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

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film-Yak   » grounds for dissmissal (Page 2)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Author Topic: grounds for dissmissal Steve Kraus Film God Posts: 4094 From: Chicago, IL, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 12-15-2002 05:06 PM                    Which shows how ridiculous labor contracts can be since there is no more work for the large house than the smaller. Sure, the owners might want extra help to ensure a good show for such a large audience but there was no legitimate reason for labor to demand it in their contract other than make-work.  |  IP: Logged Scott Norwood Film God Posts: 8146 From: Boston, MA. USA (1774.21 miles northeast of Dallas) Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-15-2002 06:48 PM                        Were the larger houses also doing live programming or anything else that might require the use of a followspot, Brenograph, or other special equipment? Otherwise, a two-man booth would seem to be excessive for normal film-only shows using safety film.  |  IP: Logged Gerard S. Cohen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 975 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: Sep 2001 posted 12-15-2002 08:35 PM                     quote: there was no legitimate reason for labor to demand it in their contract other than make-work. But the economics of exhibition supported a high degree of performance reliability at a time when projection involved danger,responsibility for public safety, and the ability to work in confinement with dangerous materials in unhealthy atmosphere and isolation. Projectionists were understood to be in life-long craft vocations, and many bought houses and sent their children through college on their contractual earnings. I wish the young would stop boasting of their abilities to run fourteen or twenty auditoriums single-handed at minimum wage, while the profits go elsewhere than to those whose labor creates it. How can you justify a worker earning less per hour than the cost of a single ticket to one of his many auditoriums he or she is responsible for running?  |  IP: Logged Sean McKinnon Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1712 From: Peabody Massachusetts Registered: Sep 2000 posted 12-16-2002 12:33 AM                        How can that be justified? They accepted a job, and they accepted a wage. No one "tricked" them into taking a job. If they felt that they should earn more they could very easily walk away, or ask for a raise. Thats just my opinion.  |  IP: Logged Bill Gabel Film God Posts: 3873 From: Technicolor / Postworks NY, USA Registered: Jan 2002 posted 12-16-2002 09:17 AM                     Scott's quote: Otherwise, a two-man booth would seem to be excessive for normal film only shows using safty film. Yes, it seems tobe excessive for everyday shows. The last regular two-man booth (non Roadshow) lasted till the early 70's at the Los Angeles Theatre. Live shows left Hollywood in the early 40's. But live shows countiued in the Downtown Los Angeles houses till the early 50's. Most of those houses seated 1500 to the largest seating 3600 people. Some of the large Fox neighborhood houses seated 1100-1200 people. It sometimes depended on what neighborhood it was located. But the chains would remove seats on under proforming houses, so they could save on the extra payroll. The Roadshow houses were in Hollywood and Beverly Hills areas. They where two-men booths and the operators got $50.00 a show (early 70's contract). But on the contract for those houses over 1000 seats you had to have two-man booths. That was a carry-over from older contracts. So that extra operator lost his job, over extra seats. Another item in the contract was you could only work 6-7 hours shifts, no doubles. That was open to 6pm, 6pm to close. During the 70's contracts, the only way to transfer film between theatres was on 2000 foot exchange reels, you could not transfer film on 6000 foot reels. otherwise you could get fined by the local and go see the executive board.  |  IP: Logged Gerard S. Cohen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 975 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: Sep 2001 posted 12-16-2002 09:47 AM                     quote: They accepted a job, and they accepted a wage. No one "tricked" them into taking a job. If they felt that they should earn more they could very easily walk away, or ask for a raise. Thats just my opinion. Historically, that line of reasoning has been used to justify child labor in mines and mills, and sweatshop labor worldwide today.  |  IP: Logged Ken McFall Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 615 From: Haringey, London. Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-16-2002 10:05 AM                     As Leo says, people make mistakes..... however they should be prepared to take responsibility for their mistakes. All too often now a days people just shrug their shoulders and couldn't care less. Mind you it must be even worse when the company, who ever they may be, takes a similar attitude. I would have thought wrap arounds, brain wraps, would not be a case for dissmisal or even a warning unless they were contributing to them in some way. The only way I can think of that that would be the case is as a result of poor making up by leaving sticky patches all over the place. Apart from that wrap arounds are not down to the projectionist..... Some people struggle while learning and then just when you thought they would never make the grade it all falls into place and they turn out fine. If some one f**k's up BIG time I can and have given a warning and put it down to experience. However, if they lie about and I can prove it then they would be out the door. If you can't trust them to be honest then you're better off without them. We are running on interlock as of Wednesday so it is vital I can trust the guy and gal when I'm not there. If there is a problem I need reliable information to sort it out. I also need to know that they are following the routine that I have established that is proven and works well. Darren, not being funny but you should be aware that our employers don't like any company issues being talked about on this forum. I would have thought your comment especially falls into that category as you have named someone! You could easily end up with a gagging order, for what its worth, being placed on you too. It's an unfortunate situation just as long as you are aware. Not that it'll keep me off here, or should it you. Regards.  |  IP: Logged Ken McFall Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 615 From: Haringey, London. Registered: Apr 2001 posted 12-16-2002 10:15 AM                     Hi Gerard, That's why we now have the minimum wage in the UK. It's still quite a pathetic rate but at least it's there. However, there is NOTHING to stop any employer paying more. Unfortunatly many employers pay the bare minimum and only pay more when REQUIRED to do so. I thought your point about slave labour etc was very well made. Your comments about accepting a job at a poor rate are quite valid unless of course the rate being offered is reasonable or better, then I would have no problem with demanding better from them. Unfortunatly what's reasonable.... how long's a piece of string. Pay peanuts.... and get monkeys to work for you.... plain and simple I had to smile when I read on another post, not sure which it was, about McDonalds paying more than a cinema was paying some of its projection staff..... now THAT'S unreasonable.... and very worrying. God forbid it starts a trend over here. Regards.  |  IP: Logged Thomas Procyk Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1842 From: Royal Palm Beach, FL, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 12-16-2002 12:19 PM                     Another factor that comes into play is that most theaters do not hire "projectionists." They hire Doormen/Ushers who sometimes happen to run the booth. THAT'S where the problems arise. Some blue-hair on the 40th floor behind an oak desk sees that they can save $6 more per hour on this practice, regardless of the quality of labor as long as a picture gets on screen and no one complains. Also, and this was especially a practice of Regal's when they took over some union booths, was to impliment a company policy that only management can run the booth. Certainly management can't form a union, so "problem solved" It's difficult to take disciplinary action against someone who scratches a print when you're not really paying them enough to care. Why is someone going to take the time to set up the film cleaner, or double-check the film path, or even sweep and mop the floor when they can "better" spend that time sitting at the re-wind bench with fast food spread over it reading a book? If they get fired, they can move right along to the next minimum-wage job down the road. Gerard -- "How can you justify a worker earning less per hour than the cost of a single ticket to one of his many auditoriums he or she is responsible for running?" -- I would frame this and hang it in the stariway to the booth, but would be afraid it could be "grounds for dismissal" =TMP=  |  IP: Logged Jim Alexander Film Handler Posts: 71 From: Greenwood, Nova Scotia, Canada Registered: Nov 1999 posted 12-16-2002 03:21 PM                        To fire or not to fire. I have trained quite a few propective projectionist and I've found it is not a job for just anyone. The individual needs to be able to think on their feet (when a problem occurs I don't want then standing there scracthing their head) and mechanically minded. We use a length of film, made up of old trailers, that we have them load and load and load... And we then, purposely put snags on the projector, platter, sound system etc and have them solve it. Once done, I expect them to learn from their mistakes. Yes, everyone makes them, and some will be new, so it becomes a learning experience. Mind you, if they continue make the same mistake, then obviously they aren't learning and its time to let them go... Back when we ran 20 minute reels, we had one girl, who really tried, but just couldn't get the hang of it. Three weeks of training got topped off when I came in to the booth to find her standing knee deep in the middle of over 1000ft of film (and building)on the floor. She forgot to thread it onto the takeup reel. All she said was "what do I do now", with tears running down her cheek. All I could do was laugh. I told her not to move, and let the film go where it wanted to go. Once the end of the reel was done, I would do the change over and she could wind it back onto the supply reel. That was her last night. Everone desirves a chance, and mistakes will happen. It how they deal with the mistakes that is important.  |  IP: Logged Gerard S. Cohen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 975 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: Sep 2001 posted 12-16-2002 08:22 PM                     Jim wrote: quote: And we then, purposely put snags on the projector, platter, sound system etc and have them solve it. Once done, I expect them to learn from their mistakes. That reminded me of a part of the second half of my Projectionist licensing exam--the performance part. After having to cement splice multiple damages in a small reel of film, to make it runable, I was led to a rusty projector in the sub-basement of Surrogate's Court building, and told to project it. Well, the wall switches were unlabled, and one was ON in the up position, but the other, ON in the down position. In striking the arc, I failed to notice the mirror was tilted so the beam did not hit the aperture, etc. ( A friend swears that during his exam the examiner handed him two wooden dowel sticks painted black and told him to strike an arc!) I did not succeed in getting a presentable