From freevoice@igc.apc.org Sun Oct 30 01:06:42 1994 Received: from mail.igc.apc.org by fido.wps.com (8.6.5/wps.com-hackery) id SAA01826; Sat, 29 Oct 1994 18:06:41 -0700 Received: from igc2.igc.apc.org (igc2.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.39]) by mail.igc.apc.org (8.6.9/Revision: 1.51 ) with SMTP id SAA18180; Sat, 29 Oct 1994 18:06:34 -0700 Received: (from freevoice@localhost) by igc2.igc.apc.org (8.6.9/Revision: 1.4 ) id SAA22861; Sat, 29 Oct 1994 18:06:33 -0700 Date: Sat, 29 Oct 1994 18:06:33 -0700 From: Freevoice Message-Id: <199410300106.SAA22861@igc2.igc.apc.org> To: maile@fido.wps.com Subject: FWO Proposal, not for distribution, though Deke can read it. Cc: deke@fido.wps.com, kevin.brandstatter@afrc.ac.uk Status: OR Funding Proposal for the Film Workers Organization in 1995. Introduction The Film Workers Organization (FWO) was formed in the Summer of 1994 by the LA GMB, largely on the initiative of FW Miguel Sanchez, a film worker and Branch Secretary. Despite the apparent strength of Unions in the film industry, FW Sanchez's experiences organizing with the current union's made it very clear that large areas of the industry were being ignored, despite strong pro-union feeling among the workers. Interestingly, the AFL-CIO unions agreed. First some background. The current AFL-CIO unions organizing the film industry are grouped under an umbrella association called IATSE (International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees). Within IATSE each trade is organized separately, with its own bureaucracy and dues structures. Each local of each trade is organized separately, so an IATSE cameraman in NY cannot work at an IATSE film in LA without paying new dues and initiation fees, and meeting other membership requirements of the LA local. As IATSE initiation fees run as high as $8000 and dues run about $1000/year, there is really no mobility within IATSE ranks. Basically all the major studios are organized by IATSE, and almost all work performed on a studio lot is locked in by IATSE unions. However, IATSE must organize every film produced off a studio lot (On Location) separately. By IATSE's own figures, currently 52% of films are now made without an IATSE contract. Given IATSE's financial resources and strength in the industry, this fact may seem surprising, except for one crucial point: IATSE is a guild devoted to maintaining high wages and no competition for its members. While studio jobs are shrinking and location jobs are growing, organizing workers on location would increase union membership and allow more workers to compete for the better paying and easier studio jobs. IATSE does engage in a small amount of organizing, as it is legally obliged to answer requests from film workers, but this seldom results in contracts, and the organized workers are seldom allowed into the union. Aside from the high initiation and dues require by IATSE, joining the union is also predicated in working for 30 days in one year on IATSE films. Since films are very short, often 1 to 2 week shoots, and work on IATSE sites limited to IATSE members, this means that an individual worker might have to organize 3 or 4 films into IATSE before becoming eligible to join the union (this would be conditional on IATSE following through with negotiations as well.) As you might imagine, this is virtually impossible for film workers to achieve. It is not uncommon for workers to successfully organize with IATSE, and still end up without a contract and excluded from the union. As you might imagine, there is considerable disillusionment with and resentment towards IATSE among unorganized film workers. Still, it is common knowledge in the industry that you are considerably better off organized, and when approached film workers sign cards at rates of 90% or better. The issue for most film workers is not whether they should unionize or not, but rather if they can get unionized given IATSE's obstinate refusal. Given this situation, FW Sanchez realized that only by starting a new union to organize the unorganized of the film industry could the workers make any progress. From very modest beginnings the FWO has had a high rate of success in signing up members (70% of those approached), and generated comments from around the industry. Currently, the biggest difficulty is making sure that the FWO has the resources to fight and deliver on its potential. So what's holding the FWO back? Currently, the FWO has no money, and a small number of members. As the LA GMB and the FWO have no fax or email capabilities, no computer to maintain member databases, organize record keeping or assist in literature production, limited capability to print or mail, and limited ability to get legal advice and consultation in a timely fashion. Simultaneously, as unorganized film workers often work 18 hour days (six hours for commuting and sleep) the ability to build and maintain a drive is severely limited at times. This has resulted in an effort, on the part of the organizers, not to reach out to a larger membership until such time as the FWO can promptly return calls, negotiate contracts and organize. Clearly, if the IWW gets a reputation for being an unreliable organization, 70% positive responses will soon turn into 99% negatives. What's being done? The fundamental resource in any drive is the people. As such, several organizers from around the country have volunteered to get the effort off the ground by temporarily moving to LA to do the ground work. While the LA GMB and FWO consist of many capable and committed people, an operating union requires more than a few hours a week to function. FW Josie from Philadelphia will be spending 16 weeks in LA, from February to May, building up the guts of the FWO. FWs from the East and West Coast as well as the South have also committed to extended stays in LA to make the drive a reality. Combining forces in this way we expect to have between 40 and 60 hours per week committed on behalf of the FWO. Given the human resources the next step is to make sure that those hours are used efficiently and effectively. The following are our goals to make the drive grow according to its possibilities: Stage One: 1) Develop computer and communication infrastructure to deal with maintaining phone/fax/mail/email connections, membership and organizing databases, financial record keeping, and literature layout and design. 2) Train FWO and LA GMB membership in effective use of the infrastructure. 3) Develop a standard "Industry Contract" to act as the basis of negotiations with film producers 4) Train FWO and LA GMB members as organizers and administrators of the FWO 5) Develop adequate infrastructure to house and maintain itinerant IWW organizers. Stage Two: 6) Generate broad familiarity with the FWO through leafleting, advertising and media work. 7) Target particular films and generate debate on the "Industry Contract". 