Sound feed to EPK is changing

[Philip Perkins]

I understand the union implications of all this, but you have to be careful.  There is not only the "Apatow" kind of stuff that was mentioned (ie not EPK per se but extras for a DVD release, kind of another category, but VERY important for DVD sales) I have also had the guy who was the "EPK/extras" shooter on one job turn up as the DP on a later gig with the same company.  People move up very fast these days.....and they remember who helped them.

Philip Perkins

[studiomprd]

not only are we being asked to provide sound for these "extras", but we are likely to become free actors in them, too.

an extreme example of this was the crews on the "Project Greenlight" TV series'; not only was the crew working at lower rates on the movie being made (the MacGuffin!), but they also provided a free cast for a (reality) TV series being shot by PA's!!

[Philip Perkins]

This is not the same as "providing sound to DIT or camera for guide track."  You, as the sound crew, are hired to provide the sound to either the DIT, or a camera, feed.  If an EPK "crew" consists only of a camera person, then you are working for the EPK "crew" or publicity department.

Maybe you need to unbuckle your pants to speak, but I speak straight out of my mouth.  I don't work for the publicity department, I cooperate with them, when their sound person comes and asks for an additional feed for their mix to their camera.

When only a camera person shows up, a sound person is not working, therefore providing that camera person with a feed is contributing to the loss of employment to your sound Brothers and Sisters.

What I feel the union needs to do, is to provide us all with the definition of what constitutes an EPK "crew."  This should also be defined by the camera local 600, as their membership is also affected by this.

There is a whole other issue with the "PA's" shooting behind the scenes video for DVD's, as this is new and has probably never been discussed by any unions.  I remember when it was impossible for anyone other than the still photographer to have a still camera on set, every cell phone now contains a camera and people are always shooting pictures on film sets nowadays.

The times they are a changing....

Rich Van Dyke

Do you think the union will address either of these issues?  I ask because in my area they haven't at all--esp the "behind the scenes extras shooters", although I've found that those guys usually DON'T ask for a feed, that's mostly been the traditional EPK crews.

Philip Perkins

[Guest Ken Mantlo]

I too have come up against this situation but didn't think that this might be violating our contract.  What is the IA rule?  If it is against the rules the correct and polite response would be, "Sorry, I can't.  The union won't let me."  If there is no rule, how is it different than providing sound to DIT or camera for guide track?

Are we not talking out of our ass's until we know what the IA rule on this is?

Maybe you need to unbuckle your pants to speak, but I speak straight out of my mouth.  I don't work for the publicity department, I cooperate with them, when their sound person comes and asks for an additional feed for their mix to their camera....

Rich Van Dyke

RVD,

When I asked the rhetorical question, "Are we not talking out of our ass's until we know what the IA rule on this is?"  I was using the "Royal" we, Dick. 

Who employs us?  The Studio (or Producers).  Who employs the publicist? The Studio (or Producers).  Who is under the IA contract?  The Studio (or Producers).

How are they not beholden to employ Union members on their shoots?  Am I missing something?

Or is it that the publicist is employed by the Distributer?

[RPSharman]

It would be great to know what the rule is. In my opinion, anyone shooting behind the scenes is EPK. Publicity or content for improved DVD sales make no difference.  I don't care if it's a PA with a camcorder or a union crew with a "real" camera. 600 should really be the leaders on this issue, since many cameras are just using onboard mics. 

That said, without knowing the rules, as long as I confirm the person asking is on set on behalf of the producers or studio, I point them to a line-level XLR that permanently hangs off the back of my cart. I do not do anything differently regarding my normal procedures. If the boom pole is on set, then it is. If it's parked at the cart and off, then there's no "set" sound between setups. I feel I am only providing the mix track, which they could easily acquire from the producers and sync later if they wanted.

If I am told that there's a staffing rule by my local or any local in whose area I am working, I will gladly refuse a feed if the team is not properly staffed.

Robert 

[Joshua Anderson]

I'm more curious about 695's position on this more than 600's (or even my local, 52). I'm probably pretty ignorant in this reasoning, but I've been under the assumption that 600 is a guild (not a union) and that difference affects their ability/desire to enforce jurisdictions between union and non-union workers (and shows).

The other assumption that I have is that since my union includes grips, electrics, props and set medics in addition to sound members, we as sound members end up being a minority. I always assume (hopefully incorrectly) that issues that involve more of the whole of the union get preference over issues like this that only involve the sound members.

