Dimmer Beach: This week’s post is geared toward local crew and how they work with road crew.
I’m going to start with a concept and build from there:
The road crew is responsible for getting the rig up every day.
The local crew sets the rig up.
Before we go any further, we need to break down the last two sentences.
19 comments:
This is really good advice. I have been on union calls where some other member of the local crew has begun to whine and moan about how this tour doesn't know what they are doing and how they are doing it all the wrong way. While it may be true, it isn't helpful because A) it is good enough for the crew that has to see this same rig every night and B) it frustrates the hell out of everyone around you. That said, I don't entirely agree with the advice that you always have to wait till after the loadin to propose another solution. I have been in situations on a call where the way that the tour crew said to do something was proving inefficient or awkward for those of us doing it, do to something about the circumstances of that particular local or that particular location. I have seen it be effective in those cases, to just ask the tour crew "Hey, do you mind if we do this a bit differently to make it easier?" as long as you get the work done, they tend not to care. But if they say no, don't fight it, do what they ask they probably have a reason and you are just pissing everyone else off by complaining about it.
This is such good advice. It is basically saying to step on others people toes. In a industry were things can be done multiple ways its hard to change the way you do things. This article is great to determine who gets the say in what. Even if the local crew might have an easier idea, the road crew might have to do things in a certain way for reasons unknown to the local crew. However the road crew should be open to listen to the local crew if they are just trying to make the job easier. Both should be open to a conversation on how to do setup so both parties are happy and the work gets done.
The way in which this article is written leads me to believe that a certain incident or group of incidents lead the author to write this (teetering on the edge of heated?) article. Not having any experience as a member of a road crew or even a load-in crew, I can't really relate to how accurate the author might be. I am sure that these things happen but the way in which the article is structured and the diction found makes me question if this is simply one persons opinion or reaction to the situations. other than that, I think that the article does bring up some great points about knowing what your role is in the grand scheme of things and learning to go with the flow and just do your job. everyone has something to teach you and I am sure that you have something to teach anyone, but the article is right to point out that there is a time, place, and way of going about teaching (and receiving) those lessons.
I'm listening to these tips but I think that at the end of the day sometimes you just have to be a team player. Don't complain to complain, because you're paid. It's your job to be there. Don't call a method stupid in an effort to show that you know more, because there are a dozen ways to do everything. However if you know a safer way to do something, or you think you know a more efficient way to do something, then you shouldn't wait until the end of a load in to inform your superiors. It is important to know who you're speaking to, but that doesn't mean you can't speak. Sometimes the local crew knows a better way to do things for that specific location, in which case they should tell the in house employees at the venue about the instruction they were given, and about the suggestion they want offered.
This article doesn't really explain the fine line between speaking out when something is unsafe and when you're just being annoying - you should always speak out when something is unsafe. He gives it a quick mention, but not speaking out because you should be afraid of pissing someone off shouldn't be advice to crews. Maybe this is because I've never been on a road crew - but if someone who knew the venue well knew a better/safer/easier/more efficient way to do something in that space, then I would like to know. Especially for things like running cable or setting up heavy equipment that will be a pain to strike later - if the cables we just ran are in one of the heaviest foot-traffic areas because the event staff close off the other doors regularly - tell me! If the speakers are being put up in a place that are really hard to access after the rest of the stuff in loaded in - tell me! Maybe don't be a prick about it, but offering a suggestion can't really be that bad. I guess there's just a fine line.
Theres a lot of grey this article didn't cover. Its understandable that to many cooks in the kitchen is a bad thing but sometimes a cook makes a mistake. Maybe its not during set up you give your opinion but off hours at a social gathering you might bring up a point of, wouldn't it work better this way? Just backing off and doing whats told because someone position is higher than yours keeps the social structure comfortable but it doesn't necessarily use all your resources as efficiently as possible. Theres a time and place to say everything so its up to the time and place its said, but not saying anything at all seems like a waste of resources, of time and experience.
This article gets at a really tricky and really important matter. Interpersonal communication and politics are really variable, and really important to understand. Often times, the best intentions are received super poorly due to the method of delivery. Other times, the same advice phrased slightly differently can be a building block for a positive relationship. Some of the more bizarre politics of Purnell are due to the fact that everyone is learning about a lot of stuff all the time, and though there almost certainly might be a better way (or a way that appears better in hindsight, or to someone who wasn’t involved in the process) that doesn’t mean that it’s always everyone’s job to go and point it out to everyone by complaining about it. It’s easy to complain, it’s easy to be a critic. Now, there’s a flip side to that, and that is that complaints are a very useful tool to recognize something that’s wrong (duh) and start to work to fix what’s wrong. But we have to complain to the right people in the right ways, at the right times. And we have to do it knowing that we may not have the full picture, and that someone possibly has heard the same complaint a whole bunch of times before we make it.
