Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Union Projectionists

Film-Tech Cinema Systems

Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

next oldest topic

next newest topic

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Film Handlers' Forum » Union Projectionists (Page 37)

This topic comprises 40 pages: 1 2 3 ... 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Author

Topic: Union Projectionists

Sean McKinnon
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1712
From: Peabody Massachusetts
Registered: Sep 2000

posted 07-12-2010 12:21 PM

Author's Homepage

Email Sean McKinnon

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Wow Steve your past a page back was really on-point and conveyed a true understanding of the topic. It certainly educated me somewhat. I guess I always assumed that a union had discretion over who they fought for and who they didn't. I can see now how a failure to fight for an employee could land the union in legal trouble. That makes a lot of sense.

Again, I just feel it is too bad. I have worked with so many great union projectionists here in New York city and in the Boston area it is such a shame that the minority of knuckle heads gives everyone a bad name. It is heart breaking to me to see the hardworking, smart, dedicated union operators looked down upon because of people's bad experiences (real or imagined) with union's in the past. It also breaks my heart that those same hard working people are forced to fight for the lazy, incompetent, dishonest, or just plain apathetic. I wish this was a perfect world where collective bargaining protected the good, hard working, honest workers of the world and the ones that for example; aren't allowed in any (Gee let's make up a fake company name here for this completely fabricated example) "American Entertainment" (A fake company founded by the fictional Samuel Blackstone) booths because he was caught by the F.B.I. cutting nudie scenes out of release prints for his personal porn collection get what they deserve instead of going on to be elected business agent [Roll Eyes]

[Roll Eyes]

I think it is time for a new workers revolution where all the hard working employees fight for the recognition they deserve and the lazy and incompetent look for new jobs [beer]

[beer]

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-12-2010 01:00 PM

Email Steve Guttag

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote: Chris Slycord
This is implying that the business owners want absolute, total control. And it's just not true for lots of owners.

Okay...I think you are playing into semantics but go ahead...ask business owners if they want absolute total control of their business and see what kind of answers you get. If they don't want absolute total control...ask them for an example of what they don't want control over.

quote: Chris Slycord
That's exactly my point. I'm not arguing that unions haven't done good things in the past. I'm arguing that those past good things have no bearing on a discussion on whether unions serve their purpose today.

It is valid to discuss the past as it give understanding as to what is happening into the present. It also serves as a reminder on what to avoid (so as not to repeat).

Since you state your belief on the present:

quote: Chris Slycord
You say this as if I'm arguing otherwise. Strange, considering that I've explicitly stated here that unions can be good depending on circumstances.

I don't get your argument since you even state they are doing good in at least some places in the present.

So...what does your example of calling a strike vote (of which we have no knowledge of the issues) that is purely within the governance of the employee/employer relationship have to do with decertification...which brings about a government overseen activity? They may seem similar but they are not related. Furthermore, the example you cite seems rather suspicious for:

1) What is the lure of a person to join a union for the purpose of striking? As soon as they get their shiny new job, they are out on the street again.

2) If an employer has a staff that has chosen not to strike, why would they be wanting to get all of these new-hires, which are unknowns?

I'm not saying it didn't happen (again I have none of the issues that may or may not have caused the incident) but this isolated example is hardly representative and likely has more to it that has been presented here.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 07-12-2010 01:25 PM

Email Chris Slycord

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote: Steve Guttag
I don't get your argument since you even state they are doing good in at least some places in the present.

Then I guess you didn't follow the conversation. A union supporter portrayed it as if unions are the greatest thing ever, only good comes from unions, and anyone giving examples of bad union experiences are just full of shit. I disagreed with this assessment. Just because you or I have had some good experiences with unions doesn't make them inherently good and just because someone else has had bad experiences doesn't make them inherently bad. It completely depends on all sorts of things.

quote: Steve Guttag
So...what does your example of calling a strike vote (of which we have no knowledge of the issues) that is purely within the governance of the employee/employer relationship have to do with decertification...which brings about a government overseen activity?

I didn't realize decertifying was a government function. I assumed you were just referring to dissolving their chapter of the union or something similar.

quote: Steve Guttag
1) What is the lure of a person to join a union for the purpose of striking? As soon as they get their shiny new job, they are out on the street again.

It's called "You scratch my back I scratch yours." The newly hired people that support the boss just might be helped out a bit by the boss, thereby keeping them off the streets.

And looking at it another way, if I don't have a job and am on the street, taking a job specifically to go on strike for a certain amount of time is not all that different than being on the streets with a guaranteed job coming up.

quote: Steve Guttag
2) If an employer has a staff that has chosen not to strike, why would they be wanting to get all of these new-hires, which are unknowns?

