# Philadelphia Theatre Company Stagehands Striking



## jglodeklights (Jan 18, 2013)

Playbill News Piece


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jan 18, 2013)

> "The management of the Philadelphia Theatre Company is guilty of hypocrisy in putting on a show about the last days of Dr. Martin Luther King — a man who lived and died for the cause of social justice — at the same time they are threatening the job security of the men and women who make the theatre work. IATSE Local 8 is walking in Dr. King's footsteps by walking the picket line in protest of the Philadelphia Theatre Company's anti-worker policies."



What a load of crock.


----------



## jglodeklights (Jan 19, 2013)

That was quite a stupid line. However, I happen to know everyone who is striking, and they are doing so with good reason. PTC has been attempting to replace paid positions with unpaid "internships." I fail to see how it is an "internship" when you aren't working under anyone......


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jan 19, 2013)

There are very strict guidelines as to what warrants an internship. If they truly were attempting that, they could get in serious trouble with the labor board. When I was a TD of a road house, where we had several resident theater companies, I was asked to start an internship program. Unfortunately, the way our organization was structured, I could not do so as I couldn't figure out how to make it work with labor laws.


----------



## LavaASU (Jan 19, 2013)

I have no idea what is going on in Philadelphia, but if you go on backstage jobs there are often postings for companies looking for an "intern" to Design and/or ME and/or program a show. Often with fairly strict requirements (ex past design experience, knowing how to program a board). Yeah, intern, right. Free labor is what they are after as if you already how how to do everything they're wanting, and there's no one there to teach you're not going to be learning much.


----------



## SalvatoreDelorean (Jan 19, 2013)

Pie4Weebl said:


> What a load of crock.



How exactly is that a load of crock? MLK stood for issues other than racial equality, and was a fierce advocate for organized labor. He gave hundreds of speeches in support of striking unions. For example: 'All Labor Has Dignity': Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Fight for Economic Justice - Joe Fassler - The Atlantic


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

Nothing wrong with them firing full time employees and using interns. You might not like it, but that's business.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jan 19, 2013)

SalvatoreDelorean said:


> How exactly is that a load of crock? MLK stood for issues other than racial equality, and was a fierce advocate for organized labor. He gave hundreds of speeches in support of striking unions. For example: 'All Labor Has Dignity': Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Fight for Economic Justice - Joe Fassler - The Atlantic



I stand corrected.


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

There's only 400 seats in their primary theater. How many stagehands do they even have working there who would be eligible for representation?!? Theater management there deserves the fight they're getting for even letting it get to the point of a ballot.


----------



## MNicolai (Jan 19, 2013)

jstroming said:


> Nothing wrong with them firing full time employees and using interns. You might not like it, but that's business.



Union or no union, there is when the collection of the remaining staff feel they could lose their jobs at any moment and decide as a group that if some of them are going lose their jobs, they'd rather put up a fight than quietly get fired one by one.

Effectively what the theatre is communicating to both its fired and to its remaining stagehands is, "You and your work have no value to us despite that our business model depends on your work for us to make money."

I can blame no one who wouldn't want to work in a situation where they feel they aren't valued and that their employer may be replace them at any moment with an unpaid intern -- especially anyone who's trying to pay a rent check at the end of the month.

To say Local 8 is walking in the footsteps of Dr. King may be a bit of a stretch, but the Mountaintop speech King gave the day before he was shot was in defense of the Memphis Santitation workers' strike. There's at least a little bit of irony that Local 8 is picketing The Mountaintop.


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

From a management perspective, they should have never let it get to that point. In a small theater, when employee grumblings start to get serious you sign a labor contract with a local production company, then fire your current employees (assuming there are only a few). Then label it some "budget restructuring" or something. 

It seems like the IA down there has had it out for them for a while. Or the local is desperate for work. Either way the theater should have handled it a lot faster.


----------



## kmccoy (Jan 19, 2013)

jstroming said:


> Nothing wrong with them firing full time employees and using interns. You might not like it, but that's business.



