IATSE and AMPTP Ratify "New" Area Standards Agreement

[RPSharman]

As I am in LA, What happens in other territories is completely irrelevant.

For you, yes. But for the production mixers who "move" to these incentive states for work, and who must earn significantly less because of this someone skewed pay scal, the subject is quite relevant.

[RPSharman]

So, if one top mixer turned it down, then by default, there are mixers who get more than scale.

As I stated above, you could probably cound that group on one, perhaps two, hands. And it would not be on every movie.

[Henchman]

For you, yes. But for the production mixers who "move" to these incentive states for work, and who must earn significantly less because of this someone skewed pay scal, the subject is quite relevant.

And I'm sure the cost of living is much, much less as well.

I'm not quite sure why anyone would move to make significantly less.

I moved to make significantly more.

[Mirror]

As I am in LA, What happens in other territories is completely irrelevant.

Please refer to the ORIGINAL topic of this thread.

And I'm sure the cost of living is much, much less as well.

I'm not quite sure why anyone would move to make significantly less.

I moved to make significantly more.

90% of production is now done outside of L.A. It is better to move and work at a lower pay than it is to not work at all.

[Mirror]

And? Getting paid over scale, is getting paid over scale. Wether it was yesterday or 15 years ago.

Okay, how about the latest "Batman" then.

Apples and oranges again.

Being that Batman is a Warner show, I would be shocked to hear it was over scale.

[RPSharman]

And I'm sure the cost of living is much, much less as well.

I'm not quite sure why anyone would move to make significantly less.

I moved to make significantly more.

Ummm... because that's where the work is. It won't be long before other states follow NY's lead and offer huge incentives to move post production facilities into their states. You might find your tune changing when that day comes. Or perhaps it won't affect you.

I'm still in Los Angeles, and doing quite well, but I am concerned for my fellow sound department members and how this all affects them.

[Jeff Wexler]

As I am in LA, What happens in other territories is completely irrelevant.

Please, Henchman, this "discussion" needs to stay on topic and try and be a little more careful with the numbers. The statement "What happens in other territories is completely irrelevant" is totally inappropriate. The Area Standards Agreement (the main title of this topic) doesn't apply to work being done in Los Angeles... so, if you live in L.A. and therefore find the discussion of "what happens in other territories" irrelevant, I would strongly suggest you S . T . F . U . and exit this topic. Start another thread, please, about how RE-recording mixers working in Los Angeles make upwards of 500K a year (also not entirely true but oh well) and you may find yourself in the company of ONE.

I am not going to bother to refute some of the other declarations of fact that you have put up here but I will say that I have done some really, really big budget movies and worked at SCALE, and I have done some really little movies with basically no money that have paid me over scale. And I will add that we should never consider equipment rental in the equation when we are talking about hourly rates of pay --- the "hourly" part refers to the hours of our lives that the employer gets of our labor in return for the rate being paid. Whether we get equipment rental money (because we own equipment and run a SEPARATE rental business with its own set of rental rates) IS irrelevant as is any discussion of cost of living, the possibility of quality of life issues depending on where we live, etc.

Okay, RANT OFF (for now, but I hope this is read carefully and appropriate behavior follows).

[Henchman]

As far as my opinion, what happens in other territories being irrelevant, the point is looking at the OP, it refers to a Los Angeles article, but I realize it's about the entire US.

It's not that I don't care about other states, but when I see people who are here in LA complaining about rates, then it's an LA based discussion. I looked up what a sound mixer gets paid under the basic agreement here in LA, and they make way more than a camera assistant.

And my point about re-recording overs and what they actually get paid, was that it was from personal experience. People pretending that rates are lower than they really are. And as you yourself have stated Jeff, you work on projects where you get more than scale, and you work on projects where you don't. I doubt you are the only one.

This nonsense that nobody ever gets over scale, is just that.

As far as rentals go, IMO, what you make form the rentals is income. Pure and simple. Its not part of your rate, but it is most certainly income, no matter how you twist or turn it.

And if this is such a low paying, crappy way to make a living. Why would anybody do it?

Oh, right. Because it's not.

Some people just like to bitch no matter what.

[Jeff Wexler]

"As far as my opinion, what happens in other territories being irrelevant, the point is looking at the OP, it refers to a Los Angeles article, but I realize it's about the entire US."

It's NOT about the entire US, that's the first thing you are confused about. It cannot be about the entire US because there are jobs done on the East Coast and the West Coast that typically DO NOT have anything to do with Area Standards rates (the TITLE of this topic).

"It's not that I don't care about other states, but when I see people who are here in LA complaining about rates, then it's an LA based discussion."

Wrong again. Thew only thing you do have right here is that the DISCUSSION is taking place amongst many people, some of which are based in LA (but obviously it is a discussion that is open to and participated in by many others who do NOT live in Los Angeles, and several people who do not even live in the US!). I live in Los Angeles, I am talking about this from my home in Santa Monica, I am complaining about the RATES because they STINK and it affects us all whether you find it to be irrelevant or not. It's sort of like "well, it's not happening to me so why should I give a hoot". Not a great attitude and not at all supportive of our community of sound professionals, the very core and raison d'etre for this site.

