Re: AFM CONTRACT\/RECORDING MEETINGS\/RS STILL IN DANGER\/COMMENTS<\/p>\n
I. NEW AFM VIDEO GAME CONTRACT GETTING RESULTS
\nII. RECORDING MEETINGS
\nIII. BOARD STILL SET ON LOBBY RENOVATION
\nIV. READER COMMENTS<\/p>\n
GREETINGS COLLEGUES!,<\/p>\n
This Monday we will have a chance to further the reform of our Local
\nby electing a person with years of experience inside and outside of the
\nLocal 47 structure, David Schubach.<\/p>\n
Even now, some are afraid to vote where others can see them. How
\nabsurd is that? How badly that speaks toward the vindictiveness of the
\npresent powers controlling our Local.<\/p>\n
Unlike past elections, steps have been taken to make sure you can mark
\nyour ballot in private. NO ONE will know how you vote. Each member will
\nbe walking up to the ballot box and placing their ballot in the box
\nthemselves. It will never leave your hand until it\u2019s put in the ballot box.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
HOWEVER YOU VOTE, VOTE!<\/p>\n
This vote is too critical to be manipulated by ANY small minority. Therefore,
\nwithout attempting to influence how you vote, we urge you to show up AND
\nvote!<\/p>\n
Food will be served before the meeting, COME EARLY, we anticipate the
\nparking lot filling very early!<\/p>\n
THE COMMITTEE<\/p>\n
=====================<\/p>\n
I. NEW AFM VIDEO GAME CONTRACT GETTING RESULTS<\/p>\n
There are more and more sessions happening with the new AFM Video
\nGame contract. We had a discussion with some members who recently took
\npart in two days of double sessions. They were thrilled with the work. the group
\nsounded great AND the players were not the usual suspects! They
\nwere not thrilled with the pay on the job though, $60 per hour plus health and
\nwelfare and pension that is higher than normal (12%).<\/p>\n
However, once they realized that this is NEW work that would never have been done
\nhere if not for the new AFM Contract, they realized that it\u2019s the AFM actions
\nthat have re-captured that work for Los Angeles!<\/p>\n
RACE TO THE BOTTOM<\/p>\n
We hear again and again about getting into a race to bottom. Well, we\u2019ve
\ncome close to already losing a race to the bottom. A race for the work. If
\nyou went to ten films fifteen years ago, chances are nine out of ten would have
\nbeen done here. Go to ten films today and you\u2019ll be lucky if two out of
\nthe ten were scored here.<\/p>\n
We\u2019ve already lost the race to the bottom, we need to get back INTO the race.<\/p>\n
=================<\/p>\n
II. RECORDING MEETINGS<\/p>\n
We were appalled to hear of member Michelle Byrne being walked out
\nof the July meeting by Parliamentarian Paul Castillo and Local 47 Counsel
\nLewis Levy for \u201cbroadcasting\u201d the meeting, when she answered her phone
\nwhile the meeting took place.<\/p>\n
Obviously, recording meetings is not illegal, since we have a secretary
\ndoing just that. We\u2019ve checked Federal, State and Federation bylaws and
\nfound NO law prohibiting such actions at our union\u2019s meetings. We\u2019re not
\nlawyers, and it\u2019s possible we missed something, so if you know different,
\ncall us on it!.<\/p>\n
If the board does not want members answering their phones or having
\nconversations or sharing the meeting with other members via cel phone, let them
\nenact a bylaw, because as of now the bylaws are agnostic on the subject.<\/p>\n
..and Michele Bryne is at the very least owed an apology by Mr. Castillo
\nand Mr. Levy.<\/p>\n
See IATSI\u2019s position on meetings below:<\/p>\n
——————<\/p>\n
Excerpted from Dropline.biz \/IATSE Local 695<\/p>\n
All labor unions are required to keep \u201cminutes\u201d of their membership and
\nboard meetings. Unfortunately, for most members, the minutes taken are
\nonly as good as the person transcribing the information from the dialog
\nduring the meetings. Some Recording Secretaries cannot keep up with the
\nconversation taking place and others cannot read their own shorthand notes.
