No, you have no such guarantee that a union candidate will be any more experienced than a non-union candidate. Using Hollywood and IATSE(The Editors Guild) as a

No, you have no such guarantee that a union candidate will be any more experienced than a non-union candidate. Using Hollywood and IATSE(The Editors Guild) as an example, some requirements in order to be considered for membership are: >"Editors must demonstrate 175 days of non-union work experience within the last three years, prior to the date of application." and ">Colorists must demonstrate 100 days of non-union work experience within the last two years, prior to the date of application."[1] Each of those is less than 3 months a year. I have many friends in that Union as well as SAG that have other pursuits but always make sure to do the minimum number of hours in order to maintain Union status in order to maintain the benefits. The only guarantee you have is that a union candidate has more hours that a non-union candidate working on union movie productions. >"... as an employee I know a movie using non union labor is not going to run as smoothly." Do you have any evidence that movie production in countries without unions runs less smoothly? For instance New Zealand’s uniquely non-unionized film industry has produced many blockbusters - the "Lord of the Rings Trilogy" and "The Hobbit Trilogy" being good examples. Is there any evidence that actual "boots on the ground" movie production ran any less smoothly? Would the latter trilogy have even been attempted had the former trilogy been so problematic as a result of it being non-union labor? [1] https://www.editorsguild.com/Join/Join-West-Coast https://www.editorsguild.com/Join/Join-West-Coast