Backstage: Labor organizations are beginning to flock to the Occupy Wall Street protest movement, but the big three actors' unions are keeping their distance. Yesterday, after the Writers Guild of America West issued a statement of support for the movement, Back Stage reached out to the Screen Actors Guild, the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, and Actors' Equity Association to ask whether those unions planned to also endorse the protests. None of the union representatives who responded offered outright support for the movement.
Sunday, October 09, 2011
Actors' Unions Not Backing Occupy Wall Street
Backstage: Labor organizations are beginning to flock to the Occupy Wall Street protest movement, but the big three actors' unions are keeping their distance. Yesterday, after the Writers Guild of America West issued a statement of support for the movement, Back Stage reached out to the Screen Actors Guild, the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, and Actors' Equity Association to ask whether those unions planned to also endorse the protests. None of the union representatives who responded offered outright support for the movement.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
To a point, I can understand why Unions would not support/endorse the Occupy Wall Street movement. It is a Union's responsibility to project workers' right and living standards. Tom Carpenter has said just that: there's ways the Union can do without participating in marches, protests, and social movements. There's also some criticism of the movement: it's a protest about something, everything, and therefore perhaps nothing really. I'd imagine if the protest was event/action specific, like the inflatable Union rats you see around construction sights for example, Unions would participate in the protest. But I'm not sure, that might be wishful thinking, hoping for the days where there was still power in a Union. But regardless of the criticism of the protest (or whatever secret reasons these Unions don't want to at least verbally support the protest) I think it behooves them to participate/support the movement.
The protest, like I said, is not really a protest at all. It's a movement against something. They are not directly protesting the salary of Wall Street suits, they are protesting the problems in the current economic system: recent recession, jobs & job growth, housing/mortgage prices, and other debts. Essentially it's a movement against the injustices of capitalism. The same injustices that created the needs for Unions in the first place. While yes, I agree there are the ways internally a Union can still support their workers, the Union as force to protect labor exists within the larger capitalistic climate.
Sure, to say "We are not going to support the Occupy Wall Street movement" doesn't mean "We are against the Wall Street movement." Actually I can't imagine anyone other than laissez faire capitalists and Big Business executives openly opposing the movement. (Though I doubt they would; for to admit that would reaffirm what they movement is a about.) But part of me doesn't understand why an organization that projects the quality of life and the rights of their workers within a potentially oppressive conditions wouldn't support a movement that seeks to improve the quality of life and rights of Americans within an oppressive economic system.
While it seems a bit odd that the various theater unions who have had issues that the whole Occupy X-Place thing addresses, it kinda makes sense that they are staying out of the protest. While those who work in theater are definitely 99%ers, they are employed and funded by people who are part of the 1%. I am sure that many members of these unions are participating, but I am not really surprised that the actual unions have chosen the path of self preservation.
Why should we expect unions to support a cause that is that of personal political opinions. sometimes i question why many people assume that organizations not backing or stating an opinion or side on a subject. why should an organization that represents many different people of vary political and social opinions, be expected to take a side on a matter which may be divided among its members.If they were to make a stand of pick a side i think the repercussions might be worse or would they be if they picked the popular side of the case?
Yeah I just assumed this was a case of the 99% not wanting to piss off the 1% who feed them. The unions don't need to step into this fray, the individual members do. Maybe this will all get too out of hand if the unions step in. We don't need such polarizing politics in the industry, things that might drive patrons away, or lead to counter protests or theatre boycotts or X, Y, and Z. By all means the union members should get involved if they so choose, but not drag the entire union into the fray, right?
i think i disagree with a lot of the comments i think part of what has been making the occupying wall-street so successful is that there are organizations big organisations getting behind it. i think that a lot of people expected this to go away pretty quickly but its not and that's because its being supported. people(big media) are going to pay a lot more attention to an entire group of organisations saying something than a mob of people. in some respects that's how politics works. organisations have a pull that rioting will never be able to have.
I have to agree with Wyatt. For this movement to see any change, it need to garner as much attention from as many people as it can. Politicians and Big Business Suits think that this problem will go away and thus can just ignore it for the time being. However, the more groups join the more permanent it becomes. I was hopeful when the marines joined the Occupy movement that more groups would follow suit and I'm saddened to see that the unions are not a part of the fray. As a group that wants to improve the conditions and livelihood of their members, it seems only natural that they would want to join a movement that wants to improve living and working conditions as well as quality of life for all.
I definitely agree with Matt here. I'm a little depressed that our unions aren't participating in these protests. As much as I respect the goal of staying neutral and preventing retribution against them by the investors, I think that this movement is actually very well aligned with the needs of our industry. It's my hope that out of this movement come a more reasonable distribution of income, and better protection for workers. These goals are pretty well aligned with the needs of unions and union members.
Post a Comment