image on the screen in the time allotted, and failed my first attempt. That taught me to expect the worst. The second time I was more mentally alert and passed easily. Gerard  |  IP: Logged Robert E. Allen Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1078 From: Checotah, Oklahoma Registered: Jul 2002 posted 12-16-2002 11:21 PM                     OK Daniel, I confess, I haven't read all the posts in this thread. But the first thought that came to my mind is that a projectionist is not "trained" in that short period of time. Depending on the individual, a projectionist is learning for years, especially as the industry changes. If the operator has potential then whoever is working with him should continue the training. I was a projectionist for 25 years and I still have a lot to learn. (And if you guys don't help slow it down a bit I may not have enough time left on this Earth to learn it.)  |  IP: Logged Sean McKinnon Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1712 From: Peabody Massachusetts Registered: Sep 2000 posted 12-17-2002 04:10 AM                        Gerard said: "Historically, that line of reasoning has been used to justify child labor in mines and mills, and sweatshop labor worldwide today." Unfortunately we are not having a history lesson, and that argument does not fit into the subject matter at hand at all. What we were discussing was a person taking a job as a motion picture operator (Who by law has to be 18 or older). The fact remains that this is not slave labor. This is a free country where citizens have the ability to choose whom they work for, If you do not like the wage you have been offered you have the ability to seek employment elsewhere. No one is twisting your arm. So therefore your argument makes no sense and is not within the context of this discussion. If you would like to discuss sweat shops and underage labor then please feel free to start another thread on that topic. Also, What Mr. Martin failed to mention was that while the McDonalds *HIRES* at a higher starting wage thier bonuses, and increases are quite poor in comparison to this theatre, This particular theatre in question offers concession commission to the floor staff, A $0.50 raise after "cross training" and another $0.25 raise after six months. Also very soon they will be offering a health plan to the floor staff employees. Not to mention the free movies and other perks of working in a theatre. most floor staff employees at that location make between 9-10 an hour. McDonalds does not offer an incentive program like the theatre. There raise structure is a lot less, and AFAIK they do not offer any health benefits.  |  IP: Logged Gerard S. Cohen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 975 From: Forest Hills, NY, USA Registered: Sep 2001 posted 12-17-2002 09:04 AM                     Sean, Yesterday when the Transit Workers marched across the Brooklyn Bridge to their 5PM ralley before accepting the result of negociations that resulted in wage increases, better safety provisions (two workers were killed below ground in two days last month) and new "dignity " provisions, they were enthusiastically cheered by motorists and pedestrians alike. You might have expected them to be booed, owing to the intransigence of the govenor, mayor and Transit Authority, who threatened them with heavy fines and imprisonment. A strike would have seriously disrupted the city. But the working population of New York hugely sympathize with the cause of workers following the ethic "In Union There Is Strength." How does this relate to the scarcely trained kids running multiplexes for long hours at pitiful wages without pensions or welfare provisions? Yes they are free to quit or to ask for a raise and be laughed at. But the high standards of living of American workers have been achieved by their uniting to demand dignity, better working conditions, hours, wages and welfare provisions. The once-high standard of middle class America is being threatened by corporate greed. The middle class is shrinking while the poor and wealthiest are growing. Tax cuts that benefit the rich, corporate CEOs paid bonuses in $$millions for firing thousands to increase the value of corporate stock, and a national administration hell bent on weakening labor laws, turning federally protected lands over to timber, mining and oil interests, raping the earth for short-term profits while depleting the environment for future generations-- these form the background for the cynical view that the individual worker can choose his destiny alone. The young are being exploited because they lack the knowledge or experience of history, and as with all exploitation, it debases our industry. Gerard  |  IP: Logged Manny Knowles "What are these things and WHY are they BLUE???" Posts: 4247 From: Bloomington, IN, USA Registered: Feb 2002 posted 12-17-2002 09:54 AM                     Exactly! Well said, Gerard. And I'd like to add that the de-professionalization of projection has contributed immensely to the growth of home-video. Many of my friends contend that they have stopped going to the movies because they can get a better presentation at home with less hassle. As a projectionist who trains newbies, I can't ignore that kind of feedback. A little off-topic, but I'll insert it here anyway because it kind-of relates to the whole "keep the costs down" mentality: Half-baked digital projection systems -- believed to be simple enough to "run themselves" -- will only compound this problem. If it is perceived that movie theatres are "just running DVDs or tapes" then our industry will suffer. There is this whole (bogus) argument that scratches, dust/dirt, jumping and weaving, etc are inevitable with film projection. These so-called "inherent flaws" are common today because professional projectionists are becoming harder and harder to find.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

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.