Caucus for Assistant Editors

Strategies for Survival

Guild members met in caucuses from June 17-20, 1996 to listen to a panel of speakers and discuss strategies for survival in the "new" Hollywood. To focus the talks, the evenings were arranged by classification.

Assistants and Apprentices

Who's First, Disposable Assistants, And Assistants Training Editors, Discussed Late into the Evening

by Mark Phillips

Greeting an audience of assistant and apprentice editors, editor Mia Goldman set the evening's tone by passionately describing editors as leaders who need others to help them. She emphasized that editors don't have power like producers, but they do have influence. It was her hope that, through these discussions, we could gain insight into this. After quoting anthropologist Margaret Mead, Mia handed the reins to Alan Bell, a seasoned assistant who served as moderator. Alan stressed that in order to face the obstacles encountered by assistants, we first need to communicate with each other and, at the very least, be familiar with the Basic Agreement--enforcing every aspect of the contract, instead of allowing provisions such as forced call and meal penalties to slide.

Alan introduced the panel comprised of sound assistants Lisa Wolf and Rob Nokes and picture assistants Scott Janush, Lisa DeMoraes, Tony Ashley, David Crowther and Tanya Riegel.

Scott Janush felt that it was incumbent upon the picture department to set the standards for production as well as post-production. He urged us to speak to the production sound mixer and post sound facility early on to decide on the most efficient way to input production sound and deliver an editor's cut. He also underscored the importance of finding a telecine house that can do what you want. Rob Nokes reinforced Scott's advice and described savings and an exactness of synch and output when production sound is loaded via DA-88 and synched to the timecode on the videotape. "This way the sound department gets an exact replica of what the picture editor did."

Lisa DeMoraes pointed out a fundamental problem: "I used to have too much work to do. Now I find myself doing busy-work all day and coming in early or staying late to do the necessary work, because there is only one workstation." Lisa described this situation as demoralizing because she was not contributing and felt the gaze of producers noticing that she wasn't doing much all day. "We need to prove to producers that we can be as useful as we were on film, provided we have someplace to work." Her solution was to stipulate in our deal memos an assistant's workstation which would obviously benefit both the editor and assistant. Tony Ashley added to Lisa's observations by citing episodic television shows whose producers actually downsized, and then overworked the remaining assistant staff because they used Mediashare. "I've seen assist-ants and editors walk away from situations like that," Tony said.

Tanya Reidel experienced similar problems when she was on a one-system show but is presently on a dual-system show and claimed she would not take a job unless there was more than one system. However, Rick Janush warned against settling for a "worthless" scaled-down assistant's station which necessitated overtime expenses greater than the rental of a full system. Alan noted that it's easier to get two or more systems on features, but we do need support from our editors when trying to get multiple systems.

Lisa Wolf was asked what she viewed as the biggest problem for a sound assistant. "Not locking on time," was her immediate reply. Because she supervises twenty Avids going twenty-four hours a day when her department is in full swing, delays from the picture department that further shorten already compromised schedules can be very exasperating. Lisa has also encountered digitally-spawned editors who are not familiar with standard film procedures, such as putting a show on ten reels or inserting head and tail pops before tuning over to sound. "I don't want to have to train picture editors," she fumed.

Alan was saddened by the lack of a real apprenticeship in the digital world. How will assistants become well-rounded editors if there is no mentorship to pass on artistry and craftsmanship?

Participation from the audience was encouraged, and it was apparent that emotions were bitter. One member asked how we could effect a change to these shortened schedules. Mia encouraged assistants to tell their editors that unreasonable requests cannot be met unless extra help is hired. She said, "It comes down to one word. Courage. Be calm, confident, and clear ... Educate your editors."

Another member reminded the group that sound assisting is much different from picture because one is dealing with multiple editors and tracks - one picture change can turn into a logistical nightmare of sound changes. "So, it's important that the picture department doesn't have an attitude."

Several members who work primar-ily on digital felt that they were treated as lesser assistants by their co-workers. In one case, an assistant whose contract stated he was first assistant was downgraded to assistant status when the credits rolled. This opened the tender issue of digital versus film assistant credits. David Crowther and Alan Bell both believed this was not a union issue but rather a cutting-room issue that should be discussed with the editor at the start of production. However, assistants and Board members alike surmised that distinctions based on tools would not only be counterproductive (these distinctions will dissolve when all assistants become proficient in both areas) but will weaken us all because such delineations will bring about wage differences and producers will want the cheaper person. In fact, examples were cited where first assistants were let go early in post when producers felt a second who could handle basic digital functions would suffice.

The "disposable assistant" seems to be a growing trend which is both inefficient and unfair. "We need to let our employers know how valuable long-term assistants are," Tanya said. "Loyalty is one of the strongest tools at our disposal... we should require editors to fight for us," Alan declared.

"What's going to happen? Is the union going to hype the issues discussed here tonight?" An audience member asked the officers present. "You are going to happen next," replied editor and Guild V.P. Carol Littleton. "Talk to people who weren't here tonight ... hopefully, within the next four years, we can apply our diplomatic strengths to form a consensus of what we require."

Executive Director Ron Kutak stressed that we should protect our positions, the provisions of the Agreement, share information even as far as the details of a deal memo and don't do "whatever it takes" to fulfill the show's interest. "By looking out for ourselves, we are actually looking out for everyone else."

At the time this article was written,
Mark Phillips had just finished as first film assistant
on 'Bad Moon', edited by Timothy O'Meara.

Audiotapes of the caucuses
are available from the Guild office.

Reprinted from
The Motion Picture Editors Guild Newsletter
Vol. 17, No. 4 - Sept/Oct 1996.

