Now, with scant notice, Carnegie seems to have decided to take a stand against the powerful union, refusing in contract talks to let the stagehands extend their sway to an educational wing to be opened next year above the hall.
Thursday, October 03, 2013
Carnegie Hall Opening Gala Canceled Because of Stagehand Strike
Now, with scant notice, Carnegie seems to have decided to take a stand against the powerful union, refusing in contract talks to let the stagehands extend their sway to an educational wing to be opened next year above the hall.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
This story is pretty crazy on a couple different levels. First off, 400k a year for stagehands?! That is insane. And then to complain that they are being treated unfairly seems ridiculous to me. I don't really understand why IATSE would try to stake a claim in the educational wing of the building since the work pretty clearly isn't really theater related, especially if doing so would take money away from the educational programs that Carnegie Hall is trying to implement. This seems to me like a case of a union getting too greedy and trying to push past it's boundaries.
I would never think that the new music rooms would be this big of a deal. And on another note, 400K!!! Oh my goodness, these guys know how to live in New York City. Are the new extensions of Carnegie Hall really be this important when these men and women already make a VERY good living? I would not really know, the article does not go too far into how much the stagehands would gain in getting these music rooms in their contract. But what is clear is the power these people have in the hall, I mean, nothing runs without them! They are costing Carnegie Hall a TON of money, so I don't really know how much longer Carnegie can hold out for.
It's hard to take the side of the little man when they are making more then the company. Why does anyone who makes 400K a year need more work? And why does IATSE believe that they can extend their contract to cover parts of the hall not really relevant to them. That is an absurd amount of money to be making as a stage hand, and they appear not to have any real reason for going on strike. Honestly my first thought was just "damn how do I get that job." Im just still a little bit in shock from the number.
As someone who hopes to join Local 1 someday, I expected to read this article and come out completely on the side of the stagehands. But honestly, this is a bit excessive. As the previous commenters have noted, the highest-paid stagehands in New York City aren't really the ones who need to be striking. They deal with everything theatrical that goes on at Carnegie Hall, and really, why should any other part of it fall to them? Other performing arts organizations also have educational wings and studios and they manage to negotiate separate union contracts for both just fine. Look at Lincoln Center, another huge NYC organization where the stagehands make hundreds of thousands a year. The librarians in the performing arts library aren't IATSE. Neither are the custodians, nor the gardeners in Damrosch Park, nor the workers who equip the rehearsal studios and workrooms. In short, IATSE needs to get a grip and strike for good reasons only (like in 2007). Otherwise, we are just making ourselves look bad and greedy.
What a shame, the Carnegie Hall opening Gala has been planned for so long and was is their largest fundraiser of the year. The 2012 opening Gala brought in $2.7 million, but this year is going to be zero because of the greedy stagehands who make over $400,000 a year. The stagehands are the most important component to the Carnegie Hall and without them there is practically nothing. This union is know for doing damage, when back in 2007 Local 1 shut down most of Broadway for 19 days. Hope the strike doesn't last long, so the company can continue with their season.
I agree with what people have said so far about the Union stepping into something thats not really their place. I don't really see why the stagehands need to be a part of the educational wing unless their is some sort of technical entertainment aspect. Although I will say 400K seems perfectly fair for these guys. If you read the comments posted with the article this is actually a quite heated debate. There are many people trying to argue that the work a stagehand does is easy and anyone can do it therefore, they are way overpaid. Personally I took HUGE offense to those comments and I think anyone involved in our industry should! In my eyes that would be like telling a doctor who has gone through years of med school that their job is easy and anyone can do it. The reality is the work done on stage typically is complex and has the potential to kill someone if it's done wrong. I certainly would not want to sit under a fully rigged truss at a concert that could potentially come crashing down because someone did not know how to engineer it properly. The people who do this kind of work have either been heavily trained from within, or gone to school such as CMU. The bottom line is that is worth something, because these are the people with the skills necessary to successfully and safely execute live entertainment.
I always try my best to understand both sides of an issue when they pertain to the unions. But I have a hard time seeing Local 1's desire to have control over the educational aspect of Carnegie Hall, especially if they don't have this with the other educational areas in the city. I'm interested in seeing how this affects Carnegie Hall's future and what the results of the strike will be.
I was a little concerned by Mr. Gillinson, from Carnegie Hall's comment of: “One thing we cannot do is compromise.” This seems counterproductive to the discussion process. There has to be compromise of some sort when dealing with anything, so it'll be interesting to see who wins, since the mind set of the two groups seems to be one way or the other and nothing in the middle ground.
Like a lot of people, I was prepared to be sympathetic towards the stagehands when I first clicked on this article. After reading it, I'm very divided. I agree that stagehands should be compensated for their work and if something new falls under their purview, then they should have jurisdiction over it. However, I'm having a very hard time seeing how an educational wing falls under the purview of IATSE, a theatrical stagehands union. The stagehands come across seeming a little greedy, especially since no other educational components of theatres in NYC are required to use IATSE labor.
Like Tyler, the comment at the end surprised me... it's a very strange and counter-productive attitude to have walking into negotiations, although I can see how maintaining a hardline position could mean in the end that they don't have to concede quite so much.
Like most comments on this blog I thought immediately that I would be siding with the stagehands on this issue however after reading it I am unsure what to think. First off, as a person who hopes to join Local 1 the sound of $400,000 is pretty amazing. That being said I cannot seem to understand why a strike is taking place causing Carnegie Hall to close on the opening of its Gala. As for the cause of the strike, I don't quite understand way a Stagehand Union would feel the need to run the educational wing of the company they work for.
I know I don't keep up with a lot of new, but specifically this article's title caught my attention. I agree with the sentiment everyone else has that IATSE has no reason to want jurisdiction over an educational area. They already make a lot and are doing really well, so why do they need more work? I honestly do not understand that at all. I really would like to know Local 1's reasoning behind this. Because personally, I think it sounds like they just want more and more for no reason.
I think its amazing that some stagehands our there are making 3 figure salaries, much less $400,000. I dont know where along the lines they found a reason to justify such a high salary, but im happy for the people doing it that they are able to be so successful. That being said, i think its absurd that the stagehands are trying to take over the non-theatre parts of the space also. That seems greedy and works to undermine the mission of the space. I'm sure the venue wants to be putting their money into the educational programs instead of paying people to move the chairs around.
Post a Comment