IATSE Strike Discussion Thread | Deal ratified

[Barnack]

2 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

It's an employers market right now. They can be picky with who they hire because so many are out of work. I've been passed over by several entry level roles because I only have college-level experience and not full time experience. Employers can complain that nobody wants to work behind a facade when in reality they don't want flight risks and choose not to hire qualified/serviceable candidates.

 

Maybe in a special sector/city, but in general it is the complete opposite of the workplace I know, where entry salary for a cook exploding and so on.

 

In Canada:

Average Hourly Earnings in Canada increased 30.91 percent in September of 2021 over the previous month.

 

Inflation up, unemployment down, salary up, modern record of people living their jobs in recent months that not an employer market:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/10/12/jolts-workers-quitting-august-pandemic/

The phenomenon is being driven in part by workers who are less willing to endure inconvenient hours and poor compensation, who are quitting instead to find better opportunities. According to the report, there were 10.4 million job openings in the country at the end of August — down slightly from July’s record high, which was adjusted up to 11.1 million, but still a tremendously high number. This gives workers enormous leverage as they look for a better fit.

 

In almost every sector tracked by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, workers are quitting at or near the highest levels on record, going back to when tracking began in 2001. 

 

Employers in many industries, including hotels, restaurants and construction, have complained about the difficulty of hiring workers after the pandemic upended the labor market and made many people less willing to take low-wage jobs.

 

Truck drivers:

https://www.trucknews.com/transportation/canada-short-18000-truck-drivers-in-second-quarter/1003154055/

 

 

 

 

[keysersoze123]

There are also stories going round that in that set, target practice was being done with the prop guns. Its possible someone loaded live ammo in that prop gun. With the current laws, many folks on the set could be carrying around guns with live ammo. 

[Porthos]

1 hour ago, keysersoze123 said:

There are also stories going round that in that set, target practice was being done with the prop guns. Its possible someone loaded live ammo in that prop gun. With the current laws, many folks on the set could be carrying around guns with live ammo. 

 

This really isn't the thread for the tragedy surrounding Halyna Hutchins' death, but I'm noting something of a split in, oh let's call it story lines, surrounding this that roughly break down to "blame the head armorer" and "blame the assistant director" with "blame the producers" being a side bit of "blame the assistant director" and I won't be surprised one whit if that's the fault-line which this eventually falls on.

 

Already I'm starting to cast something of a jaundiced eye at some of the... I hate to use the word gossip, but I can't quite think of a better term outside of "finger pointing", coming out about just what was going on that set.

 

I guess I am saying that I won't be surprised if folks are either trying to cover their own ass here or throw other folks under the bus and thus we should probably be a bit skeptical of stories coming out now until there is more corroboration.

Edited October 25, 2021 by Porthos

[Plain Old Tele]

^^ Those individuals may all be responsible to some degree, but the production company and those in charge are at the absolute heart of this mess and they should be held accountable. 

[Barnack]

From my little understanding It will be diffuse with some finger pointing by definition I think because

 

) Either the weapon master was on set and has full responsibility of the gun or production skipped is presence and bend the rule

) Even there the actor has in is guideline to make sure the gun was test-fired before and to test fire yourself before usage and the actor need to watch the prop master validate the absence of object or dummy bullet.

 

Which sound like rules that sound people will almost always bend on set where guns are used all the time and if that the case, singled out just the actor when a tragedy happen would be hypocritical.

 

I think it is case if the report of previous gun fire incident, it clearly increase the responsibility on the production.

 

Those claim are insane:

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/movies/prop-gun-used-by-alec-baldwin-was-used-by-crew-for-fun/news-story/ce9ced9ac9612921f2f67691dd43805c

 

It could have been an actual bullet !? If that the case that would almost certainly involve criminal negligence.

Edited October 26, 2021 by Barnack

[dudalb]

The AD has a history of not caring much about safety:

 

https://variety.com/2021/film/news/rust-assistant-director-david-halls-halyna-hutchins-1235097307/

 

Who the hell thought hiring a guy with this past would be a good idea on a movie where gunfights would play a major role?

And I do have a couple of questions about if the Director's guild was somehow shielding the guy.

Oh, the film producers still bear the ultimate blame..they hired he guy, and it happened on their watch, but a lot of questions need to be aswerered.

