Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 Not trying to turn this into a Pro-Union vs. Anti-Union thread, but... If these union members are so happy with their jobs and with what they're being paid and don't support this, they can always leave their respective unions, but I'm willing to bet most will not. Anyone who knows anything about that the American entertainment industry knows that it is controlled by unions and its in your best interest to sync up with them if you want to offer a legitimate product. If you're a member, be prepared to suffer the consequences when something like this happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Vee Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 The unions are a fact of life and work in any civilized part of the country. It's something that needs to be dealt with responsibly. It could be a big thing, or it could be over next week. We just don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 supposedly its on her FB but unless your her friend U cant view it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Soaplovers Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 What did her Facebook say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rhinohide Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 Oh. I am sure. But as anyone knows, all Unions are not the benevolent organizations they are cracked up to be. They're not always negotiating in the best interests of their members. And yes, membership maybe voluntary, but as you yourself pointed out, the union's stronghold makes the term voluntary meaningless. It's virtually impossible to get work without being a member. So it's more like being a hostage than a beneficiary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 couldnt see but was told she was bashing & couldnt believe she was fired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 I don't think unions always work in the best interest of those they're supposed to protect, but maybe PP should have given this more attention upfront than they did. I see a lot of nonsense on Twitter like, "Well, would the union rather these people be without jobs!" What's the use of having a job if it can't provide you some protection from being taken advantage of? Isn't that why most of these folks joined the unions anyway? What precedent would these unions be setting for their members if they don't pursue all the loopholes here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Soaplovers Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 I can sort of understand why she would be pissed, but at least it is just on her private facebook page.. and not all over twitter like before. At least she is smart in that regard. The pacing (her biggest weakness while head-writing DAYS) was actually good, and the show seemed to resemble Pine Valley of old. Plus, I could tell the human trafficking story was all her (she had written a story about Jack about being tortured and dealing with PTSD that got derailed pretty quickly). The difference being that we saw Jack after he was rescued and dealing with the effects vs. the HT story where we are seeing some of the torture. Had the show been able to get back the actress who played Natalia.. I could have seen them having her rescued earlier and dealing with the PTSD aspects of such an experience. Back on topic, I think both PP & the union are probably in the wrong. My experience in these situations are that it takes two to tangle. and I hope PP meets the union half-way and vice versa. The upside is that they have over two months to work this out before production resumes in mid August. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members John Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 https://www.keek.com/!OCYscab AMEN & totally agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 I could see it being her, and one that Nixon, who likes to keep up with issues, approved. That said, I doubt it was ever written for Natalia--or if it were, I would hope it would play differently. I'm not saying that smart women (or people in general, even if when it comes to sex trafficking adults it's largely women) would not get into this sort of thing, but I would have a harder time believing streetwise cop Natalia would just get into someone's random car at the airport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Soaplovers Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 If I were doing the story and Natalia was available.. I would have had Natalie working under-cover to expose the Human traffickers.. someone tips them off (probably one of the other girls).. and she gets taken hostage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members EricMontreal22 Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 OK, that coulda worked actually--good point. I think Marlene's issue has been integrating the various stories and cast--not so much pacing which has been fine IMHO. This seems to be improving--I'm not sure if it's because the HWs (as implied by Cady) have gotten more used to the vets, etc, or it just took time, but... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rhinohide Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 The best protection against being taken advantage of in this day and age is quitting. They aren't indentured servants. Bottomline, PP was under a lot of pressure to negotiate many "unknowns" because it was a start up. As we've seen from all the changes they've already made, it's been a fluid situation. There are many things they did not anticipate. Maybe they should have. Or maybe there was no possible way they could know in advance. People make all kinds of assumptions about why the changes were made, but none of us are sitting in the room when the discussion is had and the decisions come down. If PP negotiated a deal with the union, and they never intended to honor the specifics, they deserve whatever they get. If they're so incompetent they neglected to anticipate things they should have, or to develop contingency plans then they deserve what they get. They were never guaranteed to be successful. My own personal feeling is that this was always a huge risk. There were so many unknowns. I'm always going to be grateful to PP for taking the risk and doing their best to make this happen. And I will never support ABC, because they are the true villains IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Y&RWorldTurner Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 While they only had two months to get these shows in production, they were really sitting on this project for almost 2 years. I'm just at a loss for why some research and thought were seemingly not put into these "unknowns." Who was handling business development there? I get production crunches, but these union regulations have existed for years, surely there was something to anticipate about this current situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members DramatistDreamer Posted June 6, 2013 Members Share Posted June 6, 2013 Hey, that's B&B's strategy isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.