This is incorrect. Even ignoring the definitions of "wrong" which include the ideas of treating employees well and negotiating with organized employees in good faith, there are laws about what jobs you may use "interns" for.

Kevin


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

I never said they didn't have to follow the law. Legally they can replace full time employees with unpaid interns. Legalities aside, your argument can only be based on morality. I find nothing morally wrong with it.


----------



## SteveB (Jan 19, 2013)

jstroming said:


> I never said they didn't have to follow the law. Legally they can replace full time employees with unpaid interns. Legalities aside, your argument can only be based on morality. I find nothing morally wrong with it.



Next time you're on tour and at my space, I'll go find some interns for the event and give all the experienced folks the day off. Then best of luck when something goes wrong and the interns haven't a clue what to do. The show will not happen, but there's nothing morally wrong with that


----------



## SteveB (Jan 19, 2013)

One thing missed in this is that the employees chose to unionize. That typically points to an underlying and ongoing problems between management and the employees. It is in managements best interest to treat the employees fairly and to pay them a competitive wage. IATSE locals typically do not go around unionizing the facilities on the margins of profitability. It costs a LOT of money to do that, sometimes for little gain. If however, the employees choose union representation, the union is required to take it on and that appears to be the case in this instance.


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

SteveB said:


> Next time you're on tour and at my space, I'll go find some interns for the event and give all the experienced folks the day off. Then best of luck when something goes wrong and the interns haven't a clue what to do. The show will not happen, but there's nothing morally wrong with that



I use Labor Ready very frequently to setup my shows, all across the country, so your point is invalid. And where did I state a theater should lay off everyone qualified? Never stated that, you're fishing.

Bring up legality and morality all you want, the bottom line is it's legal, and at the cost of going under any business owner would lay people off and still try to get the job done by whatever means necessary.


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

And before you fish some more, let's assume "whatever means necessary" involves following the law. HAHA.

Also, please be aware that I am one of the few people on this board who is in an administrative management position, so I try to bring some alternative perspective to these discussions.


----------



## SteveB (Jan 19, 2013)

jstroming said:


> I use Labor Ready very frequently to setup my shows, all across the country, so your point is invalid. And where did I state a theater should lay off everyone qualified? Never stated that, you're fishing.
> 
> Bring up legality and morality all you want, the bottom line is it's legal, and at the cost of going under any business owner would lay people off and still try to get the job done by whatever means necessary.



Here's what you wrote

"Legally they can replace full time employees with unpaid interns. Legalities aside, your argument can only be based on morality. I find nothing morally wrong with it."

That reads to me like you have no use for full time employees. And that it's "moral" to fire all, or even some of the full time'ers to be replaced by either unpaid or poorly paid interns (show me a well paid intern). 

Legal maybe. Moral ?, well no. 

Besides all the related issues of lack of knowledge and experience for interns, typically who are interns because they don't have any experience or knowledge, this scenario may leave you legally vulnerable. You are replacing experienced employees with non-experienced interns. What happens if something goes wrong ?. What will the lawyers say during the lawsuit when you explain how it was cost effective to use an intern to operate potentially dangerous equipment (do YOU have an ETCP certification for rigging ?, will your intern flyperson ?). Suppose one of the folks you let go was the mandated fire warden ?. Will the local AHJ allow an intern in that place ?. How then can it be moral to fire (no other name for it) your paid staff in favor of those with no qualifications. Why as a business owner would you do that ?. 

In an ideal world there would be no reason for unions. The management would do a good job running the company, which hopefully would be profitable and would in turn pay the employees a reasonable wage. The employees would in turn, do good work for the company, be loyal employees and allow the owner/management to provide a good product to the customers. Theater isn't any different then any other company in this regard. Your model as stated seems to find it "moral" to fire all or some of those potentially dedicated employees and replace them with interns. How dedicated will the remaining full time staff be at that point ?, knowing this is the reward for dedicated work ?. Do you expect the interns to stay loyal ?. That's not going to happen as the interns will be gone as soon as they can find payed employment. And they are not staying with you, and why should they ?, when they too can expect to be let go and replaced by yet another intern. 

