6 ms·

> Striking out on their own is the benefit I am talking about. So are you saying we should keep employees overworked and underpaid so they're more likely to le

> Striking out on their own is the benefit I am talking about. So are you saying we should keep employees overworked and underpaid so they're more likely to leave their current employer...?

friendlybus 7y ago
I am saying that running your own show or a show with other people you value working with does not need to be under the thumb of union rules or overarching corporate pressure. There is no scenario in entertainment where unions "keep to themselves". A union started will soak up the entire industry and now my show with people I respect, admire and fair equity shares now has time limits and controls none of us decided or agreed to because a union(s) can excommunicate us from the entire working industry. The industry should self-regulate under threat. Implementing a union will benefit few but the union leaders. The film industry is a prime example of what happens and films like Star Wars barely exist in the face of union pressure. George Lucas hired Irvine Kershner to direct because he knew all about Hollywood, but was 'not Hollywood'. Gary Oldman turned down a SW role due to union rules. The public has no idea how cliquey and regulated the film industry is, thanks in part to the studio model and union rules. I'd sooner call for a tech union and see a whole bunch of engineers get a proper cut of the $100 million+ companies that get sold without them seeing a dime. Game industry artists are very skilled and can get work elsewhere for much easier conditions. They choose to stay and work hard and can choose to negotiate better salaries. I can't comment on mega-corps that there are limits to negotiations, in the independent part there is a lot more leeway. The conditions will always be difficult, timing is the difficulty that we can't control.
- jahaja 7y ago
  > Implementing a union will benefit few but the union leaders. What the heck? This sounds like something out of a movie. Do you think union leaders get a cut of every member's pay or something?
  - username90 7y ago
    > Do you think union leaders get a cut of every member's pay or something? Isn't this exactly what happens? You pay the union a percentage of your salary, which is then used to among other things pay union leaders salaries. And just to note, union leaders typically earn a lot more than union members, making this transaction regressive in nature.
    - jahaja 7y ago
      Wow, this is a very cynical interpretation of union leaders salaries. The previous posts implies that they are enriching themselves through members dues in a caricature manner.
      - username90 7y ago
        Can you explain to me why a union leader should earn many times more than the median union worker? Enforcing that they don't earn more than median workers would increase solidarity and be more fair, but as far as I know no unions have such a policy. Why do you think they don't do it?
        jahaja 7y ago
        I don't think they should. I think it should be quite frugal. Some pay too much, some don't. It's in any case vastly different than the multiplier that the execs get.
  - friendlybus 7y ago
    In terms of political power, it will benefit few but the leaders.
- unapologetic 7y ago
  > I am saying that running your own show or a show with other people If you're running your own thing then you aren't a worker. You aren't part of the union. Your input on union activities is not valuable, because you are the opposition. Sorry to be harsh, but that's the truth.
  - friendlybus 7y ago
    What argument do you have? I feel free to identify with and as a worker.
    - unapologetic 7y ago
      That's fine, but you're still a boss and your opinions on unions should be treated as those of a potentially bad actor. That's just the way it works. I can't trust you to tell me a union is a bad idea. You have too much to gain by saying no.
      - friendlybus 7y ago
        The world is a good place with good people in it. The perception of bad actors and bad intent is your worldview, not mine. You have too much to gain from painting the world as a bad place, it's not trustworthy. The innocent everyday man aiming to be king of the union has all the personal motive in the world to manufacture a utopian vision of worker's rights. The real world has good people bearing a cross of suffering to generate something of meaningful value in this world.
        unapologetic 7y ago
        They also have the incentive make those things happen. The boss doesn't. The boss has incentive cut costs and increase profits. Even if the current boss is good person, the next one might not be. Situation might change the boss might go after workers to save profits. We aren't on the same side of the table. Look at Google. Good job, stable, good pay, solid benefits. Sounds great. They were also engaged in massive wage fixing and are now firing union activists.

> Striking out on their own is the benefit I am talking about. So are you saying we should keep employees overworked and underpaid so they're more likely to leave their current employer...?

friendlybus 7y ago

I am saying that running your own show or a show with other people you value working with does not need to be under the thumb of union rules or overarching corporate pressure. There is no scenario in entertainment where unions "keep to themselves". A union started will soak up the entire industry and now my show with people I respect, admire and fair equity shares now has time limits and controls none of us decided or agreed to because a union(s) can excommunicate us from the entire working industry. The industry should self-regulate under threat. Implementing a union will benefit few but the union leaders. The film industry is a prime example of what happens and films like Star Wars barely exist in the face of union pressure. George Lucas hired Irvine Kershner to direct because he knew all about Hollywood, but was 'not Hollywood'. Gary Oldman turned down a SW role due to union rules. The public has no idea how cliquey and regulated the film industry is, thanks in part to the studio model and union rules. I'd sooner call for a tech union and see a whole bunch of engineers get a proper cut of the $100 million+ companies that get sold without them seeing a dime. Game industry artists are very skilled and can get work elsewhere for much easier conditions. They choose to stay and work hard and can choose to negotiate better salaries. I can't comment on mega-corps that there are limits to negotiations, in the independent part there is a lot more leeway. The conditions will always be difficult, timing is the difficulty that we can't control.

jahaja 7y ago
> Implementing a union will benefit few but the union leaders. What the heck? This sounds like something out of a movie. Do you think union leaders get a cut of every member's pay or something?
- username90 7y ago
  > Do you think union leaders get a cut of every member's pay or something? Isn't this exactly what happens? You pay the union a percentage of your salary, which is then used to among other things pay union leaders salaries. And just to note, union leaders typically earn a lot more than union members, making this transaction regressive in nature.
  - jahaja 7y ago
    Wow, this is a very cynical interpretation of union leaders salaries. The previous posts implies that they are enriching themselves through members dues in a caricature manner.
    - username90 7y ago
      Can you explain to me why a union leader should earn many times more than the median union worker? Enforcing that they don't earn more than median workers would increase solidarity and be more fair, but as far as I know no unions have such a policy. Why do you think they don't do it?
      - jahaja 7y ago
        I don't think they should. I think it should be quite frugal. Some pay too much, some don't. It's in any case vastly different than the multiplier that the execs get.
- friendlybus 7y ago
  In terms of political power, it will benefit few but the leaders.
unapologetic 7y ago
> I am saying that running your own show or a show with other people If you're running your own thing then you aren't a worker. You aren't part of the union. Your input on union activities is not valuable, because you are the opposition. Sorry to be harsh, but that's the truth.
- friendlybus 7y ago
  What argument do you have? I feel free to identify with and as a worker.
  - unapologetic 7y ago
    That's fine, but you're still a boss and your opinions on unions should be treated as those of a potentially bad actor. That's just the way it works. I can't trust you to tell me a union is a bad idea. You have too much to gain by saying no.
    - friendlybus 7y ago
      The world is a good place with good people in it. The perception of bad actors and bad intent is your worldview, not mine. You have too much to gain from painting the world as a bad place, it's not trustworthy. The innocent everyday man aiming to be king of the union has all the personal motive in the world to manufacture a utopian vision of worker's rights. The real world has good people bearing a cross of suffering to generate something of meaningful value in this world.
      - unapologetic 7y ago
        They also have the incentive make those things happen. The boss doesn't. The boss has incentive cut costs and increase profits. Even if the current boss is good person, the next one might not be. Situation might change the boss might go after workers to save profits. We aren't on the same side of the table. Look at Google. Good job, stable, good pay, solid benefits. Sounds great. They were also engaged in massive wage fixing and are now firing union activists.