The Editors Guild is now one of the largest locals in the IATSE, as well as the fastest growing. In 1997, we welcomed many members of Local 695 -- re-recording mixers, recordists, engineers and studio projectionists. A 1998 merger with New York editing Local 771 brought us 800 new members, and in 2000, the story analysts joined our ranks, as well. In less than
|
|
New challenges have accompanied our rapid growth. In 2000 the Board of Directors' Digital Steering Committee decided to create a survey to help us better understand how our members work with one another and with the Guild. It has proven to be an illuminating way to measure our dreams, expectations, strengths and shortcomings.
Overview
The survey was conducted in the fall of 2000 and covered members' experiences from August, 1999 to August, 2000. It was broken into five sections. The first covered career expectations, contracts, services and training programs, and was distributed to all members. Classification-specific questionnaires were also distributed to editors; assistants; projectionists; sound and music editors; and mixers, recordists and engineers.
Like the latent image of a Polaroid slowly coming into view, a surprisingly positive image of a typical Guild member emerges from the survey. Here is a snapshot of Mr. (or Ms.) X during the period the survey was conducted: He (or she) is working and earning more than he did three years ago. He works several hours of overtime and one or two weekend days per month. He works union. His responsibilities have increased over the last three years, and he sometimes performs tasks outside his primary skill or that were performed by more than one person in the past. He does not work at home, but feels the workplace will become more decentralized in the future. He believes that his job will be viable in terms of wages and conditions five years from now. He has little incentive to change classifications unless it would help him move up in the industry. If he could change classifications with the proper training, what would he choose? Picture editor topped the list, followed by sound mixer and sound editor. Of course, the economic climate has changed considerably since the survey was conducted, but we were still gratified to see how many members were working and were working union.
The Guild
How do our members perceive the role of the Guild? Most indicated that providing some measure of security for our families and ourselves should remain the organization's primary goal. They believe the Guild needs to continue to negotiate better wages, benefits and working conditions, and to organize the non-union workforce. In addition, some members would like the Guild to take on additional responsibilities, including the following:
- Wage increases that match rises in our cost of living, which is perceived by some to be more than the 3 percent per year currently reflected in our contracts. (Actually, the cost of living is growing more slowly than that.)
- Lobbying our government to stop runaway production in Canada and other foreign countries.
- A 401K plan for our members.
- More training programs, including access to practice rooms at night and on weekends. (Since the survey was distributed, training programs have been greatly expanded.)
- Negotiating a realistic 45-hour guarantee for picture editors.
- More seminars and social events for members.
- Orientation meetings for new members.
- A new classification for visual effects editors and other jobs created by the digital revolution.
Working Conditions and Overtime
During the year covered by the survey, nearly half of the respondents worked between 40 and 52 weeks and another quarter worked 30 to 40 weeks. A large majority worked union jobs exclusively (65%). Only 6% worked entirely non-union (see Figure 1).
 |
|
Figure 1. During the year covered by the survey (August '99 to August '00) most respondents worked more than 31 weeks and a substantial majority worked union. |
Most did not feel they are working excessive hours on a regular basis. Nevertheless, roughly an eighth are working overtime every day and another quarter are doing so three times a week or more. Half are working one or two weekend days per month. (See Figure 2. Note that the survey was long and that may have introduced some bias into the overtime figures: those working the most may not have had time to fill it out.)
 |
|
Figure 2. Most members worked some overtime every week, but most did not feel they were working too much. However, the survey was long and those working the most may not have had time to fill it out. |
But here's the rub: most members say they do not understand the provisions for weekly guarantees, overtime and meal penalty, and a significant number don't report all their overtime (see Figure 3). When asked why, they offered several answers. Nearly half did so either because their supervisors would not authorize overtime, or because they believe they would be judged harshly for reporting it properly. Another quarter indicated that it is difficult for them to keep a flexible schedule and report their actual hours worked. Some added that working over-scale made reporting overtime inappropriate, and others thought that since they were working on call, as long as their total work week didn't exceed 56 hours, they had no reason to report overtime. (In fact, our contracts stipulate overtime pay based on each day's work, not a weekly total.) Turnaround is reported more often, but meal penalty is rarely reported and most say they are never compensated for it (see Figure 4).
