The Hollywood Reporter: Blasting Proposition 32 as a deceptive attempt “to silence labor’s voice,” a contingent of delegates from SAG-AFTRA, IATSE and American Federation of Musicians Local 47 joined one thousand other labor activists rallying against the November ballot measure at the LA Convention Center Thursday morning.
4 comments:
I always find it interesting when a labor union takes a stand on an issue, whatever it may be. I'm interested in getting more information about what this Prop 32 entails and more about how it influences the Unions that are opposing it. I may not always agree with unions but I do respect them when they take action against an issue that is important.
Prop 32 seems to be an interesting topic that definitely goes deeper then labor unions having a say in politics. I agree with Tyler, it would be interesting to see more about Prop 32, and if all the details the labor unions are talking about will be affected. Its good that they are standing up for good political incentives to labor unions. I definitely want to follow this in relation to unions and how they compare to the corporations.
At first I found myself being bothered by the fact that Unions were so intent on making political donations out of money collected from its members for the purposes of prolonging the operation of the Union. When the motivation of tax incentives was mentioned, though, it all made sense to me. (Also, it was pretty naive of me to think that the unions wouldn't be spending money on political issues for other reasons though.) Tax incentives are growing to be an increasingly important issue in the film industry, especially in that state of California. As more and more states are offering desirable tax incentives to studios, the people of California need the opportunity to ensure that California offers similar (if not better) tax incentives so that more films do not leave the state. I admire these SAG-AFTRA, IATSE, and AFM members for standing up for their beliefs and for representing the interests of many of their fellow union members.
I almost find this a little ironic. Unions were practically formed for the guarantee of good working conditions, fair pay, etc. Deducting actor's pay to finance political movement seems to be against that ideal. Although I am sure the locals have very legitimate arguments against that, on the surface it seems kind of weird. I'm sure the local leaders in the rally would point out that lobbying against this law will allow higher wages or better working conditions, or whatever by having the funding to lobby laws that would hurt the actors. I would be tempted to say that the people in these unions could be fine or hurt by this law going either way. Hopefully, the unions won't take advantage of their lobbying power
Post a Comment