\nIn some cases, the minutes are created after the membership or board meeting,
\nso as to suit the desires of the officials of the labor organization.<\/p>\n
Even in the advent of stenography (The skill or process of writing in
\nshorthand.) by a professional shorthand reporter, labor unions have still
\nchosen to rely on the crude notes taken by the Recording Secretary. Labor
\nunions have even defied using tape-recording devices and\/or film and tape
\ncameras to document membership and board meetings; again, most likely
\n because of the officer\u2019s behavior going on behind the scenes.<\/p>\n
Transcripts of union membership and board meetings and\/or electronic
\ncopies would provide the members with an accurate record of what transpired
\nand what was decided. Moreover, these devices would eliminate the \u201che said,
\nshe said\u201d arguments, and would carve in stone exactly what was said. But, again,
\nmost union officials do not want an accurate record because it would not afford
\nthem the \u201cwiggle room\u201d that they have with the notes taken by the Recording
\nSecretary.<\/p>\n
At the 3rd Quarter Membership meeting of the International Alliance of
\nTheatrical Stage Employees, Local 695 (\u201cLocal 695\u201d), the meeting was
\ntranscribed by a Certified Shorthand Reporter (\u201cReporter\u201d), thanks to the
\nmotion brought at the previous board meeting by board member, Rusty
\nAmodeo. The shorthand reporter was present at this meeting and her equipment
\nwas set-up in the front of the assembly hall, in plain view of all the members.
\nAs the members approached the floor to speak to the assembly, they provided
\nthe reporter with their name. This information was necessary to make sure that
\nthe statement transcribed was attributed to the correct individual.<\/p>\n
Local 695 may or may not continue to hire a reporter to transcribe the
\nmembership meetings; most likely not since the transcript will prove to
\nbe the corrupt officials undoing. Nevertheless, the meetings will be tape-
\nrecorded from now on; possibly videotaped, as well. This way, not only
\nwill there be an accurate record, but the magnetic record will provide the
\nvoice inflection of each individual who is speaking. This is something that
\nis not available on a transcript, unless stated for the record. <\/p>\n
Some individuals who attend the membership and board meetings may object
\nto being recorded, however, when they attend a public gathering such as these
\nmeetings, they have zero say as to the devices used to document the information.
\nThey may, however, choose not to remain at the meeting or just not speak.<\/p>\n
LEGAL SPECIFICS<\/p>\n
In the case of a union membership or board meeting, California Penal Code
\n\u00a7 632 DOES NOT APPLY. Section 632 states in pertinent part: <\/p>\n
\u201c(a) Every person who, intentionally and without the consent of all parties to
\na confidential communication, by means of any electronic amplifying or
\nrecording device, eavesdrops upon or records the confidential communication,
\nwhether the communication is carried on among the parties in the presence of
\none another or by means of a telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio,
\nshall be punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars
\n($2,500), or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the
\nstate prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment\u2026.\u201d<\/p>\n
Section 632 defines \u201cperson\u201d as follows:<\/p>\n
\u201c(b) The term \u2018person\u2019 includes an individual, business association,
\npartnership, corporation, limited liability company, or other legal entity, and
\nan individual acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of any government
\nor subdivision thereof, whether federal, state, or local, but excludes an individual
\nknown by all parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or
\nrecording the communication.\u201d <\/p>\n
Section 632 defines \u201cconfidential communication\u201d as follows: <\/p>\n
\u201c(c) The term \u2018confidential communication\u2019 includes any communication carried
\non in circumstances as may reasonably indicate that any party to the communication
\ndesires it to be confined to the parties thereto, but excludes a communication made
\nin a public gathering or in any legislative, judicial, executive or administrative
\nproceeding open to the public, or in any other circumstance in which the parties to
\nthe communication may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard
\nor recorded.\u201d <\/p>\n
THE BOTTOM LINE<\/p>\n
A union membership or board meeting is not only a \u201cpublic gathering,\u201d but is
\nnot intended to be confidential. By its very nature, the members in attendance
\nof the membership meeting, or those unable to attend are entitled to know everything
\nthat went on at the meeting. Similarly, board meetings conducted by union officials
\nare also not intended to be confidential because the elected officials are obligated
\nto provide the membership with ALL information that was presented, discussed,
\nor decided on at a board meeting. Therefore, a surreptitious tape-recording of either
\nof these meetings is fully legal, BOTH UNDER CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LAWS.
