Monday, July 18, 2011

So ... It's Going to Canada?

There's a new hire at Arc Productions.

... Stephanie Denton, former president of film sales for Lionsgate Films International, has been tapped by Toronto 3D animation studio Arc Productions to head up its Los Angeles office.

... Denton’s role will be enticing more Hollywood studios to bring their projects to the Canadian cartoon factory to exploit up-front cost savings from local film and digital tax credits.

Enticement is the name of the game. Plus tax credits and low-ball bids. Chris Meledandri's Illumination Entertainment has had success outsourcing animation to Paris, France (Despicable Me). Disney Toon Studios has done okay with studios in India for its features on little silver disks. (Tinkerbells I, II, III, etc.) But the sub-continent hasn't yet produced any big, profitable theatrical features.

(On the other hand, sequences of DreamWorks Animation's Puss N Boots have been done in India, so we'll see what develops there.)

58 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's sad and I know it's the way things are, but it seems like every studio in Canada is low balling to get contracts. Could it be because of how high our dollar is?.

Anonymous said...

Canada's dollar is worth more than the US dollar now. The only way they can lowball now is thanks to government tax incentives.

Anonymous said...

Why doesnt California offer the same tax incentives? No one ever seems to answer this question. If more jobs were to stay here in this state then the state would benefit. What I make here I also spend here and therefore I am paying taxes. At the same time it would bring down the unemployment within our state and the state would be handing out a lot less in EDD checks. How is this not a win win for everyone? Can someone answer this? Top answer I know is that Jerry Brown and most politicians are idiots but let us go beyond that. Does this union offer up these ideas or present this to our state? Steve what is the union doing to get us there. As I drove in to work today my wife and I were talking how weak the union seems and this is another example. IS the union going after Paramount to be unionized? Why does any studio want to be part of the union what does it benefit them? Just questions I an d I am sure many others have so let us have a discussion about these things.

Steven Kaplan said...

Hello Anon -

Why doesn't California have a tax incentive? It does. AB 1069. Representatives of IATSE went to Sacramento last week to lobby for its approval by the state senate. Why is it not the same amount as the Canadian incentive? Because the Province of BC is paying much more than the State of California can afford to.

There is also a compelling argument that tax incentives do not foster long-term industry growth. Studios seem to chase the incentives as long as they're available. They ship people in to do the work, and those people leave once the work is completed. The state ends up with a net-negative on its investment .. or so the argument goes.

How weak the union seems. Are you referring to IATSE or to 839? How would you like to see your union stronger?

Is the union going after Paramount? Speaking for TAG, if there is an animation studio in town doing work that we represent, its being "gone after". If you have any information regarding where the studio is that Paramount will be using, who is working there, which projects are being considered and for what time frame, feel free to contact me and I'd be happy to discuss this with you in person.

Why does any studio want to be part of the union? What does it benefit them? Generally speaking, they don't. Unionization empowers the employees by focusing the leverage their skills and experience bring into a unified collective voice. It gives the employees a more equitable influence on workplace conditions and standards. This is perceived as a threat to most as it takes away "power" that management would normally have.

Anonymous said...

Too bad the U.S. (feds and state) does not try harder with better tax incentives or whatever it takes to keep animation production in the U.S.

Point of fact: Disney outsourced most of the clean-up work on 'Winnie the Pooh' to Canada. Good for the Canadians , but too bad for the MANY out-of-work former Disney clean-up artists in L.A. and also in Orlando, FL (who did work on Princess & the Frog).

Anonymous said...

It's true. The reason why Canada does not have a union is because many in our animation industry believe that the union would threaten jobs. It is presumed that if there is a union, no studio would set up shop and all of us would be out of work. Alternatively, it is also thought that a skeleton crew would be kept at a studio while animation would be completed in India or some other country where labour is less costly.

I guess it doesn't matter to studio owners where work gets done. So long as their standard of living stays the same. Which is unfortunate for the rest of us.

Low-balling contacts means less pay for all on average and a higher quota with the same production deadlines.

Anonymous said...

I was the anonymous poster on the TAG blog about work going off to Canada due to tax incentives.

First off I am not writing youn or did I post that comment out of anger at the union. I have been a member since 1996 and am grateful for the health care and benefits it has provided for myself and my family. Currently I am working at a non union studio (not by choice).

