Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

iatse.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 81 posts

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#21

Post by itsdrewmiller »

tehjoker wrote: post #14
calcifer wrote: post #3

This is set to be even bigger than the 2007 WGA strike, which was ~12k people for 100 days. WGA had some precedent-setting wins with that, hopefully the same will happen with IATSE.

The WGA strike was really significant world historically. My recollection is that that strike created the impetus to do more reality television, which in turn created The Apprentice, which in turn gave us the 2016 election. America is a completely TV addled nation lmao At the time, the only thing I noticed was one of my favorite actresses from House MD participated in the strike and that the quality of the writing de…

The Apprentice started in 2004, 3 years before the WGA strike.

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#22

Post by breadzeppelin__ »

TheDudeMan wrote: post #17
slownews45 wrote: post #13

I'm not super pro-union (plenty of mess there) but there really are some reasonable asks union side. My guess, folks have been NOT working the 12+ hour days, have NOT been doing the "rolling lunches" and other wild hollywood stuff (that a construction worker would think was crazy) during COVID. Might have opened their eyes to life outside of the hollywood dream machine. Maybe look for things as basic as: Mandated sto…

Aren't there already laws that grant breaks during work? Does Hollywood not abide by those? Who polices that sort of thing? (Also not very pro-union.)

Not related to hollywood but I worked wildland fire for the local sheriff for a couple years and the 'mandated lunch breaks' were pretty much bullshit. MAYBE 15 minutes to stop and eat (often not even sitting down), then get back to work but had to report at least a half hour of unpaid downtime on the shift report at the end of the day. No wonder that area expertise is also hemorrhaging skilled workers. Luckily it was only part time for me but those guys are really getting fucked over between low pay and the ridiculous breaks

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#23

Post by tehjoker »

itsdrewmiller wrote: post #21
tehjoker wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The WGA strike was really significant world historically. My recollection is that that strike created the impetus to do more reality television, which in turn created The Apprentice, which in turn gave us the 2016 election. America is a completely TV addled nation lmao At the time, the only thing I noticed was one of my favorite actresses from House MD participated in the strike and that the quality of the writing de…

The Apprentice started in 2004, 3 years before the WGA strike.

I never watched it, sorry I got the timeline wrong. I thought it was popular after the strike. (EDIT: Looks like it ran 2004-2017)

That was one of my favorite alt-history theories. Sad.

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#24

Post by petee »

slownews45 wrote: post #13

I'm not super pro-union (plenty of mess there) but there really are some reasonable asks union side. My guess, folks have been NOT working the 12+ hour days, have NOT been doing the "rolling lunches" and other wild hollywood stuff (that a construction worker would think was crazy) during COVID. Might have opened their eyes to life outside of the hollywood dream machine. Maybe look for things as basic as: Mandated sto…

Most productions started up in August 2020 with strict Covid protocols; personally I've had 1 week off since then. Crews have been doing full days, with masks. Normal work under harder conditions.

They finally offered 10hr turn around after we voted to strike; and its with strings. They cant even give an hour for sleep. Ive done the 14-17hr days, with 9hr turn around, and I live 1hr 20min from set, so thats 6hrs personal time a day to eat and sleep.

As for lunch, many shows do have a 30 min lunch, but the flow works out that not everyone gets an equal lunch, some have responsibilities that require them back on set before the others. Production will not wait on one person to eat. Also 30 minutes in a 16 hour day isnt much anyway

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#25

Post by tonyarkles »

thrill wrote: post #8
calcifer wrote: post #3

This is set to be even bigger than the 2007 WGA strike, which was ~12k people for 100 days. WGA had some precedent-setting wins with that, hopefully the same will happen with IATSE.

Yeah, a lot of television shows really suffered due to it.

Although, if legend serves correctly, the entire last half-season of Battlestar Galactica was rewritten during the strike and the writers were much happier with the second version.