8) Generate a contact list of 500 to 1000 film workers, with an FWO membership in the IWW of between 200 to 500, with a core of 100 to 200 remaining active throughout the year. Stage Three 9) Using the core membership and contact list to comprehensively organize the Industry in the 1996 film cycle (starting January 1996). The standard flaw in IWW organizing drives has been Administration and long term stability, and we do not plan to make these mistakes. Stage One will be done primarily with the input of FW Josie and the LA members. FW Josie's experiences and success with the Monkeywrench Press and the Duplication Workers Network, as well as his computer, and publishing experiences will form the basis for developing the FWO's infrastructure from January through early March. His commitment of 30 hours per week should provide sufficient for the stated goals. The formulation of an Industry Contract will be done with pro bono legal consultation, and a reliable draft should be ready by late February. Stage Two will start in late February, once we are confident that we can handle a growing membership, and host larger numbers of IWW activists, and continue through the following months with a strong drive planned for mid April to mid May. It will be at this point that we will best be able to judge the effectiveness of the drive and benefit from the long and tiresome infrastructure work of Stage One. With a solid base of membership in Stage Two the FWO will be able to continue on its own footing and it is expected that Stage Three will be basically an FWO affair. What can the FWO bring to the IWW? First off, it is fulfilling the historic mission of the IWW, organizing the unorganized, and that should be clear enough. Second it provides us with a strong basis to help train IWW organizers from around the country and to share a lot of the skills we currently posses. Third, it will result in a significant increase in our membership base, from the FWO, as well as from the cross fertilizing effects of organizing experience, renewal of a vital IWW and general publicity. Fourth, the FWO will bring in a significant number of skilled communication workers which will be instrumental in future efforts (this is in much the same way that IU 450 and the Duplication Workers Network have repaid the IWW many fold in printing and publishing capacity.) Lastly, and this should never be a deciding factor in IWW decision making, in order for the FWO to generate its continuing funds, we will be signing up people on a six month basis. Since almost all film workers fall into max dues category, signing up with the film workers will entail a commitment of 6 months dues plus initiation, or $84. While this would be high in another industry, the $1000 per year IATSE dues make this seem a pittance. This would bring the Clearing house $42 per new member, or $4200 for 100 new members, or $21000 for 500 new members (the same amount would also be generated for the FWO) Clearly the numbers speak for the fiscal conservatives within the union. Such a request for money up front from the film workers can only be justified if the FWO can deliver on some basic services, such as regular mailings, prompt return of inquiries, ability to negotiate contracts, and provide legal aid. What does the FWO needs financially? The FWO's needs can be summarized as follows: 1) $2000 to cover purchase of computer/fax/email hardware. 2) $1200 to cover phone/email charges over first 12 months ($100/month.) 3) $2000 to cover printing/Xeroxing over first 12 months. 4) $2000 for trade advertising. 5) $1500 legal contingency fund. 6) $1300 miscellaneous expenses arising out of supporting itinerant IWWs. Item 1 represents current pricing for computer equipment that can reliably provide the needed services. Item 2 is a very modest request, and the difference will be made up through fundraising. Item 3 is also very modest given current costs. A significant part will go towards purchase of a mid volume copier (60,000 copies per month) available through the Duplication Workers Network project to make IWW groups printing independent. Included will be training by FW Josie on self teching the machine. Similar copiers are being used by the Philadelphia, Paterson IWW, as well as the IWW Black/People of Color organizing drive. Item 4 represents modest advertising in trade publications. A 1/16 page ad in the Hollywood Reporter running every 3rd week will run $206 per add, or $1236 for 4 1/2 months. A similar ad in Dramalog $130 per add, or $780 for 4 1/2 months, and a 2" x 1" ad in International Variety $90, or $540 for the full run. These ads are vital to building broad recognition of the FWO, and gaining the support of film workers who often work in small numbers on isolated sets. These publications represent one of the only common grounds in the industry. Item 5 is so that we can provide a some legal protection to FWO members who suffer because of organizing, and also so that we can negotiate contracts effectively when the opportunity arises. While IWW defense campaigns have built solidarity in the past, an organizing drive that cannot provide immediate legal support for its members fails one of the critical tests of organizing today. We intend to continue old style defense campaigns, but for the unlucky stiff who just lost his job, immediate help makes all the difference. Item 6 is intended to keep itinerant IWW organizers alive in the effort. Currently a stipend of $35 per week is envisioned for itinerant organizers who are not independently wealthy. Housing and aid will be provided by the LA GMB, but the GMB does not have the resources to meet many of the basic human needs for an extended period. $35 per week or $5 per day is intended only so that organizers will not have to fear hunger. For one FW Josie is not independently wealthy, and deserves to be kept alive while working to build a fighting IWW. The FWO provides the guarantee that all material infrastructure that remain in the event that the FWO is dissolved will revert to the LA GMB for future efforts, and unspent moneys will be returned to the Nelson fund. For its part the LA GMB will turn over any material resources to the Clearinghouse in the event that it is dissolved. Conclusion The FWO represents one of the first cross IWW efforts at organizing in many years. It has the possibility of training and solidifying a new generations of organizers. It needs and will support IWWs from around the country, giving us a chance to work shoulder to shoulder to create a living union. It also is one of the best bets out there for IWW growth and revitalization. While some will try to liken the FWO to past proposals for funding, it has many qualities lacking in previous proposals. It is a union organizing drive and nothing else. It is entirely inside the IWW, and all FWO members will be members of the IWW. Its goals are nothing other that organizing workers, at their workplaces, to collectively bargain today, and to build the new in the shell of the old tomorrow.