I guess myself and many others are just frustrated with California as a whole. Our state is broken and yet no one in the political realm seem to really have an understanding of a care about what to do about it. Our state could and should be the #1 place to make and produce films and animation. California could be the one state that sets the proper tone for business growth by listening to people but they turn a deaf ear to us all. It is hard for me to understand why the powers that be continue on this destructive path, surely they can see it is not working.

Tag should post up more about when they do approach the state about these issues and what was said and why the outcome is the way it is.

Anonymous said...

Although I am not one of the people who benefited from the work on "Winnie the Pooh" that went to YOWZA. I can say that the work was greatly appreciated. There are a lot of folks here in Canada who are out of work pretty much permanently because a lot of 2D hand drawn work has either been shipped overseas or has gone digital. I'm not saying it's right.

Personally, I wish California would have a stronger industry like it was back in the mid-90's.

Anonymous said...

Why does any studio want to be part of the union? What does it benefit them? Generally speaking, they don't.

My understanding is that several major union employers did indeed seek out the union, or were at least very friendly when their initial hires expressed the desire to be union, because they wanted to recruit top talent. Certainly within the animation community (as opposed to hard-core visual effects), there is an understanding among many producers that the union is not the enemy, and that it's good for their work force.

The reason why Canada does not have a union is because many in our animation industry believe that the union would threaten jobs.

Ironically, that's exactly what Disney told Canadian artists not so long ago, when Disney was in the process of setting up two Canadian studios. The Canadian animators bought into this claim, went to work at the new non-union Disney studios, and saw both those studios shuttered in less than two years.

Despite the absense of a union presence in Canada, Canadian animation studios have struggled for years. The 'union threat' is a strawman, invented by producers who aren't very good at doing their jobs.

Anonymous said...

You have no idea what a comfort that brings to me. Even though nothing will be done for the reasons I listed above.

Many people at a few studios I have worked for have expressed a yearning for an Animators Union. Then they remark on how the person who starts it will be "Black Listed" from working at any studio.

If a union were to ever happen here. I would hope that upon graduation it would be mandatory to enter it regardless of your intention to make animation a career. However, I am sure that my perceptions of how unions are started are skewed.

Anonymous said...

It's no secret that California unfortunately has gotten out of control on expenses and taxes so they are obviously looking at other states, locations, north of the country or far east for ways to save money. Thats why Pixar opened the 2nd studio in Vancouver and not in Los Angeles. And Vancouver is expensive for the individual but the company gets the incentive to set up so it can save money. Its just business, as it has always been.

Are We Men or are we Mice? said...

That old scare tactic of "unions will drive the work away" is used constantly , but I'm surprised that ruse goes over in Canada, too. I thought Canada was supposed to be more liberal or even "Socialistic" than the U.S.A. (?) , so why are labor unions so weak or non-existent up there , or is it just in animation and film production that unions are verboten ?

Even though I know the Guild is basically powerless to do anything about it, did the Guild even raise a whisper of protest that Disney (a Guild signatory studio) outsourced most of the clean-up and ink & paint work on Pooh to a foreign non-union studio while many Guild members languish in long-term unemployment, but would be eager to get back on the board, pencils in hand ? At least to say: "Hey, what's the deal, Disney? You've got the best clean-up artists in the world sitting idle in L.A. , why not put 'em back to work ?" (not that the Disney management , middle and upper, gives a thin rat's ass about the artists, but at least by drawing attention to it you expose what they're doing.)

Anonymous said...

Would be great if we had some sort of organization that could muscle the studios into not sending work overseas...
Like a Union... Or a Guild even...

BiG M said...

There are loads of Unions in Canada - Mostly automotive, electrician, and you know the OTHER trades.

Animation, art, the whole thing - no unions.

As for Canada being a "socialist" country. That is complete bull. If we are such a "socialist" country, then why does our health care system just barely squeak by at #30 and the U.S. at #37 at the Global scale?. But, that is another argument for another time.

The United States propaganda machine is alive and well isn't it?.

Anonymous said...

I like our union. Our pension and benefits are great. But it would also be cool if the union leaders were overly aggressive, in-your-face activists who put the fear of god into big studios. You know, kind of like how aggressive and ruthless producers are about getting movies done.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, that's it - we need our union to act like a Chicago thug teamster. That'll make our cause sympathetic and really endear us to the public.

Steven Kaplan said...

Would be great if we had some sort of organization that could muscle the studios into not sending work overseas...
Like a Union... Or a Guild even...


Hope to see you at the next membership meeting. That's where it all starts, not anonymously commenting on our blog.

Anonymous said...

"thats where it all starts...."

