Carl Icahn Now Wants ALL Of Lionsgate 
Action Comedy TV: Showrunner Matt Nix 
SAG National Board Approves Joint Bargaining … 
I'm told IATSE's official pro-ratification campaign is entering a new phase. According to an email sent from the International Cinematographers Guild, 
IATSE Local 600, President Steven Poster to a select group of National Executive Board members, a phone bank will be set up to call members and get them to Vote Yes. It is being coordinated by Western Region Director David Behm who will supply the phone lists. But it has raised questions about what Guild resources will be used and/or abused. "First, it is not the role of the Guild to lobby the members either for or against ratification -- although there is precedent from the 2006 contract ratification, where the NEB officially authorized an anti-contract-ratification campaign because of the loss of mandatory staffing of camera operators," one ICG Vote No organizer tells me. "But, unlike 2006, there has been no NEB authorization of this political action that Poster is unilaterally undertaking." In his email, Poster sounds anything but confident: "This is the first full week that the ballots will be out there and this is the week 80% of the members who will vote will do it... We need to see it pass our local with a decent percentage."
- IATSE Hollywood Leaders Sweat It Out
- This Email Is Making The IATSE Rounds
- Ballots Going Into IATSE Members Hands
- Smoke & Mirrors For IATSE & AMPTP, Too
- Remember IATSE/AMPTP Tentative Pact? There Looks Like Lotsa Trouble Ahead...
- IATSE/AMPTP: Controversial Health Plan Eligibility Rollback Causing Complaints
- Details Of AMPTP-IATSE Tentative Deal
Loading ...
Hey Steven, how much did you get for your soul?
I hope whoever they find to man the phonebanks have experince as telemarketers as I am sure they will be hearing a lot of cussing.
I’m a member of 700, and I’ll be putting my no vote in the mail tomorrow.
Did any of the leadership in Local 600 and 700 Negotiation Committees object to any of this durning Basic Agreement Negotiations .They represent about 12,000 IATSE rank and file members .
Talk about out of touch leadership.
Curious IATSE
WOW,
A select group of Local 600’s NEB and staff “lobbying” its members to pass a contract they themselves have no stake in? Oh wait, of course they have an interest in the new contract. Local 600 has a $10 Million per year (no typo, $10 Million) operating budget. Doering’s $250,000 salary, $40,000 car, first class air fair has to be supported. And those NEB members Bruce doles out work to really don’t want to miss any work. I hear Steven is up for another “runaway” job.
All the while the “workers” at local 600 (rep. by OPEIU) have been working without a contract for over a year. Local 600, Bruce, can’t seem to afford a cost of living increase for them. A real union guy!
“Lets get this contract passed so everyone can get to work and the cash flow can continue uninterrupted.”
Already voted No on this crap deal!
Just when I thought the IA couldn’t stoop any lower…This contract is yet another sell out contract. Our collective bargaining has disintegrated into collective sell down the river. I say let’s dissolve the IA and roll our crafts locals into the Teamsters 399. Nice job IA leadership. Who you’re serving, I do not know, but it’s defnitely not your membership. Btw, get fucked.
” We need to see it pass our local with a decent percentage.”
Why, Steven? So you wont get a spanking from Matt Loeb, who desperately needs to not be the first IA President in history to lose a Hollywood Basic Contract vote?
Pathetic. The members will treat these callers as the snake-oil salesmen they are.
This is crazy. Theoretically, in a voting bloc where everybody is on the same side, there shouldn’t be any attempt at coercion. Particularly in a union that is funded by dues, so the members are paying for the propaganda being used on/against them. This isn’t the presidential election where Democrats are trying to convince Republicans and vice versa, all these people are supposed to be on the same team. Supposedly. Though it’s obvious that isn’t the case anymore.
Nikki, Thanks for the above posting.
IF this is for real, is it a legal, sanctioned use of IATSE 600 dues funds?
Just asking…
Umberto
What is in this deal for Steven Poster, Paul Covington or any other IA member? We are being offered a contract that invites abuse in an already abusive industry. Our elected officials should be PROTECTING us, not selling us out.
My understanding of an elected leader, both on the board and as President, is that he/she is supposed to be the VOICE of the membership. Steven, are you listening, the members of local 600 do not want to give up anymore. No amount of phonebanking coercion will change that. Fight for us, not against us.
Well, well… Last time (2006) locals 44 and 600 had the nerve to actually vote against the contract. 600 was pissed about a provision allowing directors of photography to double up and be the camera operator on a show as well, and voted 141 in favor vs. 2227 against it. Local 44 voted 512 in favor vs. 1313 against it.
That prompted this little rant from Tom Short:
“We have a couple of local unions that have too many chronically unemployed or retired officers and officers with issues that have kept them from working in the industry,” said International President Short. “I’m convinced that we need to make certain that the elected officers of our local unions work in the industry for a certain amount of time to be eligible to run for office. We don’t want to end up emulating the Writers Guild West and Screen Actors Guild – guilds run by certain officers who don’t work in the industry.”
“When I look down the road to the future of the IATSE, I see that only knowledgeable leadership on the local level, real leaders who are working members able to communicate with working members, can make us stronger,” International President Short said.
I have been in the biz for over 20 years. This is the worst contract ever. The new media wild west contract is without job classifications and goes against what a skilled labor union is supposed to represent. This shouldn’t be career day.
Also medical does not take into account children. They are the ones that got screwed.
I won’t have it. I already voted no.
Too bad they didn’t use all these lobbying resources to get a decent deal from the AMPTP. The more I learn, the more I lean to a no vote. Every IATSE member should learn as much as possible about this deal, especially about how it handles so-called “new media,” in other words the future of “all media.” It’s all about working under non-union conditions and paying dues for the privilege. Seriously, don’t take my word for it. Read the memorandum. Do the research. Listen to the IATSE and local leadership’s arguments. Then decide if you can vote yes to this.
local 600 member wrote:Too bad they didn’t use all these lobbying resources to get a decent deal from the AMPTP. The more I learn, the more I lean to a no vote. Every IATSE member should learn as much as possible about this deal, especially about how it handles so-called “new media,” in other words the future of “all media.” It’s all about working under non-union conditions and paying dues for the privilege. Seriously, don’t take my word for it. Read the memorandum. Do the research. Listen to the IATSE and local leadership’s arguments. Then decide if you can vote yes to this.
just wanted to repost the above as it bears repeating.
I read a ton, did as much research as possible and came to the conclusion many (if not most) have which is that there’s no way I can vote yes on this contract.
What’s really awful about it, is that the IA didn’t even negotiate on behalf of it’s members—or seem to know what the membership cared about?
What’s the use of wage increases if everyone is working non-union gigs half the time?
There are many working non-union crafts who are doing better and better without the benefit of joining the union. One of the few things left union had over non-union was group health care policy. But if that’s shaved down too–what is the use being in the IA? I can see the AMPTP’s motives in union busting, but I can’t figure out why the IA wouldn’t see this coming?
hollygolightly wrote:
“I can see the AMPTP’s motives in union busting, but I can’t figure out why the IA wouldn’t see this coming?”
Is there any doubt left in your mind about who they are really working for?
I am a member of two IATSE locals here in LA. I took the time to read the MOA several times, took notes, busted out a highlighter, and thought for a while. It’s interesting that all of the hype being pushed is about the qualifying hours for medical, and not the NON UNION workspace that’s being created in New Media. It seems contrary to the reasons for having a labor union in the first place.
I am voting no on this MOA, and urge my brothers and sisters to do the same.
“Hey Steven, how much did you get for your soul?”
DP weekly rate (in Canadian dollars).
I sent in my ballot today. I voted NO. I had to.
It wasn’t the fear of 400 hours or a $100 copay in the ER. It was New Media.
