The ILM/Pixar Collusion is getting a bit of play on various outlets. One of them is a thread at a vfx forum site.
I write about how I observe the denigration of our craft by some of the posts by various members of the vfx community. TAG Organizer Steve Kaplan forwarded me one that just makes me laugh. If I had to write a sarcastic post by a free market supply-side libertarian vfx artist about the scandal it would go like this.
The problem is it’s by an actual person posting at the forum. Stuff like this just makes you wonder:
Yes, I think that\u2019s fair. It’s their money- not yours.
Of course the companies are in need of protection- probably more than the employees.
I’ve seen this thread dominated with the mindset that everyone in the world owes the animator whatever the animator feels what they are worth- it’s a disgusting entitlement mentality. Sure, we all might be worth $100 / hr., but there’s nobody obligated to pay that.
Businesses exist for 1 reason only: To make money. To live. To thrive.
Employees exist for 1 reason only: To make money for the business.
It’s up to the business to decide what you are worth; take it or leave it. Otherwise, go work for The Orphanage, Assylum or Cafe FX- all who cited the same reasons for closure: inability to compete and maintain the necessary cash flow.
Except that there IS NO “my wage”. What you are citing is an un-provable hypothetical.
The only real “MY WAGE” is the one that I agree to work for; and if ILM doesn’t want to pay me any more than what PIXAR paid me, then that is THEIR prerogative.
And no competition has been staunched, either.
The only way someone gets “screwed out of their wage” is if they agree to one pay, and receive a smaller paycheck. That’s it.
Personally, I think that Unionized employees are already screwed out of their paychecks.
I mean, lets think about this:
What is a union? It is an entity just like any other business: it desires to live, to thrive and to grow. However, Unions don’t labor to produce for their own benefit; they make their $$$ on the backs of the employee and the employer.
So of course the Union is unhappy about wages not going up; they base their Union dues off of pay scales.
Who among us knows what is involved in running a business? It is all out of pocket expenses. Every wage, insurance, quarterly tax, liability fee, light bill, upgrade bill, vacation wage, sick wage, personal wage, bereavement wage, unemployment tax, etc. ad nauseum. Everything. Remember- the insurance premiums alone in my place SKYROCKETED almost 30%. How do we re-coup that? Pass it on to the customer, or eat it?
Ever fee that gets shouldered onto a business is less product for the customer.
So, lets say the business eats it? How much money is left for pay raises?
And, California is worse than many to most other states. That\u2019s why many businesses are re-locating out of state.
The employer can only pay you what they have and what they responsibly can. And, much of what they bid their jobs out for covers overhead. So what happens when a facility bids against a smaller facility with much smaller overhead and smaller / less expensive business costs? Ask The Orphanage.
That same thing happened to us.
First, I don’t see this as an artificial salary limit. And if it is, then so what? Are they not half the Market?
Second- it all depends on how bad an artist wants to be employed. They are the second part of the market.
If this “collusion” is indeed a problem, then it will correct itself.
If we were serious about desiring a “free market” approach, then you would get the DoJ and the Unions out of it. The Union especially, since it is a Special Interest.
This is probably from someone who never actually worked in the industry or just has plain sour grapes. Who knows? However I keep seeing arguments that seem to take the other side regardless. If only there was reciprocity for such benevolence.
(Update, I’ve edited the comment since the poster updated his/hers)