This article makes a good point about the distinction between someone coming in and helping get a set up vs someone who has been putting this specific set up for months. It’s understandable that if you’ve been loading in and striking something the same way for moths you're going to have a plan and a usual way you like to do it, a way that is efficient and works. However, this article only talks about the annoyance of road crew members when people think they know better than them, but not about what to do in actually dangerous situations. Where you don’t just think doing something one way is a bad idea, but you know it’s a bad idea because you’ve seen catastrophes happen or have heard about them. It worries me that this article never mentions what to do in that situation. I suppose if you really felt unsafe and no one was listening to you, you could just quit, but that isn't the best option and it doesn't keep people safe. Though in the end, the author is right- the road crew is liable for the load in. If something does go wrong, it will be on them.
I really liked this article because one thing that I think can easily create a lot of conflict on any sort of load in/out or technical call is "stepping on toes." I don't think this is something that happens frequently in theatre in the context of an educational environment like ours, for instance. However, I certainly could see this happening in a normal work environment where there is just hired labor trying to get things done. One distinction this article makes that I like is that there is a definitive role definition between what the "road crew" and what the "local crew" should be doing. Determine how the show is to be set up, and setting it up, respectively. I certainly can understand how if the line was crossed or if a seasoned member of a local crew didn't like the way something was rigged they would want to speak up, but it doesn't mean they should. And finally, I certainly agree that safety comes above all else and that is an exception to the rule of when to speak up.
Having been on the local crew end of the stick this article is both something I agree with and did agree with. Yes the road crew knows the set and how to get the rig up because they have done it multiple times, but the same can be said of the local crew when it comes to the venue in question. The local crew knows what can be dangerous in the rig for their space and just more efficient uses of their space. This fact is why I feel that while the road crew has final say in all regards except safety, there is an important things to note that both crews want everything to go smoothly and that people need to act professionally.
This article does not do a great job of clarifying the "fuzzy line"jurisdictions of each department/position. This article should allow groups to work together in harmony rather than animosity because it should clearly define who does what. In stage management it is important to understand everyone's job description to the fullest because of the consistency of when you need to check in on respective departments. The concepts of Local crew and Road crew, as the article defines them, really intrigue me and surprise me because of their job descriptions. All though Road crew does know more about the show, Local Crew understands their venue far better and sometimes they will actually be a stronger resource when it comes to correcting any tech issues.
I think this concept made more sense before reading the article than it does now — and I knew nothing about this before reading the article. I actually think I understand it, but it takes a bit of digging to really understand. The road crew are the crew heads for the local crew. I think that is the CMU terms way to think about it — just without the experience disparity discussed in the article since the “local crew” in the CMU metaphor would be the freshmen. I also question the whole never providing input during load in because sure, they have been doing this with this show for a while now, but each venue is different and there are shortcuts to each one which could be just minor changes which will make things go faster specifically in that venue. If this is mentioned after the fact then it is useless because it could be months or years until this crew returns to this venue.
To be honest I wasn’t sure exactly how the responsibilities were split up between the road crew and the local crew for touring shows. I’m definitely interested in touring at some point in the future, so learning how that relationship is usually structured from someone who knows the business firsthand was very cool. Some of the issues the author pointed out towards the end of the article remind me a little of things that happen during CMU crew calls. Because we are all students and still learning the situation of a crew member thinking they know how to accomplish something better than the crew head is very common. Usually, to be honest, we just vent by talking about that person behind their back, but that can create a very negative work environment very quickly. I think always believing the best of your superiors and, in the case of a college setting, trusting the faculty advisors to talk to them if they are headed for disaster is the best strategy. And if you really think you know a better strategy, the author’s suggestion of pulling someone aside after the load-in is complete to talk is great. However, I do appreciate that the author makes the point that is you see something unsafe happening during a call, safety matters more than any one person’s pride and you should always, always speak up
I think all of the comments before me are certainly valid, but this is from someone's personal blogspot. This is by no means set it stone- it's one person's way of looking at the way that road crews and local crews interact with one another. What probably happened was that the author was working a load in call where one of the crews pissed the other one off. That being said, there's no hard and fast rules when it comes to working touring shows. And there can't be! Each show has different specifications, different people, and a different rig. While more differentiations might be good to have in place, it's not going to be solved overnight. One thing I would recommend is maybe changing up the job titles. Road crew and Local crew are really similar and it sounds like the two of them are on the same level when in reality, this article makes it seems like the road crews are more in charge. Changing the job title of Road crew to something without the word crew in it maybe would help.
