Hollywood preps for Teamsters walkout

[Brian Dzyak]

I doubt van drivers are getting 1500 bucks a day unless they worked a 24 hour day. Then they deserve it, but who would want to ride with them if they did not get a nap somewhere durning the day. As opposed to grip electric trailers or campers, van drivers can have the hardest teamster job. They are picking up crew and actors and hour or two before general crew call, then make pickups and drop offs all day, then drive people home and to parking lots, and then drop off film and sound at the end of the day. Who came up with that first number and where did it come from? A payroll accountant or heresay?

 

There are Department of Transportation regulations for ALL "commercial" drivers that limit how much they can drive within certain amounts of time. They all keep logs of when they drive and when they rest. Those "naps" are mandated for the very reason of safety.

 

But, of course, "free market" Conservatives HATE regulations of any kind, so if they had their way, not only would your van driver be paid less than the minimum wage, he'd also likely drive you into a ditch because of fatigue as they would be forced to work non-stop by "free market" Producers. :unsure:

[Tom Lowe]

The "Free Market" could perhaps do what you suggest, only we don't truly HAVE a "Free Market" economy.

 

I agree completely.

 

This nonsense of "free market" just doesn't work.

 

Well wait a minute. You just admitted that we don't have anything even remotely resembling a free market. How do you know whether it will work or not? Our entire nation was built on free-market principles. It worked incredibly well!

 

If we did have a true "free market," I'd be on board.

 

Excellent. In that case, start voting libertarian. :lol:

[Saul Rodgar]

 

 

But, of course, "free market" Conservatives HATE regulations of any kind, so if they had their way, not only would your van driver be paid less than the minimum wage, he'd also likely drive you into a ditch because of fatigue as they would be forced to work non-stop by "free market" Producers. :unsure:

 

Yup.

[Saul Rodgar]

Jeez, wouldn't it be smarter to have two shifts?

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

 

 

I have worked on a couple of big studio films (as an assistant) where split shifts were attempted at production-wide levels and the results were near catastrophic, IMO, since the heads of departments are not around all the time to supervise that things are happening as needed. The incoming crew was fresh, yes, but when push comes to shove in the thick of heavy filming pressure, the outgoing and very tired crew members always forgot to mention some little detail that made the fresh crews' working with other departments HELL, making production react in very negative ways sometimes.

 

Some situations we encountered included: people getting fired for not relaying needed information or items, or for merely being at the wrong place at the wrong time, and then sometimes being re-hired a few days later when things calm down; pressing things not happening because crew members don't have authority to call some shots and those who do are NOT on split shifts, and by the time that person gets in, all hell breaks loose because things didn't happen in a timely fashion; entire departments threatening to walk out because of those types of situations, etc. Just madness.

 

I suppose it can work under the right circumstances, but I haven't seen it work smoothly. Would I love to work 8 hour shifts on features? You bet! Just my practical experience with it has not being nothing but a string of avoidable bad situations.

Edited July 25, 2010 by Saul Rodgar

[Francis Kuhn]

Are these the same Teamsters who hold productions hostage here and force them to pay $1,500 a day for passenger van drivers?

 

Hi Tom,

 

Where did this $1,500/day figure come from? It seems to be the gasoline on this particular fire. I have to agree with you, it does seem like a lot for a van driver, but I'm wondering if this is some urban myth or if it's actually what a Teamster van driver makes in a normal dad-to-day situation (no overtime, etc). I noticed Tim Healy asked this painfully obvious question in his post above, but, unless I missed something, it seems to have been ignored by everyone.

 

BTW hope your shoot is going well. I thought the Lone Pine/Bristlecone images looked fantastic.

 

-Fran

[Tom Lowe]

Hey Fran, when I worked on a big Audi TVC in LA last summer, the Teamsters were making $800 a day to drive those white vans, up to between $1,200 and $1,500 a day, depending on how much overtime they could rack up.

 

The best thing to do is to actually ask the drivers themselves the next time any of you guys are on set being driven around by them.