And my point is valid in that regardless if you use "We Are The Greatest Staqehands Ever Co." as crew, were you to attempt to load that show to a theater that has one full time person and the rest of the crew as completely inexperienced students (what's a c-wrench ?), your day goes badly. I'm certain here are any number of folks here who deal with this all the time. The burden to get the show up and running in a safe manner entirely falls on the road crew and that one person with a set of keys. After a tour full of these events, well SURPRISE, you have turn-over. And that does not make your job as management easier. 

But best of luck with your business model.


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

Well how you read it is incorrect. 

I do over 100 shows a year in the US, Canada, South America, and Europe. So yes my model is working. HAHA.

You wrongly insinuated I meant all full time employees should be replaced with unpaid interns. You also accused my morality in the discussion, and the morality of this is very subjective. Can an argument not be made that it is morally OK to fire an employee and use an unpaid intern if it will save the jobs of others?

You continue to put words in my mouth, then try to disagree with the words you put there. Unbelievable. I never speak in absolutes, and your inferences are completely incorrect.


----------



## DuckJordan (Jan 19, 2013)

unfortunately, what you are talking about isn't what is happeing to local 8, The theater wants to kick all the stagehands to the curb and setup an "Internship" for free labor, NOT LEGAL TO DO. I work in a facility that has interns quite often. They are only allowed to work to learn, we are not allowed to make a profitable gain from them. In this case every intern would be creating a profit gain for this theater. So jstroming while you are pointing out someone fishing you are just as guilty about it.


Either way I don't know local 8 nor do i know the theater. I know something similar is going to happen here soon to our local (although the only opposition to this local shutting down is the guys on the union paycheck not actually doing the gigs [office guys]).

A better way of going about the move from union is to hire your own staff and use the paid staff as they would be paying for a union guy. We did that here in our space and ended up with happier employees because instead of paying a union $17/hr/hand we could pay the employees directly $13 (after union dues they would make $11.--/hr. We also hold training sessions and have better working conditions because we don't put neck down guys on head positions.


----------



## kmccoy (Jan 19, 2013)

jstroming said:


> I never said they didn't have to follow the law. Legally they can replace full time employees with unpaid interns. Legalities aside, your argument can only be based on morality. I find nothing morally wrong with it.



You are not correct. Internships are not a way to bypass the minimum wage laws. Internships should be educational, and should not replace or displace regular employees. Firing a regular employee and then creating an internship to do the same tasks would be a pretty clear indicator that you're just trying to violate the law. See more information here: Internship Law & Legal Definition

I'm not interested in discussing your misguided philosophies -- people like you exist at various levels of the business, people who think the "market" is more important than the humans involved, people willing to squeeze the soul out of people to gain a few more pennies in your pocket. I've worked for people like you, and I'm glad to now work for producers who find a better balance. I have no illusion that I can change your attitude, so I'll focus my efforts on discouraging people from putting up with the crap trickling out of you and others like you. But if you're going to claim knowledge of the legal situation, you need to please stop spewing misinformation. Thanks.

Kevin McCoy


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

kmccoy said:


> You are not correct. Internships are not a way to bypass the minimum wage laws. Internships should be educational, and should not replace or displace regular employees. Firing a regular employee and then creating an internship to do the same tasks would be a pretty clear indicator that you're just trying to violate the law. See more information here: Internship Law & Legal Definition
> 
> I'm not interested in discussing your misguided philosophies -- people like you exist at various levels of the business, people who think the "market" is more important than the humans involved, people willing to squeeze the soul out of people to gain a few more pennies in your pocket. I've worked for people like you, and I'm glad to now work for producers who find a better balance. I have no illusion that I can change your attitude, so I'll focus my efforts on discouraging people from putting up with the crap trickling out of you and others like you. But if you're going to claim knowledge of the legal situation, you need to please stop spewing misinformation. Thanks.
> 
> Kevin McCoy



"People like me". I appreciate your personal attacks. Luckily I have a tough shell and you dont really scare me HAHA.

Now I was unaware that there is a part of US labor law that specifically addresses this. I always believed it was legal as long as it was for the benefit of the intern. So I stand corrected on that issue.

