Metropolitan Opera to Lock Out Stagehands as Contract Talks Stall- Page 2

[KKeller6]

That's not what they didn't agree to tho. They didn't agree to a 30% pay cut, 15% of which, would be forever. Even after the Met got back to regular levels.

[HogansHero]

this thread is getting along fine without me so I will just annotate a few things.

1. Actually, the stated salaries of the heads do NOT fall within the 1% even in literal terms much less when fully distributed. 

2. The Met and Broadway are apples and oranges. 

3. These people hold the precious institutional knowledge of the institution to any extent that exceeds even the chief executives. If Gelb takes a month off, the Met doesn't miss a beat. (Some might say it catches a few, but that's another matter.) If these folks do, the show doesn't go on. Is that healthy? Maybe not, but that too is a separate issue. 

[Tag]

itsjustmejonhotmailcom said: "The Met's head electrician makes $510k and the head carpenter $459k. I'm sure they are great at what they do. But they are not upper-middle class, they are literally in the top 1%."

And they probably don't have a life outside of work!

[unclevictor]

Had to respond.

Hogan, you’re actually WRONG, the heads DO fall w/in the 1% @ the Met AND in every Bway theatre. Ooooooh yes they do. They have their ways and completely abuse the system.

From hogan: “ These people hold the precious institutional knowledge of the institution to any extent that exceeds even the chief executives”
Whaaaaat?! What ru talking about?!? Clearly u have never worked on a Bway show.

[Wee Thomas2]

Kad said: "Wee Thomas2 said: "bwayobsessed said: "Let’s be real, stagehands are some of the only people working in theatre who get paid like professionals. They shouldn’t budge. Everyone else should be getting paid more. Pressure producers and the government to be generous. Not workers. Also whoever said stagehands just mop the floor is repulsive."

Assume you are ok paying higher prices and higher taxes then?"

Assume you are okay with workers being stiffed so you can save a few bucks?"

I did make the statement, you did.  My inquiry to you is based on your specific quote that they should get paid more.  I did not agree nor disagree, just pointed out that if you want that to happen, you need to be prepared to pay higher ticket prices and taxes.

 

So I ask again, are you ok with that?

[HogansHero]

unclevictor said: "Had to respond.

Hogan, you’re actually WRONG, the heads DO fall w/in the 1% @ the Met AND in every Bway theatre. Ooooooh yes they do. They have their ways and completely abuse the system.

From hogan: “ These people hold the precious institutional knowledge of the institution to any extent that exceeds even the chief executives”
Whaaaaat?! What ru talking about?!? Clearly u have never worked on a Bway show."

The threshold for the 1% is $538,926. As rehearsed above, the heads at the Met do not reach that number, even in the fully distributed compensation which is what those numbers (as opposed to the stat) are.

I guess what you think you know about my work history tells me all I need to know about the credibility of what you post here. Also, note that we are talking about the Met, not Broadway, so what you say is irrelevant in any event. 

Nice try.

[frogs_fan85]

HogansHero said: "this thread is getting along fine without me so I will just annotate a few things.

1. Actually, the stated salaries of the heads do NOT fall within the 1% even in literal terms much less when fully distributed.

2. The Met and Broadway are apples and oranges.

3. These people hold the precious institutional knowledge of the institution to any extent that exceeds even the chief executives. If Gelb takes a month off, the Met doesn't miss a beat. (Some might say it catches a few, but that's another matter.) If these folks do, the show doesn't go on. Is that healthy? Maybe not, but that too is a separate issue."

 

Thanks Hogan. You're 100% on this. 

Yes, the heads make a ton. And when we're talking about heads, this is 5 people out of hundreds.

Yes, the stage hands, especially the heads are well compensated. But their total yearly pay is not base pay. The reason their pay is so much higher than the base is because management does such a poor job managing to the work rules in the contract. And the work rules exist because they were negotiated over several contracts in exchange for low or no annual percentage salary increases. 

Broadway stagehands (generally) work on one show at a time. Met stagehands work on 22-25 active shows during any particular season, as well as new planning for new productions for the upcoming season.  

Institutional knowledge backstage is critical to the Mets capacity to stage repertory work. 

I wish there was video somewhere of a weekday rehearsal to performance changeover or a Saturday changeover, so that people could see what the stagehands are actually doing. (And changeovers are just one aspect of the job.)

[Kad]

Wee Thomas2 said: "Kad said: "Wee Thomas2 said: "bwayobsessed said: "Let’s be real, stagehands are some of the only people working in theatre who get paid like professionals. They shouldn’t budge. Everyone else should be getting paid more. Pressure producers and the government to be generous. Not workers. Also whoever said stagehands just mop the floor is repulsive."

Assume you are ok paying higher prices and higher taxes then?"

Assume you are okay with workers being stiffed so you can save a few bucks?"

I did make the statement, you did. My inquiry to you is based on your specific quote that they should get paid more. I did not agree nor disagree, just pointed out that if you want that to happen, you need to be prepared to pay higher ticket prices and taxes.



