Hard News: Anatomy of a Shambles
1695 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 25 26 27 28 29 … 68 Newer→ Last
-
@ Blake - can someone move the NZ oil/gas supplies to another country?
That's the difference why that worked and this was never going to.
Peter - All I was trying to demonstrate is that tans tasman unions co-operating together can be a benefit to NZ workers. Real improvements in wages won't come from fiddling around with the tax system.
-
Peter - All I was trying to demonstrate is that tans tasman unions co-operating together can be a benefit to NZ workers.
If it's done well, I couldn't agree more - and not just trans-tasman, but also the US, Canada, etc. and I'm glad you made the point. And thankyou also for making me clarify myself. We certainly don't want to get into a position where we're suggesting overseas unions are all self interested monsters. My personal view of the MEAA is they actually made an honest mistake too with their legal position, and I'm sure they'll learn from it.
Having said that I don't think that they certainly wouldn't have made the same mistakes if they were in Australia, and would have been a lot more careful with how they run it - checking the legal status properly, getting their members vote first, interacting and the wider industry first, etc. so as to avoid this kind of damage we've seen here.
Real improvements in wages won't come from fiddling around with the tax system.
Also, very true. Nor plans to make last second changes to labour law by Gery Brownlee.
-
Quite frankly, Fran can piss off the China.
Sounds like the kind of stuff Stephen King wrote when he was on the beer 'n' blow diet. Just hope Fran never pisses on the china, because that's just gross.
-
In 2010 New Zealand Equity has continued to grow in numbers and in strength of purpose; by mid-year 50 more members had joined their union.
Which, added to Pat Hackett's 89 means around 139 members at the time this dispute began. (where did you find that report, BTW, Pat? It's eluding my eagle eye)
Also:
On the campaign front, NZ Equity’s call for a standard contract is continuing with an online petition encouraging the Screen Production & Development Association (SPADA) to meet with us to begin negotiations.
Who's zooming whom?
-
Robyn Malcolm on Close Up: "There was no boycott."
"We lifted it on Sunday"
"Lifted what?"
"Well, the ... the conversation ... suggestion that ... um ..." -
On the campaign front, NZ Equity’s call for a standard contract is continuing with an online petition encouraging the Screen Production & Development Association (SPADA) to meet with us to begin negotiations.
What? When? Where?
-
So in the end, it's a question of timing, isn't it? We don't really know what came first, chicken or egg. Did those notices come out after some approaches were rebuffed? Or not? We don't know.
Even if the notices came out after some approaches were rebuffed I don't see it as a reasonable move on the union's part because the target of the notices (The Hobbit producers) were not the people the union should have been negotiating with (Spada).
One final point. The union has finally been negotiating with Spada so they've obviously recognised that Spada was the right party to approach. So why wasn't the notice against the Hobbit rescinded at that point? Why has The Hobbit production continued to have been blocked even after the union entered the negotiations they wanted with an unrelated party? The notice has been up for far longer than it should have been.
Btw Jacqui, while I've been responding to your posts I haven't intended to target you specifically. I feel that some people (e.g. Millsy) have tried to turn the debate into arguments based on generalisations (e.g. if you're pro-union you must support NZAE in this). I don't' agree with that: I think the debate should be about the specifics of this situation. Your posts just conveniently bought the thread back to the specifics.
-
And not specifically NZAE but:
..............Jun-08......Jun-09........Jun-10
Media.......7,902.........7852..........7364
Equity.......7,111.........6701..........6393
ATAEA......3,615.........3798..........3392
Musicians......858..........886............830
TOTAL......19,486......19,237 .......17,979An almost 10% drop in membership in 2 years is something to be concerned about and either an indication of how members really feel about the organisation or an indication that the industry is shrinking to the point where those members are no longer employable.
PS Russ #PAS2.0 tables?
-
And, finally, from that report (just for giggles):
Performers are good talkers. It’s what we do. No surprises then that the success of Equity relies on chat; on communicating our hopes and dreams for our industry, clearly and consistently, to as broad an audience as possible. In the last year we’ve done a pile of talking. We’ve talked to producers, government and agents about immigration. We’ve talked about Kiwi jobs for Kiwi workers. We’ve talked to casting directors about auditioning guidelines. We’ve talked to countless performers about signing our petition for a standard contract.
There’s no secret about what we’re trying to achieve – we’re after a fair and viable industry that performers in NZ can contribute to and feel proud of. So we’ll keep talking and, along the way, we’ll continue to build our Equity
Jennifer Ward-Lealand is an Auckland-based performer and the President of NZ Actors Equity
It is to laugh.
-
And, finally, from that report
Oh, now you're just being mean.
-
Mea culpa mon ami ;-)
-
ooh, I just noticed we've passed the Veitch thread. What was the final comment count on the Copyright Thread of Doom, Russ?
-
Also, very true. Nor plans to make last second changes to labour law by Gery Brownlee.
And sadly, those who want to necromance the ECA 1991 and set the zombie loose have been handed ammo on a plate by the whole Hobbit affair. And the cycle rinses and repeats.
I liken industrial relations in NZ to the Israel-Palestine situation - unstoppable force meets immovable object. Unlike other countries, where one side usually gets the upper hand - the companies in the USA & UK, the unions in mainland Europe.
-
...I paraphrased 'boycott' there, I was focusing more on the 'collective agreement' part. They don't use the precise term boycott. They say:
'[the FIA] urges each of its affiliates to adopt instructions to their members that no member of any FIA affiliate will agree to act in the theatrical film The Hobbit'.
I just paraphrased that as boycott/strike as most people I think probably would.I don't understand what the difference is between "no member...will agree to act" and the single word "boycott", in this instance.
According to tfd.com, boycott means "to abstain from or act together in abstaining from using, buying, or dealing with as an expression of protest or disfavor or as a means of coercion".
So how was it not a boycott?
-
And sadly, those who want to necromance the ECA 1991 and set the zombie loose have been handed ammo on a plate by the whole Hobbit affair.
It's a bit too serious to be merely "sad" about. Those who have put heaps of effort into say the teachers' dispute must be right pissed off.
-
ooh, I just noticed we've passed the Veitch thread. What was the final comment count on the Copyright Thread of Doom, Russ?
Only fifty-one more pages to go.
-
We'd need a better troll to make it that far.
-
We'd need a better troll to make it that far.
Hmm, Russell, how about hooking Chris Trotter up with an account?
Wait, what am I saying?
-
Just hope Fran never pisses on the china, because that's just gross.
Well, it would be a rinse of some sort if you're worried about soap residue. And, by all accounts, wee is supposed to be sterile.
-
And now chilluns, go outside in the sunshine. It's a very beautiful day.
-
I wish. In Waikanae, it's kind of grey, and putting the towels on the line was more an act of hope than anything else.
Perfect PAS weather, in other words ;-)
-
"The way the first meeting in Wellington was run was a disgrace – while anyone who turned up and called themselves a performer was allowed to vote in Auckland, the rules were changed in Wellington after the vote had begun to exclude non-Equity members."
This is inaccurate. The only 'members only' vote at the meeting was on a motion to allow non members to vote on the substantive motion. It was carried and then the other was, with everyone voting.
-
A song for Simon:
-
This is inaccurate. The only 'members only' vote at the meeting was on a motion to allow non members to vote on the substantive motion. It was carried and then the other was, with everyone voting.
My apologies. Some people there were clearly confused about what happened.
-
Song for the AE:
Post your response…
This topic is closed.