 |
|
Figure 3. Most respondents indicated that they do not understand the provisions for weekly guarantees, overtime and meal penalty, and a significant number don't report all their overtime. |
 |
|
Figure 4. Most members are not compensated for meal penalty. |
For many picture editors and assistants, one reason for under-reporting of overtime may be the difference in their guarantees under the Hollywood Basic Agreement -- editors work much longer before they go into overtime than assistants do and, as a result, editing teams don't present a unified front to their employers (New York guarantees are different). Almost half the assistants indicated that this difference creates staffing difficulties and many respondents requested that the establishment of equal weekly guarantees for editors and assistants be a priority for the future. Among editors, 41% said the difference in editor/assistant guarantees caused assistants to work overtime, and another 26% thought the problem forced assistants to work overtime without approval.
The Guild has a rigorous mechanism in place to help get proper overtime for members and deal with other contract violations. But only a small fraction (16%) make use of it by calling the office for help (see Figure 5). Of those that call, a little more than half indicated that the office had helped resolve their problem. Of those who had unsatisfactory experiences, some said that information was confusing or incomplete (33%) or that the attitude of the staff member wasn't helpful (18%). Others had difficulty reaching an appropriate staff person, or said staff members offered contradictory advice. Some felt that it took too long to get a response. Nevertheless, most members who called received help and more than half were satisfied with it.
 |
|
Figure 5. Only a small fraction of the membership call the office |
The office and the Board of Directors strongly encourage members who are having overtime or other problems to call and discuss their situation in confidence, so that appropriate action can be taken. When problems go unreported, employers become emboldened to intimidate others. The staff can't solve a problem if they don't know about it. (See Ron Kutak's article.)
Primary Skill
Post production now requires a breadth of technical knowledge that few of us could have imagined a decade ago, and, as our equipment becomes more flexible, job categories are becoming less well-defined. The term "primary skill" was instituted in our last contract to deal with these issues, and it became part of a flexible formula that allows members to get their jobs done but prevents exploitation and double-jobbing. Employers can ask members to work outside their primary skill as long as the work is incidental to their primary function and occurs on a single workstation. If these requirements aren't met, then they're doing another job and need to be paid for it. Most Guild members felt they were working within these rules. But they are also acutely conscious of the fact that their skills are expanding and they want to see better working conditions and wages accompany their increasing productivity.
Editors
In their written comments, some editors bemoaned the end of film editing, even while noting that most projects are still shot and finished on film. When asked what systems they expected to use in the future, the clear front runner is the Avid, with Final Cut Pro running second. The impact of digital projection was often mentioned as causing more frequent previews and
|
|
The impact of changing technology on the traditional role of the film assistant and the editor/assistant relationship was mentioned frequently. Editors were also concerned about the proliferation of low-budget, non-union productions. The new tasks required of editors combined with increased hours, lower pay and accelerated schedules are perceived as a direct result of new digital technologies.
Assistant Editors
When asked if recent technological changes have made it easier or harder to become an editor, assistants were almost evenly spilt. Some thought digital equipment made it easier to learn to edit, but others bemoaned the fact there is no longer any time to observe editors at work, and they have little opportunity to learn to edit on the job.
Roughly three quarters said that their editors were supportive of their career aspirations and working conditions. But overtime abuses tend to fall disproportionately on assistants and there was a great deal of written criticism directed at editors who leave assistants to fend for themselves. Some felt that their editors did not have an adequate understanding of contract provisions that apply to assistants. They'd like to be consulted when schedules are accelerated and want to see their editors advocate the hiring of additional personnel when overtime becomes abusive. In a non-union environment, they'd like to see their editors take the lead in helping the show get organized. Some also wished that their editors learn more about the equipment they use, so assistants could avoid baby-sitting and be more productive.
Sound (All Categories)
In some ways sound has moved into the digital realm more quickly than picture. Most members no longer work with film, except perhaps as a picture element on a stage. But mixers, recordists and engineers for the most part have not used our training programs for cross-training -- they're primarily learning on the job.