"I looked up what a sound mixer gets paid under the basic agreement here in LA, and they make way more than a camera assistant."

And if that very same sound mixer and the very same camera assistant take a job outside LA where they are offering employment at rates under the Area Standards contract, the sound mixer could very well be making less than the AC.

"And my point about re-recording overs and what they actually get paid, was that it was from personal experience."

I am a member of the Editors Guild, some of my best friends over the years have been in post, and I am well aware of their position in the industry and what their earning potential is. I also know, from many personal conversations, that they are concerned (which you evidently are not) about the erosion of rates here, in other states and around the world, since they understand that this has an affect on the entire industry (even if it doesn't directly affect their income today).

"And as you yourself have stated Jeff, you work on projects where you get more than scale, and you work on projects where you don't. I doubt you are the only one."

Again, you missed the main focus of THIS topic --- the Area Standards contract and rates of pay. Very few if any of the production sound mixers who work in other states under the Area Standards contract make over scale deals ... period. This is the fact.

"This nonsense that nobody ever gets over scale, is just that."

Wrong again. Not nonsense... reality. I think you would be surprised how few sound mixers even working under the best rates of the West Coast Basic Agreement make over scale deals.

"As far as rentals go, IMO, what you make form the rentals is income. Pure and simple. Its not part of your rate, but it is most certainly income, no matter how you twist or turn it."

So, money I make from a business I started making bio-degradable water bottles out of hemp is income, but so what? This has no bearing on the discussion of hourly rates of pay for our labor on a job. It does, of course, have relevance to each individual's personal financial situation and lifestyle, but that's not what this discussion is all about. If you are interested, we could have a discussion about the erosion of rental rates over the years and how that particular revenue stream for those who own their own equipment has gone through massive changes.

"And if this is such a low paying, crappy way to make a living. Why would anybody do it?

Oh, right. Because it's not.

Some people just like to bitch no matter what."

And some people like to engage in extended combative conversations riddled with diversions, inaccuracies and lies just because they love the sound of their own voice.

[Henchman]

Quite tho contrary Jeff, I do give a hoot.

Which is why I am a very vocal supporter of the Union.

Why do you think rates have been eroded, and in what way?

And if a camera assistant IS making more in some cases, then it seems they must have a stronger union.

Why is that?

[Jeff Wexler]

Quite tho contrary Jeff, I do give a hoot.

Which is why I am a very vocal supporter of the Union.

Why do you think rates have been eroded, and in what way?

And if a camera assistant IS making more in some cases, then it seems they must have a stronger union.

Why is that?

There are no simple or quick answers to your questions above. Certainly the overall erosion of pay rates, if we really want to thoroughly discuss the root causes, would be a lengthy conversation. The Camera Union (or "Guild" as they are called) is not a "stronger union" --- it is the same union, the I.A.T.S.E., but the Camera Guild has a national CONTRACT. It is this national contract that levels the rates of pay across all the states in the United States. Sound people, on the other hand, while members of the I.A.T.S.E., are members of various Locals, locals which work under specific contracts. Those contracts do not necessarily travel so well. By that I mean there are all sorts of conditions, many of them contested and contentious, when a member in one local travels to work in another state. By the rules of the contract, for example, if I am hired for a job and I am a member of Local 695 (here in LA) and my deal comes under the West Coast Basic Agreement, my wages (scale wages) and working conditions (when I go into overtime, when I get meal penalty payments, etc.) are all set --- the employer cannot violate this and it doesn't matter where we are actually working. But, on the same job, the production can hire another sound mixer (for 2nd Unit work for example) in Georgia where we're shooting and that mixer will be working under a DIFFERENT CONTRACT with much lower rates of pay and often different rules regarding working conditions. The camera person, on the other hand, wherever they are hired and wherever they are working, benefits from a scale rate of pay that is uniform across the US.

[jacefivesound]

But, on the same job, the production can hire another sound mixer (for 2nd Unit work for example) in Georgia where we're shooting and that mixer will be working under a DIFFERENT CONTRACT with much lower rates of pay and often different rules regarding working conditions.

So, so true. And some places the cost of living is less, others, not so much. Although I understand the ASA, and recently even spoke with president Loeb about it, I still feel (as sound department members) being divided into separate contracts only weakens us as a whole.

[Henchman]

Everyone would benefit from combining all union locals into one big union.

Just as the mpeg did with soundeditng and mixing.

I don't understand why sound mixers themselves have not been mobilizing to make this happen. It's a win win situation all around.

I'm truly baffled.

[studiomprd]

" Everyone would benefit from combining all union locals into one big union. "

for now, consider the advantages of L695 becoming part of L600

[afewmoreyears]

Everyone would benefit from combining all union locals into one big union.