I don’t need a union card to work as an independent on low budget content which is what will be the lions share of the work once the distributors and exhibitors exploit all of the loop holes in this contract. And that will be soon. I have payed my dues. I already had to light, shoot, and set my own flags on many indie-productions as idiot inexperienced producers made the money and took the credit.
I’m looking into solar and green tech as a new career. I know every 20 year old with a $5000 dollar camera can swoop in and brown nose everybody, make $300 per day, shoot from the hip and think they are players in “Hollywood Baby!”
I will no longer be able to qualify for my hours in 2011 if this contract is passed. I don’t think I am alone. It is predjudiced toward people over 40! I have given this industry 28 years and this is how I end it? I find this disgusting and corrupt! I am ashamed for them. I will have to go back to my family who will be able to help me because I won’t be able to afford medication I must take and no insurance will take on someone with pre existing conditions caused by working in this industry. It is a complete slap in the face. I voted no but will it do any good? It was sneaky and underhanded how this was handled. anyone who votes yes has to be so selfish and self centered. Think about your brothers and sisters and families who will be out of work and insurance. They have kids so it’s more than 3500 people more like 10,000 without insurance. Sickening.After we have put our whole lives into the industry where do we go? Do they expect us to disappear quietly into the background? I think we should get together and file a class action suit against our leadership!
I am really curious as to what the incentive is here, the AMPTP must have offered our “negotiators” something big to make them feel the need to jam this joke of a contract down our throats. Lets get rid of this contract offer then get rid of this “negotiating committee”.
Vote NO.
you guys are ridiculous. if you have a problem with steven (or anyone else) working in canada, maybe you should be calling our GOVERNOR.
DPs don’t pick the locations, you guys know that.
as for the deal, everyone’s health care costs have gone up. you can either have huge increases in premiums to keep your insurance (which is WAY better than most) or you can increase your hours. either way, the huge cost in health care doesn’t pay for itself.
Poster, et al, take the rose colored contrast glass away from your eye and witness some reality. how do you live w/ yourselves selling out your self proclaimed “brothers and sisters”? whose pocket are you in? …do you enjoy the view from your ivory tower watching your “brothers and sisters” scratch and scrape for survival? been in biz for 18 years and in the union for 12 years.. i used to make a comfortable living in this biz. but since runaway production, etc has turned it all on it’s side i’ve lost my wife/child (to divorce), my house, my health insurance and my patience! i refuse to stand for this any longer…my NO vote went in mail today. and i’d like to tell you to stick it where the sun dont shine but its way more important in the ballot box. plus, you’ve already got all your cronies heads up there so i doubt it will fit. ps have fun in canada on your next job. i pray to god that yeti exists and he tears your arms off and beats you to death with them. have a nice life.
I am surprised and disappointed to see these comments about Local 600’s phone bank cite this effort as evidence of some evil intent, a conspiracy to force the rank & file members of this union to accept a sub-standard contract.
On January 11th, 2009, the National Executive Board of Local 600 met in a special session to consider whether to recommend ratification of the proposed Basic Agreement to the membership at large. After about four hours of discussion, the Board voted by more than a two thirds majority to recommend the contract.
Our National Executive Board is the governing body of this Local, and their decisions set the policy that we follow. Some of those who are criticizing the actions of this Local on your blog were on the losing side of that debate. While we encourage freedom of speech and open debate, it is unfair to characterize their opinions as representing the majority of Local 600 Board Members. They are, in fact, the minority voice.
Many of those board members who voted to recommend ratification are now volunteering their personal time, with no compensation, to discuss that decision with the members of our Local.
The phone bank that is being vilified in your blog is simply a tool to open dialogue with our members about what is going on at the Local, what factors went into the Board’s decision, and what we hope the members will consider as they make their own, informed decision. In other words: Democracy.
Unlike many of those who criticize, I will sign my name.
Respectfully,
David Behm
Western Region Director
International Cinematographers Guild
IATSE Local 600
Ha ha! I already sent in my vote!! No way, Jose! ppffftttt!!
“The phone bank that is being vilified in your blog is simply a tool to open dialogue with our members about what is going on at the Local, what factors went into the Board’s decision, and what we hope the members will consider as they make their own, informed decision. In other words: Democracy.”
Actually David, “Democracy” would have been phone banking to find out what members wanted while negotiations were going on not as a propaganda tool after you few have decided what we want!
Of course you’ll sign your name – you don’t work in the field so no blacklisting for you and you get to show your beloved President “See? I did your bidding Mr. Loeb.” You really are a disgrace.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO
WAAAAAYYYYY
AM
I VOTING
YES
David Behm,
Please don’t try to dismiss the growing number of people in your guild’s dissatisfaction with this contract by implying the frustration is the product of some small faction of sore losers in an internal battle. The ever-increasing number of potential no voters that I know had nothing to do with the guild’s internal power struggles. The terms of the contract didn’t get onto lots of our radar until the past few weeks. It was the memorandum itself (primarily what another poster calls the ‘wild west of new media’) that made us realize that it would be difficult or impossible to vote yes on this on this thing.
You and those in favor of this contract talk about the increased cost of healthcare. Okay, maybe raising the hours is the best way and maybe it’s not. I think most of us would give you the benefit of the doubt. You talk about increase in rates. That sounds good. BUT: It doesn’t matter because of the one thing neither you, Steven, Bruce, Loeb nor anyone else is talking about and that is the terms of “new media.” You won’t talk about it or try to justify the proposed contract’s treatment of “new media” because you know that it creates an enormous loophole for a tremendous number of productions (and not just “webisodes”) that allow producers to run “union shows” as if they’re nonunion.
Please, nobody be fooled by deflection about “the board said this” “the dissenters did that.” That’s how SAG shot itself in the foot. Ignore all that and read what the memorandum has to say about “new media.”
As I’ve said before: It allows you to work under non-union conditions, for non-union pay and to pay dues for the privilege.
To all IATSE members: DON’T DECIDE THIS THING BASED ON SOME ROBOCALL! READ THE NEW MEDIA TERMS AND IMAGINE YOUR FUTURE. Then decide whether you can vote yes to this contract.
The January 11th IASTE Local 600 Special National Executive Board meeting was NOT four hours of “discussion”.
The 10 a.m. Sunday morning meeting (called to order at 10:36 a.m.) was approximately a one and a half-hour “presentation” by Local 600 President Steven Poster and National Executive Director Bruce Doering.
The presentation was followed by approximately two or three questions, at which point, one of Mr. Poster’s supporters made the motion that the NEB recommend ratification of the contract.
The motion passed (as planned) and was followed by approximately two to three more speakers, at which point, another of Mr. Poster’s supporters abruptly called the question (ending all debate and forcing a vote on the motion). The motion passed (39) “for” and (18) “against” with (1) abstention.
It was all very choreographed and scripted, and the sole objective of the “Special” NEB meeting was successfully accomplished.
The meeting adjourned at approximately 1 p.m., although many members stayed afterwards to speak about the issues that they weren’t given the opportunity to during the “four-hour discussion”.
The only purpose of the meeting was to get NEB approval for “ratification” as Local 600’s official policy. Local 600 could then launch their pro-ratification campaign in ALL Local 600 media (website, ICG Magazine, “Camera Angles” newsletter, letters, and a barrage of emails – ALL FUNDED WITH OUR MEMBERS DUES).
The Special NEB meeting was held PRIOR to any general membership meeting, because the real objective was not to seek member opinion, but to elicit the official Local 600 edict from the NEB (the supreme governing body). Mission accomplished.
“… freedom of speech and open debate…”?
Not from ANY IATSE/Local 600 media – unless it’s “pro-ratification” dogma.
“… volunteering their personal time, with no compensation…”?