So I ask again, are you ok with that?"

I didn’t make the statement, bwayobsessed did.

My response should make my position fairly clear. And the fact you raised the question at all should make your position fairly clear.

And it’s a silly question to ask. The increased cost to audience or taxpayers would not be massive; it would be single digit dollars. 

[unclevictor]

Eye roll. I don’t care about your work history, hogan. You’re still wrong. Beyond wrong!

And frogs fan, I don’t know where u get your info, but you’re wrong too!

Lots of misinformed people here!

[HogansHero]

unclevictor said: "Eye roll. I don’t care about your work history, hogan. You’re still wrong. Beyond wrong!

And frogs fan, I don’t know where u get your info, but you’re wrong too!

Lots of misinformed people here!"

LOL gonna have to do better than that sweetie. 

[Kad]

unclevictor said: "Eye roll. I don’t care about your work history, hogan. You’re still wrong. Beyond wrong!

And frogs fan, I don’t know where u get your info, but you’re wrong too!

Lots of misinformed people here!"

Telling people they’re wrong with literally nothing to back it up is meaningless.

[unclevictor]

You’re wrong. U 2 are beyond misinformed.

Can’t explain... stagehand code of honor.

To many eyes and ears.

[frogs_fan85]

unclevictor said: "Eye roll. I don’t care about your work history, hogan. You’re still wrong. Beyond wrong!

And frogs fan, I don’t know where u get your info, but you’re wrong too!

Lots of misinformed people here!"

Cool story bro. 

[thedrybandit]

unclevictor said: "You’re wrong. U 2 are beyond misinformed.

Can’t explain... stagehand code of honor.

To many eyes and ears."

Are you in this thread ****ting on Local One backing their members, while you talk **** about their members, and then also saying "stagehand code of honor?" That really doesn't compute.

[HogansHero]

unclevictor said: "You’re wrong. U 2 are beyond misinformed.

Can’t explain... stagehand code of honor.

To many eyes and ears."

Are you a joke or a troll? 

Let's unbundle this for a minute. There were two assertions. One was about the 1%. That is demonstrably wrong based on the data I provided. You have provided nothing because, like Trump, when you spout falsehoods, and are challenged, you just fling nothingburgers. The other is about the heads at the Met (something you confused with a Broadway house). The work they do is not a secret, but of course you would rather make up some nonsense about codes of honor for people you don't have anything to do with. The honorable thing would be for you to acknowledge you said a couple things that were misinformed or wrongheaded. What exactly is your agenda in these posts?

[ghostlight2]

^^^ This.

I also wonder what unclevictor's agenda is, for their words are wildly inaccurate.

[unclevictor]

They’re not widely inaccurate.

No agenda here, loves.

Let’s agree to disagree!

Can’t we all just get along?? For the sake of bway!!!

Happy Hanukkah!

[HogansHero]

unclevictor said: "They’re not widely inaccurate.

No agenda here, loves.

Let’s agree to disagree!

Can’t we all just get along?? For the sake of bway!!!

Happy Hanukkah!"

Here's the thing: you can disagree about policy all you want, but you can't disagree about facts, at least not without providing a reasoned basis for not believing them. Are you questioning the work of economists who determine the 1% threshold? If not then you can't argue with my factual statements relating to the threshold. Making unsupported statements like "not widely [sic] inaccurate" do not provide a basis for intelligent discussion. We can all get along, but that requires an exercise of personal responsibility that you seem unwilling to entertain. (The "sake of bway" is not affected by anything that you say here, no matter what.) Season's Greetings. 

[SmoothLover]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/17/arts/music/performing-arts-unions-pandemic.html?referringSource=articleShare

December 17 NY Times union concessions article.

[Islander_fan]

What needs to be noted is that, when it comes to working as a stage hand at the Met, it’s a beast of a job. I remember a conversation I had during a smoke break while ushering at NYCB.

Two stage hands and I were having a casual conversation,
And I asked if they had worked other places as well. One mentioned that he did work at the Met, the other said there’s no way in hell he’d ever work there. Fact of the matter is they spend
more time working at the Met than they do with their own families. And, regardless of how much money they earn, there are some who don’t want to live like that. I don’t blame them From not to wanting to take Glebs pay cut suggestions. They give up a lot just to work there. Pay aside it’s an insult for theme to be willing to work there. And, I find that when articles and discussions like this people look more at numbers than what is at stake for the actual workers themselves

[thedrybandit]

Islander, you're absolutely right. I know a lot of the crew there either directly or through industry friends, and the Met is absolutely one of the hardest places to work in the city. The changeovers are near-daily sometimes, the sets are incredibly old and have to be built very quickly, but they're also reinforced safely and repaired almost every time they're used, and it's all done in a fast paced, relatively dangerous environment. Not to mention the crew that make the most money there absolutely do spend more time at the theater than with their families, and are often the people working sixteen hour shifts, plus the overnight load-ins/outs for the single day changeovers. It's not an easy or safe job, and that's why this long-term paycut is absolutely an insult to every crew member in the building.