However, I'm still going to disagree with you on the morality end of it. I simply don't see anything wrong with it. I think it should be legal. The market should dictate what you pay people. If an intern ends up adding value to your company, you hire them full time, or they quit. If you treat all your employees like crap, then they all quit and you go out of business. What is wrong with that?


----------



## jstroming (Jan 19, 2013)

DuckJordan said:


> unfortunately, what you are talking about isn't what is happeing to local 8, The theater wants to kick all the stagehands to the curb and setup an "Internship" for free labor.
> 
> > I highly doubt this is what is happening. If it's so cut and dry, the theater wouldnt stand a chance of fighting it. They even suggest in this article they are hiring replacement workers to fill the void:
> > Union Stagehands at Philadelphia Theatre Company Are on Strike - Playbill.com


----------



## SteveB (Jan 19, 2013)

To jsstroming, whomever you are in real life.

Your very first post stated this:

"Nothing wrong with them firing full time employees and using interns. You might not like it, but that's business.'

You go on to state in later posts "Also, please be aware that I am one of the few people on this board who is in an administrative management position, so I try to bring some alternative perspective to these discussions."

I respect your second post and under other circumstances would respect your opinion and welcome your perspective in this issue. You need to understand that many members of this forum will have serious differences of opinion as to your first post. These are all merely differences of opinion(s) and should remain as such.

I have any number of issues however, with your tone in responses to myself and other CB members. Your use of "HAHA" as punctuation comes across as offensive and has no place here. When you post ""People like me". I appreciate your personal attacks. Luckily I have a tough shell and you don't really scare me HAHA.", well that sort of gets people pissed off. You must indeed have a tough shell, but if you feel that way towards fellow CB members, why belong ?. Obviously we are not going to change your opinion (or you ours) so what exactly are you attempting when you state that you're one of the members involved in "administrative management"? and then come across as offensively as you have. 

I view you (possibly incorrectly) as a typical reason that unions need to exist and the reason people join a union in an otherwise non-union workplace.


----------



## SteveB (Jan 19, 2013)

Found this:

A blog from one of the staghands.

Suzanne's Stagehands


As well as this:

Philadelphia IATSE Local 8 Strikes at Philadelphia Theatre Company for MLK, Jr. Show - Lighting&Sound America Online - News

And this:

Stage Fright

One of the quotes in this article was:

"But in fact, in the Aug. 16 letter, which the Wilma shows me,he proposed that the Wilma contract with the union for a technical director and an electrician who'd be paid $650 a week. A third man would work the fly system for $600 a week. Everyone after that would get $12.50 per hour. Workers would get 20 percent more in benefits. The eighth and 13th hires could be non-union."

$650 per week is $33,000 per year @ 40 hrs. per work week. How exactly do you live in Philly on that ?. much less $12.50, which is $26,000 per year . $650 per week is $16.50 an hr. as BTW.


----------



## derekleffew (Jan 19, 2013)

Not directed to any one person:
While I enjoy a lively debate/argument as much as anyone, please keep the conversation civil, or staff will be forced to close and remove this thread. 
Everyone is entitled to MY opinion, no matter how wrong.

From the FAQ:

> *Membership Expectations*
> As a member of the ControlBooth.com community, the Senior Team expects you to abide by the rules, guidelines, and community values established in this FAQ. We also expect you to practice common netiquette while participating in a discussion in consideration to the other community members. We have borrowed many of the below statements from the "Netiquette Home Page" (an excellent online resource) and have specifically tailored them to suit the ControlBooth.com community. The ControlBooth.com Senior Team expects you to review these rules and guidelines periodically, as we occasionally enhance them. We will try to provide notices and announcements to any significant change to these policies.
> 
> *Non-Acceptable Uses*
> You consent, through your use of this service, that you will not use ControlBooth.com to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law.


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Jan 20, 2013)

*Fact Sheet #71: Internship Programs Under The Fair Labor Standards Act*
This fact sheet provides general information to help determine whether interns must be paid the minimum wage and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act for the services that they provide to “for-profit” private sector employers.