 

The funny thing is, there was a kid on the shoot who had just graduated from USC film school. He had initially been planning to become a producer, but once he found out how much he could make driving those vans, he switched his goals and was trying to get into the Teamsters union! :lol:

[Francis Kuhn]

Hey Fran, when I worked on a big Audi TVC in LA last summer, the Teamsters were making $800 a day to drive those white vans, up to between $1,200 and $1,500 a day, depending on how much overtime they could rack up.

 

The best thing to do is to actually ask the drivers themselves the next time any of you guys are on set being driven around by them.

 

The funny thing is, there was a kid on the shoot who had just graduated from USC film school. He had initially been planning to become a producer, but once he found out how much he could make driving those vans, he switched his goals and was trying to get into the Teamsters union! :lol:

 

 

Thanks, Tom.

 

I actually have a photo/film assistant who just got into the Teamsters last year. He's been shuttling trucks (18-wheelers, I believe) back and forth to New Mexico for some big feature. I'll forward him this link and see if he can give me the rate structure. I don't think he's making anything like $800 a day, but I'll have to see what he says. I know he's low in seniority, so he doesn't always get called to work, either.

 

FWIW he is about the hardest-working guy I've ever met. multi-talented Brooks Institute grad, a hell of a photographer, and he's a pretty decent 1st AC when needed. With shoot days and rates shrinking as they are in photography and cinematography (and with twins on the way), he went looking for a better job. He was really happy to get in.

 

I know he was relieved to get some decent pay and benefits. He's definitely not swimming in cash, though. Just a normal middle-class guy working hard, supporting his wife and kids and paying his taxes.

 

I'll let you know what I can find out.

 

-Fran

[Thomas James]

Tom Lowe, originally our great nation was founded under communism which was the original economic system of the Plymouth Colony as well as ancient Christianity. Although they could not make that system work and later had to resort to Capitalism in order to provide people with an incentive to work, nevertheless communism will be the ideal political system once people are ready for it.

[timHealy]

There are Department of Transportation regulations for ALL "commercial" drivers that limit how much they can drive within certain amounts of time. They all keep logs of when they drive and when they rest. Those "naps" are mandated for the very reason of safety.

 

But, of course, "free market" Conservatives HATE regulations of any kind, so if they had their way, not only would your van driver be paid less than the minimum wage, he'd also likely drive you into a ditch because of fatigue as they would be forced to work non-stop by "free market" Producers. :unsure:

 

 

Their are plenty of producers who would rather pay one guy for the day, and his health and welfare benefits for the day. If one introduces shifts, where is the first guy going to find another half day of work? And do you think producer wants to spend twice as much for health and welfare for every job position? not.

[Francis Kuhn]

Tom,

 

Here's what my Teamster friend just sent. It seems that reality is a lot less spectacular and interesting than the story of the $1,500 a day Teamster passenger van driver. :)

 

-Fran

 

Just back from our Union meeting ... Our board is recommending us to vote Yes on ratification ... I believe it is going to pass no problem, so no strike in the near future.

 

Here is how our rate structure works .... depending on what your driving ... its a buck or 2 different ... Semi's and large trucks make more than van drivers ... lets just say 32/hr for the first 8hrs ..... Time and a half after 8hrs ... double after 12.

 

So for an average 12 hr day a Teamster makes $448. Now .. the kicker is .. when the crew does 12hrs ... Teamsters generally do 14hrs, as we need to get the truck to location, parked and opened up before call. Then we need to drive it away after wrap end of the evening. We can make really good money .. but it takes lots of hours to do.

 

Back to back $800 is not impossible ... but it would be 16/17hr days ... no one is pulling back to back $1500 days.

 

Yes it is a lot of money to drive a passenger van. On the other hand ... I have had a van completely packed with 14 crew members (lives) ... it is not a task that I take lightly ... the amount of responsibility is off the scale.

 

Suppose you could have a $150 flat rate PA do that. (who is not subject to the drug and alcohol testing I have to go through)

[Guest]

A most interesting post Fran, thanks for that. I still think $32.00/hr is high for a van driver, it's still way above the hourly rate of teachers in the public school systems. And they need teaching degrees. In order for a teacher to make that kind of money they would need to make $107, 000.00 a year!! Find me a teacher that makes that much any where in America.