IATSE & Local 600 staff and employees have been volunteering their time writing these post and organizing phone-banks, etc?
“… to open dialogue with our members about what is going…”?
IATSE to member translation:
“We’ll tell you what we want you to know and think.”
Bill Roberts
1st Assistant Cameraman
IATSE Local 600 WRC/NEB Alternate
Mr Behm,
The Board members who voted on January 11 did not know the terms of the agreement. The Memorandum of Agreement (which is still not the formal agreement) was only released with the ballots. I doubt anyone on the Board knew the details of these health care givebacks: PPO copays up 20%. ER copays up 100%. MPTF visits now $5. Hospital admission now $100. Out of network down 15%. Mail order drugs are mandatory. Drug copays up $5. And there is now a coordination of benefits for drugs which will harm a spouse with an inferior health plan. How different would the vote have been if all the cards were on the table?
Go ahead and call me. My vote is already in, so it will be a wast of time.
Perhaps President Poster is correct when he says we will only get a worse deal if the IA goes back to the table. This may be a prime example of a “self fulfilling prophecy” if there ever was one.
If the no vote succeeds, can we — dues-paying members who are voting no based on the wording of the agreement, our experience with prior contractual giveaways, our consciences, and the needs of our families — trust the same leadership to sit at the table?
I certainly hope we can. We’ll just have to take our chances.
I am surprised and disappointed to see these comments about Local 600’s phone bank cite this effort as evidence of some evil intent, a conspiracy to force the rank & file members of this union to accept a sub-standard contract.
I don’t think “force” is the term you’re looking for here. “Gull” or “deceive” would be more apropos, because yes, it is definitely a sub-standard contract.
All this time and effort on the part of the local which employs you would be best spent working on a better deal. Although a majority of your NEB recommended accepting a bad contract, it does not follow that it is a good deal, nor, even more so, that it is the best deal that can be had.
IATSE History Lesson:
Back in the 1930s and 1940s, the big Hollywood studios could “buy” any IATSE contract they wanted, if the stack of $100 bills they distributed to IATSE Business Agents and Officers in brown paper bags was tall enough.
The IATSE was, and is, well-known as a “Company Union” very eager to please their AMPTP masters by supplying a “compliant workforce.”
I guess nothing has changed, except that now they probably use wire transfers to offshore bank accounts.
And David, at the January 11 NEB meeting that “recommended” this contract to the membership, the NEB based their decision on the false and incomplete information given us by Doering and Loeb.
Now that we have finally seen the 17 page Memorandum of Agreement that the IATSE and Local 600 sat on for three weeks without forwarding to the NEB as Poster promised, we know how much of what Doering and Poster told us in that 4 page Contract Summary that we voted on was lies and disinformation.
I doubt you would get that 2/3 vote to recommend RATification (emphasis on “RAT”) if that NEB meeting were held today.
I am also assuming that your description of this abomination of a contract as “sub-standard” would be one of Doering’s famous “member sellout” euphamisms.
Doug Hart, 1AC, NYC, Local 600 NEB, 34 years
(Proud to be one of the 18 NEB members voting AGAINST the recommendation for RATification)
David, thank you for participating in this discussion.
If some of us choose to remain anonymous, it is because, unlike yourself, we are vulnerable to job discrimination for expressing controversial views. I am confident you understand that.
As I am also confident you would agree that commenting on sites like this would be unnecessary if only Local 600, or the IA, for that matter, would permit the “freedom of speech and open debate” you speak of on their membership-funded websites, which they do not.
While the National Executive Board is the governing body of Local 600, and “their decisions set the policy that we follow”, I do not believe the NEB voted to rescind freedom of speech at Local 600.
You state that “the Board voted by more than a two thirds majority to recommend the contract” and that “those who are criticizing the actions of this Local…are, in fact, the minority voice”.
Since President Poster decided to hold the Special NEB to discuss and recommend the contract before the Special Membership Meeting, it would be impossible for the Board members to know how the MEMBERS felt about the contract. Would not “Democracy” have been better served if the Board had first heard from the membership they are elected to REPRESENT?
Perhaps that “minority voice” you speak of would have turned out to be the “majority” voice of the MEMBERS.
And finally, I have to take exception to your benign characterization of the phone bank as “simply a tool to open dialogue with our members about what is going on at the Local, what factors went into the Board’s decision, and what we hope the members will consider as they make their own, informed decision.”
President Poster’s email to selected Board members doesn’t quite comport with your description:
“We need as many of you as possible to phone bank for the contract.”
“We need to see it pass our local with a decent percentage”
Phone bank FOR the contract?
We need to see it pass?
Again, thanks for your contribution, David.
Really.
-Publius
Voted NO today, If you get a call from these clowns keep them on the phone as long as possible. Ask tons of questions. Get your money out of the deal.
annoyed at the lies wrote:
“if you have a problem with steven (or anyone else) working in canada, maybe you should be calling our GOVERNOR.”
Dear annoyed, (Kim?)
Perhaps you don’t get the reference, but there’s a bit of history in the comments tying Steven Poster to Canada.
While “ac4no” was busy losing his family, his home, his health insurance and his patience to runaway production, there was a group of us trying to put an end to the illegal Canadian subsidies that were stealing our jobs…and our lives.
We tried twice to get Local 600 to join SAG, the Teamsters Local 399, and IA 44, 695, 728 and others in this effort.
Each time, Steven Poster, who was a member of both Canadian camera locals, led the charge to fight us.
He rallied the “no” vote and was largely responsible for the motion’s defeat. Twice.
We were ultimately unsuccessful in getting Washington to pay attention to our plight. “ac4no” was one of thousands who lost most of what they hold dear to the predatory Canadian subsidies.
Who knows how it might have turned out if the Camera union had stood up for its members instead of siding with the MPAA against them.
The January 11th IASTE Local 600 Special National Executive Board meeting was NOT four hours of “discussion”.
The 10 a.m. Sunday morning meeting (called to order at 10:36 a.m.) was approximately a one and a half-hour “presentation” by Local 600 President Steven Poster and National Executive Director Bruce Doering.
So – once again the truth comes out. Silly me, I was giving Mr Behm the benefit of the doubt. Even though I should (and, do) know better.
Moving on to Mr Poster:
“We need as many of you as possible to phone bank for the contract.”
That would be as opposed to, say, phone banking for the membership?
“We need to see it pass our local with a decent percentage”
Yea, one must wonder, why would even say that, what with Tom Short no longer around to ream out those who fail to whip their members into going along to get along. Looking at 600’s LM-2 I see he only got $11,643 in 2007. So, I’m guessing his motivation here is he’s worried about (oh, the irony!) his own ability to get work.
Dear Western Regional Director Behm, let’s have a little democracy in action. First, no one termed it a conspiracy but you. Steven Poster is quoted above as having written, “We need to see it pass our local with a decent percentage.” That doesn’t sound like an effort to, as you state, “…open dialogue with our members about what is going on at the Local, what factors went into the Board’s decision, and what we hope the members will consider as they make their own, informed decision.” Boy, that’s some disconnect between what Poster’s written to a select group of NEB members about what the goal of the phone banking is, and your insincere attempt at defending that poor decision.
See, the whole problem here, and it has been since DAY ONE of the contract negotiations going back nearly ONE YEAR AGO when then-President Short went into the earliest negotiations in the history of early negotiations — namely, barely half-way into a 3-year deal: YOU GUYS ARE DICTATING TO THE MEMBERS, AND NOT LISTENING. Read the posts, read what the members across the Hollywood Bargaining Unit are writing. LISTEN. WE DON’T WANT THIS CONTRACT, IT IS UNACCEPTABLE TO US. YOU ARE DEFENDING THE DEAL AND TRYING TO CONVINCE US OF ITS MERITS, INSTEAD OF LISTENING AND REPRESENTING US. It’s called BULLYING.