\nNo, criminal charges can be made by a prosecutor and no civil complaint brought
\nfor Invasion of Privacy. Members who attend a public gathering at a membership
\nmeeting have no expectation of privacy. Moreover, board members have no
\nexpectation of privacy during a union board meeting because their actions are not
\nfor their own benefit, but are for the benefit of the entire membership they represent.<\/p>\n
=============<\/p>\n
III. BOARD STILL SET ON LOBBY RENOVATION<\/p>\n
We recently told you of VP Trombetta\u2019s videotaping the lobby and
\nits environs for a renovation contractor, including the area that
\nincludes the Referral Service.<\/p>\n
This board has already spent thousands of dollars consulting
\ncontractors and designers when they and we know that the
\nmembership passed a motion protecting the Referral Service
\noffice from being moved.<\/p>\n
Renovation is a good thing. Using \u201crenovation\u201d partly as a
\npretense to move the Referral Service and making it less visible is
\nnot. It\u2019s also against a membership mandate, one we will protect.<\/p>\n
==============<\/p>\n
IV. READER COMMENTS<\/p>\n
The comments below are the views of the contributors and not
\nnecessarily those of the COMMITTEE.<\/p>\n
—————–<\/p>\n
comment<\/p>\n
I’m reading the Overture and getting madder and madder. During regular
\nelections officers are not allowed to have articles or pictures in the paper
\nso they won’t have extra influence. So I was interested to see if the temporary
\nofficer (Leslie Lashinsky) who is running for office was allowed to have an
\narticle this month. She has three, and a picture, and announcements about her
\nupcoming gigs! And remember she is also the editor of the paper. Maybe there
\nis no rule about this conflict to cover a special election like we are having but
\nthere should be. This tells me everything I need to know about her judgment,
\nor lack of.<\/p>\n
————<\/p>\n
Dear Committee,
\nWe need to establish some kind of term limits like the rest of the world.
\nThis is something that I was working on with Richard before he passed.
\nI believe that the elections for officers and board members should be like
\nSenators and Executive Branch members of the United States. We should off
\nset the years so that an election is every year for an office. We think it
\nwould be too much but I believe it will be the safest way to protect what is
\ngoing on. The key is absentee ballots and making sure no administration is
\ngoing to have all their “people” on the board. If anyone runs as an officer
\nfor more than 3 terms (6 years), then they cannot run again and the same for
\nthe board, starting immediately if you already have 3 terms in. Then the
\nrule would be that you cannot run again for 4 years. This will weed out the
\nbad blood and give others the opportunity to run. <\/p>\n
We still need an open board meeting once a month in the auditorium that is
\nonline if possible and streamed live or for later viewing. <\/p>\n
We also need an on staff attorney that works in the office to answer
\nquestions for free to members 1 day a week and then shows members how to
\nfile small claims suits and gives advice for larger cases. They then meet
\nonce a month to file like a field trip down to the court house to get it
\ndone. I have seen this work. There are Offices that offer this service not
\nfree of course but to our members it should be and then have a small return
\nor gratis for the service. Something can be worked out I am sure.
