Overworked Production Crews

[Phil Rhodes]

1 hour ago, Tyler Purcell said:

There are people sitting at home twiddling their thumbs who are dying to get a chance to work on a big show

That was my thought.

I suspect that won't be something that any producer would do quickly or willingly, or in large numbers, but on stuff not requiring massive amounts of experience it seems a bit of a stretch that literally no person can do any form of camerawork anywhere. It works if we assume Variety's definition of "a set" is rather restricted.

Reportedly the American unions also have separate agreements with certain producing entities (BET and HBO?) which would suggest to me that at least some production could continue.

For what it's worth, what Greg mentioned earlier in the thread about the Marvel ten-hour workday is more or less what I understand is generally being aimed for in the UK and has been for years (often it's "ten plus one," the one being lunch, and although "eleven plus one" is also common it's not quite as nasty as 16 overall hours which appears to be normal in some places). Things like "prep and wrap time" (unpaid overtime) and moving the location of the "production office" in order to game the travel rules have been the exploits here.

It may be worth pointing out that the very existence of IATSE owes, in a very indirect manner, to a strike in New York over a century ago during which nonunion crew were hired and proceeded to build sets so dangerous the cast refused to go anywhere near them. Possibly the liability issues are a concern here.

[Gregory Irwin]

Even if scab camera people do take over the reins, there won’t be a director, a cinematographer, assistant directors, actors, post production staff or any other job that has agents and specific contractual commitments.  Their guilds and locals are supporting the strike. It isn’t reasonable for the employers to staff across the board with non union labor and have to deal with contact disputes and law suites. The unions still have this power to shut down the industry. I just hope a contract will be agreed upon before any of this happens. 
 

G

[Aapo Lettinen]

2 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

On a side note, I do think the days of big union crews are dwindling, due to there being so many super talented people who have the skills, simply sitting around waiting for the next opportunity. 

Well, the real issue here is that there is lots of talented and somewhat experienced people around who DON'T HAVE ANY WORK ETHICS . that is really destroying the whole industry for everybody.  They are willing to work for lower pay and in unsafe working conditions and to cut corners whenever asked whether it being wise or not.

Then you have to compete with productions who use this kind of people who are willing to do double the work hours for the same pay and don't care about safety at all unless the producer specifically asks them to.  

I get it that for some people it is life and death to get the single movie done and they are willing to risk anything to get the merit out of it and not to be labelled "the cowards who had to go home after 20 hours when the others still had to continue on the top of the skyscraper without any safety harnesses and 40mph wind"  . But for most persons it is just work. Myself included. I could just as well drive a cab or something and it would be just as fun as working in the film industry. Would probably get even more money out of it with less hours...   but that is an issue for sure. People are either unethical daredevils risking everything all the time OR they are so used to the film business that they could not care less about a single project and are mostly interested about when they get to eat and sleep and where the nearest bathroom is

[Phil Rhodes]

I should clarify: I don't think, as a practical matter, that union crews in US film and television production are likely to be replaced on any scale, but there are a few reasons why Variety's line about nobody being able to pick a camera up on any set is likely a bit of a generalisation. I mean, it won't stop people shooting independent music videos...

Presumably the real question is what sort of working conditions the business model actually supports - in short, is the money actually there to fulfil the demands of the unions? I ask this question because I've personally been involved in conversations where demands were being made of productions which I knew it was not within the power of the production to fulfil; the production would simply not happen. That's generally at the lower end and it's a complex problem, but in the end, if it's just a matter of scheduling a few extra days on the production and making a bit less profit, that's fine. Equally, there would probably be a band of budget levels at which this might pinch a bit, no matter how you wanted to frame it, though you'd have to ask why a functionally insolvent business is being run basically on the goodwill of the workers.

[Neal Norton]

I do not think there is a "ton" of skilled workers just waiting to work as scabs in the TV & Film business.  Working on the pressure cooker sets that exist require a level of experience that simply has not been developed in the US with non union crews.  I can tell you from experience that working in areas with few or no developed film crews can be very challenging.  Finding one competent AC on a location outside of major production center is often not possible.  Finding 6 is just a pipe dream.

The bigger threat is from run away production with shows going en mass to Eastern Europe, South Africa, Mexico, The UK, Australia and Asia.  The actors are key here.  If the actors agree to shooting outside the US then the strike could be a very tough slog with lots of damage both to the US based businesses & crews.