This was an interesting read. I think the end message was "be collaborative and don't be a jerk." I agree with the author's point that safety is more important than any sort of crew hierarchy. It is paramount that both teams work together to ensure that everything is installed safe, especially considering the speed with which tours load in. This is an area where input from both sides is necessary. The local crew has experience with the venue and can point out any special considerations to the road crew. The road crew, on the other hand, knows the rig really well and knows how it should be assembled and installed per the engineering done beforehand. I do think that there can sometimes be a fine line between wanting to offer help and coming off as a jerk. Knowing when to offer an alternative (in my opinion, only when there's a problem to be solved) is key to making everyone happy and keeping the load-in smooth.
I think this article went for too many topics and not enough space to actually discuss all of them. I love that the author drew the distinction between the responsibilities of the road vs the local crew, and I think understanding those differences is key to an efficient and well-run load in. Stepping on other people's toes is never fun, and often slows down wrk by creating unnecessary confusion. One of the things I really think needed to be addressed more is the speaking up about safety. i think it would have been important to expand, even just a little bit, about where the line is in terms of questioning the safety of a practice being used. In this I think it would have been important to emphasize that if someone on the road crew tells you to do something a certain way that maybe you either don't know how to or are not comfortable doing because you believe it to be unsafe, you can always speak up, find someone else, or find another way. One other point, I am all for speaking to people after a call to figure out why they did something or to maybe mention something that you noticed that they may have not. I think everyone, especially in this industry, can lear so so much from everyone else that it is important that we feel like we can question and talk to everyone around us.
I do think the author of this article made some good points, but I can't say I agree with all of it. First off, this industry is rooted in collaboration and flexibility. That is something that must be kept in mind at all when working in the field or else the process loses efficiency. I've never really thought about how crews work for touring shows but the categories of road crew and local crew and their responsibilities make complete sense. With that said, it feels like the author wrote this article as some heated reaction to an incident he had. What he said does make sense; for the most part a local crew should be there to rig a show to the specifications outlined by the road crew. My issue though is that the author presented these responsibilities as hard and fast rules with little to no intereference other than in cases of safety emergencies or once the job has been completed. Honestly, I see know reason why a local crew member can't suggest an alternative way of doing something that works best for their space to a road crew member. It would be ridiculous for somebody on a road crew to get upset at this. As much as they may know their show they have to stay flexible and remember that the local crew knows way more about the space than them and may offer some useful information that could possibly even help in later gigs. If this kind of interaction wasn't important then we might as well just have one crew if one really thinks they know how to do everything.
Sometimes, on a call, I will find myself saying “do it anyway, and it will be my fault when we are wrong”. There is an important distinction to be made when someone has a different idea about how something should get done than the person who has responsibility for it; the person who is responsible for it can do it the way that they want to within the bounds of safety of course, but its their call. If they are smart they will listen to anyone giving them advice, if they are lucky, it will be good advice. I have been in both positions, wanting to say something about the way something is being done, and doing a mixed job of holding my tongue, or being the person in charge of the call and responding anywhere from “shut up and put that where I tell you too” to “thank you, that is an excellent idea”, and its always tricky to know what the best thing for the project at the time is.
Though the article is short and straight to the point, it is an important one. I haven’t done much touring, but I have worked with a lot of stagehands. Some were great, and some weren’t. The point behind the article is in what your responsibility is and when to say something. This summer, I worked with a technical director who made some bad choices – or at least I thought they were bad. I went along with the TD’s plan, and it caused us to have to do a lot more work. But I wasn’t in charge of creating the plan – just implementing it. It pained me to see some of the things the TD had us do, but unless it wasn’t safe, I kept my mouth shut. I ended up leaving that job. I think this principle is one that people are generally aware of, but some don’t adhere to it. It is similar to going to someone’s house and following their rules, even if you think they’re silly. Only in this case a guest is bringing something to your house.
Post a Comment