\nI have talked to a member (attorney) that is now out of town that was
\nthinking of coming back to run for secretary. I think we need two
\nsecretaries in this case. One head secretary and another for legal and
\nseparate duties such as I described making having a business or
\nentertainment law degree as a prerequisite. There are people out there for
\nthis, not a musician or union member per se, I think it’s important to have
\nit. <\/p>\n
I served on the board for four years and I believe that this insider info will
\nhelp clear the slate in the future. <\/p>\n
——————<\/p>\n
Congratulations to Charles Fernandez for his interview with Mark Northam.
\nIt was clear, to the point, accurate, and more polite than I would have been.
\nI hope everyone in the Local hears it. That goes for Local 47 leadership as
\nwell except that they appear to be deaf and worse over there. <\/p>\n
You can hear the interview here: http:\/\/www.filmmusicmag.com\/itb\/<\/p>\n
I believe 47 leadership believes in the union, but they are also facilitating its
\ndemise through their inability to understand, adapt and lead in a positive
\nway. I don’t want to seem harsh but the interview with Dr. Bobby Rodriguez
\nwas pathetic, in my opinion. If he represents Local 47 leadership then the
\nunion is in all kinds of trouble — which it is.<\/p>\n
Let me put my cynicism aside for the moment and assume Local 47’s
\nleadership is motivated by the highest of principles. Unfortunately they
\nwill continue in their failure because, 1) They simply don’t understand the
\nhistorical changes that are taking place in the world’s markets today, which
\nleads to 2) an inability to see in any direction except backward. There is no
\nhope of recapturing the past. Successful leadership means, BY DEFINITION,
\nguidance into the future. There is NO successful leadership in Local 47.
\nZERO.<\/p>\n
Apparently “scab” is “normal terminology” in union-speak, even if applied to
\nlong-term loyal union members. Well, where I come from “schmuck” is commonly
\nused also. <\/p>\n
Ironically, a lot of these people in positions of power today are products of the
\n’60’s who have given extensive lip service to being “progressive,” “democratic,”
\n“concerned about the children” etc. ad nauseum. The presumption has always
\nbeen that given the opportunity these people will correct the sins of the past and
\nfacilitate a better future of, among other things, honesty and integrity. What a joke.
\nThe current leadership in both the RMA and Local 47 demonstrate the same time-
\nhonored failures and corruptibility of past power brokers, and like the mediocre
\nminds of the past habitually place blame on other people, people like a community
\nof decent dedicated musicians in Los Angeles who are trying to do an honest days
\nwork. <\/p>\n
The RMA and 47 leadership should be ashamed, the schmucks.<\/p>\n
Rick Blanc
\n(Always include name please if published)<\/p>\n
—————-<\/p>\n
Hello _______,
\n Do you think after repeatedly breaking the law regarding Beck objectors,
\nthat the union officials at Local 47 would resort to violence if they thought
\nthey could get away with it? My question is directed to Lou Levy, legal
\ncounsel for 47. A yes or no will do.<\/p>\n
—————<\/p>\n
I believe the RMA wants to reduce the membership of the
\nAFM nationwide and get rid of many of the small locals while at the same
\ntime, slowly increase their voting power at the convention. In their
\nview, as the AFM drops in the number of locals and members, their voting
\npower will increase, thereby allowing them to eventually control the
\nAFM. <\/p>\n
At that point, they will insist that the electronic music
\ndepartment be turned over to them to administer and at that time there
\nwill be plenty of money for them to do whatever they want, including
\ntaking legal action to suppress the rest of the AFM membership. They
\nhave the power through intimidation to make those 150 players pay as
\nmuch money as RMA wants whenever they want. So they hope the new
\nmembership program fails because it will interfere with their plans if
\nthe membership increases. <\/p>\n
Also, they want to keep the salaries of local officers and national officers
\nlow because they don’t want to encourage those with any ability to stay in
\nthe AFM labor movement or to strive
\nfor an AFM leadership position. In different words, let’s keep the
\nsalaries low so we don’t get any quality individuals running for these
\njobs and let’s create such a ruckus within the AFM that the locals will
\nsurely vote Tom out the next time. In the meantime, let’s make sure the
\nAFM doesn’t have any resources to run a membership department or file
\nsuits against some of the motion picture companies or record companies
\nso that we can:<\/p>\n
1. Keep locals from increasing their membership.
\n2. Accuse Tom of not enforcing contracts.