*Background*
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) defines the term “employ” very broadly as including to “suffer or permit to work.” Covered and non-exempt individuals who are “suffered or permitted” to work must be compensated under the law for the services they perform for an employer. Internships in the “for-profit” private sector will most often be viewed as employment, unless the test described below relating to trainees is met. Interns in the “for-profit” private sector who qualify as employees rather than trainees typically must be paid at least the minimum wage and overtime compensation for hours worked over forty in a workweek.*

*The Test For Unpaid Interns*
There are some circumstances under which individuals who participate in “for-profit” private sector internships or training programs may do so without compensation. The Supreme Court has held that the term "suffer or permit to work" cannot be interpreted so as to make a person whose work serves only his or her own interest an employee of another who provides aid or instruction. This may apply to interns who receive training for their own educational benefit if the training meets certain criteria. The determination of whether an internship or training program meets this exclusion depends upon all of the facts and circumstances of each such program.
The following six criteria must be applied when making this determination:
1.The internship, even though it includes actual operation of the facilities of the employer, is similar to training which would be given in an educational environment;
2.The internship experience is for the benefit of the intern;
3.The intern does not displace regular employees, but works under close supervision of existing staff;
4.The employer that provides the training derives no immediate advantage from the activities of the intern; and on occasion its operations may actually be impeded;
5.The intern is not necessarily entitled to a job at the conclusion of the internship; and
6.The employer and the intern understand that the intern is not entitled to wages for the time spent in the internship.

If all of the factors listed above are met, an employment relationship does not exist under the FLSA, and the Act’s minimum wage and overtime provisions do not apply to the intern. This exclusion from the definition of employment is necessarily quite narrow because the FLSA’s definition of “employ” is very broad. Some of the most commonly discussed factors for “for-profit” private sector internship programs are considered below.

*Similar To An Education Environment And The Primary Beneficiary Of The Activity*
In general, the more an internship program is structured around a classroom or academic experience as opposed to the employer’s actual operations, the more likely the internship will be viewed as an extension of the individual’s educational experience (this often occurs where a college or university exercises oversight over the internship program and provides educational credit). The more the internship provides the individual with skills that can be used in multiple employment settings, as opposed to skills particular to one employer’s operation, the more likely the intern would be viewed as receiving training. Under these circumstances the intern does not perform the routine work of the business on a regular and recurring basis, and the business is not dependent upon the work of the intern. On the other hand, if the interns are engaged in the operations of the employer or are performing productive work (for example, filing, performing other clerical work, or assisting customers), then the fact that they may be receiving some benefits in the form of a new skill or improved work habits will not exclude them from the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime requirements because the employer benefits from the interns’ work.

*Displacement And Supervision Issues*
If an employer uses interns as substitutes for regular workers or to augment its existing workforce during specific time periods, these interns should be paid at least the minimum wage and overtime compensation for hours worked over forty in a workweek. If the employer would have hired additional employees or required existing staff to work additional hours had the interns not performed the work, then the interns will be viewed as employees and entitled compensation under the FLSA. Conversely, if the employer is providing job shadowing opportunities that allow an intern to learn certain functions under the close and constant supervision of regular employees, but the intern performs no or minimal work, the activity is more likely to be viewed as a bona fide education experience. On the other hand, if the intern receives the same level of supervision as the employer’s regular workforce, this would suggest an employment relationship, rather than training.

*Job Entitlement*
The internship should be of a fixed duration, established prior to the outset of the internship. Further, unpaid internships generally should not be used by the employer as a trial period for individuals seeking employment at the conclusion of the internship period. If an intern is placed with the employer for a trial period with the expectation that he or she will then be hired on a permanent basis, that individual generally would be considered an employee under the FLSA.


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jan 20, 2013)

Thank you all for sharing the labor regulations on internships. This is exactly what I was referencing early on in this thread. jstroming, as an administrator, you should really hone your skills on fair labor. It can really bite you even in right to work states, especially since you had been under the assumption that this (replacing a paid employee with an intern) was a legal practice that had been suggested. Since you state that you do shows in multiple locations, you may need the assistance of a human resources specialist who can also advise you on regional variations since some states have even stricter guidelines (assuming that you might at some point be in the position of hiring an intern). 