So... having a guild with some sort of actual power, and contracts with the studios that actually carry some sort of weight is up to us? Not the Guild?

Just admit that the Guild can do nothing to prevent Union studios from farming work out to Non-union shops.

Never have before.... looks like they never will.

Steven Kaplan said...

Never have before.... looks like they never will.

You forget the strikes of '79 and '82. Your union was able to put language into the contract regarding runaway productions in 79, and it was removed in 82. Why? Leverage, timing and the power of the collective.

So, if you want language in our contract that prevents studios sub-contracting to non-union shops or foreign countries, get involved. Its possible and only with YOUR action.

Or, just sit quietly behind the veil and lob grenades over the wall.

Anonymous said...

I think all Steve is saying is get involved, I am guilty of this. I have been a member since 1996 and have never attended a meeting. Bout time I start as should others.

Anonymous said...

Im busy animating. I pay my union dues on time. I assume that money is paying people to do stuff which isnt in my job title.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, that's it - we need our union to act like a Chicago thug teamster. That'll make our cause sympathetic and really endear us to the public.

Having our union go to a private meeting with Disney producers to say "If you dont have the cleanup work for Winnie the Pooh done in the USA, I'll ask our members to organize a strike" will cause the public to get mad at the union? Thats acting like a thug?

Really?

Steven Kaplan said...

I assume that money is paying people to do stuff which isnt in my job title.

Which goes to show how little you know about how a union works. If you'd like to change that, come to the next meeting. July 26.

Steven Kaplan said...

Having our union go to a private meeting with Disney producers to say "If you dont have the cleanup work for Winnie the Pooh done in the USA, I'll ask our members to organize a strike"

Our contract explicitly states that a company will not lock out and the workers will not strike while the contract is in effect. If you've lost your copy, you can find the language in the contract on page 53, Article 21, Paragraph J titled "No Strike - No Lockout"

Cement Shoes, however, have not been excluded. /sarcasm

Anonymous said...

No one is suggesting that the Guild leadership act like "Chicago teamster thugs".

But there could be some pressure applied, at least in terms of drawing the public's and news media's attention to the fact that Disney is outsourcing work on their animated features to foreign studios while U.S. animation artists are languishing in long-term unemployment. Shame them. (yeah, I know, they have no shame, but still ...) Create some public sympathy for the plight of unemployed Guild members. This does not require anyone to act "thuggish".

Anonymous said...

ROFLMAO - you might want to study history. In 1982 we hoped just for that type of sympathy from the public. Didn't happen then - won't happen now. The public doesn't care who makes their cartoons. Why should they.

Steven Kaplan said...

Love the idea! It would require approval for the expenditure from the Executive Board. It would also require someone to spearhead the effort.

Guess how that gets started? Hint: I've mentioned it a few times.

Yes We Can said...

Yes, the membership will have to get actively involved. Thank you for pointing that out repeatedly, Steven.

The cynicism and defeatism has to go, re: the comment from Anony at 10:49 am -

"ROFLMAO - you might want to study history. In 1982 we hoped just for that type of sympathy from the public. Didn't happen then - won't happen now. The public doesn't care who makes their cartoons. Why should they."

That's precisely why we should study history, because "history" goes back longer than your experience in 1982. Don't be stuck in the past. It has to be admitted that MPSC/Animation Guild has been weak in the past and is currently weak, but things can change if the membership has the will for it. (back to you Mr. Kaplan ... )

Anonymous said...

Im busy animating. I pay my union dues on time. I assume that money is paying people to do stuff which isnt in my job title.

You complain that TAG lacks power, and then you go on to justify not giving TAG any power. Great.

The reason the WGA is feared and reviled is because many of their members are willing to strike. Many are willing to not sit around earning money while they pay people to do publicity campaigns (which are a colossal waste of time). Their membership is willing to get off their asses. On the other hand, that union aggression has been ineffective in recent times, and that, too, is food for thought.

If people want a no-outsourcing clause in the contract, it will have to be put back in the contract (like it was in 1979). The studios will reject it (like they did in 1979). Only a strike will get them to possibly accept it (like happened in 1979). But the studios might ignore the strike, and outsource the work anyway (like they did in 1982), while union members who don't care about the outsourcing issue cross the picket line (as many did in 1982).

There are not abstract issues. Saying "the union could do more about outsourcing" if fine rhetoric, but I've never met anyone who went on that rant who had thought through the practical options to doing something about it.

