American Cinematographer - May 1994 - 100

Tough Love: A Union Member's Plea for Reform
by Steven Poster, ASC
The

opinions expressed in this column

are

those of the author, and do not nec¬

essarily reflect the views of the ASC or
American Cinematographer magazine.
Since this column is intended as a sound¬

ing-board, AC encourages our readers to
respond to the issues raised. - Ed.
In this month's column, I'm
some

going to say
things that will probably get me

into trouble. But when has that

ever

stopped me?
I don't think

anybody is saying

what should be said about the unions,
and I've finally gotten concerned enough
to stick out my neck. It's a big subject
that can't be covered in this one column,
but I must start talking about it because
I am a great believer in trade unions and
I see ours being destroyed by our own
mistakes.
The first tenet of trade union¬

ism is to

organize. This really hasn't hap¬
pened since shortly after film unions
were first started. Everybody got in and
then closed the door behind them. Of

there have been some small ef¬
forts lately to organize blatantly non¬
course,

union
a few

productions. And there have been
open-door periods in the past (usu¬
ally forced by legal actions). But our
unions have become protectionist to the
point of destroying the small turf that we
are trying to hold onto. And by protecting
our

turf

we

have created

our own com¬

petition.
Starting in the 1960s, film
schools began turning out a large num¬
ber of graduates, whom we blatantly
kept out of the "club." These people had
a need and a right to work, and over the
ensuing years they became a viable work

fact, the DGA is beginning to have its

the systematic undermining of the
strength of our unions.
IA members were very willing

duction

gan

to work non-union because work was

tight in most markets at the time.
Throughout this period, the union
waffled on letting the members do the
work or trying to stop them. It was hard
to stop our own members, in all good
conscience, because some of the enlight¬
ened officials realized that our members
had to make a living. However, there

periods when the unions tried to
stop non-union work by members (to no

were

avail: the work was out there and IA
members were taking it).
In the meantime, the Reagan
Administration was making it very easy
for foreign nationals to come to America
to work as directors of photography.
These cinematographers were willing to
work under any conditions for less pay
than our members, just for the opportu¬

problems with more non-DGA pro¬
happening all the time.
At this point it has become
very easy for all of the major production
companies to work non-union. But non¬
union doesn't really mean non-union, it
just means non-IA. They can save a little
money, abuse the crews and get away
with it easily. Nobody is out there to stop
it, including our own "International."
own

So what can we do now that
we've lost most of the bread-and-butter

production that kept

our Pension and
Health coffers filled for so many years?
If you haven't noticed, both plans are in

serious danger of disappearing over the
next five to ten years if we don't do

something. And if you haven't noticed,
most TV production, feature production
and commercials are now being done
non-IA. How many times lately have you
been asked if you are IA on a job inter¬
view, and turned down when you answer

yes?
In the short space

nity to shoot for "Hollywood." Whatever
they made was usually more than they

left I am
going to try and outline a few ideas about

would make at home anyway.
Now, I'm not against

what I think

foreign
cinematographers working here legally.

After all, this is America, and most of our

parents and grandparents also came
here to find

better life. These

people
are our colleagues and should be wel¬
comed as such (in fact, many have been
a

made members of the ASC). But there is
still no reciprocity with the countries they
come from. Just see what happens if an
American cinematographer tries to shoot

picture in France, England or Australia,
if we are willing to work for the lo¬
cal pay scale.
Another problem lies with our
brother and sister unions (DGA, SAG and

a

we

have to do to survive in

today's market.
*
First, we must let every film
worker out there in the union immedi¬

ately! That's right, stop trying to protect
exist in a short while. Ev¬
erybody in this country has a right to be
a member of a labor organization. It is unAmerican (and stupid) to try and keep
them out. Are you afraid of working in an
open market? If you are, you must not be
very good at what you do and can't stand
up to competition.

what may not

*

even

nated. It

The roster must be elimi¬

serves no

purpose anymore ex¬

force outside of the union. As this work
force grew, production companies seized
the opportunity to save a few dollars on
the labor budget.
When it first became viable for

the Teamsters), who have shown limited

to

solidarity with us. There has been lip
service to solidarity at times, but if any¬

companies to work non-union, there

one can name a

should an outsider want to be a member
when there is much more work for them
on the outside? We have to find ways to

people available in most of the sup¬
port categories to fill in crews, but there
was a lack of experienced keys. This is

and

guilds that has refused a job because

the

crew was not

American

May 1994

were

100

where a combination of our own mem¬
bers and the Reagan Administration be¬

Cinematographer

member of these unions

IA, I would be very sur¬
prised and pleased to hear about it. In

cept to hurt our own members. It also
makes it very

unattractive for outsiders

try and join our ranks. Anyway, why

make it attractive for them to
that's

right,

we

join. Yes,
have to recruit them. You
Continued

on

page

99
American Cinematographer - May 1994

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of American Cinematographer - May 1994