This will be interesting to see how the labor process carries out. It can take up to a year through negotiations. If they do indeed try to put on the production while the employees are using their legal right to organize under a union, they could end up with bigger lawsuits than if they negotiated. 

Employees generally don't attempt to unionize unless the employer has driven them to that end. I have watched it happen in several theaters. I have also worked with stagehands who were considering the advantages and disadvantages of unionizing (being that I had been a union member). It is not an easy decision to make.


----------



## museav (Jan 20, 2013)

ruinexplorer said:


> Employees generally don't attempt to unionize unless the employer has driven them to that end. I have watched it happen in several theaters.


Maybe for IATSE and other theater trades, but that is not my experience for all trades (Teamsters, UAW, IBEW, etc.).


----------



## ruinexplorer (Jan 20, 2013)

Touche. I suppose I should have been more specific. Some unions are very active in attempting to influence non-union shops. When Fresh & Easy grocery stores first started opening up locally, they were constantly picketed, even though the employees were not asking for representation (or any of them whom I spoke with). I don't know how that finally ended up.


----------



## jglodeklights (Jan 24, 2013)

SteveB said:


> "But in fact, in the Aug. 16 letter, which the Wilma shows me,he proposed that the Wilma contract with the union for a technical director and an electrician who'd be paid $650 a week. A third man would work the fly system for $600 a week. Everyone after that would get $12.50 per hour. Workers would get 20 percent more in benefits. The eighth and 13th hires could be non-union."
> 
> $650 per week is $33,000 per year @ 40 hrs. per work week. How exactly do you live in Philly on that ?. much less $12.50, which is $26,000 per year . $650 per week is $16.50 an hr. as BTW.



Living in Philadelphia on that money is completely doable should you not drive, own a home, have children or have significant debt. However, doesn't leave much for retirement, or paying for healthcare or taking vacations.


----------



## ruinexplorer (Mar 2, 2013)

It seems that Local 8 is attempting to get a better salary for more venues: Philadelphia Stagehands Strike Electric Factory, Call for Boycott of Erykah Badu Show | The Philly Post


----------



## Pie4Weebl (Mar 3, 2013)

ruinexplorer said:


> It seems that Local 8 is attempting to get a better salary for more venues: Philadelphia Stagehands Strike Electric Factory, Call for Boycott of Erykah Badu Show | The Philly Post



And by "get a better salary" you mean, fire the non union workers and replace them with union ones.


----------



## SteveB (Mar 3, 2013)

Pie4Weebl said:


> And by "get a better salary" you mean, fire the non union workers and replace them with union ones.



Or, some to many of the existing folks will get union cards, a better pay, medical benefits, a pension, etc... 

When our house went Local One in '03, 7 people got cards who otherwise had no chance to do so. 2 stayed as our SM (Crew Chief) and Head Audio, 4 of the other 5 have all been working other union gigs all around NYC - ABC, CBS, The Nokia, etc... so got regular work in the local. 

Of the other 20 or so on our overhire list ?, the contract allows us to continue hiring them, though many have moved on in 10 years. 2 of those did eventually get cards and the hours they put in at our facility counted towards that.


----------



## kmccoy (Mar 3, 2013)

Pie4Weebl said:


> And by "get a better salary" you mean, fire the non union workers and replace them with union ones.



Can you provide any support that this claim is anything more than just anti-union scare tactics?

Kevin McCoy


----------



## avkid (Mar 3, 2013)

From Local 8's Facebook-

> Cyber Sunday. Yesterday's picket line was a success. *We have been informed the Employer increased the non union stagehands rate by upwards to 70%. This is still below standards set by IATSE Local 8 for similiar work in other concert venues.* This demonstrates how bad these workers have been being treated by this Employer as they rebuild their business. Therefore we remain on strike.



That's pure exploitation of unprotected workers by a money hungry employer.


----------