Would a publicity campaign, at a time of major unemployment in many industries and at a time when unions are being scapegoated right and left, really make Disney or any major studio do something different? Would the majority of members vote to strike over Disney outsourcing some of the Pooh work? These are serious questions.

Anonymous said...

You complain that TAG lacks power, and then you go on to justify not giving TAG any power. Great.

Theres more than one Anonymous here.

Anonymous said...

Which goes to show how little you know about how a union works. If you'd like to change that, come to the next meeting. July 26.

You're right. I dont. It's my job implicitly to make art, not know how the union works, or keep track of which shows are being outsourced at all the studios, or any of that crap.

But if I get a message from the union that says "XYZ Studio is outsourcing to China! Lets all do something about it!" I'll get behind a movement.

I'm sorry, but it seems like the union is led by a bunch of old guys who arent go-getters and talk exclusively about the old days, and when studios do crappy thing, they pass the buck and blame it on their members for not being more involved.

I know you have every argument in the world against this opinion, but it's mine and, frankly, there's a lot of people who feel this way.

Anonymous said...

A strike? That doesn't make sense, unions are barely holding on now as it is and companies are going elsewhere when they can. Acting like Chicago style bullies will only make it worse. It's a fast changing landscape out there and the best thing is to be able to adapt to it and make yourself valuable.

Steven Kaplan said...

You're right. I dont. It's my job implicitly to make art, not know how the union works .. I'm sorry, but it seems like the union is led by a bunch of old guys who arent go-getters and talk exclusively about the old days

Because *YOU* let them!! Unions are the membership. You want to see change, its up to *YOU* to make it! Get it?? You want new blood on the Exec Board, RUN FOR A SEAT! I've been to the election, I can say you'd have a decent shot.

But if I get a message from the union that says "XYZ Studio is outsourcing to China! Lets all do something about it!" I'll get behind a movement.

Really?! Email me your name and address. I'll send you a card and invite you to participate. Would that do it?

MAN(agement) is in the forest said...

^
|

RE: Anony's comment at July 20, 2011 4:54:00 PM (and similar comments in this thread)

What's so sadly ironic is that all these posts about how we're powerless to do anything and what we better do is just keep our heads down, our mouths shut, and "make yourself valuable" (written like a true management stooge) are posted directly above the interview with Martha Sigall that leads off with a reference about the strike at Schlesinger's --

http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/2011/07/talk-with-martha-sigall-part-i.html"

I don't know ... those people don't look like "Chicago style bullies" to me, they look like just regular folks , like you and me, trying to make a decent living wage in the animation biz. (the difference between us today and that generation of people is that they had a backbone and cared about sticking together for the common good, and were willing to take a chance to make things better. What they sacrificed for to make this industry better has been almost totally lost today through indifference and cynicism or fear cultivated by management toadies who intone: "you're lucky to be working here; you better make yourself valuable")

http://i222.photobucket.com/albums/dd10/tagblog/Schlesinger.jpg

Anonymous said...

You want new blood on the Exec Board, RUN FOR A SEAT!

No. I dont want to be on the exec board, just like I dont want to run for politics. I want the people in power to do THEIR job. If you ran for that job, and got it, then do it. Im happy doing mine. Yes, Im being a backseat driver, and I acknowledge it. But that doesnt change the facts that it doesnt seem like anything is ever being done.

Really?! Email me your name and address. I'll send you a card and invite you to participate. Would that do it?

You have every union members address. Not sure about email, but I have to assume you have that too.

Anonymous said...

Here's what people like the anonymous above don't understand: 'union leaders' aren't like city council members or members of congress. In regular government, we elect people who have power (which the people have given them) to create laws and enforce laws. Our job, as voters, is to vote for the best candidates, and give them feedback on what we think of the job they're doing, and pay taxes so things get done.

A union is fundamentally different. We elect union leaders to negotiate with the studios on our behalf, and to enforce the contract that gets negotiated. That's "their job," and I know they do it as well as they can (they can't enforce contract violations if members would let them, for example).

What people in this thread want is for the union leaders to do something they don't have the power or authority to do -- unilaterally change the contract that the membership voted for, publically attack signator studios where members work, and somehow evoke change while the membership sits on the sidelines. Actually, that's too specific. Some of the posters here don't know what they want our leaders to do, they just want them to come up with a solution, without having any inkling what that solution might be, and then they promise to support that solution, even though they can't be bothered to come to a meeting or figure out how their own union operates.

