Maxim Ford Posted February 15, 2014 Author Share Posted February 15, 2014 No one is preventing anyone from being a grip. Get the training do the job. Do you think anyone should be allowed to operate a crane with a camera and 2 people at 10 meters high? How about driving a train? Any training? SFX people? surely we should let anyone who wants to have explosives and set them off on set? Don't want to stop people working. So not only all the "facts" you mention here are wrong, Martin Spence is a full time official for BECTU and has never been a cameraperson. Before that job he worked as a production manager at Trade Films in Newcastle. No one is being prevented from working, but the Union wants to prevent people from getting jobs "just" by undercutting the going rate for the job. I will say there is no money in film when I see the producers travel economy. Les Mis which at the time of shooting had so little money the crew were told went on to take 441 million US dollars. (only the below the line workers though) Now if film workers cannot organise and demand proper wages, I am sure the producers will find away of spending the extra money. Private jets are expensive. Just because film making is glamorous does mean it is not a proper industry like screw manufacturing. Its workforce should have proper wages, reasonable hours, holidays and a safe work place. There are a lot of cinemas, TV stations and Blu Ray factories, they need product, tons of it. They should pay the proper price for it. Producers that cannot make the grade should be put out of business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Do you think anyone should be allowed to operate a crane with a camera and 2 people at 10 meters high? Hell YES! If people have the training and ability to operate a crane they should be allowed to operate it. I don't think only special people should be allowed to operate a crane, the possibility should be open to anyone. Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 (edited) No one is being prevented from working, but the Union wants to prevent people from getting jobs "just" by undercutting the going rate for the job. I think it's complete nonsense that no-one is being prevented from working. There are already tons of barriers to entry in the industry. Low budget work provides an opportunity for those lower down the scale to start out. My experience is that it is usually the established workers in the industry who are undercutting people further down the rung, far more than just anybody is coming along and getting work by undercutting everyone else. The awful thing is that we then have to hear those same established workers whining about the low paid work they have done. Well they shouldn't have taken it in the first place. They certainly didn't need to. If just anybody wants to operate a video camera then why not?! It's hardly that dangerous. If people want to only work on higher paid projects good for them. If they want to prevent those further down from getting work then that is not at all good. It's called pulling the ladder up after you and there is a long tradition of this in the UK. I don't see anything wrong with union members marketing themselves as being quality workers who expect a higher rate of pay. Seems like a good way of handling things but attempting to put everyone else out of business is definitely out of order. Freya Edited February 15, 2014 by Freya Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Les Mis which at the time of shooting had so little money the crew were told went on to take 441 million US dollars. (only the below the line workers though) er, hardly a low budget production was it! Which makes me ask a few other questions. I saw the current Bectu rates and I note there is little difference in day rate between the low budget rate and the higher budget rate. Shouldn't Bectu be pushing for higher rates on the larger productions? Why is there all this focus on the tiny little productions when you say that there are productions like Les Mis where people are flying in private jets and could afford to pay people a better rate? Perhaps BECTU would be better served focusing on those productions. Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 15, 2014 Share Posted February 15, 2014 Producers that cannot make the grade should be put out of business. I want to know EXACTLY what you mean by that! Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 15, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted February 15, 2014 Maxim, you're not listening. No one is preventing anyone from being a grip. Get the training do the job. Existing grips get to choose who gets to train. Obviously, they don't want more competition, so the incentive is to train nobody. Yes, people are being prevented from working. Regardless of whether you accept this is deliberate or not (and I think it's clear it is deliberate), it's still the natural consequence. Do you think anyone should be allowed to operate a crane with a camera and 2 people at 10 meters high? Well, maybe, if they know what they're doing (and having or lacking an NVQ doesn't prove or disprove that - it is never simple, sadly). There are already LOLER and related rigging regulations. Although to be honest I've never seen a ride-on crane in the UK, at a trade show or in use, and I'm not sure there's one in the country, so that may not be a particularly good example. Anyway, you're attempting to create a false dilemma. I object to the fact that it's being made artificially hard to get the training. I don't object - necessarily - to the idea of requiring training to do a job, although in many cases with gripping the job does not really involve sufficient risk to warrant it. A dolly is less dangerous than other things for which formal training is not required. It's always easier to talk risks up. Martin Spence is a full time official for BECTU and has never been a