I just assume 695 and its members are stronger.

Josh

[Jan McL]

I've never gotten the feeling that 52 sound staffing questions were lesser questions than other departmental staffing or other questions. I've often seen / heard of EPK crews being carded on union sets, and not at my suggestion, but by the shop steward on his own (as far as I know). At least on the east coast, I get the feeling that staffing questions are -- generally -- very important to address.

It's also my understanding that if it's a union job, anybody working on the set (including EPK/ENG but excluding PA's) should be union. Period.

Feel like I want to add something else to this discussion: should one of these kinds of issues come to my attention, my first stop is the shop steward. Never, ever would I take it to a producer. Never. Ever.

Which brings me to another question: do you ever make a gift to the shop steward? Seems like they sure deserve some kind of recognition for their service. I always make sure I take a couple moments during the course of the show to thank them, but...

All right.

Out.

- Jan

[studiomprd]

"  I've been under the assumption that 600 is a guild (not a union) "

Local 600 is the camera local of the IATSE, and has national jurisdiction, even though they are an IATSE union local, they prefer and use the name "guild", just as the editor's local 700 (also with national jurisdiction) does.

I don't really think that L 695, L600, or any local can just make up a rule about 'additional crews' (among many things!)...

it has to be covered in the contract!

" It's also my understanding that if it's a union job, anybody working on the set (including EPK/ENG but excluding PA's) should be union. Period. " mine, too.  If the employer has agreed to a union contract, then the work is done by union members, at union rates and conditions.  what the producers do is add their own "assistants" to do some of our work, and the union fails to take action, thus allowing prescidents to be set, and giving away our jobs.  This is not new, and does not just affect the IATSE.  Producers on sitcoms started having various 'production assistants' switch the pictures on the monitors for the audiences, and the DGA lost jobs... the camera guild / union includes the stills photographer (for publicity shots!) but has allowed all sorts other cameras and camcorders to set precidents that are now opening the floodgates...

I remember working on shows where the "BTS" crew (predecessor to EPK) was a 600 camera crew (usually 2) and a 695 sound person.  I remember when visiting crews on union shows had to be union members...The union could make that the rule (and the shop steward's job to enforce) because it was clear in the contract.

[old school]

I think Peggy handled it correctly in the realm she works in. Seems like no one answer covers all the situations and arenas we toil in. In my LA commercial world we have behind the scenes crews all the time. Most times it is a camera dude a sound dude and a producer type that are running around. I talk w the sound guy. Most are nice and want to be sure not to step on my rf freqs. We shoot the shit a bit and that is it. I only feed him my mix when we roll. We do our deal n they do theirs and we all go home. In the old days all this used to be union jobs in LA. Now? Hard to say who's in one and who is not. I wish we were all in and covered by one. I think the EPK crews should be camera n sound and be in the union for their benefit but I doubt they ever will.

CrewC 

[peggynames]

Okay....so....I am happy the discussion has begun. That was the intention. 1st, I do not put down non union sound persons, for heavens sake, I was one for several years. I may have mis-stated my position....what I really meant was that the SOUND person had been cut from the behind the scenes filming crew due to budgetary constraints. I feel badly that these fellow sound people have been aced out of work because the producer of the EPK,ENG,BTS, or whatever you call it, thinks that he can just hop a feed from us to the camera, bypassing the sound person all together, and, NO, the cameraperson does not wear a headset. Many of these sound guys I have known for years and this is their livelihood. They tell me that they are required to belong to the IA695 but that only one of the companies that hires them is a signatory to the IA so....they get none of the union benefits but still have to pay the dues. Crazy, huh? I know times are tough for all of us but these guys are getting hit particularly hard. It would be helpful to know if there are any union rules in place to back us up when we say " no sound guy/girl, no sound feed". Sorry if I was not clear about the point I was trying to make and trust me...I wish to offend no one. I just wonder if there is something that we, as a group might do to support our fellow sound friends. If there are no rules in place, then their should be......if there are rules in place, then we need to spread the word as to what they are. Why are the guys required to be union anyway if the company they work for is not a union signatory? What is the point?

I have also run across the situation of the personal documentarian for the director syndrome as you spoke of with Judd Apatow, only my experience was with Steven Spielberg and Robert Zemeckis. It is hard to turn them down.......I don't propose to know what the answer is, but I hope that this discussion will lead to something positive. If we do not try, nothing will happen.