 

In fact I'm sure most firemen and policemen are not making 107K/year to risk their lives. Driving a passenger van really doesn't compare.

 

What he says about the extra two hours a day to set up and tear down, etc. That is all true I accept that.

 

Now I'd like to get into the hours a director puts into a project before it starts, a year or more, plus the time he puts in after production shuts down, another year or more.

 

R,

[Francis Kuhn]

Good points, Richard. But the more I think about it--what a van driver actually might be responsible for-- the more I'm wondering if Production is actually required by their insurance provider to have a vetted and trained professional driver at the wheel.

 

A big-rig full of lights can be replaced, but the potential litigation from a loss of life or limb could devastate a company. Can you image trying to mount a defense in court, then trying to explain that you only wanted to pay a college kid $150 a day to drive the van that took the director and DP over the double yellow line into oncoming traffic.

 

Also, my Teamster friend can only dream of a time when he works year-round, so his annual take-home is really not all that spectacular, more like solidly middle-class.

 

The teacher argument, I agree with, but for some reason we have historically placed things like teaching at the bottom of the list of things that need attention. I can't exactly say why that is. It seems like the business of education, with proper investment in good teachers and schools, would more than pay for itself in the long run. But I think that when it comes to actually paying teachers, we really don't value them as much as we like to think. Just wait for the next teacher's strike and listen to the spew of vitriol when they want job protection and a cost-of-living adjustment. Somehow people seem to feel that education should be funded by non-stop bake sales.

 

I suspect perhaps these kinds of debates are a result of our inclination to pick on an easy target to vent our frustrations in tough times. I mean, the guys on Wall Street who got their outrageous bonuses after driving the world's economy off a cliff, well, how do you even begin to attack them?

 

--Fran

[Adrian Sierkowski]

As Fran does mention, I think it is important to keep in perspective that us film folks normally don't have the benefit of working year round.. and even if we did get offered that much work.. I don't know how many years we could keep it up for.. regardless of what job it was.

Whenever I tell people how much my day-rate is (non film people mind you) they have this astounded look, thinking I'm working something like 250 days a year (typical work in the US me things... 50 weeks (2 vacation) 5 days a week.) Hell I'd love to pull 250 shoot days a year.. but I don't think that normally happens for the vast majority of us film peoples.

[Guest]

For me....I can't accept the, film workers only work on occasion therefore they need large salaries, argument. Technically I haven't worked since Aug 8th, 2009 when The Dogfather shut down. The soonest I can work again will be Summer 2011, "IF" I can get the next shoot up and running. It's my choice to do this, if I can't make a living I need to get into some thing else.

 

The van driver having people's lives in their hands argument I'm not sure carries much weight either. They guy who drives me to the airport in the passenger van isn't making any thing like $32.00/hr!!! Yet he has the exact same job as a Teamster.

 

My sister-in-law has seven children and uses an airport passenger van to move them all around, she's not getting any special perks for doing this.

 

I can see how a semi-truck driver is a highly skilled position, and deserves the $32.00/hr. But if I can buy a passenger van off the Ford lot and drive it home....sorry, it just isn't skilled labour worthy of $32.00/hr.

 

R,

[Francis Kuhn]

For me....I can't accept the, film workers only work on occasion therefore they need large salaries, argument. Technically I haven't worked since Aug 8th, 2009 when The Dogfather shut down. The soonest I can work again will be Summer 2011, "IF" I can get the next shoot up and running. It's my choice to do this, if I can't make a living I need to get into some thing else.

 

The van driver having people's lives in their hands argument I'm not sure carries much weight either. They guy who drives me to the airport in the passenger van isn't making any thing like $32.00/hr!!! Yet he has the exact same job as a Teamster.

 

My sister-in-law has seven children and uses an airport passenger van to move them all around, she's not getting any special perks for doing this.