Let’s be clear about the NEB’s vote after deliberation — since you’ve raised the subject. Let’s get some facts out there. There weren’t “four hours of discussion” as you state — that was the approximate length of the entire meeting. President Poster and your boss, National Executive Director Bruce Doering, both spoke at length about the reasons behind the decisions to go to 400 hours and the New Media conditions (or lack thereof), for almost TWO HOURS. As soon as President Poster opened the floor to questions from the ELECTED MEMBER REPRESENTATIVES, his hand-picked stooge got second-in-line to the microphone and rushed the motion that the NEB recommend ratification to the members. When seconded, that motion ENDED THE QUESTIONING BY THE MEMBERS after only ONE QUESTION. By the way, that stooge is an Associate Member who gets 56 hours paid into the Health and Pension Plans every week through his non-production employment (his work is not covered by the very contract he moved that the NEB recommend). In other words, the stooge who rushed to close discussion and have the NEB endorse this crappy contract IS NOT GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY THE INCREASE TO 400 HOURS, because he gets his 400 hours in LESS THAN TWO MONTHS of a six month qualifying period — JUST LIKE YOU DO, TOO. That’s some way of encouraging freedom of speech and open debate. Let’s call it what it is: hypocrisy. And that two hours of talking-points from Poster and Doering? The NEB voted on whether or not to recommend ratification based on only a “summary.” They did not have the benefit of the Memorandum of Agreement that only arrived with the ballots just this past week. And, the MOA isn’t even the contract language that WE will eventually have to work under! Some democracy!
You want to argue with your own employers on a weblog? YOU ARE NOT LISTENING. As for your holier-than-thou willingness to sign your own name, YOU don’t work freelance and your career isn’t in jeopardy by identifying yourself, so good for you that you signed your name. You get your six-figure-plus salary granted to you by NED Doering, without member oversight or approval. Incidentally, why is it that you are doing the dirty work for him, and why is he hiding in the shadows behind you? Oh, that’s right. He gets to DICTATE while flying under the radar. What a coward.
As for your phone bankers who are volunteering their personal time with no compensation, well, at least one of them has said that his “arm was twisted” (that’s a QUOTE) to make the calls, and the best he could come up with was, “They want me to say this…” and “They want me to say that…” One of his talking points was that “We want a strong ‘Yes’ vote TO SHOW THE AMPTP THAT WE WANT TO GET BACK TO WORK.” In other words, our leadership wants to show that we will BE COMPLIANT and accept a terrible deal that will put as many as 10,000 members and their dependents on the streets when it comes to health care, and allow the Producers to work us non-union while we have to pay union dues for the privilege. Rather than saving the Health Plan, if this contract’s Experimental New Media provisions are ratified, the Health and Pension Plans will further suffer because coverage “shall be at the Producer’s option.” To save the Health Plan — and our livelihoods — WE MUST REJECT THE NEW MEDIA DEAL. WE, THE R&F, GET IT.
Democracy is supposed to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. Rejecting this contract defends the THOUSANDS that will be tossed off of the Health plan, and rejecting it protects us from the inexcusable “New Media” provisions. Democracy, indeed!
VOTE NO! DO IT NOW! DON’T WAIT FOR THE PHONE BANKER’S CALL.
“anoyed at the lies” said:
“you guys are ridiculous. if you have a problem with steven (or anyone else) working in canada, maybe you should be calling our GOVERNOR”
I don’t have a problem with anyone else working in Canada.
I DO have a problem with THE PRESIDENT OF LOCAL 600 WORKING IN CANADA.
The message sent by such a selfish act FROM OUR PRESIDENT sends the following message:
I MAY BE YOUR PRESIDENT, BUT I DON’T REALLY CARE ABOUT YOU. THAT’S WHY WHEN THE MOST IMPORTANT CONTRACT IN YOUR LIVES WAS BEING NEGOTIATED, I WAS WORKING IN CANADA. AND I DIDN’T BRING ANY OF YOU, EITHER.
Nobody forced Steven Poster to actively conspire to impeach the previous president and usurp the office himself. Only self-interest did that. If he can’t afford to turn down runaway productions on principle. HE SHOULD NOT HAVE RUN FOR PRESIDENT OF A LOCAL HURT BY RUNAWAY PRODUCTION.
If you want to be “annoyed”, try that on for size.
Talk about “ridiculous”.
The concern about funding health care and pensions should be viewed in light of previous concessions we’ve made about how gross profits feed into that system. AMPTP should roll back some of those concessions and share the risk of the modern economy more equally with all involved.
Here’s the problem with President Poster working in Canada: he represents approximately 5700 American members, who work (hopefully) under the Hollywood Basic Agreement, unless they’re unlucky enough to work under a Low Budget, HBO, Disney, Digital or whatever Side Letter that they never voted for nor agreed to.
When he goes to Canada, guess what, “annoyed?” He isn’t working under the Hollywood Basic Agreement, he’s working under a Canadian IATSE contract. By doing so, he UNDERMINES EVERY ONE OF HIS MEMBERS. He’s actively going to work UNDER A DIFFERENT CONTRACT THAN THE ONE HIS OWN MEMBERS HAVE TO WORK UNDER.
And, because he’s a DP, he gets a waiver to work in Canada, but Canada’s Cultural Protection laws prohibit HIS OWN MEMBERS FROM WORKING THERE.
If, as Publius wrote, he chooses to work on runaway productions, he should have the DECENCY to refrain from running for the presidency of our union. It makes him a hypocrite.
While our contract was being negotiated — and it’s the ONLY Hollywood Basic Agreement that will be negotiated during his current term in office — he was not present and, worse, he was undermining that very contract by working out of the country under a different contract. That’s some leadership!
Now, he has the nerve to come back home and tell us what a great deal it is and we’d better sign it –or else. Okay, let’s be fair, he’s admitted that it’s not a great deal, but, hey, it’s the best we’re gonna get or we’re just gonna have to go on strike, ya know?
How does he know? I guess he got a full report from the people that actually showed up at the “negotiations.”
Any contract that both rolls back benefits and creates non-union workspace within, without or around a bargaining unit is going to be a very hard sell with even the most adept telemarketers manning (and womaning) those phone-banks. It would almost be worth reversing my early retirement in order to be able to vote NO on this excrescence.
Davey,
You overpaid IA punks got this all wrong.
You don’t try to eat the whole elephant in one sitting.
You do it like we did it in the old days one bite at a time.
You had it right for awhile, first you gave away night premiums, then Studio Zone requirements, 1st class travel, 8 hour minimum calls, drive to, cancellation of call notice, weekend rates, prevailing rate requirements and then allowed ungodly long hours to go unchecked until the media machine ground the flesh of your members into disease or death….now that’s the way you do it.
Not this way.
You are not promoting democracy in trying to sell this Alice in Wonderland POS of a contract, this contract promotes anarchy with membership requirements and removes the basic provisions of any real “union” collective bargaining agreement.
Indentured servitude doesn’t sell that well with the rank and file, it has to look like you care more about the members than that new motorcycle you have your eye on.
After reading posting on this site and other sites, I must respond.
I have been a member of Local 600’s NEB as well as a member of the Western Region Council for years and I’m constantly amazed by Bill Roberts, who has built a reputation for saying “no” to everything.
I’m not surprise that Bill is asking all of you to stand beside him and vote “No” on this Basic Agreement. What’s that saying, (Misery loves company), and Bill is looking for a little TLC from you.