I hope the actors stand with us.

Neal Norton
Cinematographer

[Aapo Lettinen]

29 minutes ago, Phil Rhodes said:

That's generally at the lower end and it's a complex problem, but in the end, if it's just a matter of scheduling a few extra days on the production and making a bit less profit, that's fine. Equally, there would probably be a band of budget levels at which this might pinch a bit, no matter how you wanted to frame it, though you'd have to ask why a functionally insolvent business is being run basically on the goodwill of the workers.

in most Finnish productions it seems that they generally lack about 20% or 30% of the budget and time to make the show great without counting on luck and the freewill of the workers. So the script and schedule is usually about 20% or 30% too optimistic and then corners need to be cut on set to try to stay on schedule and still make the show worth watching. The issue is that everyone is doing this so every show needs to be 20% or 30% bigger than they have resources for because, well, every single one of your competitors is doing that as well and you would look cheap if doing everything by the book all the time ?  

In most parts of the world it can be worse than this I have understood. but it is generally with films and tv-series just like it is with your jeans or t-shirts or a nice jacket which is comfy and nice cool looking: if it is cheap and still great it is absolutely certainly made in a sweatshop and someone suffered greatly stitching it together

Edited September 28, 2021 by aapo lettinen

[Phil Rhodes]

34 minutes ago, Neal Norton said:

The bigger threat is from run away production with shows going en mass to Eastern Europe, South Africa, Mexico, The UK, Australia and Asia.  The actors are key here.  If the actors agree to shooting outside the US then the strike could be a very tough slog with lots of damage both to the US based businesses & crews.

I have to say there's not a lot of point sending it over here at the moment; the UK film production sector is rushed off its feet with the combined post-covid production boom combined with the peak of the streaming wars. It won't last, but right now you can barely get crew or facilities.

Beyond that, there's also the fact that the union here just voted on terminating its agreement with PACT (the UK equivalent of the AMPTP) over very much the same concerns as the recent IATSE vote. It's not clear what that will mean in practice, since the union is far less omniscient here, but while things are different they are certainly far from perfect.

[Tyler Purcell]

4 hours ago, aapo lettinen said:

Well, the real issue here is that there is lots of talented and somewhat experienced people around who DON'T HAVE ANY WORK ETHICS .

When you live in a world where people are paid bonuses to cut corners, there will be a lot of corner cutting done. The problem isn't the crews, it's the executives who make horrible deals with producers/line producers which are enablers for abuse. 

The union's can't have any special rules related to schedules and meals FOR ANYONE! It's total bullshit. I actually hate the union rules, they aren't strict enough honestly. If it were my contracts, I'd have the following; 10hr "work" day, with a 1hr break after the first 5hrs. 15 minute breaks every 3hrs and a 30 minute 2nd meal at the end of the day, guaranteed. When you're being taken away from home for days, weeks, months on end, you need to be fully fed every day by the show. You can't be fed later and having a solid one hour break mid day with a few more relax moments during the day to mingle and chill, it would really help break the monotony. 

[Gregory Irwin]

I am very proud to report that my union, The IATSE,  has successfully negotiated a new contract with the AMPTP and has avoided a nationwide shutdown of motion pictures and television production in the USA. We were scheduled to stage a walkout strike on Monday, October 18th. This would have been a first in our 128 year history.  It took our union president, Matthew Loeb, to set the strike deadline in order to alert the employers to take our bargaining positions seriously and bring substantial offers to the table in the past few days. Last night, the agreement was reached.

This simply proves that our union continues to have the power and authority to influence the employers as they have conceded to our reasonable demands that for months they were rejecting. 

This is just the first step in changing the culture of our business thus making it a much better work environment for all film, television and video workers not only in the USA but eventually around the world. Excessive hours and little turnaround between shifts without breaks is not a sustainable way to work over many years. I applaud our leadership for improving these conditions. Now the membership will read the new contract and vote to either ratify it or reject it. I am convinced that we will overwhelmingly ratify the new contract. 

The following is just a few of the contractual improvements:

Better living wage for the lesser paid crafts

 Annual cost of living wage increase 

An updated and more generous streaming contract 

Longer turnaround between shifts

Weekend turnaround 

Increases in employer funded retirement and healthcare benefits 

Increased penalties for late or no meal breaks 

There are many more bullet points but I’ll end it here. 
 

G

Edited October 17, 2021 by Gregory Irwin