cameraperson. Oh, okay. So? All I said was that I agreed with him on a couple of points. No one is being prevented from working I can't work as a grip, anymore, can I? Not that I've ever wanted to - I don't smoke - but the point remains. Yes, people are being prevented from working. If they do it to camera too, a lot more people will be prevented from working. I will say there is no money in film when I see the producers travel economy. Producers I work for do travel economy. Now if film workers cannot organise and demand proper wages, I am sure the producers will find away of spending the extra money. Drivel. It doesn't exist. Now, you could reasonably take the position that it doesn't exist because the banks are being excessively difficult about lending it, but again, the point remains. All producers want to produce big, impressive shows. My impression is that they're as hidebound by circumstance as the rest of us. Just because film making is glamorous does mean it is not a proper industry like screw manufacturing. Couldn't agree more, generally, but in a purely pragmatic sense it is possible to pursue low-budget filmmaking. Screw making is completely impractical in any circumstance other than a very upscale industrial manufacturing plant. Bad example, but I know what you mean. There are a lot of cinemas, TV stations and Blu Ray factories, they need product, tons of it. You'd have thought, but really, they don't. Why make a million copies of ten indie features when you can make ten million copies of Harry Potter 17, which is the current model. Producers that cannot make the grade should be put out of business. Define "grade". P 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxim Ford Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 This is from Nick Ray grips branch of BECTU... Hi Maxim I have read the conversation, I find it full of ignorance on their part and beneath contempt for me to reply. As far as our qualification is concerned it is government sponsored and only supported by the union as with many other good causes the union supports. I find so many of the facts being discussed are from a background of little knowledge. If the other participants wish to have a face to face discussion I/We would welcome the opportunity rather than hiding behind a keyboard . Cheers Nick Ray NVQ Advanced Level 3 Grip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 This is from Nick Ray grips branch of BECTU... Hi Maxim I have read the conversation, I find it full of ignorance on their part and beneath contempt for me to reply. As far as our qualification is concerned it is government sponsored and only supported by the union as with many other good causes the union supports. I find so many of the facts being discussed are from a background of little knowledge. If the other participants wish to have a face to face discussion I/We would welcome the opportunity rather than hiding behind a keyboard . Cheers Nick Ray NVQ Advanced Level 3 Grip Now there's a response from a union member for you! I especially like, "I find it full of ignorance on their part and beneath contempt for me to reply." Hilarious! R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 16, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted February 16, 2014 it is government sponsored and only supported by the union as with many other good causes the union supports. Well that's just obvious drivel. Morton and his cronies were at a camera branch meeting a literally years ago talking about how they'd managed to force this thing into being, and how useful it would be at keeping out people they didn't like. There is no secret about why this was done, they weren't even trying to be secretive about it. They were laughing and joking at the power they'd managed to gain. I don't like the situation, but what I like a lot less is being lied to about it. Don't try to tell me this isn't the case, I was bloody well there. It was a revolting spectacle. Might actually have been the last branch meeting I ever went to, on the basis that I wanted to be in the union but if I kept witnessing things like that I was going to have to quit on principle. And what on earth is this "in person" hilarity? Am I being offered out, or something, on an internet forum? Well, that would be more or less what I'd expect from the average member of the gripping fraternity... Ugg. Me grip. Me no like puny cameraman. We step outside. Grrr! Edit - well, okay, I haven't met every grip in the world, and I'm sure some of them are lovely. But I'm trying to think of an example, and I can't. That has to tell you something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 I have found that nothing drives the unions more nutso than when the producer insists on hiring non-union people to work on a union show. The union has to find a way to accommodate them somehow, permits or whatever. It totally blows a hole in the cronyism aspect of unions which is rampant, especially in film. I have had so many threatening emails in my time from union bosses here in Ontario it isn't even funny. What is funny is how many times the union bosses made good on those threats. Total number of times......ZERO! HA! I've had so many of these emails that include the phrase, "we will get your shoot shut down" or "we are going to have a serious problem here." It's incredible that in a free constitutional democracy like Canada that unions are able to make these kinds of threats and get away with it!! The union bosses like to blow a lot of hot air and fluff and bluff, but when the producer calls their bluffs, turns out the emperor has no clothes after all and the producer carries on however he feels. We also have a situation here in Ontario where the various film unions are in a constant state of war with each other. Now that does make me laugh indeed. Ontario may soon be a right to work province, and that will change things for film production here. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 This is from Nick Ray grips branch of BECTU... Hi Maxim I have read the conversation, I find it full of ignorance on their part and beneath contempt for me to reply. As far as our qualification is concerned it is government sponsored and only supported by the union as with many other good causes the union supports. I find so many of the facts being discussed are from a background of little knowledge. If the other participants wish to have a face to face discussion I/We would welcome the opportunity rather than hiding behind a keyboard . Cheers Nick Ray NVQ Advanced Level 3 Grip er I think Phil is the only one who has mentioned Grips. I'm not too concerned about Grips and certainly don't mind if they have an NVQ. Good for them! You havn't answered any of my questions tho Maxim and assuming Nick Ray is talking about this thread (??) then he is right about one thing, that I have little knowledge about all this BECTU stuff you are talking about! Which is of course why I'm asking you about it. I'm especially still wondering what you meant by: Producers that cannot make the grade should be put out of business. Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxim Ford Posted February 16, 2014 Author Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) In this situation I am in agreement with Nick. The nonsense and ill informed nature of your remarks make it a waste of time writing on these forums. You don't think people working on film should be trained and qualified. I do and so do the majority of members of BECTU. We also thing that pilots should be trained to fly planes and train drivers have the skills to control trains. I have seen the dangers caused by unskilled workers, HMIs running ti the rain with trailing cables, Cranes not supported properly. Poorly earthed lights. Mixed 3 phase lighting. This is not to stop people working, but to work in any profession you need the skills to do it, not just the willingness to do it for less money.. If producers can't run a safe film set and pay proper wages they have no business in this industry. Producers employ people not unions, why don't producers advertise all their jobs? Why because that's where the cronyism comes in. Producers don't hire on merit (would they know ?) They just employ who they know. Its not what you know its who you know. So producer advertise all your jobs and let all apply for them based on merit. Different countries have different histories and I have no knowledge of the Canadian Unions, but unions do nothing for working people, they are just a framework for workers to organise to do things for themselves. If workers don't actively take part and fight for what they want don't be surprised if you don't get the Union you want. Producers distributors and owners of production companies spend a fortune getting what they want, they sit on all the film bodies the BFI, the Film Review. no workers are invited , no actors ...on the last Film Review there was no one who worked on a film set on the committee. And of course no trade unions. BECTU rallies what all the members of the production branches think and tell the politicians. BECTU had Chris Smith the head of the Film Review and there we told him about the state of the film industry. About the falling budgets and long hours.... Or maybe you think they sit around reading this forum? Is that your plan B? When a union fights and campaigns for better conditions, do the non members, who weakened the campaign, who whined on forums, who didn't take the time to come and discuss with their fellow film makers, do they take advantage of that? Are they just freeloaders? Edited February 16, 2014 by Maxim Ford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 16, 2014 Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) In this situation I am in agreement with Nick. The nonsense and ill informed nature of your remarks make it a waste of time writing on these forums. You don't think people working on film should be trained and qualified. I do and so do the majority of members of BECTU. We also thing that pilots should be trained to fly planes and train drivers have the skills to control trains. Are you replying to me or someone else Maxim? It doesn't seem clear? Certainly I think it's great if people are trained or experienced and believe these things to be good. I believe that training should be open to anyone however, so perhaps that is where we differ? Or perhaps you aren't replying to me at all? I have seen the dangers caused by unskilled workers, HMIs running ti the rain with trailing cables, Cranes not supported properly. Poorly earthed lights. Mixed 3 phase lighting. Thankfully I havn't seen any of that, but then I just tend to work on really low budget stuff where none of this kind of equipment exists. Freya Edited February 16, 2014 by Freya Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 16, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted February 16, 2014 I've had BNC connectors drawing inch-long arcs from equipment (my own equipment, actually) due to the fact that electricians in the UK seem never to bother earthing generator trucks. That's pretty much normal, if they're parked on hardstanding. Just too much trouble to walk to the nearest soft ground or piece of metal street furniture with a clamp. And they're qualified people. And they're in the union. Doesn't stop them being lazy, feckless, incompetent and dangerous. P 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Producers don't hire on merit (would they know ?) They just employ who they know. Its not what you know its who you know. Name one industry on the planet that does not operate on this principle. It's a fact of life, deal with it. Producers certainly aren't going to hire a camera guy who feels strongly that all producers are evil SOBs who should not be paid for the work they do. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 17, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted February 17, 2014 Are you replying to me or someone else Maxim? Glad you asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Glad you asked. I think he is replying to Richard because he talks about Canada and obviously I'm not Canadian. I just wondered as it was following right on from my posting. *shrug* Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxim Ford Posted February 19, 2014 Author Share Posted February 19, 2014 There is a meeting on these matters.... Short notice as it started off to be just for the crew but has since gone viral http://filmindustrynetwork.co.uk/bectu-invites-filmmakers-members-discuss-film-standards/2658 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 19, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted February 19, 2014 Well, okay; going, Maxim? Might make the trip... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxim Ford Posted February 19, 2014 Author Share Posted February 19, 2014 Name one industry on the planet that does not operate on this principle. It's a fact of life, deal with it. Producers certainly aren't going to hire a camera guy who feels strongly that all producers are evil SOBs who should not be paid for the work they do. R, All universities, educational organisations, most industries, Health service, political bodies.... Have to advertise jobs, have to obey employment laws against discrimination, and have to employ people with the right qualifications. http://jobs.newscientist.com/en-gb/ So you first attack unions for cronyism then defend it for yourself, Then you lie about all others doing it. You are a poster boy producer for union recruiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Companies that make financial contracts with workers are obliged to fulfil them in accordance with local law and should those contracts be broken, payment not be made or safety standards not adhered to, they can be formally investigated and even liquidated for not complying to proper standards. Companies can also be fined for creating hazardous conditions for workers. Saw this on "Film Industry Network". Not exactly a big threat in this context really is it! ;) Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 19, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted February 19, 2014 No, it's slightly less threatening than a Beanie Baby, because most film crew are far too poor to bring legal action anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freya Black Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 There is a meeting on these matters.... Short notice as it started off to be just for the crew but has since gone viral http://filmindustrynetwork.co.uk/bectu-invites-filmmakers-members-discuss-film-standards/2658 Would come to this but it is, as you suggest, too short notice at this point. However I feel sad that BECTU are making this an issue of "health and safety on low budget productions". The issue there isn't that it is a low budget production but the way the production was being run. I don't feel trying to vilify low budget productions is helpful as most of them are much safer than larger productions. Very few low budget productions could afford to have an explosives guy for example. It would be helpful if someone could ask the following questions tho: 1) Why are we making this about "low budget productions"? Beyond the fact something like this would be easier to brush under the carpet on a larger budget, wouldn't this be just as concerning if this was a larger production? I think it's really unhelpful to be making this about low budget productions, there is good and bad everywhere and low budget productions are generally far safer by their nature. 2) I was surprised to discover that union members had worked for this company in the not so distant past. I and others working in the low budget world took the decision not to work for these people because we had already heard enough stories. Why were more established people, including an owner/operator of a Red Epic kit and union members choosing to work for these people when others further down the scale have chosen not to?! One powerful ability we have as human beings is that of making choices. My experience is that there are too many very established workers choosing to work on every piece of work they can get their hands on without thinking about whether it might be appropriate for them or not. 3) What can be done about a company that is run by people who do not care about the law and will put the company into liquidation on completion of the movie anyway? This is a key question in this instance that nobody seems to be addressing. People seem more concerned about beating up on low budget productions than facing the more serious questions in this matter. Freya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Phil Rhodes Posted February 19, 2014 Premium Member Share Posted February 19, 2014 Couldn't agree more. Anyone, anyone at all, going to this meeting? I could go, but I'd hate to find myself talking to a mirror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Dunn Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 All universities, educational organisations, most industries, Health service, political bodies.... Have to advertise jobs, have to obey employment laws against discrimination, and have to employ people with the right qualifications. http://jobs.newscientist.com/en-gb/ Everyone must obey the law, of course, and no-one has said producers shouldn't, but in the UK at least there are very few professions in which it is unlawful to practise, or employ, without specific qualifications. Some medical staff and gas and electrical installers, certainly. It's also not a legal requirement to advertise posts outside a very few public-sector areas under European law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now