I’ve long suspected Brother Bill, and others, of being more-or-less a union buster – first off, he has mentioned at past council meetings that dues should be voluntary, which is an argument for right to work. Now, he’s posting information on other sites as to how a local can decertify from the IATSE, which goes against the oath he took when he was elected as an alternate. This kind of talk does not sound like a brother who actually wants the IATSE to negotiate a better deal. It sounds like a person who wants to throw our union to the dogs, so that we may all lose together.
I heard the same information that everyone has heard at membership meetings, including Brother Roberts.
In fact, I remember Steven seating Brother Bill and other unseated alternate guests at the Special Board meeting to recommend the ratification of the contract just so that these people could participate in the discussion and vote. If that isn’t Democratic, I don’t know what is–being that every one of these alternates seated by Poster at the board meeting had been a very vocal “No on the Contract” person’s even before anyone knew what was even in the contract!
There are no conspiracies here. I thought Local 600 did a great job of presenting a consistent explanation of the Agreement and how we got to this point. No, it’s not the best contract for sure.
The most important issue for me and I’m sure for the members,
Is to get back to work now!
I’m not for anything that would delay or stop more JOBS from being created.
I voted “yes” because it is the right thing to do. The arguments against ratification posted on this discussion board doesn’t stand up to common sense and relies too heavily on conspiracy theories that don’t exist.
For more work NOW!!
Here are my ramblings …
I am thankful to all who wrote into this website. Smart, educated and researched–Thank you all.
I see that most members here will be voting no, as I have done so don’t call unless you want me to try to talk you into voting no.
I don’t understand how one writer would say the NEB meeting went on for “about four hours of discussion” and then a vote was taken and somebody else, who I presume was at the meeting, reports it was was “approximately a one and a half-hour presentation” then a vote was taken. I have to say it sounds like it was decided in advance. I would like to hear somebody say different here.
Also I have to say I am very surprised to hear that the President of Local 600 took work in Canada. Not that Canada is so bad but he is supposed to uphold certain values in my mind. And if he is taking work away from this country why wouldn’t anybody? I would, but not if I was the head of Local 600. For all I know he worked one day on the Canadian side of Niagara Falls. But he knows how long he was working there.
I wonder if I was on the E Board would I feel any different. I have been in 659 and now 600 since 1989, I have paid my dues every year and organized two shows personally and several other with help …. blah blah. Now I heard people saying “Darwinism” will decide the fate of the non-working members, will weed out the non-working like myself. Do we have to many members for the work going on now? Yes. Is that to many members for when it “gets busy again” Perhaps. Did I/we vote on a open door if you have the money to join policey?” I don’t think so.
Is that how it’s always been in the IATSE and local 600 now? Should I have stayed a loader? Would I be working today and making my 300 hours to get insurance for my family? Would I be on the E Board? I don’t know. Should I cash in and take the money owed to me, find a job in the solar industry as one person suggested?
I was hoping to work ten to fifteen more years and still have the very good health insurance plan that we do now. Lets see 15 years of dues, plus producers percentages …..
DTz
Local 600
David, hang in there, I appreciate your comments and the Studio Mechanics appreciate your support. Most of these postings don’t seem to notice that the world is shifting under their feet. Eisenhower is no longer president and Detroit is no longer the car building capital of the world. Let LA rail about the injustice, the rest of the world (my card does say International on it) is ready and able to do the work. Oh, by the way, I’m also a 30+ year member of Local 44 who has cast a yes ballot. I chose to move out of LA and these postings remind me why.
“You know something is happening but you don’t know what it is, do you Mr. Jones” Or “there’ll be no shelter here, the front line is everywhere” . Pick your generation.
FYI, the Governor will not do anything to either help or hurt IATSE. During the Writers Strike, he betrayed the WGA and SAG by not appointing a mediator to help solve the strike. Since your leaders are trying to supress free speech, you have the right to vote “no” to the point that each “no” vote is only worth 1/1,048,576 of a vote and each “yes” vote is worth 9,000 times its actual worth.
FYI, I am willing to bet that the 1/1,048,576 is the actual worth of each slave by plantation owners in the pre Civil War South. Translation, IATSE members are slaves to the AMPTP.
moreworknow,
Your attack on Bill Roberts is completely out of line.
As a member of the Local 600 National Executive Board and Western Region Council, I have personally witnessed Bill’s dedication to the members of our union. And while he and I have not always agreed on every issue, there is no one who pays more attention to the members hard-earned money in our local’s $10 million annual boondoggle.
Obviously you can’t attack the message, so you vainly attempt to attack the messenger.
Bill is not anti-union. Bill is anti-corruption. It’s unfortunate you can’t discern the difference.
And from reading his comments, he is smart enough not to trade “more work now” for no work later. He knows that a contract with no pay scales, no classifications and job interchangeability has no place in any union.
And, unlike those who hide under rocks, Bill even signs his name to his posts.
If only everyone here were that courageous.
I am shocked and amazed that Steve Poster–the president of Local 600– was not even at the negotiations and, I can’t believe I am even typing this, he was in Canada working on a feature film ….. It can’t be true, can it? I thought it was just a one day commercial in Nova Scotia. Like I said I’d go work in Canada right now BUT NOT if I was the President of a local with 5700 members AND FAMILIES. Thanks Greg Toland for a good letter.
DanTeaze
Hey Moreworknow,
Once again, someone who is in favor of the contract is not answering any of the specific concerns about “new media” “experimental new media” or insurance but simply trying to conflate protest of the proposed contract and specific personalities who are doing the protesting. They must be crazy, conspiracy theorists, in bad faith, out to bust the union. It is simply not possible in your mind that their concerns can be legit and correct and that someone could vote no on this proposed contract without an ulterior motive.
There may be crazy, conspiracy theorists among the dissenters but there are also people as sane as you who have read all the material available and come to the conclusion that this contract will NOT in any way mean MORE WORK AS WE’VE KNOWN IT NOW.
The local 600 leadership is arguing furiously that the terms are “as good” as those in the AFTRA and DGA contract. They are right. And those terms, especially the “new media” and “experimental new media” provisions were designed by the AMPTP to neuter the unions.
That’s not a conspiracy theory. Read the memorandum, learn some history of studio bookkeeping and do the math.
Moreworknow and everyone else who’s pro-contract, argue the points please and stop trying to dismiss professional people’s concerns with personal attacks.
The personal attack on Bill Roberts by the anonymous “moreworknow,” for simply and honestly speaking his mind in a public forum, is typical of what Doering’s thugs, slime and freeloaders do on his orders, and demonstrates exactly what they think of the “democracy” and “free speech” that they keep talking about.
They have to only talk about it, because we certainly don’t have any of it within Local 600’s NEB, or in our publications or website, where no dissent is tolerated or will ever appear in print, no opinions other than Doering’s have any value, no request for more information is ever answered, and the few of us who continuously stand up for the rights and futures of the members are targeted for intimidation and threats, and blacklisted from employment.
No Local 600 member is more consciencious, caring or courageous than Bill, and his recent posting about how the Special NEB meeting of Jan. 11 was really run as an undemocratic travesty and insult to elected NEB members, is dead-on accurate.
I was there, and I support his description of the meeting 200%. If anything, Bill is too kind in his choice of words.
The NEB member who made the motion to recommend RATification, and the one who made the motion to end debate to prevent the NEB members from finding out exactly what they were voting on, are both freeloaders who are scamming the system, with Doering’s help, to get their 54 hours a week without actually working for them the way the rest of us have to do.
I’m sure they will both be featured in future articles in the ICG Magazine, the usual reward for blind obedience to 600’s administration.
Neither of them will be affected by the increase to 400 hours, or by the New Media language, but they felt the need to help Doering and POster railroad through the RATification recommendation vote, against the best interests of our membership.