Over time, people quit and then they get new hires because they need positions filled.

quote: Steve Guttag
I'm not saying it didn't happen (again I have none of the issues that may or may not have caused the incident) but this isolated example is hardly representative and likely has more to it that has been presented here.

Didn't claim it was representative. You said "all you have to do is X" and I said it wasn't neccessarily as easy as you said and gave an example of a possible outcome.

edit:
One thing I want to be clear on:
Whether you think unions are good or bad, I think it is wrong to look at them all with such a broad stroke. I don't join a union based on what unions in general do, but what that particular union does.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-12-2010 04:25 PM

Email Steve Guttag

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Come on Chris...this is starting to become a Bobby/Michael bickering.

quote: Chris Slycord
Then I guess you didn't follow the conversation.

Yeah...I did and you clearly didn't follow mine. You are now jumping from disallowing past gains as an example of a positive union position and even positive union outcomes today to someone posted something idiotic about everything unions do/did is great. It was a given and stated as such there have been good and bad on both sides.

quote: Chris Slycord
And looking at it another way, if I don't have a job and am on the street, taking a job specifically to go on strike for a certain amount of time is not all that different than being on the streets with a guaranteed job coming up

It is an interesting concept but the union does not have a guarantee to get back their jobs if they go on strike...thus promising a laborer a job, if and when they successfully strike and get their jobs back is an odd proposition, to say the least.

quote: Chris Slycord
Over time, people quit and then they get new hires because they need positions filled.

In your example...these are hard times...and people don't tend to give up paying jobs during those. Furthermore...there is not a very long period of time from when a contract comes up to when a strike can/will be called to force a position on a new contract...just what is the turnover in this business that you could "pack" such a strike vote in such a short amount of time. Again...your story is inconsistent with how I've seen things function. I can guarantee you have left details out.

I too have never said that unions are the answer for all problems but I do claim they are a viable solution for some and there is a good reason they still exist and whether people realize it or not, their presence generally improves the wages/working conditions for all that could be unionizable.

-Steve

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 07-13-2010 12:27 AM

Email Chris Slycord

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote: Steve Guttag
You are now jumping from disallowing past gains as an example of a positive union position and even positive union outcomes today to someone posted something idiotic about everything unions do/did is great. It was a given and stated as such there have been good and bad on both sides.

1) I think if you're going to refer to people's comments as "idiotic" you've gone beyond the point of behaving in a civil, professional manner. Maybe that's just me.

2) It's dishonest to say that I "disallow current good results" from my assessment of unions considering that I've said nothing of the sort. If anything, I've considered them along with the bad results and concluded that unions are neither inherently good nor inherently bad. And yes, I've said that I don't consider the past good things because to me they are currently not relevant. My point was that if I am gonna choose to work in a union (or not) it's going to be based on what I'll be getting out of it WRT pay and benefits and the historical shaping of laws isn't something that comes into that decision at all.

3) And if everyone in the discussion agreed that there was both good and bad on both sides, I'd likely never have entered the discussion. And just so we're clear, I wasn't referring to you as being the person who portrayed unions as being the answer to everything.

quote: Steve Guttag
It is an interesting concept but the union does not have a guarantee to get back their jobs if they go on strike...thus promising a laborer a job, if and when they successfully strike and get their jobs back is an odd proposition, to say the least.

Maybe I'm biased by thinking that nearly all the time the strikes result in the union not being let go by the owners.

quote: Steve Guttag
I can guarantee you have left details out.

I'm also admittedly going on memory from a short conversation that happened nearly 2 decades ago. There's definitely information I don't remember/know. And I can't exactly ask him to clarify the parts I'm forgetting or missing.

| IP: Logged

Monte L Fullmer
Film God

Posts: 8367
From: Nampa, Idaho, USA
Registered: Nov 2004

posted 07-13-2010 01:24 AM

Email Monte L Fullmer

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

A beginner's question then: What was the reason for the inception of the IATSE and MPMO in the first place?

Was working conditions, when 'magic lantern' theatres began to show movies on a bedsheet in empty parlors, bad to create such a union in the first place to establish an organized workforce?

| IP: Logged

Louis Bornwasser
Film God

Posts: 4441
From: prospect ky usa
Registered: Mar 2005

posted 07-13-2010 07:32 AM

Author's Homepage

Email Louis Bornwasser

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Monte: must have been. No union ever formed unless there was a good reason.

My personal hero was the original owner of the former Fischer Packing Company in Louisille who requested his employees to form a decent union right now, so that in case the owner died or lost control of the company they would be protected. All was well for 60 years until the company was sold a few times and ended up with Hormel (which closed the plant and fired everyone in a union-busting move.) Louis

| IP: Logged

Sam D. Chavez
Film God

Posts: 2153
From: Martinez, CA USA
Registered: Aug 2003

posted 07-13-2010 11:05 AM

Author's Homepage

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Nicely put Louis.

