From: "Preston Foerder" <preston-AT-pfpuppetry.com>
To: <puptcrit-driftline.org-AT-lists.driftline.org>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 18:54:28 -0500
Subject: RE: QRE: [Puptcrit] UNIONS - Puppeteers


I have donated all my residuals to socialist charities. Yeah, charities,
that's what I did with them, yeah.

Preston

-----Original Message-----
From: puptcrit-driftline.org-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org
[mailto:puptcrit-driftline.org-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org] On Behalf Of
Widerman-AT-aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 12:59 PM
To: puptcrit-driftline.org-AT-lists.driftline.org
Subject: Re: QRE: [Puptcrit] UNIONS - Puppeteers

Like Preston, I perform under union contract from time to time. Although
I 
can relate to grumbling about never getting the pension, I take issue
with the 
notion of never getting the benefits of union membership. 

When you perform in film or video, your performance is mechanically 
duplicated and multiplied exponentially. Today, this can mean throughout
the world. A 
producer who does not compensate you when your performance is sold to a
mass 
market is blocking you from participating in the revenue generated by
the 
success of your work, and he simply keeps it for himself. The union
assures that you 
participate in the success of your effort, and are compensated in
accordance 
with its use. That can mean repeat broadcasts, reuse in syndication, 
repackaging, replaying on cable, satellite or home video VHS and DVD,
local markets, 
national markets and world markets. Perhaps Preston neglected to mention
his 
residual checks? (I can chide Preston a little because we are friends.) 

Although I consider this a singular important benefit, the union also
assures 
that you are allowed to take breaks and have meal time when filming,
that you 
are paid overtime when the Director says "let's just keep going until
it's 
done," and they can't force you to come in the next day at 8:00 a.m.
when you 
just finished working 3 hours before that (don't think it doesn't
happen). The 
crew on the set has these protections, so should the performers.
Performers are 
so readily abused by producers, we should not lightly brush off what so
many 
of our predecessors have fought so hard for.

When you work under a nonunion contract, (which union members are not 
supposed to do) you ought to be paid substantially more than union scale
because the 
producer, in what is called a "buyout," is not obligated to you beyond
the 
initial use, as he would be under a union contract. You are on your own
to make 
sure you are covered for breaks, overtime, turnaround and all the other
things 
the union has thought of which you may not have. Yes, you are happy just
to 
get the work, but be careful.

There is a Puppeteers Caucus of the Screen Actors Guild, and among other

things, they have defined precisely what distinguishes prop handling
from 
puppeteering. Not appearing onscreen usually denotes prop handler. As a
puppeteer, you 
are clearly more than a prop handler. The fact that someone may not
appear on 
screen while performing a mime character that emotes, but does not speak

lines has been addressed. This is one of many issues that puppet
performers have 
fought for through the union, much of it won by veteran Muppet
performers over 
the years.

I am also sensitive to the chicken/egg aspect of joining the union (you
can't 
apply for union work if you are not a member, and you can't become a
member 
without having union work), but everyone in the union has faced this
hurdle, 
and has paid substantial fees to join.

Finally, I would like to say that Bil Baird's theater did not fail
because of 
Actors' Equity, as alluded to in another post. In fact the opposite is
true, 
and Equity would have worked very hard to keep Bil's theater an ongoing 
venture, which would have been in everyone's best interest.

I consider the benefits provided by membership in the performers' unions
to 
be quite valuable and it would be a shame to lose them as the new
markets 
emerge.

    -Steven->


In a message dated 11/29/04 4:25:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
preston-AT-pfpuppetry.com writes:
There is an Equity puppeteer's contract. It was created by Bil Baird for
the Chrysler exhibit at the 1964 New York World's Fair. All workers at
the fair had to be union and they wanted the puppeteers to join the
Teamsters or the stage hand's union (Local 1). The logic being that the
puppeteers were just people moving props around. Bil refused and told
them that the puppeteers were performers and had to be part of the
performer's union. Hence, the Equity contract.

Even though Equity has a contract, they really don't care about it.
Puppeteers are possibly the only people that have worked on Broadway
non-union. I know the puppeteers in Eva LaGallienne's Alice in
Wonderland were non-union on Broadway.  When Peter and Wendy played the
New Victory Theater, Equity maintained that as long as the puppeteers
were hooded they didn't have to be in the union. I'm fairly certain the
puppeteers in Avenue Q are Equity. But most of the time Equity has to be
forced to represent puppeteers.

As far as the film and video unions go, it's fine if you're in a place
where you can get enough work to qualify for benefits like LA or to a
lesser extent New York, but if you're only getting work from time to
time, you're paying dues while getting none of the benefits. Last I
knew, you needed to make at least $10,000 (it could be more now) to
qualify for the health insurance. AFTRA keeps pension money for me,
which I will probably never be able to collect because I've never made
enough in a single year to qualify for it.

Preston
_______________________________________________
List address: puptcrit-AT-lists.driftline.org
Admin interface:
http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/puptcrit-driftline.org



_______________________________________________
List address: puptcrit-AT-lists.driftline.org
Admin interface: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/puptcrit-driftline.org