The worst travesty at that NEB meeting was that the NEB members voting only had a 4 page “Summary” of a 17 page “Memorandom of Agreement” of a 212 page contract written by a squad of highly paid AMPTP attorneys to go by.
Now that we have seen the Memorandom of Agreement (delivered with our ballots, though it has been available for several weeks), we see that there are a lot of items conveniently left off the Doering/Poster “summary” we had to vote by, and never mentioned by them, things that could have and should have turned that vote around.
So much for “free speech,” “democracy,” and “fair exchange of ideas,” Doering and Poster style.
Then to top it off, Doering’s thug “moreworknow” is too chickenshit to sign his name to his drivel.
Don’t worry, though, by now he’s back under his rock, awaiting more orders from Doering for more attempts at character assassination and intimidation of his betters.
Doug Hart, 1AC, NYC, 600 NEB, 34 years
Hi Doug! Hi Tim!
Glad you responded because both of you are the “other” union-busters I was alluding to in my previous post.
Tim, thanks for dropping the aliases and using your real name, for your response. You were beginning to sound like Sybl with all the dialogue carried on between all your Canadian-hating identities.
Since it seems to be perfectly fine for all of you to smear the character of Steven Poster, Bruce Doering and now David Behm, I think it is only fair to let the casual reader know a little something about the smearers themselves. I’m sure you have contributed Nikki’s information because some of the details provided by “sources” have not been entirely correct.
Tim McHugh is the owner of a non-union production sweat shop. As long as I’ve know him, he has never even worked a union job, which has been well over 10 years). He has absolutely nothing vested in the health and pension plans, yet he has wormed his way into Local 600’s politics.
I think he likes to play Local 600 member because he still dreams of one day filing another 301a petition against Canada to stop runanway production. A 301 a is a politically charged act of litigation against another country, using the World Trade Organization as its court. For the record, years ago, he and his real group, FTAC (not Local 600), found a Republican (Dick Cheney-luvin’) lobbyist/attorney and together, and over the course of many years, successfully suckered a lot of unions into give money to their cause.
They tried more than once to get Local 600 to chip in to the tune of a quarter of a million dollars of our members’ dues money. Local 600’s Board had long discussions and we ultimately had a debate forum between a former US Trade Representative from the Clinton Administration and McHugh’s Republican lobbyist/attorney.
The Trade Rep predicted with absolute certainty that a 301(a) would be dead on arrival in D.C. and had no chance in hell of being successful. McHugh’s lobbyist/attorney assured success and promised to return all unspent money if proven otherwise. The Board listened to the arguments and voted not to support the 301(a).
Tim refused to listen to anything that differed from his own beliefs, so he moved on and ended up conning enough other Unions into contributing so that he could file his 301(a). True to the warnings he ignored, the petition was dead on arrival. I even heard it was laughed out of Washington. (Doug and Bill were great supporters of this filing, btw?)
To date, I have not heard that any of the money conned by McHugh and his Republican lobbyisty/attorney has ever been returned to their supporters. Madoff would be proud.
Doug is a bird with similar plumage. He prefers to make all his vitriolic attacks on the computer and was once, years ago, brought up on charges and found guilty by a Local 600 jury of peers for deliberately trying to sabotage an IATSE organizing drive on a non-union show he was working on. To this day, he still screams that he was framed, but the evidence was there and it was compelling. But he is the king of conspiracies, complete with tinsel hats and miniature black helicopters. And everyone else is corrupt, except, of course, himself.
I wish that all three would grow up and stop their childishness. I think they would actually find happiness and a real career outside of Internet blogs and message boards. Instead, they fight the IATSE and from time to time, bring up the idea of decertification, which would take away everybody’s health and pension benefits. They have these lofty notions of forcing SAG and the IATSE into a shotgun wedding against the AMPTP, which would probably benefit from facing such a dysfunctional alliance.
But the heart of all of their motives is that all three hate unions so badly, that thy would rather see the IATSE destroyed and have all of its members stripped of their many years of health and pension benefits then to let their sworn political enemies actually work to bring stability and jobs back to an industry that they barely work in.
They don’t offer credible alternatives to this Agreement. They would be voting “no” even if the contract was flawless.
I do hope that one day, all three of them will come to their senses. I hate to see people devote their whole entire lives in the pursuit of failure.
Dear FaceReality,
Still curious why people put up attacks and then don’t sign their name. And still curious why the “pro-contract” people are having to resort to trying to discredit anyone who is advocating a NO vote.
Instead of trying to convince us with real facts and data (and please don’t point to the “Facts” newsletter, because most of that can be proven to be misleading or completely false)… but, instead of laying forth a true and reasonable argument for ratification all I am seeing is pleading i.e. David Behm, Paul Covington, and the phone/email campaigns the locals have launched; and smear tactics i.e. facerealtiy, moreworknow et al.
Why are you not addressing the concerns that are actually being put forth by many members? Why are you not producing real facts and data? Why am I being begged to sign a disastrous contract rather than being shown why it is good?
It is immaterial whether there is a grand conspiracy or not. The contract will destroy the union and our futures. Whether our “leadership” is taking kickbacks or just really suck at negotiating really doesn’t change the fact that this is a horrible contract. And no amount of name calling or mudslinging can change that.
All one has to do is read the Memorandum and see how ridiculously bad it is. Add that to the misleading misinformation campaign that has been launched by the IA, whether due to malicious intent or incompetence, and you get a rising majority that wants to vote AGAINST RATIFICATION.
And please, if you have to resort to name calling. At least sign your name.
Calvin Starnes
Local 80 Grip – Ten Years
thanks for dropping the aliases and using your real name…
How about you doing the same?
Since it seems to be perfectly fine for all of you to smear the character of Steven Poster, Bruce Doering and now David Behm
These three have, by their own actions, smeared themselves. I didn’t even know who Behm was until he showed up here at Nikki’s place, and I even took him at his word and believed what he said – until I found out what really happened.
facereality,
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the IATSE can shield the members from the political, economic and/or healthcare consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the IATSE to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the IATSE.”
facereality
or KGW or JN or whatever Doering stooge is posting the anonymous drivel, didn’t you pay attention to the last presidential election? People are sick and tired of your ilk who are admirers of the Rove style tactics. There are hundreds of well written, nicely articulated post that represent the reasons the membership do not want to support this contract. Are they all “anti-union”? If you cannot add anything constructive to the conversation, stand aside.
Aaaahhhhh.
Facereality:
A smear is only when the accusations leveled are false. Politics is a messy business. One either stands on their actions, or they don’t.
NAME ONE ACCUSATION LEVELED BY EITHER BILL ROBERTS, TIM MCHUGH, OR DOUG HART, AGAINST STEVEN POSTER, BRUCE DOERING, OR DAVID BEHM, THAT IS FALSE. PLEASE.
Since you can’t be bothered with FACTS — as other commentators have noted — your only resort is to smear by false and malicious accusation the character and integrity of these three IATSE members because of their activism. Your smears are a lesson in political repression, IATSE-style.
How ironic that they each sign their posts openly, and yet you hide behind your own lies. Since you are a loyalist, what are you afraid of that you fear the repercussions of revealing yourself? You are just a coward who throws bombs and then runs away.
“[False] Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.”
Samuel Johnson, April 7, 1775.
You, Brother, are a scoundrel.
facereality -
You have me at a disadvantage by hiding under a pen name. As you allude to writing a previous post mentioning “union-busters” I will conclude that you are also “moreworknow.”
If that is the case, you claim to be a member of the Local 600 Western Region Council and National Executive Board. You attended the Jan. 11 Special Contract meeting in an official capacity. You voted for the contract, so we now have a finite set of 39 real names to choose from.
[We'll get back to "Name that Goon" later.]
Here’s where your “facts” are flawed:
- No one currently seated on the board has known me for over 10 years, so your statement is incorrect.