I believe it's all been said ad infinitum and we should close the thread.

The only real issues here are the principles involved and they have been covered eloquently by Steve.

So, we have people who are pro union, we have people who are interested in what a union can do for them personally, we have free market people who are anti-union reflexively because it interferes with the principle of the free market, and we have a few who have an open mind and had not been exposed to the issues discussed before.

A little has been learned, but few minds have been changed.

It's time to move on.

| IP: Logged

Richard Hamilton
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1341
From: Evansville, Indiana
Registered: Jan 2000

posted 07-13-2010 12:15 PM

Email Richard Hamilton

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I also think this thread should be closed. I have my opinions, but I also have a handfull of friends on this site and I dont want to take sides. [beer]

[beer]

| IP: Logged

Rick Raskin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1100
From: Manassas Virginia
Registered: Jan 2003

posted 07-13-2010 03:12 PM

Email Rick Raskin

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Why bother? It'll pop up again in a year or two. [evil]

[evil]

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 07-13-2010 10:03 PM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

quote: Steve Guttag
Simple...decertify the union. Again, that has to be worker based...if you don't want the union, vote to decertify. Note...workers can even change union affiliations (switch unions entirely yet remain the same workforce working for the same employer). A union represents employees.

You make it sound easier than it is practically. The employees (not the employer) have to petition the labor board for de-certification, and they also have to foot any legal fees in order to pursue it. Do you think the unions would really help the employees de-certify? You say they work for the employees. I submit that the unionized employees provide a revenue stream for the unions and that they would fight the employees' de-certification process. We have a union buster guy that consults for us who has seen it over and over again. Once the union is there, it's almost impossible to get rid of it. THAT is something that needs to change.

| IP: Logged

Chris Slycord
Film God

Posts: 2986
From: 청주시, 경북도, South Korea
Registered: Mar 2007

posted 07-13-2010 11:13 PM

Email Chris Slycord

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

In Steve's defense, the guy who works as a union buster isn't the most unbiased source.

| IP: Logged

Mark J. Marshall
Film God

Posts: 3188
From: New Castle, DE, USA
Registered: Aug 2002

posted 07-14-2010 08:06 AM

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

No, he's just a guy who is very familiar with what it takes for employees to get a union OUT of a company. In those cases, the unions do not work for the employees, they work for themselves.

| IP: Logged

Steve Guttag
We forgot the crackers Gromit!!!

Posts: 12814
From: Annapolis, MD
Registered: Dec 1999

posted 07-14-2010 08:18 AM

Email Steve Guttag

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

Misread Mark's post...thus edited my response.

Yes, it is the employees that have to vote to decertify. It does have to be official and go through the proper procedures. If there feeling is near 50% for one way or the other...yes it would be more difficult...but if you have a case where a clear majority want to decertify...there is little beyond politicking that a local/national union can do about it.

In practice, I can't remember ever seeing a group that wished to decertify. Normally, the way it has been done is for the employer to "bust the union" and those that wish to keep some form of job cross the picket line (scab)...probably with similar pay/benefits...but new-hires typically are without said pay/benefits. And then...those that stayed on see their hours, pay, benefits or some combination of all three reduced.

I'm not saying there are not union situations out there where the employees have a bad deal and want to get out from a union that doesn't serve them well but I would say that is a severe minority. And, as I have said before, a unit can change union affiliations if another union wishes to represent them (you'd be amazed at what types of jobs the Teamsters would be willing to represent). The choice is with the employees.

| IP: Logged

Gerard S. Cohen
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 975
From: Forest Hills, NY, USA
Registered: Sep 2001

posted 07-14-2010 11:14 AM

Email Gerard S. Cohen

Send New Private Message

Edit/Delete Post

I'm glad this thread was revived, because the issues involved have been simmering while the thread slept these last several years. They will not go away, and it's necessary periodically re-examine our goals and the kind of society we wish to live in.

I suspect this thread is read by many more than those who post in it; many will reflect on the ideas explored. Film-tech.com is fortunate in having many experienced, intelligent,
courageous and expressive cadre and members who render this site a high educational value.

These postings do not evaporate, but can be accessed and studied years from now. So lets cherish the opportunity to enjoy the opportunities of free and frank expression.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 40 pages: 1 2 3 ... 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Move Topic

Delete Topic

next oldest topic

next newest topic

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.

© 1999-2020 Film-Tech Cinema Systems, LLC. All rights reserved.