Guild Home | Newsletter Home | Top of Page

Copyright © 1996, All Rights Reserved by The Motion Picture Editors Guild, IATSE Local 776


	*Strategies for Survival* Guild members met in caucuses from June 17-20, 1996 to listen to a panel of speakers and discuss strategies for survival in the "new" Hollywood. To focus the talks, the evenings were arranged by classification. Assistants and Apprentices Who's First, Disposable Assistants, And Assistants Training Editors, Discussed Late into the Evening by Mark Phillips
		Greeting an audience of assistant and apprentice editors, editor Mia Goldman set the evening's tone by passionately describing editors as leaders who need others to help them. She emphasized that editors don't have power like producers, but they do have influence. It was her hope that, through these discussions, we could gain insight into this. After quoting anthropologist Margaret Mead, Mia handed the reins to Alan Bell, a seasoned assistant who served as moderator. Alan stressed that in order to face the obstacles encountered by assistants, we first need to communicate with each other and, at the very least, be familiar with the Basic Agreement--enforcing every aspect of the contract, instead of allowing provisions such as forced call and meal penalties to slide. Alan introduced the panel comprised of sound assistants Lisa Wolf and Rob Nokes and picture assistants Scott Janush, Lisa DeMoraes, Tony Ashley, David Crowther and Tanya Riegel. Scott Janush felt that it was incumbent upon the picture department to set the standards for production as well as post-production. He urged us to speak to the production sound mixer and post sound facility early on to decide on the most efficient way to input production sound and deliver an editor's cut. He also underscored the importance of finding a telecine house that can do what you want. Rob Nokes reinforced Scott's advice and described savings and an exactness of synch and output when production sound is loaded via DA-88 and synched to the timecode on the videotape. "This way the sound department gets an exact replica of what the picture editor did." Lisa DeMoraes pointed out a fundamental problem: "I used to have too much work to do. Now I find myself doing busy-work all day and coming in early or staying late to do the necessary work, because there is only one workstation." Lisa described this situation as demoralizing because she was not contributing and felt the gaze of producers noticing that she wasn't doing much all day. "We need to prove to producers that we can be as useful as we were on film, provided we have someplace to work." Her solution was to stipulate in our deal memos an assistant's workstation which would obviously benefit both the editor and assistant. Tony Ashley added to Lisa's observations by citing episodic television shows whose producers actually downsized, and then overworked the remaining assistant staff because they used Mediashare. "I've seen assist-ants and editors walk away from situations like that," Tony said. Tanya Reidel experienced similar problems when she was on a one-system show but is presently on a dual-system show and claimed she would not take a job unless there was more than one system. However, Rick Janush warned against settling for a "worthless" scaled-down assistant's station which necessitated overtime expenses greater than the rental of a full system. Alan noted that it's easier to get two or more systems on features, but we do need support from our editors when trying to get multiple systems. Lisa Wolf was asked what she viewed as the biggest problem for a sound assistant. "Not locking on time," was her immediate reply. Because she supervises twenty Avids going twenty-four hours a day when her department is in full swing, delays from the picture department that further shorten already compromised schedules can be very exasperating. Lisa has also encountered digitally-spawned editors who are not familiar with standard film procedures, such as putting a show on ten reels or inserting head and tail pops before tuning over to sound. "I don't want to have to train picture editors," she fumed. Alan was saddened by the lack of a real apprenticeship in the digital world. How will assistants become well-rounded editors if there is no mentorship to pass on artistry and craftsmanship? Participation from the audience was encouraged, and it was apparent that emotions were bitter. One member asked how we could effect a change to these shortened schedules. Mia encouraged assistants to tell their editors that unreasonable requests cannot be met unless extra help is hired. She said, "It comes down to one word. Courage. Be calm, confident, and clear ... Educate your editors." Another member reminded the group that sound assisting is much different from picture because one is dealing with multiple editors and tracks - one picture change can turn into a logistical nightmare of sound changes. "So, it's important that the picture department doesn't have an attitude." Several members who work primar-ily on digital felt that they were treated as lesser assistants by their co-workers. In one case, an assistant whose contract stated he was first assistant was downgraded to assistant status when the credits rolled. This opened the tender issue of digital versus film assistant credits. David Crowther and Alan Bell both believed this was not a union issue but rather a cutting-room issue that should be discussed with the editor at the start of production. However, assistants and Board members alike surmised that distinctions based on tools would not only be counterproductive (these distinctions will dissolve when all assistants become proficient in both areas) but will weaken us all because such delineations will bring about wage differences and producers will want the cheaper person. In fact, examples were cited where first assistants were let go early in post when producers felt a second who could handle basic digital functions would suffice. The "disposable assistant" seems to be a growing trend which is both inefficient and unfair. "We need to let our employers know how valuable long-term assistants are," Tanya said. "Loyalty is one of the strongest tools at our disposal... we should require editors to fight for us," Alan declared. "What's going to happen? Is the union going to hype the issues discussed here tonight?" An audience member asked the officers present. "You are going to happen next," replied editor and Guild V.P. Carol Littleton. "Talk to people who weren't here tonight ... hopefully, within the next four years, we can apply our diplomatic strengths to form a consensus of what we require." Executive Director Ron Kutak stressed that we should protect our positions, the provisions of the Agreement, share information even as far as the details of a deal memo and don't do "whatever it takes" to fulfill the show's interest. "By looking out for ourselves, we are actually looking out for everyone else."
	At the time this article was written, Mark Phillips had just finished as first film assistant on 'Bad Moon', edited by Timothy O'Meara. Audiotapes of the caucuses are available from the Guild office. Reprinted from The Motion Picture Editors Guild Newsletter Vol. 17, No. 4 - Sept/Oct 1996. Guild Home \| Newsletter Home \| Top of Page Copyright © 1996, All Rights Reserved by The Motion Picture Editors Guild, IATSE Local 776