- There is no one on the board that would have any knowledge of my work status for the past decade.
- While I have enjoyed reading the comments written here (posthumously) by famous Directors of Photography, it is not me writing those comments – with or without a Ouija board.
- I have not communicated either directly or indirectly with Nikki Finke and therefore am not a “source” for the information she has published. I will say, however, that from the first or secondhand knowledge I have regarding meetings she has detailed, her information is stunningly accurate. My interaction is limited to daily readings of Deadline Hollywood Daily and an occasional posting.
[I would also like to nominate Nikke Finke for a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame because the service she is providing to the industry workers with this website is priceless. Thank you, Nikki.]
- I do not own a sweat shop, either union or non-union.
- I am vested in the MPIPHP pension plan.
- I have not mentioned, let alone smeared, Bruce Doering or David Behm in any postings.
- I referred to the facts surrounding Steven Poster’s role in the defeat of the 301 funding. I doubt there is any statement he would challenge.
- You inferred that I benefited monetarily from my efforts to stop runaway production. Nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, my lobbying on behalf of YOUR job cost me many thousands of dollars, far more hours, and probably more than a few jobs.
- I “hate” unions so much that I marched on the picket line with SAG (and IA and WGA) members yesterday in from of Fox.
All right, I going to go out on a limb here and guess your identity. You seem very agitated so I’ll bet you were mentioned in one of the posts you mistakenly thought I wrote. You have chosen ad hominem attacks in an attempt to shut down critical discussion. This would be the established M.O. of the “stooge” Billy Bitzer referred to as making the motion to cut off debate in his detailed report of the Jan 11 meeting.
Let’s see… ponytail?
First initial “J”?
Am I getting warm here?
Maybe “facereality” should show his real face.
Big Surprise – another (or maybe even the same one) of Doering’s freeloaders and thugs, too chickenshit to sign his/her name, attacking the person rather than the message, and using even more lies and disinformation to do so.
Your recounting of the charges against me from years ago is totally false, of course. Those were NOT even the charges against me. On that job, when the crew and I had the producer ready to sign a very good contract for his two subsequent films, the 4 IATSE thugs showed up, managed to screw up our deal, and “won” for us a much worse deal, then filed charges only only the four Local 600 members on the job, despite the presence of 13 other IATSE members from 6 different Locals.
Then Local 600, in an amazing example of judicial misconduct, held a kangaroo court trial stacked with my politial foes from the NEB, fined the other three camera crew with fines from $100 to $250 (after plea-bargaining), while my fine was set at $4000., for identical charges.
I was denied the right to question witnesses, I was denied access to files and documents, I was denied the right to challenge the seating of the Doering goons and my political enemies on the trial board. This was not about a non-union film, but about a political vendetta against me personally.
But that is not even the point here.
You have not answered ANY of the points I raised about this lousy contract – you have simply piled even more irrelevant falsehoods onto this blog.
I can therefore only assume that you realize there is no possible defense of this contract – it stinks to high heaven, and will devastate thousands of members of 20 different locals if it is RATified (emphasis on RAT!). Your only hope of succeeding depends on baffling the member voters with enough irrelevent bullshit to confuse them or get them so disgusted with your antics that they won’t vote at all. Well, I have more faith in our members than you do, and I am predicting a landslide “NO!!” vote.
You also apparently agree with me that Poster and Doering lied to us to get that NEB recommendation vote, or you would have denied that in your charming post above.
Since you didn’t deny the lack of democracy, free speech or discussion, and the impossibility of ever getting an opposing opinion published on 600’s website or in the publications our members pay for, you must agree wih me about these items also, or you would have said so.
Facereality/ morewworknow:
Big Surprise – another (or maybe even the same one) of Bruce Doering’s freeloaders and thugs, too chickenshit to sign his/her name, attacking the person rather than the message, and using even more lies and disinformation to do so.
Your recounting of the charges against me from years ago is totally false, of course, as you well know. Those were NOT the charges against me – you couldn’t even get that right.
On that job, when the crew and I had the producer ready to sign a very good contract for his two subsequent films, the 4 IATSE thugs showed up, managed to screw up our deal, and “won” for us a much worse deal, then filed charges against only the four Local 600 members on the job, despite the presence of 13 other IATSE members from 6 different Locals.
Then Local 600, in an amazing example of judicial misconduct, held a kangaroo court trial stacked with my political foes from the NEB, fined the other three camera crew with fines from $100. to $250. (after plea-bargaining), while my fine was set at $4000., for identical charges. This was the first ever trail at Local 600 for working non-union in their 10 year history – I guess no one in 600 has EVER worked non-union, until my little organizing effort. Amazing!
During my “trial,” I was denied the right to question witnesses, I was denied access to files and documents, I was denied the right to challenge the seating of the Doering goons and my political enemies on the trial board, rights all guaranteed to all members in the IA and 600 C&BL, except me, apparently. This was never about a non-union film. This was a political “witchhunt” and vendetta against me personally, for my past and current battles on behalf of the membership, and against the corruption and tyranny destroying our union.
But that is not even the point here.
You have not answered ANY of the points I raised about this lousy contract – NOT ONE – you have simply piled even more irrelevant falsehoods onto this blog, hoping to bury the members in nonsense so they won’t vote.
You did not even try to defend this contract proposal. I can therefore only assume that you know there is no possible defense of this contract – it stinks to high heaven, and will devastate thousands of members of 20 different locals if it is RATified (emphasis on RAT!).
You also apparently must agree with me that Poster and Doering lied to us and withheld vital information about the contract, in order to get that NEB recommendation vote, or you would have denied that in your charming post above.
You didn’t even mention my bringing up the past history of bribes to IATSE leaders for buying any contract the AMPTP wanted, so you must know that is the truth as well.
When you are ready to discuss the real issues of this contract, and its potentially disastrous consequences for our members, without the lies and the bullshit, and are ready to tell us your name (I don’t really care who you are, but I already know WHAT you are), I’ll be here, along with Tim and Bill, and many others.
Until then, crawl back under that rock in Doering’s back yard.
Doug Hart, 1AC, NYC, Local 600 NEB, 34 years
Facereality/ morewworknow:
Cowards or coward. Jeff N has always been a coward, hiding behind Bruce’s skirts… He is also a liar and a cheat. A friggin’ drain on the working members of the union. Bruce pays him 56 hrs a week in H&P and all he has to do is post anonymous lies and attack the working members trying to change things for the better for ALL of us. JN has been operating a hair solon in Agoura for years, and the members pay his P&H. What an asshole.
I may be wrong and off track, at least with the main issue here, but ….
… It seems to me, with one or two exceptions, maybe, that all who favor a NO VOTE are signing their names (to their posts) and those voting a YES Vote are using an alias. Is this true or false? It’s very disturbing to me, Danny Teaze Local 600 member and proud of it-!!!!!
Thank you all at least as far as I can thank you given that I would need to know your name to actually thank you …………………..
I’ve been a casual reader of this thread and it is quite amusing and infuriating. As a Local 600 member out here is Louisiana, I’ve read Doug Hart’s stuff before. It’s hilarious becaue it is so awful and filled with hate. Doesn’t he know he sounds like an imbecile to most members?
I am amazed that people are posting here and elsewhere how everything the IATSE is sending is a lie or propaganda and that they want to see real reasons why they should vote for this contract. Do you not know how ridiculous this sounds as well?
The IATSE’s informational supplements are the only ones that makes sense and talk about specifics. Their reasoning is the only ones that remain consistent and don’t change. And their reasoning is more factual and less emotional than anything written by guys like Calvin Starnes or Bill Roberts or Doug Hart.
