Kravis Center vs. IATSE
- Thread starterderekleffew
- Start date
JChenault
Well-Known Member
The news article is an interesting read.
It implies that an existing agreement had expired, and that the Kravis center decided that they did not want to use the Union guys any more.
It would seem to me that if I ran a venue, and had a contract with the union that had an expiration date, and that contract had expired, that I could do whatever I wanted to re the union after that date. Can someone explain to me what I am missing?
It implies that an existing agreement had expired, and that the Kravis center decided that they did not want to use the Union guys any more.
It would seem to me that if I ran a venue, and had a contract with the union that had an expiration date, and that contract had expired, that I could do whatever I wanted to re the union after that date. Can someone explain to me what I am missing?
It goes back a long while, so the numbers are plausible. Remember that the NLRB ruled 5 years ago about violations, for the many years preceding that (12 according to the IATSE website) Kravis then continued to violate the terms of the agreement they had with the NLRB, thus the decision. It doesn't take much to count every non-union employee that Kravis has hired over the decade and extrapolate from that in terms of numbers. They are also the major Broadway touring venue for the area, so typically big crews on big shows. I do have to wonder however, if the local actually has that many card carrying members.....
This was on the IATSE site:
"In 2007, the NLRB ruled that the Kravis Center had failed to bargain with IATSE Local 500, unilaterally changing wages and other terms and conditions of employment and refusing to use the Local 500 hiring hall to staff its productions. This is a violation of federal labor law. The Board ordered the Kravis Center to reinstate the displaced workers and to resume negotiations with the union, which the Kravis Center had unlawfully ceased in September 2000. In 2008, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals enforced the Board’s order."
So in answer to John Chenaults question, yes it is in violation of federal labor law, though there's obviously a lot more to it then the example you are using.
This article describes some of it from the IATSE viewpoint.
http://www.iatse-intl.org/news/krav...eement-and-commits-new-unfair-labor-practices
If memory serves, this was a case of the center unilaterally abrogating it's contract in negotiations for a renewal. I'll see if I can dig up more.
Last edited:
porkchop
Well-Known Member
Remember if it was easy for venues to get out of IATSE contracts you wouldn't see so many buildings with really strong union contracts. A building might not get away with it in union heavy cities like NYC or Chicago, but in places like Oakland with the Oracle Arena they have surprisingly strong union contract and there's certainly plenty of labor in the area willing to take the jobs.
DuckJordan
Touring IATSE Member
But you have to do it right. Our facility got rid of union labor about a year ago and we had to basically wait until contract was up to hire any stage hands. And at first the union blacklisted hands that would work both union and here. Making their sole income from our facility. They got very touchy on the subject and I found myself no longer recieving work calls due to my employment.
StNic54
Active Member
I live and work in West Palm Beach, and watching the Kravis/IA struggle unfold has been pretty amazing. Simply put, the Kravis Center was found to have violated the law, and readmitting the union stagehands for the Broadway Tours has been in practice for the last few years, and non-union labor is used only for events and small productions. Florida is a right-to-work state, and the labor laws leave a lot of control with employers, so much so that once the economy crashed, many full-time employees have found their hours being cut way back (down to 8 hours a week), often to the point of losing eligibility for benefits. I'm not a card-carrying member, but having worked here, I understand fully what it means to not be represented. The IA stagehands and the non-union stagehands have had quite the battle over this space, to say the least. Kravis lost a non-union employee who fell from the catwalk a few years ago, and in my mind the union's arguments over skilled, safe labor were legitimized by this accident. As for the interest and the repayment, that's for deeper pockets to figure out.
As for there being several hundred union employees at the Kravis Center, that can only encompass the local IA roster on the whole, most of whom work at numerous venues in South Florida. I've certainly never seen several hundred technicians at any given point at the Kravis center, and their non-union technicians have probably never even reached a number as high as 50, much less over 100. My guess is that there are a healthy number of law firms in our area, and that this fight will continue to grow, maybe even to the point of having a good screenplay arise over time. I'm sure they'll use IA labor for any major motion pictures about this event in the future. I'll keep my ear to the ground and post anything else I find.
As for there being several hundred union employees at the Kravis Center, that can only encompass the local IA roster on the whole, most of whom work at numerous venues in South Florida. I've certainly never seen several hundred technicians at any given point at the Kravis center, and their non-union technicians have probably never even reached a number as high as 50, much less over 100. My guess is that there are a healthy number of law firms in our area, and that this fight will continue to grow, maybe even to the point of having a good screenplay arise over time. I'm sure they'll use IA labor for any major motion pictures about this event in the future. I'll keep my ear to the ground and post anything else I find.