Just as the mpeg did with soundeditng and mixing.

I don't understand why sound mixers themselves have not been mobilizing to make this happen. It's a win win situation all around.

I'm truly baffled.

Because they are all loosers with no balls...

Only kidding...

[Henchman]

Because they are all loosers with no balls...

Only kidding...

Well, I think it comes down to too many people not being involved enough.

It's so easy to sit back and complain, and expect someone else to fix the problem.

It doesn't work that way.

" Everyone would benefit from combining all union locals into one big union. "

for now, consider the advantages of L695 becoming part of L600

That would be a smart move, IMO.

[Jeff Wexler]

Everyone would benefit from combining all union locals into one big union.

Just as the mpeg did with soundeditng and mixing.

I don't understand why sound mixers themselves have not been mobilizing to make this happen. It's a win win situation all around.

I'm truly baffled.

Nothing baffling about it. All of us union members, production sound mixers, boom operators, re-recording mixers, ADR mixers, sound editors, etc., we're all in the SAME union. The differences are the "Locals" that we are in which was based on where we have permanent residence. All of this changed when the various camera Locals were merged into one "local" with a national contract. All sound people, production and post, used to be in various locals around the country with the main locals being Local 695 on the West Coast and Local 52 on the East Coast. About 10 years ago (maybe more, I've sort of lost track) all the POST production sound people were moved into the Editors Guild. Production Sound people remained in the various locals (again, primarily L695 and L52) across the country. So, what is this lack of "mobilization" you are so baffled by? As members of Local 695, for example, working under the Basic Agreement (with pretty damn good rates as you always point out), what sort of mobilization could our members (only 1500 of us) do to affect radical changes in the way in which the International operates? You have to remember, the merger of the 2 big camera locals (L659 on the West Coast and L644 on the East Coast) was not member initiated --- there wasn't this big mobilization or uprising to force the I.A. to make a national guild (union local) with a national contract. And, the post-production sound people's move into L700 (Editors Guild) was also something that the International unilaterally initiated.

[Izen Ears]

Um. No one worth their salt works for the ASA scale, I never have. It's a bullshit rate compared to camera, but ESPECIALLY compared to the sound people on the basic agreement. I personally have no idea how to combat working for scale other than "no thanks." Just imagine what would happen if we all said that... What a nice dream.

Dan Izen

[bigmaho]

Really?

I think this was pretty clear:

As far as LOCATION mixers getting above scale, how about we let some of the resident mixers who work on big budget movies and shows chime in.

Anybody here worked on big budget pilots like "Revolution", or "Wonder Woman" last year.

When I work on motion pictures and tv I get NY / Local 52 scale which ranges from $48-55/hour. When I work out of town in ASA contract areas I usually negotiate to NY or LA scale. I work the big films and the little. Rates are about the same. The only wiggle room is in equipment rentals. LA mixer rates are a bit better.

[SoundHound]

Wow! How the mighty have fallen since I retired 9 years ago (just slipped form the "Roster" a few months ago by choice). Regardless of wages the Production Sound Mixer is the head of a (very small) department and "The Keeper of the Flame" for an entire medium-Sound.

For the 37 years I worked the "Mixer" was, typically, the second highest paid crew behind the DP. Inconceivable that the Mixer is paid at or below any AC in this century. In 1990 I grossed over $250,000 (my best year-don't imagine that's $500K in 2012 $$$ though) with a 6 months series (and other work but not 52 weeks) including lots of equipment. Just my 2 cents for perspective.

And as to the topic please listen to JW who is very successful, very experienced with so many decades in the biz. And O. K. I'll say it he's a Legend. Because a good forum is not about winning at semantics but learning and helping each other.

[Henchman]

As a re-recording mixer, I wish location guys still had the power and say they once had on set.

[Michael P Clark]

Mixers have left "Breaking Bad" and "Walking Dead" and I suspect some others too because of their rate being $30/hr, and production refused to pay over scale.

 

Robert, this information, at least for "The Walking Dead", is incorrect in regards to rate. I can't answer for the mixers that left the show, on their own accord, but this was not the rate they were working at.

[RPSharman]

Robert, this information, at least for "The Walking Dead", is incorrect in regards to rate. I can't answer for the mixers that left the show, on their own accord, but this was not the rate they were working at.

 

Thanks, Michael.  That's good to know it wasn't minimum.  Perhaps the rate was higher, but not a high enough (Basic Agreement) rate.  Maybe the same for "Breaking Bad" too.

 

Sorry for the misinformation.

[studiomprd]

speaking of contracts....

SAG-AFTRA has a new contract for commercials

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/sag-aftra-commercials-contract-details-438718

 

" One-time 6 percent increase. The increase is effective over the term of the contract (April 1, 2013 – March 31, 2016) and is mathematically equivalent to 2.9% annual increases. That compares with the 2 percent annual increases that have become customary in Hollywood labor deals. "