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#26

Post by slownews45 »

TheDudeMan wrote: post #17
slownews45 wrote: post #13

I'm not super pro-union (plenty of mess there) but there really are some reasonable asks union side. My guess, folks have been NOT working the 12+ hour days, have NOT been doing the "rolling lunches" and other wild hollywood stuff (that a construction worker would think was crazy) during COVID. Might have opened their eyes to life outside of the hollywood dream machine. Maybe look for things as basic as: Mandated sto…

Aren't there already laws that grant breaks during work? Does Hollywood not abide by those? Who polices that sort of thing? (Also not very pro-union.)

No - those laws do not apply in Hollywood.

This is in part because with a CBA (union agreement) the union can bargain away rights you might otherwise have under law.

This can also be because wage orders (ie #12) modify rules or provide for exceptions.

And then even if on a union set, some things will be ignored (despite all the safety talk from the unions some trades find some of the safety practices a bit overboard or impractical -> looking at you fall prevention standards etc) especially for old timers who started before some of the safety rules came in (juicers / grips etc).

So union lunch break rules etc control - but can be ignored, and enforcement would be through a grievance usually vs a court case in some cases etc.

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#27

Post by Aerroon »

petee wrote: post #16
m0zg wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could just be laid off under the present circumstances. If a tree falls in a forest and there's no one there to hear it, does it make a sound? Edit, since HN is throttling my response to the bigman433 below: I absolutely agree with you. Much like music industry, to paraphrase Hunter S Thompson, movie industry is "a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good…

Every job in film is highly specialized, even down to construction. These are trades that are taught and passed down through years of on the job experience. It would take them years to replace every department. We do it well, fast, and safe.

But what would happen if they decide to move countries over this? Hollywood and other movie and TV production is obviously a powerful tool to sway the public. I bet there are some other countries itching to have their own media production improve.

Eg the people putting money into these productions could take their money to China instead, no?

The strike does seem reasonable to me though.

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#28

Post by mchusma »

TheDudeMan wrote: post #17
slownews45 wrote: post #13

I'm not super pro-union (plenty of mess there) but there really are some reasonable asks union side. My guess, folks have been NOT working the 12+ hour days, have NOT been doing the "rolling lunches" and other wild hollywood stuff (that a construction worker would think was crazy) during COVID. Might have opened their eyes to life outside of the hollywood dream machine. Maybe look for things as basic as: Mandated sto…

Aren't there already laws that grant breaks during work? Does Hollywood not abide by those? Who polices that sort of thing? (Also not very pro-union.)

They have to abide by them, which is what I can't understand here. I'm in California and the laws are strict, it's easy to sue, and the companies involved (e.g. Disney) are giant. So I just can't see them getting away with violating labor laws. I assume they are looking for protection above and beyond what the law requires? I can't find the actual demands anywhere. The website and links are all basically propaganda links (no section that says "this is what we are asking for").

Re: Strike Date Set for 60k Film and Television Workers

#30

Post by oceanghost »

TheDudeMan wrote: post #17
slownews45 wrote: post #13

I'm not super pro-union (plenty of mess there) but there really are some reasonable asks union side. My guess, folks have been NOT working the 12+ hour days, have NOT been doing the "rolling lunches" and other wild hollywood stuff (that a construction worker would think was crazy) during COVID. Might have opened their eyes to life outside of the hollywood dream machine. Maybe look for things as basic as: Mandated sto…

Aren't there already laws that grant breaks during work? Does Hollywood not abide by those? Who polices that sort of thing? (Also not very pro-union.)

I worked at a Walmart 20 years ago that would lock employees in at night-- even when their shifts were over, in an attempt to get them to work extra hours.

My first gig out of college-- the company said they didn't pay vacations or holidays for the first 6 months. I had no idea this was illegal in California, but one of the other hires did and got them in some major amount of trouble for it. They also asked me to sign a non-compete, I knew that was illegal and told them "I'll sign if you want, but these are illegal in California so its unenforceable." And they also forbade me from talking about my compensation, which is illegal. I later found out some people were making half what I was, and some people were making significantly more than I was. During the negotiations they told me they absolutely couldn't go over number X, when in fact that was not true. Of course they didn't want people comparing salaries.

Employment is the wild west. A law just means you have some recourse when they do a thing, not that they won't do it.

Post reply on HN