It's easy to be frustrated, and to strike out at our own union. I say stop taking the easy road. If you have ideas on how to make things better, speak up. If you don't have those ideas, stop attacking the people who are actually doing their job as well as we let them do it.

Steven Kaplan said...

You have every union members address. Not sure about email, but I have to assume you have that too.

And we just sent out cards to the next Membership Meeting. I look forward to meeting you.

Anonymous said...

What people in this thread want is for the union leaders to do something they don't have the power or authority to do

In that case I take back my statement. Instead I'll say it's even worse than I thought and unions are a waste of time. And that's not being defeatest. I literally mean that if it takes all the members to organize and come to a consensus and jump through hoops just to enact a tiny bit of change, then it is literally a waste of time. I'd rather work my way up through my studio and enact change from within: because it's my studio that I care about anyway

Steven Kaplan said...

I'd rather work my way up through my studio and enact change from within: because it's my studio that I care about anyway

And the hard lesson you'll learn there, is that its not *your* studio, its theirs. What's yours, is the union.

Best of luck Anon. Just remember, we'll always be here.

Anonymous said...

Semantics. "it's the studio I work for that I care about anyway". Better?

Doesn't make any difference.

Anonymous said...

You're right. It doesn't make any difference. You can care about "the studio you work for" all you want - they don't care about you. When you come to that realization then you'll be living in the real world.

You can call it semantics - most of us would call it a Freudian slip that shows how naive you really are.

Anonymous said...

"it's the studio I work for that I care about anyway."

Hey, you've got yours, eh Junior ? What do you care about what else goes on, right ?

So when your "family" at the studio you currently work for starts to ship your job overseas and you suddenly find yourself not a member of the happy "family" anymore remember what was discussed here.

Anonymous said...

"Its possible and only with YOUR action."

I think its painfully obvious that studios are outsourcing on a rampant pace.... Dreamworks just announced an entire feature going to INDIA yesterday....

But you're saying its up to the members to start something? Members dont like to step forward and get blacklisted from studios... It happens. Nothing can be done about it.

Why doesn't the Guild start something?
You're really not putting much faith in us by repeating "its up to you, come to a meeting, etc etc"

If the GUILD starts something, than I'm sure the membership will stand behind it... But for the dues we pay, it shouldnt be the other way around.

Anonymous said...

"But for the dues we pay, it shouldnt be the other way around."

Just to be clear, the dues that we pay to TAG are 1/3 or more LESS than what most other Unions charge their members.

Anonymous said...

Oppps. I meant to say the TAG dues are 1/3 the dues of other Entertainment unions - maybe even less than a 1/3

Anonymous said...

I'm not "junior" and its not about having lovey-dovey family love for my studio. Its about keeping my co workers employed, that's all. And I feel I can have a better effect within the studio than going to meetings and working with the impotent guild.

Steven Kaplan said...

If the GUILD starts something, than I'm sure the membership will stand behind it... But for the dues we pay, it shouldnt be the other way around

Let's use an example since the direct approach isn't working.

Studio XYZ is a TAG signatory .. has been for some time. Steve H visits regularly and hears that artists are working unpaid OT. Steve H adjusts his schedule to go after hours, and walks up to artists and confirms they're not filling out their time cards properly.

Steve H says, "This is against the law and in violation of the contract. I'll file a grievance in the morning and we'll get you paid" Arist says "Don't do that. I want to do this. You'll get me fired. I need to do this to keep up."

Steve H, and TAG, can't do *SQUAT* because the MEMBER refuses to ACT. We can't do anything without the membership. TAG is beholden to the membership to direct its actions.

Make sense? As stated before, we're not government officials, we're union representatives. If you, a member (assuming), want something to change in the studio you're at, you need to come and tell us. Not post anon in the blog .. you need to participate. Its not hard to do. The fact that you're so unwilling to do so, yet are willing to whine about it anonymously in comments, punctuates the problem.

Anonymous said...

Thats one example, and the member is an idiot.

No what can you do if a studio sends their work overseas and doesnt post an opening for in-betweeners in the USA?

Anonymous said...

*Now

Steven Kaplan said...

No[w] what can you do if a studio sends their work overseas and doesnt post an opening for in-betweeners in the USA?

Nothing. We can only enforce the contract. There is nothing in our contract that keeps a studio from sub-contracting their work.

Want to take a stab at how you can change the contract?

Hint: I may have said it already

Anonymous said...

Instead I'll say it's even worse than I thought and unions are a waste of time.

