NEW YORK (AP) -- THE LATEST: A union representative says negotiations between striking Broadway stagehands and theater producers ended this morning - with no settlement reached.
Thanks! At least that has a more positive spin, like, "we need to get some sleep, but we're making progress." However, since no one will comment on further negotiations, I am afraid it's a bad sign.
Bruce Cohen, Local One spokeperson, is saying (live) that there is no deal, nothing scheduled and he is not blaming it on fatigue. He is saying they broke down because they couldn't come to an agreement on one particular point. He is reiterating that nothing is scheduled.
is the union trying to break Broadway cause its only 30%-40 of the job sites they work ??
just reread the nov. 20th post from the league
To Our Valued Employees: We are extremely disappointed that we have been unable to reach agreement with Local One. During talks last Sunday, we offered significant concessions, and there was cause for optimism in the room, which makes the current impasse all the more frustrating. We continue to believe strongly that the contract must be modernized. Archaic and inflexible work rules need to be changed. The industry’s future and the economic well-being of all who work on Broadway depend on it. However, we recognized that such change can’t happen overnight. That is why we withdrew many of our original proposals and agreed to keep most of the work rules intact, in an effort to get a deal. • We dropped the request to eliminate paying a flyman -- at $160,000 a year -- who has no work to do. • We dropped the request that Carpentry Department employees could assist each other, which forces us to hire more people than we need. • We wanted to be able to hire two additional stagehands until two weeks after opening to help the show work out the glitches. We even agreed to pay more to them than the regular crew. The Union said “no,” only one can be hired, and we said, “OK”. In addition, the few changes we asked for are reasonable: • The ability to start a four-hour work call or rehearsal at 2:30 pm rather than 1:00 pm, to permit us to also set up for that night’s show. The Union said “no.” • The ability to do a two-hour paid call before the show or a one-hour paid call after the show to do certain limited work. The Union said “no.” • We now pay more than $60 an hour, 8 hours per week, to mop a stage – even if it’s mopped only once. We offered $25,000 to every stagehand who mops, in exchange for reducing the rate by half, to more than $30 per hour for mopping. The Union said “no.” The last proposal we presented on Sunday reflected a gradual approach and contained compensation increases of over 20% for the next five years. Most in the room, on both sides of the table, sensed that a deal was achievable. That hope was dashed when local leadership countered with an offer that, instead of building on the positive momentum, moved backward. Saddest of all, most of Broadway remains dark, and people in the industry and those who depend on it are suffering needless economic hardship. The facts are available if you want to learn more. Ask your union leaders and we will be happy to respond to their questions. November 20, 2007
Stagehands are notorious pillagers, playing practical jokes like turning lights off and on, messing with the sound, moving scenery around, taking candy from babies, that sort of thing. Baaadddd stagehands.
Why do they meet all night instead of day talks? It seems to me that they must be exhausted and I would think it's difficult to negotiate with a clear head when you are that tired.
I rail against the LOCAL 1 union because I think they are using all the other union folks as their shield.... 335 guys are stopping everyone else from making a living...what kind of collective bargaining is that.
just keep saying this "I am out of work because of a $56.00 per hour floor sweeper"
maybe then you will wake up
if the local one had nothing to hide why don't they publicly tell all of us what they are asking for ...where is the full page ad in the times telling us what they have and what they want its called transparency.
you lose the right to secret negations when your job actions affect so many other peoples right to make a living ...can you understand that idea ... is that idea so outrageous??
I am well aware of the various issues of this debate on both sides--possibly more so than you.
And the reason I and others go after you has nothing to do with which side of this debate you are on and everything to do with your smug, asshole, know it all, superior tone and posting of a gazillion smarmy threads.
And now you want to act like a "fair and balanced" bystander.
"if the local one had nothing to hide why don't they publicly tell all of us what they are asking for ...where is the full page ad in the times telling us what they have and what they want its called transparency.
you lose the right to secret negations when your job actions affect so many other peoples right to make a living ...can you understand that idea ... is that idea so outrageous??"
The same can be said for the League. Why don't they open their books and show the actual numbers? How much they're making on subsidiary rights, concessions, the actual breakdown of costs? If you want transparency it should come from both sides, don't you think?
"Just a Guy. Your feelings are touching. I am gladdened by the thought that you will one day wind up 6 feet under as we all do." - MrRoxy ------
"I do not suggest you walk out the door onto a New York street with your vulnerable child part exposed and not protected..." - Jason Bennett