And I think mandatory firearm safety instruction for all cast and crew on any movie where guns are to be used is a much more useful step then trying to ban all "reaL" guns from movie sets.

[keysersoze123]

 

[Plain Old Tele]

30 minutes ago, keysersoze123 said:

 

I mean, I may vote NO but that graphic is cherry-picking. Not all the locals had those things across the board, it was a mishmash. There are real gains in the new proposed deal… whether they’re enough is up to members to decide. 

[dudalb]

Man, it just looks worse and worse for the producers of Rust

 

:https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-10-25/prop-master-alec-baldwin-rust-accident-waiting-to-happen

 

I am all in favor of  small budget movies and keeping costs down in the film industry across the board; I think the massive cost overruns that have become almost routine will end up biting the studios in the butt someday, but safety is one thing you do not cut corners on.

Maybe one reason they had the clowns working on this film that they did was that the competent people would not touch this with a ten foot pole.

I wonder if this film will ever see the light of day, now. i know one thing, every PR person in Hollywood is thinking "My job might be bad, but at least I am not a PR guy for Rust".

[dudalb]

Maybe Tele can tell us if the Rust scandal will have any impact on the vote to ratify the agreement.

I know there is no direct connection, but indirect connections are often important, and the shooting has certainly heightened concern about safety and health issues in general,and that might influence uniion members.

[Plain Old Tele]

I don’t know anything other than a lot of people are pissed in general. 

[dudalb]

16 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

I don’t know anything other than a lot of people are pissed in general. 

And what happened on the Rust set won't make them any happier vis a vis safety and health....

[Plain Old Tele]

Maybe make a Rust thread then. 

[dudalb]

18 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

Maybe make a Rust thread then. 

Might be a good idea, since discussions about Rust are running both here and in the general conservation thread.

Done. Just submitted one.

 

Edited October 27, 2021 by dudalb

[Plain Old Tele]

Had another general Editors Guild meeting today. It was…. a bit contentious. I don’t know if we will ratify (to say anything about the other Locals). 

[The GOAT]

Any truth to the rumor that there's more green screen and CGI because SFX workers are non-unionized? 

Whereas practical effects require more unionized workers?

[Plain Old Tele]

2 minutes ago, The GOAT said:

Any truth to the rumor that there's more green screen and CGI because SFX workers are non-unionized? 

Whereas practical effects require more unionized workers?

No.  

[lorddemaxus]

6 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

No.  

I feel like there's some truth to it. It's easier to get VFX artists to crunch and work overtime for nothing.

[Plain Old Tele]

11 minutes ago, lorddemaxus said:

I feel like there's some truth to it. It's easier to get VFX artists to crunch and work overtime for nothing.

VFX houses are separate from the studios and production companies (even if some of them are owned by the larger ones). They are technically an outside vendor that bids on a project. The studio doesn’t care about the minutiae of how/what the bid is, broken down on a granular level at least. And since profit margins are razor-thin on the VFX side of things, a VFX house will bill studios for overages (including, among many other things, the salaries they’ll have to pay their employees). 
 

edit: of course, there are going to be times when it’s way more efficient/possible to do a shot in post rather than practically, but that’s not so much the studios cleverly and diabolically overloading the poor VFX team, but because it’s, well, either impossible or unrealistic to try to achieve it practically. 
 

A bigger problem for VFX houses is studios pencilling in release dates waaaaay in advance and then not wanting to push them further back when they run into complications. That’s when they overwork everybody (including union people).

Edited November 13, 2021 by Plain Old Tele

[lorddemaxus]

4 minutes ago, Plain Old Tele said:

VFX houses are separate from the studios and production companies (even if some of them are owned by the larger ones). They are technically an outside vendor that bids on a project. The studio doesn’t care about the minutiae of how/what the bid is, broken down on a granular level at least. And since profit margins are razor-thin on the VFX side of things, a VFX house will bill studios for overages (including, among many other things, the salaries they’ll have to pay their employees). 

What I thought is that most studios prefer using VFX because VFX houses can ask for less money from studios while continuing to maintain their profit margins by paying then paying their workers less money. I don't think the studios aren't actively asking for VFX houses to pay their workers less, but I doubt they would like to be billed more by VFX houses.