You absolutely can. The problem is that the definition of "bargaining in good faith" is extremely narrow, especially when it comes to a union-friendly (some would say union-fanatic) organization like the NLRB. I have heard of venues being found in violation of this for things as ridiculous as an e-mail being sent to a client about the effects of a possible strike.
In contrast, the union can do pretty much whatever they want, including slandering the venue, it's current employees, etc. My company has a very strong relationship with Hyatt hotels, in fact I do around 60 shows a year in Hyatt hotels, as the sole client (we're not an outside production company, it is our name on the contracts). Anyone aware of event production labor relations nationally can tell you that UNITE & to a lesser extent IATSE have been engaged in a very bitter war with each other over the use of UNITE members in Hyatt hotels nationally. I have received several phone calls from several different unions throughout the past 2 years demanding that I change my venue in that city because of the ongoing labor dispute. The first time they called, I was somewhat concerned, as they have a brilliant way of wording things on the phone...."You need to change your venue for your **** event at the Hyatt ****** immediately."....."Does this mean I won't be allowed to legally hold my event there?"....."We can recommend several other hotels in the area where you will be well taken care of and within the scope of union jurisdiction"...."Does that mean I have to change venues or what?"...."It means we can't guarantee the success of your event at this venue and in the best interests of all parties you should change your venue immediately".
To me those are bullying tactics, and if I didn't know any better I would have gotten very nervous. Now I record all conversations (I can in my state) and forward them to my sales reps as necessary. So while it is possible, some venues choose not to pursue dropping their unions because they don't want the hassle, or they are happy with their union labor. I have been to many union venues where both venue management and my production crew has been happy with the provided union labor. In my opinion, smaller unions generally give you a better level of service, although you'll have more knowledgeable stagehands in larger markets where the talent and training are available.
As I like to say about stagehands...."Easy Going, Cheap, Skilled.....Pick Two!"
DuckJordan
Touring IATSE Member
StNic54
Active Member
Kravis Center cancels tonight
So the local hasn't been active in picketing since the ruling, and they chose this week to begin picketing shows. It's a calculated move seeing as how popular Jersey Boys is, and how many, many old people live here in South Florida. I think this fight is going to continue for a long time with the Kravis Center ultimately losing revenues. Now local businesses are speaking up since they rely on the influx of patrons to the Kravis Center to drive their holiday profit. I don't see Kravis giving in on the $2.6 million anytime soon, but I'll be interested to find out how it affects the season-ticket sales, and if Kravis loses more than that sought-after 2.6. It makes me wonder if they could have settled for less over the summer and gone about their business.
So the local hasn't been active in picketing since the ruling, and they chose this week to begin picketing shows. It's a calculated move seeing as how popular Jersey Boys is, and how many, many old people live here in South Florida. I think this fight is going to continue for a long time with the Kravis Center ultimately losing revenues. Now local businesses are speaking up since they rely on the influx of patrons to the Kravis Center to drive their holiday profit. I don't see Kravis giving in on the $2.6 million anytime soon, but I'll be interested to find out how it affects the season-ticket sales, and if Kravis loses more than that sought-after 2.6. It makes me wonder if they could have settled for less over the summer and gone about their business.
techieman33
Well-Known Member
That sentence makes me laugh. Odds are they've performed in spaces without union crews and never even thought about it. And I would think that safety wise the set should be just as safe no matter who the local crew is since the touring hands should be supervising all construction to make sure it's done correctly.
Not True. It's done on a state by state basis. Some states require both parties to be aware they are being recorded.
techieman33
Well-Known Member
Guess I missed that. That would be insane.
From Stagehands strike Kravis - South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com
There are bits and pieces of quotes in all of the articles. The key to it all though is that the road crew is not going to cross the line, and therefore Equity is not going to perform.
Last edited by a moderator:
DuckJordan
Touring IATSE Member
Well, given that the show has been canceled for the last three days, and is not exactly looking like it's going to open... I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the road crew won't cross the line (Most of the road crew have home locals of their own, and are, in fact, thankful for the union and the benefits it provides them. Furthermore, in my experience the guys in Local 500 are, for the most part, fantastic stagehands and great people. I know that everyone has there story of a terrible experience with a local, but from my experience local 500 does not fit that stereotype. And equitys statement (Actors' Equity - Representing American Actors and Stage Managers in the Theatre) makes it look like they will not be performing either. I don't know if I'd say I'm pulling assumptions based on a report based on more assumptions (mostly because I'm not really sure what that even means), but I would say I have done more research and read more articles than the few that have been posted thus far in this thread.
Jersey Boys is a yellow card show so all of their crew are card carriers. They will not cross the line and can not lose their jobs for that. It is the job of the presenter to take care of this issue.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2