 

I can see how a semi-truck driver is a highly skilled position, and deserves the $32.00/hr. But if I can buy a passenger van off the Ford lot and drive it home....sorry, it just isn't skilled labour worthy of $32.00/hr.

 

R,

 

Hi Richard,

 

Well, I know "limited time for earning" is an argument that goes largely unquestioned, and is in fact celebrated, when it comes to athletes and actors salaries. We sure do love our celebrities.

 

And I'm not saying the $32/hr is a good or bad thing, I only brought it into the discussion because Tom mentioned the $1500/day figure. It just seemed suspect. Again, productions, at least big productions with high-priced talent, may find $32/hr reasonable in relation to the value of the lives in the van.

 

BTW sorry to hear about the work situation. It's absolutely grim down here, too. And getting worse. Just got word from an agency contact that my biggest client just set their brochure budget for the new model year. Total alloted for new photography/video: $0.00. I don't think the Teamsters have much to do with my clients all being broke. In fact, if we could just get another million jobs in the USA that paid Teamster-level wages, my clients could move some product and I'd probably be able to get back to work myself.

 

Best,

 

-Fran

[Guest]

BTW sorry to hear about the work situation. It's absolutely grim down here, too. And getting worse. Just got word from an agency contact that my biggest client just set their brochure budget for the new model year. Total alloted for new photography/video: $0.00. I don't think the Teamsters have much to do with my clients all being broke. In fact, if we could just get another million jobs in the USA that paid Teamster-level wages, my clients could move some product and I'd probably be able to get back to work myself.

 

Well I should elaborate, when you're a producer all your work needs to be self generated. There is no time clock to punch that produces a magical pay cheque. So I either get a new show up or I don't.

 

Director for hire work is basically non-existent, there are few TV guys that do this, that's it. I only know of a tiny handful of director for hire types in Hollywood. These days the director has typically wrote the script, arranged for some of the financing, or both.

 

R,

[Tom Lowe]

Fran, it seems like your friend confirmed the $800 full day up to $1,500 max, although obviously not back to back. Why they are encouraging 20 hr days for drivers with massive pay bonuses is beyond me! Sounds like a recipe for disaster, not added safety. :huh:

 

To me, if these drivers were worth 1,500 big ones per day, more power to them. But unfortunately, it seems like the unions are sort of colluding with other unions to FORCE these productions to pay these astronomical rates for van drivers.

 

The auto worker unions had a large role in bankrupting GM and Chrysler. It's all well and good to pay someone $75 an hour to turn a wrench if you live in a walled city where no other cars can be imported and no other competition can start up an auto company. But we live in a global economy. It's simply impossible to pay auto workers 75 bucks an hour to turn a wrench when someone in China will turn it for 75 bucks a month. Same thing with van drivers. Legally, the unions can do as they please, but in the end, they are killing their own jobs (just like the suicidal autoworker unions killed theirs), plus the jobs of many other people in the entertainment industry around LA who are non-union.

 

Now, you might think it sucks for the autoworker in Detroit to have to earn a little less, but it's wonderful for the dirt-poor peasant in China who can see his or her standard of living increase tenfold from virtual starvation to a decent living over the course of only a few years. The world is leveling out. Richer countries will have to work harder and save more, but poorer countries are going to see a massive increase in their standard of living. Hundreds of millions of people will be lifted out of poverty.

[Guest]

Hundreds of millions of people will be lifted out of poverty.

 

Not if the GOP has anything to say about it. :D

 

R,

[Francis Kuhn]

Fran, it seems like your friend confirmed the $800 full day up to $1,500 max, although obviously not back to back. Why they are encouraging 20 hr days for drivers with massive pay bonuses is beyond me! Sounds like a recipe for disaster, not added safety. :huh:

 

To me, if these drivers were worth 1,500 big ones per day, more power to them. But unfortunately, it seems like the unions are sort of colluding with other unions to FORCE these productions to pay these astronomical rates for van drivers.