Point of clarification to those who do not know what area I am working in.....I reside in Los Angeles and have been a 695 member for more years that I wish to state and work on features

One more point about the shop steward. I am not aware that we have those out here on the west coast, at least I have never met one in all my years. It sure would be nice to have one, then we would not have to go to the producer directly. We could have someone else do our dirty work....Hehehe

Just trying to keep brothers and sisters working as they always have.

peggynames

be the change you wish to see in the world

[studiomprd]

" Why are the (gals and) guys required to be union anyway if the company they work for is not a union signatory?  "

that is because in order to be working on an IA set, one needed to be an IA member, and that membership was enough, even if the visiting producer was not a signatory.  as a courtesy, it was often enough to be a member of another appropriate union (like IBEW or NABET-CWA), if the visiting producer was a signatory to one of them.  Even if the visitor wasnb't working under an IA contract, the membership, which was a ticket onto the set, was a commodity, and got our members work, and often a bit better pay, too.

" I have also run across the situation of the 'personal documentarian for the director' syndrome  "

this really isn't new, but technology has made it far more widespread, and relatively cheaper and easier (any kid can do it!); the problem is the union has allowed precedent to be set for this new gimmick-version of BTS.  These major players (actually their production companies) can easily afford to pay properly for this. The IATSE has been derelict in protecting its jurisdictions, and been letting them slip away, instead of negotiating for them in the contracts.

[Darryl Linkow, C.A.S.]

Why are the guys required to be union anyway if the company they work for is not a union signatory? What is the point?

Simple answer to your question, Peggy.  The slime-ball EPK producers are taking advantage of a union member's card.  These producers know that since their company is non-union, they could run into a problem on a union show.  They figure that if the sound mixer and/or camera operator for the EPK should get "carded", they can show membership cards and the producers get away scott-free and can keep on shooting.  I have reported many, many times over the past 30 years to reps of our Local 695, about this situation, and nothing has been done to challenge this.  The general statement about this is that the EPK companies are hired by the Publicity Dept. of the various studios, and that they are not governed by an IA contract.  I disagree with this, especially seeing how nowadays the Publicists are members of IATSE Local 600!!  If you or anyone else is disturbed by this situation, I suggest you contact representatives of your local or maybe your favorite board member and voice a concern and/or a complaint.  With the current situation of members being out of work and the upcoming requirement to get 400 hours per period for health benefits, it would greatly benefit members if all the EPK jobs were required to be done by Signatory companies, so that members could get their benefits.

[RPSharman]

Did we ever lose walkie talkies in the contract, or did they just become too much of a pain in the ass to handle?  The 695 contract affords staffing increase until the burden on the department is lifted. I expect other locals have similar language. Management of walkies would constitute a burden on the department for sure! Perhaps we can start with that to get some sound people some union hours.

And what about playing back on HD cameras?  If there's sound on the camera being fed by the mixer, then that's video assist. We should have a person there for that. Perhaps the walkie talkie person.  This is contractual.

Is it contractual for EPK?  We still haven't established that. Many of us were used to the work being done by IATSE crews, but did it have to be?

Curious.

[Jeff Wexler]

Did we ever lose walkie talkies in the contract, or did they just become too much of a pain in the ass to handle?

I don't think Walkie-Talkies were ever specifically in any contract (I could be wrong) but were traditionally handled, in the beginning, by the sound department. We also typically did get to add people to our crew if the Walkie load got to be too much for the 3rd (utility) person to handle. The whole process by which we "lost" the Walkies happened over quite a stretch of time and there were a lot of factors contributing to the Walkies being handed over to Production/AD department. Once that transition was fairly well established and without any real contractual language or disputed violations, it was a done deal. I don't think we would ever get it back and be able to add sound crew to handle the Walkies.

-  Jeff Wexler

[Guest Ken Mantlo]

Oh man, I'd quit the business if we had to go back to handling walkies.  Robert, you weren't around when we did and it's a nightmare.  Try keeping track of 130 walkies from 3 different vendors for 4 different units on a show.  Then try to get them all back at the end.  Nothing like getting the blame for 20 walkies going missing.

NOOooBODY KNOWS... THE TROUBLE I'VE SEEN...nobody knows my sorrowww...