Prove you mean that, and give your union pensions back. Prove you believe that, and pay for your health care out of pocket, like most people at non-union studios do. Prove you mean it and don't cash that severance check the union studio is required to send you after they lay you off. Prove you mean that by working for wages below the union minimum.

You're guilty of black and white thinking. If the union can't magically do everything I want it to do, without any sacrifice from you, then it's totally, completely worthless. And you ignore the fact that your lazy, childish attitude is part of the problem you hate.

Of course, you don't think that way about "your studio." You ignore that fact that they're eagerly trying to outsource your work, grateful to have a job while others don't. And so you keep quiet, and look for others to do the heavy lifting.

And that's not being defeatest.

Yes, actually it is.

I literally mean that if it takes all the members to organize and come to a consensus and jump through hoops just to enact a tiny bit of change, then it is literally a waste of time.

What you want to call a "tiny bit of change" is an issue that TAG went on strike over twice. What you call a tiny bit of change is a change that no union studio would willingly allow to happen. Your cognitive dissonance probably comes from the need to sleep at night, but it doesn't make your warped perceptions correct.

Anonymous said...

Stop vilifying me and just listen to what Im saying.

Im not arguing that the union has done great things in the past, Im saying it is impotent now. The contracts need to be updated to include disallowing sub-contracting to overseas countries.

But I guess thats up to me to do.

PS) I took a pay cut when I came to a union shop, but whatever.

Steven Kaplan said...

TAG CBA .. Article 4, Paragraph C:

Nothing in this Agreement shall prevent any individual from negotiating and obtaining from the Producer better conditions and terms of employment than those herein provided.


Thanks, again, for proving the point. You negotiated a lesser wage at a union shop, and then anonymously imply on our blog that its our doing.

When clearly, the contract has provisions that allow you to negotiate a better wage than we stipulate the company should pay you. Those provisions were stipulated by (say it with me now) the membership .. and bargained for by the union with the producers.

If you spent half the energy your taking to monitor and comment here motivating your colleagues to get behind your effort to keep "your studio" from sub-contracting overseas, this could very well be a moot point.

Anonymous said...

That wasn't the point of my post. It was an aside. Hence the PS. I was making a point that the above commenter told me to work for wages below union minimum, when I've never made less than union minimum at non union shops

But keep ignoring my bigger point.

PS) thanks for educating me on time management. Your snark and opinion are noted.

PPS) repeat with me: it's not my job to find out what jobs are being farmed overseas.

Anonymous said...

How do we even know this person works for a union studio? For all we know they are just a lurking poster like at slashfilm or imdb. Isn't it about time to have a better anonymous commenting system? Seriously?

Anonymous said...

Im saying it is impotent now. The contracts need to be updated to include disallowing sub-contracting to overseas countries.

Is it vilifying you to continue to point out the ways you misrepresent reality? The contract we have is what the negotiating committee negotiated and the membership approved. It is renegotiated every three years, and not simply "updated" at our will.

22 years ago, exactly what you propose was introduced into the CBA. A fine 'no outsourcing' clause, to keep the work here. How did this "little thing" happen? The membership (not the "union leaders") decided they wanted to put an end to outsourcing. The membership made sure it was a key part of the 1979 Collective Bargaining Agreement proposals. When the studios rejected this "update" to the contract, the membership as a whole voted to go on strike. And strike they did. They all got up from their desks, and went without pay, and pounded the pavement, and ate up their savings.

Eventually the studios relented, and the 1979 contract excluded outsourcing unless the entire active membership had full employment. Victory!

And 3 years later, in 1982, when the CBA was negotiated again, the studios insisted that clause be taken out. The membership (not the leaders) refused to accept this, and authorized a strike. And after several months of a painful, debilitating strike, this time the membership relented, and accepted that outsourcing was a part of the animation landscape.

I've never made less than union minimum at non union shops

Let the union disappear, and see how long non-union studios need to keep paying above union minimums to get quality animators.

Anonymous said...

The pro-studio guy here has changed his mind about a dozen times over the course of this thread.

First he wants the union to be stronger. Then he sees no need for a union at all, and will "work from within." Then he demands the union prevent outsourcing through strikes.

Here's a question, buddy: if the union called an actual strike to prevent outsourcing, would you risk your career and help walk the picketline? Or would you cross the picketline and "work from within" with your good friends inside the studio?

Actually making the union stronger takes guts and action, but frankly you seem apathetic about anything except complaining.

Anonymous said...

There have been so many trolls on TAG comments lately I don't know who to believe is a union member and who isnt

Site Meter