 

The auto worker unions had a large role in bankrupting GM and Chrysler. It's all well and good to pay someone $75 an hour to turn a wrench if you live in a walled city where no other cars can be imported and no other competition can start up an auto company. But we live in a global economy. It's simply impossible to pay auto workers 75 bucks an hour to turn a wrench when someone in China will turn it for 75 bucks a month. Same thing with van drivers. Legally, the unions can do as they please, but in the end, they are killing their own jobs (just like the suicidal autoworker unions killed theirs), plus the jobs of many other people in the entertainment industry around LA who are non-union.

 

Now, you might think it sucks for the autoworker in Detroit to have to earn a little less, but it's wonderful for the dirt-poor peasant in China who can see his or her standard of living increase tenfold from virtual starvation to a decent living over the course of only a few years. The world is leveling out. Richer countries will have to work harder and save more, but poorer countries are going to see a massive increase in their standard of living. Hundreds of millions of people will be lifted out of poverty.

 

 

Well, I think he said the rate for a normal day is about $450. That's what he bases his monthly household budget on. The $1500 day is a rare exception. BTW judging from recent events it hardly sounds like the workers at Foxconn are celebrating the sub-poverty level wages they take home every week doing the jobs imported from around the globe.

 

It is a question of balance, and a very complicated one, I admit. The unions in this country, as despised as they seem to be these days, were what helped build a strong middle class and raise the standard of living for millions. As did family-owned businesses run by entrepreneurs who cared about more than just the financial bottom line.

 

I had a friend named Bill Meyer who passed away about four years ago. Bill invented and patented the fire sprinklers used in virtually every commercial building in the world. He made millions off that single invention, and he ran a company that employed hundreds of people. He always paid a fair wage and benefits because he cared more about the people who worked at his company than buying a private jet or another fancy car. He was exceptional.

 

Before he passed away, Bill saw what was happening to manufacturing in the US as clearly as the next guy, but refused to ship his production to another country because, as he said, "When you lose your manufacturing, you lose your country."

 

The problem, as he saw it, was that as companies matured and were acquired by big international corporations, the heart went out of them. The focus went exclusively to the bottom line and stock prices. Profits were the key to the new managers getting their bonuses. Peter F. Drucker Management By Objective types took over. There was no longer pride of ownership in the company, no longer an owner who felt that there was as much profit in seeing your employees prosper as in a higher quarterly profit.

 

Not saying I have an answer, just an anecdotal observation. Like I said, it's complicated.

 

Anyway, sorry to get off track. Hope you're catching the California sunset right about now.

 

Best,

 

-Fran

[Brian Dzyak]

A most interesting post Fran, thanks for that. I still think $32.00/hr is high for a van driver, it's still way above the hourly rate of teachers in the public school systems. And they need teaching degrees. In order for a teacher to make that kind of money they would need to make $107, 000.00 a year!! Find me a teacher that makes that much any where in America.

 

In fact I'm sure most firemen and policemen are not making 107K/year to risk their lives. Driving a passenger van really doesn't compare.

 

What he says about the extra two hours a day to set up and tear down, etc. That is all true I accept that.

 

Now I'd like to get into the hours a director puts into a project before it starts, a year or more, plus the time he puts in after production shuts down, another year or more.

 

R,

 

Your entire argument seems to be based on "relativism." Group A earns more than Group B, but Group B DESERVES more than Group A.

 

Maybe so, but to that I have to wonder, why is the first inclination to undermine the wages of Group A instead of increasing the wages of Group B? What the hell is the rationalization for driving wages, and concurrently the standard of living, for so many people? I mean, if you think that one group of people is earning "too much" in this "Free Market Capitalist" system (which really ISN'T a "Free Market"), then where does this desire to drive them into poverty coming from? Is it jealousy or resentment? Is it inherent hate for others?

