and they can get crew member who need there health & welfare hours.

Younger members "Stand Up"--this is your future,your career.

J.D.

[studiomprd]

This contract isn't about what we gained as much as it is about what we didn't lose.

[RPSharman]

This contract isn't about what we gained as much as it is about what we didn't lose.

That's what they always are. And we did lose. We lost $.30/hr of our retirement savings plan. Some of us will pay $50/month for health insurance for our dependents. We lost 1% of a traditional wage increase, which was always lower than inflation anyway. We lost time at home with the expansion of the studio zone. Loeb made it seem like we "gained" a 2% raise, and we "kept" our H & P as it was. But it was only at the expense of these other things.

Why can't we force our leadership to do something about it? I only have the power to vote for 1 person out of all of the poeple who represent us. It's total bullshit.

Robert

[jrd456]

Also the loss of the IAP is Huge!

You will lose many thousands of dollars when you retire.That sucks.

J.D.

[studiomprd]

" This contract isn't about what we gained as much as it is about what we didn't lose. "

maybe better to state: This contract isn't about how much we gained as much as it is about how much we lost

[Peter Kurland]

The West Coast locals are in somewhat of a difficult negotiating position, at least as far as feature films are concerned. However, the Area Standards Agreement is also up for renegotiation next month. The studios are receiving BILLIONS of dollars in tax incentives for work done in states outside of CA. If the whole IA would stand together, and the International wouldn't put up with the divide-and-conquer separate negotiations, I think we could get better working conditions instead of just a slower erosion of standards.

[RPSharman]

The West Coast locals are in somewhat of a difficult negotiating position, at least as far as feature films are concerned. However, the Area Standards Agreement is also up for renegotiation next month. The studios are receiving BILLIONS of dollars in tax incentives for work done in states outside of CA. If the whole IA would stand together, and the International wouldn't put up with the divide-and-conquer separate Inegotiations, I think we could get better working conditions instead of just a slower erosion of standards.

Hear hear!!

Why did we make a deal before the negotiations for the area standards began? Matt Loeb should be using each agreement to strengthen our position on the other. More proof that the other side is better at this than we are, and why lawyers should be our BAs and International leaders, not union relics.

[jrd456]

The producers have the BEST lawyers that money can buy and we have pretend lawyers.........We're screwed

The international reps. are already yelling victory without talking to the people that ARE the union....US.

[jrd456]

Would the new contract start on Aug.1st, 2012 ?

J.D.

[T. Jones]

_{I didn't see a single positive post on the Facebook page about this new contract. When asked 65 folks (all who responded) were against it. Any word on whether the new contract will change the number of hours needed to qualify for insurance for retirement? The producers wanted to change it from 400 too 1000 hours a year. And to increase the number of years from 10 to 20 if you didn't already have 10.}

[RPSharman]

_{I didn't see a single positive post on the Facebook page about this new contract. When asked 65 folks (all who responded) were against it. Any word on whether the new contract will change the number of hours needed to qualify for insurance for retirement? The producers wanted to change it from 400 too 1000 hours a year. And to increase the number of years from 10 to 20 if you didn't already have 10.}

I expect we'll get some portion of the agreement to look over (they never seem to make the whole thing available), along with a letter about how brilliant they were to negotiate the smallest turd possible, and how we should all agree blindly because that's what they tell us to do. And like last time, a majority of members will vote for it. Shame.

What upsets me is that some stuff manages to sneak in there along with the big stuff that's brought to our attention. I had no idea, for example, that forced call compensation changed on the basic agreement. There are a couple of other details that I missed too. Working for so many years without actually being on the basic agreement has made me less and less aware of the terms.

Robert

[Laurence]

_{Any word on whether the new contract will change the number of hours needed to qualify for insurance for retirement? The producers wanted to change it from 400 too 1000 hours a year.}

The Producers dropped it. The hours to qualify for a retirement year won't change.

[MatthewFreedAudio]

This contract isn't about what we gained as much as it is about what we didn't lose.

Keeping the line of scrimage at the same place means you lose the ball after the 4th down. If there are no advancements then in the very near future we lose in a big way, it's simply postponed a little.

www.matthewfreed.com

Production Sound Mixing for TV, Films, and Commercials

[wolfvid]

Check out the discussions on Facebook, in the "2012 IATSE Contract Forum."

quote: The most important question on the table was... how much money is the

Producer going to give us? They gave us 6% over 3 years. Not enough to cover

inflation... but 6% higher than they "had" to. Health care costs went up...

production hours and contributions went down... and thus the plan is in trouble.

So how much extra will they put in? Enough to cover the increase in costs? So

far in this country, healthcare isn't a right, so the producer (or government)

isn't required to pay for it. They wanted the premiums to be 300% higher than

they finally agreed upon. In the end, they agreed to increase their

contribution to the Plan by 20% ($1 per hour) and we'd kick in a portion of our

IAP to cover the difference in order to keep the premiums low.

and

i think the worst of the contract is the handling of NEW MEDIA etc -- huge

loophole!!!!!!!

and this is how votes are counted by the IATSE

Quote: They count Delegate votes. Each local gets 1 delegate vote for each

100 members... plus 1 for just having a charter. If you have 99 members 2

delegates. If you have 100 to 199 members, you get 3. Local 695 has about 1590

members so I think we get 16 delegates. If 100% of Local 695 member votes

Yes... or if only 51% vote Yes... all 16 delegates vote Yes. So if you can get

just a little more than half of a big local like 600 to vote Yes, you get ALL of

their delegate votes... and you're well on your way to ratification.

I say vote NO and get a better deal. lots of time for better negotiations.

[RPSharman]

The argument that it's great they gave us 6% over three years, because they could have given us nothing is just madness.

They could have cut out wages by 6%. They could have dumped the whole health contribution and made us pay for health care. They could have eliminated holiday & vacation pay on all shows. They could have done anything. The idea of the negotiations is to stop them from doing that stuff and demand we continue to make good wages and receive benefits and have safe working conditions.

Our representatives have failed. Our conditions have not improved by demanding penalties for overworking the crew, and our wages have not increased on pace with inflation.

I heard a news report that "inflation slowed over the last few months, which means Americans will have more to spend, which is good for the economy." That's crazy. Americans would only have more to spend if wages increased and inflation increased at a slower rate. Inflation may have slowed, but wages have been stagnant or declining for years.

Robert

[Jeff Wexler]

"They could have cut out wages by 6%. They could have dumped the whole health contribution and made us pay for health care. They could have eliminated holiday & vacation pay on all shows. They could have done anything. The idea of the negotiations is to stop them from doing that stuff and demand we continue to make good wages and receive benefits and have safe working conditions."

Our negotiators could have waited until the contract was about to expire and when the producers said anything resembling the above, we could have said: Fine, NONE of us will be working for you anymore until such time as we can all agree on a contract that provides decent wages and working conditions. Wages and Working conditions are the fundamental basis for which labor unions should direct all of their efforts. The greatest negotiating power we have is the mass withholding of our labor (will anyone in the I.A. ever dare even use the word "strike"?) and this threat has to be perceived by the employer, the producer, to be real --- if they cannot agree to a decent contract they will not be able to make their product.