\n3. Drain the AFM of their resources by making their legal fees high. <\/p>\n
Hal of course doesn’t have a clue to any of this. <\/p>\n
————-<\/p>\n
\u2026\u2026 about the INDIE CONFERENCE.<\/p>\n
Concerning the recent Indie Conference at Local 47\u2026\u2026.<\/p>\n
This was one of the best conferences I have attended in years in the
\nmusic field. I hope they all come back! Dr. Foy<\/p>\n
(EDITOR\u2019S MORE: We can all thank Amie Moore of member services
\nwith the assistance of Lisa Haley, President of the FMA for their dedication
\nin making the 2007 Indie Conference happen.)<\/p>\n
————<\/p>\n
When you suggest sending a sub to vote you should make it clear that no
\none can vote in your name. They have to vote for themselves. One head, one
\ncount. Is this too nit-picky? I can see the opposing side accusing you of trying
\nto stuff the ballot box.<\/p>\n
————-<\/p>\n
The real problem with the union (international and local), is that there is
\nreally no reward for being a good union member. If someone goes Fi-Core and
\nfigures out that this semi-scab organization really isn’t getting them
\nenough work the union allows them back with a hearty hand shake and a
\nwelcome. It has happened. If someone gets caught on a cash date the union
\nmakes sure they get a contract and not a fine. Same thing for casuals. When
\nis the last time you have seen anything but a failure to pay work dues issue at
\nthe trial board? If unionism is not pure it doesn’t work. When it is pure it works
\nbetter than fine. This anything for a contract policy encourages everyone to do
\nwhatever they want. After all, what is the worst that will happen. They will get
\na contract. HaHaHaHaHa. Sick policy. And that’s the real reason the union doesn’t
\nwork. And that’s the truth. <\/p>\n
————-<\/p>\n
I can tell you that going BECK is not the answer – New Era scoring
\ncannot get an outside client because who wants to be the first to
\nbe associated with the buy out orchestra in LA??<\/p>\n
Lets say you’re a big composer in LA and you get a must non-
\nunion score – but you also get many union scores in LA too – do
\n you want that fall out from the
\nunion people every time you use New Era – hell no…..<\/p>\n
The reason Seattle and other places around the globe are successful
\nfor recording is BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT IN LA – EVEN NEW ERA
\ncan’t get a job in LA other than a session for the guy that owns
\nNew Era (who happens to be a music library guy- a very big and
\nsuccessful one at that)<\/p>\n
It’s too far down the river – and too easy to continue biz as usual
\n– let’s go to Seattle so we are not crapping in our own backyard
\nmentality.<\/p>\n
============<\/p>\n
COLLEAGUES,<\/p>\n
WE NEED YOU THERE THIS MONDAY, OCTOBER 22nd at 7pm.
\nBe early, get fed and do your duty and VOTE.!<\/p>\n
Until Next Time,<\/p>\n
THE COMMITTEE FOR A MORE RESPONSIBLE LOCAL 47<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Re: AFM CONTRACT\/RECORDING MEETINGS\/RS STILL IN DANGER\/COMMENTS I. NEW AFM VIDEO GAME CONTRACT GETTING RESULTS II. RECORDING MEETINGS III. BOARD STILL SET ON LOBBY RENOVATION IV. READER COMMENTS GREETINGS COLLEGUES!, This Monday we will have a chance to further the reform of our Local by electing a person with years of experience inside and outside […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-committee-newsletters"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=63"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=63"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=63"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.responsible47.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=63"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}