 

I truly don't understand the hate and intolerance and lack of empathy that seems to permeate the "Conservative" "Free Market" mindset. Yeah, there will always be a few "lazy" people who are content to mooch off the system. But I have to believe that, by and large, MOST people WANT to work for what they get and deserve a fair wage that allows them AT LEAST a comfortable 80-ish years of life on planet Earth. But "Conservatives" have little faith in their fellow humans and prefer something more akin to "survival of the fittest," wherein ONLY the "strongest" or most savvy get to live in opulence. That's not what our US Constitution and Revolution was about despite what Fox "News" claims. The Libertarian phrase of "rugged individualism" is code for "I got mine, you get yours, and if you can't, then F you!" That's not what the USA was founded upon no matter what anyone claims. To that end, the failed idea of "Free Market Capitalism" is antithetical to everything the USA stands for. But again, that's a moot point since the world has never seen true free-market Capitalism. It's a stacked system designed ONLY to benefit the wealthy while leaving everyone else behind.

 

To reiterate, I don't understand the desire to suppress wages for a group of people who are deigned to earn "too much" relative to other professions. Why not INCREASE the wages of those who "deserve" more instead? Doesn't that make a whole lot more sense in addition to being more humane?

[Guest]

To reiterate, I don't understand the desire to suppress wages for a group of people who are deigned to earn "too much" relative to other professions. Why not INCREASE the wages of those who "deserve" more instead? Doesn't that make a whole lot more sense in addition to being more humane?

 

Ok that's fine, teachers should earn more. Question, where do you propose to obtain this additional revenue for teachers salaries, given that teachers are paid from public funds. Better known as taxes.

 

As you know your state has been in a budget crisis going on three years now.

 

R,

[Tom Lowe]

Ok that's fine, teachers should earn more. Question, where do you propose to obtain this additional revenue for teachers salaries, given that teachers are paid from public funds. Better known as taxes.

 

As you know your state has been in a budget crisis going on three years now.

 

R,

 

Why stop at teachers? Surely school bus drivers should be making $1,500 a day. After all, they are hauling our most precious commodity -- children. They deserve to make $1,500 a day. Nevermind that the average citizen, who is paying for all of this, doesn't even earn $1,500 a week.

[John Sprung]

I have worked on a couple of big studio films (as an assistant) where split shifts were attempted at production-wide levels and the results were near catastrophic, IMO, since the heads of departments are not around all the time .....

 

I was thinking just for the drivers, since they start the earliest, leave the latest, and have the least to do in the middle of the day. It would be safer, since they'd all get enough sleep. Clearly you can't work without your department heads.

 

 

 

 

 

-- J.S.

[Hal Smith]

Yes it is a lot of money to drive a passenger van. On the other hand ... I have had a van completely packed with 14 crew members (lives) ... it is not a task that I take lightly ... the amount of responsibility is off the scale.

 

Suppose you could have a $150 flat rate PA do that. (who is not subject to the drug and alcohol testing I have to go through)

 

When Producers start hiring PA's to drive extended wheelbase vans with 14 passengers there will be horror stories in the news about fully loaded crew vans going out of control and killing the driver and passengers...just like the fairly frequent stories where a fully loaded church van being driven by a volunteer driver has gone out of control with multiple fatalities.

 

I drive a 3/4 ton Ford Super Duty E250 Super Cargo van for my business. That's the same chassis and body as a 15 passenger window van. When fully loaded with equipment, supplies, tools, etc. it's not something I'd want to be riding in the passenger seat while being driven by an eighteen year old kid. The big vans are safe when driven by good drivers, and death traps when driven by amateurs.

 

Teamsters ARE professional drivers, and worth the money they get paid.

 

PS: I charge my clients for travel time and mileage, I make a lot more per hour driving my van than a Teamster, anyone got a problem with that? My clients don't, they get their money's worth because I show up with a fully equipped engineering department on wheels.

[Justin Hayward]

To reiterate, I don't understand the desire to suppress wages for a group of people who are deigned to earn "too much" relative to other professions. Why not INCREASE the wages of those who "deserve" more instead? Doesn't that make a whole lot more sense in addition to being more humane?

 

I can’t tell if this is sarcasm or not. If it’s not, when we raise everyone’s price, the price of gum triples. Meaning the cost of everything catches up. Meaning, we’re back to square one with higher numbers.