First it is the thousands of members thrown off the health plan, then it is hundreds of members. Oops,now it is back to thousands. Suddenly, New Media will allow makeup artists to operate the camera. Then not. Now it is non-union. Then suddenly, the IATSE’s deal is worse than AFTRA and the DGA.
I mean, the arguments against the contract keep evolving and evolving. The only consistency is the shrillness of the “No” crowd. When the IATSE sets the record straight, all these guys call them liars.
Have I read the Memorandum of AGreement? Yes, and I don’t agree with people like Calvin Starnes’ interpretation. I will put my money down on what seasoned negotiators say over what a disgruntled, unemployed member will say any day.
And I for one am sick of all the petty attacks made by the “No” on the contract people against anyone with a different opinion. If their careers are so bad that their only livelihood is to post on blogs and messageboards, then I think these members should get out in the real world and find a more rewarding life cuz what they got now ain’t working.
We IATSE members may not be able to lower health benefit requirements but what is not to stop us from suggesting that we bargain for an increase in the bank of hours in the next round of negotiations?
What is to stop us from making gains in other areas, like New Media?
I read this morning that Warren Buffet said that the economy has fallen off a cliff. I would not be surprised if the DOW plunges well below 6000 and unemployment rises over 10%. If the entire economy is sinking like the Titanic, why are we complaining about the room service in our already 1st Class cabins?
Look around. Those of us privileged to work in the film and television industry have had it pretty good compared to other industries. And once this contract passes, we will still have it better than many, many other industries.
So please stop acting like babies. I suspect another election is on the horizon. That is the only reason I can see for Local 600 members to be ridiculously posturig against a contract, that is otherwise pretty good considering the fact that we might find ourselves heading in the direction of a global depression.
Do you want to risk hurting more families by forcing a strike or by forcing renegotiations? I’m sure none of you have ever been at a negotiating table before. And I darn sure don’t want Doug Hart representing my voice on any issue of importance. He was a loudmouth for Gary Dunham, who as any local 600 member knows, screwed us something terrible at the last negotiations because he thought he knew something about negotiations and clearly didn’t. That is what hurt families. Arrogant know-it-alls that know nothing.
One last note. I can see why posters don’t want to use their real names here. It’s because of all the flame throwing done by those that don’t. And just for the record, there are plenty of “no” people here using aliases as well, so I think this issue is mute.
Thank you for letting me post my comments here on this message board, Nikki. Whoosh! I feel much better now but I think it is time to go back to work.
Nose Shadow-
Firstly, kind of difficult to take your tough guy dialogue seriously when you refuse to post your name due the threat of being “flamed”. My name is there for you to use as you did.
Secondly, you can call me whatever you like, which seems to be SOP for the yes voters. Disgruntled with an axe to grind. Rabblerouser. Muckraker. Troublemaker. Unemployed. Or worse. But, that doesn’t change the simple BLACK AND WHITE FACTS of the proposed contract.
Item 4. Productions Made For New Media
Article D. Term & Conditions on Original New Media
Terms & conditions of employment on Original New Media Productions are FREELY NEGOTIABLE between the Employee and Producer.
So good luck securing any kind of protections for yourself in those negotiations. Yes, there will be some producer’s that will be crew friendly. But, for those of us with any history in this business. How many do you think there are versus the scumbags?
Article E. Other Provisions
Item (3) Preference of Employment etc.
“There shall be no preference of employment of any kind in the employment of Employees on New Media Productions hereunder.”
So that clear up any ambiguity? They CAN HIRE ANYONE. The result of this will be even more people in the union, which according the IA is bursting at the seams and its health plan can’t maintain what we already have.
Item (5) Staffing
It is expressly understood and agreed that there shall be no staffing requirements on Productions made for New Media and that there will be full interchange of job functions among Employees, so that a single Employee may be REQUIRED TO PERFORM THE FUNCTIONS OF MULTIPLE JOB CLASSIFICATIONS cover hereunder.
I added the all caps. But, again, here it is in black and white. Anyone can do anyone else’s job.
Article F. Reuse in New Media
Item (1) a. Anything under $25K per minute. NO RESIDUALS
Item (1) b i. Anything over $25K per minute that runs on any free-to-the-consumer, ad supported platform i.e. hulu, crackle, any of the network websites. NO RESIDUALS.
Item (1) b ii. Anything over $25K per minute that runs on any consumer pay platform i.e. buy it via Amazon or stream it through Netflix or pay per view. NO RESIDUALS.
Item (1) c & d Anything over $25K per minute that first runs on any free-to-the-consumer, ad supported platform then on any consumer pay platform or if they are released simultaneously then WE FINALLY GET RESIDUALS – 26 WEEKS AFTER IT IS FIRST AIRED.
How many viewers do you think are watching six months after anything airs?
And all these residuals that we aren’t getting are supposed to be keeping our health plan afloat. You know the health plan that quotes a $19K per person per annum cost. Even though comparable plans average $12K per person per annum. But, I won’t get into the health plan.
Yes, I am aware that we have it better relative than the average worker. But, relative to the people we are dealing with i.e. multinational corporations and their studio arms and the vast sums of money they make I think it is only fair that we, even the people that don’t like me, we ALL GET TO SHARE IN THOSE PROFITS. Whether it’s continued health care or a better media deal. But, we all earn and deserve it.
We all work ridiculously hard to make these TV shows, movies, commercials, et cetera. Shouldn’t we be taken care of too?
I apologize. I made an error in one of my statements above. I said that hulu.com, crackle would be part of the free-to-the-consumer, ad supported platforms. But, apparently the IA went ahead and took care of that for me.
I was so focused on the other areas I can’t believe I missed this little nugget. Now if we’ll all turn to page 17 of our Memorandums of Agreement.
It states that “…IATSE acknowledges that it considers new media exhibitors such as HULU.COM to be exhibitors, and not distributors…
Why is this important?
One way the IAP, the Health Plan, and the Pension are funded is when the employer contributes money with each hour we work. The other way the IAP, the Pension, and the Health Plan are funded is via monies earned through profits on a “motion picture”.
When a movie makes a ton of money we have contractual language that says we get some of that. The “Producers” contribute a percentage of what is called the “Producer’s Gross”. The “Producer’s Gross” is the “worldwide total gross receipts of Producer derived from the distributor of such motion picture…”
What does this mean?
It means that by designating Hulu.com, and sites like it, as an “EXHIBITOR” then the dollars earned by the studios via these web sites are not considered part of the “Producer’s Gross” and therefore we get NONE OF IT.
Why is this really wrong?
Below is the a link to the Hulu.com Press Release which was released publicly when they first went live.
http://www.hulu.com/press/new_video_venture.html
I will share the first two sentences of that press release:
“News Corporation and NBC Universal will launch the largest Internet video distribution network ever assembled with the most sought-after content from television and film, it was announced today by Jeff Zucker, President and Chief Executive Officer, NBC Universal and Peter Chernin, President and Chief Operating Officer, News Corporation. The video-rich site will debut this summer with thousands of hours of full-length programming, movies and clips, representing premium content from at least a dozen networks and two major film studios.”
“…largest Internet video DISTRIBUTION network ever assembled…”
Look at the companies involved. Look at the dollars that are talked about. The number of people they project to reach. And this was even before they rolled out a massive Super Bowl ad campaign.
But, the IATSE is okay with calling them an exhibitor. Why? We already have contract language that gives us a right to the money the studios are earning by doing this and the IA is GIVING IT AWAY.
Again if you are still on the fence I hope this is yet ANOTHER glaring example of why you should be VOTING AGAINST RATIFICATION.
(And if I am in error in my reading the contractual language and laying it our here for you to read please let me know. And perhaps in between name calling you could reference a page number in the MoA or the Basic Agreement, so that I know what you are talking about.)