Almost two-thirds of sound and music editors indicate that they always work their 48.6-hour guarantee or more. Roughly two-thirds use some of their own equipment on the job, but of t
|
|
Projection
When asked how advances in digital technology will change the role of the projectionist, respondents indicated that digital projection is imminent and they must familiarize themselves with the newest equipment in order to remain competitive. They want the Guild to help provide training on the various emerging systems but seemed to be relatively uninformed about the training programs that are currently available. When asked if they have contemplated a change in their classification, 85% responded "no," largely because they were unaware of the possibility.
Resources and Training
The survey asked members about the magazine, the directory, the website, and the available list. All received high marks. The magazine was very well received and the technical tips section is particularly popular. When asked what the readers would like to see in the future, the answer was generally more of the same. Some wanted the magazine to remind them about available training. Others asked for a section focused on interviews with retired members and more articles on classifications other than editors. The Guild website is relatively new and seems to be taking hold, but 38% of our members never visit it. (The site has grown considerably since the survey was completed. Over 1,000 people now visit it every day, many of them non-members.) Most members list themselves on the available list when they're out of work, but a significant majority (32%) don't use it at all.
Over three-quarters of respondents felt they were experienced with computers and digital technology. A majority use Macs both at work and at home. When asked about Guild training, most felt it was valuable, but a significant number either did not know about such courses or had not taken them. The same was true of our practice rooms. On the East Coast, a majority of members were aware of Guild training programs, but only about a third had used the Help Fund or Videotape fund to pay for training.
When asked what additional training would be helpful for career advancement, a majority of editors and assistants wanted advanced Avid training with special attention to equipment troubleshooting, visual effects and networking. (Much of this is now available.) Respondents were also interested in Final Cut Pro, Adobe After Effects and Photoshop. (These classes have been added as well.) A significant minority want film training. There is also an emerging interest in high-definition video, 24P and DV. For sound and music editors, Pro Tools was the system most respondents wanted to be trained in.
To some degree, engineers, mixers and projectionists feel their needs are not yet fully met by the expanded Guild. In their written comments they asked for more seminars and events focused on their needs, and more interviews and technical articles in the magazine. The Guild has begun to offer small-group, technical seminars and most respondents would like to see more of them, where members can network and learn from each other.
The Future
Our merger process is only now coming to a close. We've gone through a huge growth process over the last several years and many Guild staffers have worked long hours to iron out the wrinkles of this process. But the job is not yet complete. To serve our much-expanded jurisdiction, we've hired Tris Carpenter as national organizer and he's rung up several significant victories since joining the Guild. We're about to hire additional staff to help him. We've enlarged our training programs this year and greatly expanded the breadth of course offerings, and we continue to expand our practice rooms. We've improved all of our computer systems and joined both coasts on a shared network. And we've created new contract language that gives Guild members the flexibility to do their jobs as technology changes, without being taken advantage of or double-jobbed.
The job of a union is never finished and we have got a lot more work to do. The survey points to several areas that we must address, in particular, the issue of contract enforcement and unpaid overtime. If you are being pressured to under-report your hours, please call the office. We can help (see contact list).
The purpose of the survey was to create a yardstick for the Board that would help us create new programs and improve the ones already in place. To that end, it has been very successful. We now have a clear, proactive course to fol low and we'll continue to use it to help guide us in the future. If you wish to discuss the survey, Guild policy or programs, please contact your elected representatives on the Board (see the March/April issue of the Guild Magazine, check the "Who's Who" section of our web site or call one of our offices).
Roughly 1,350 people took the time to fill out the survey. Though that represents only 24% of active members, compared to typical survey response rates, it's quite respectable. Special thanks to all those who responded. A copy of the complete survey results is available in each of our offices. If you'd like to see it, contact Daphne Robinson at extension 227 in Los Angeles or Norman Gay at extension 15 in New York.
Digital Steering Committee
Survey Analysts
Copyright © 2002, All Rights Reserved, The Motion Picture Editors Guild, IATSE Local 700