Making a Living Making Films

Background

On the last day of June, I travelled to Seoul, Korea, to represent our Guild at the UNI-MEI Asia-Pacific Film Workers’ Conference [1] held over three days from 2–4 July. It's an annual UNI-MEI initiative designed to promote solidarity of film workers in the Asia-Pacific region. This year's theme: «Making a Living Making Films».

So what is this UNI-MEI? It's the Media Entertainment Industries arm of UNI [2], a global federation of unions representing 20 million workers in a wide range of industries. UNI-MEI have associations with many Techos' Guild counterparts, such as IATSE [3] in the USA and Canada, and BECTU [4] in Britain. The NZ Film & Video Technicians' Guild is not currently affiliated with UNI-MEI, but was invited to send a representative to this conference, for which UNI-MEI paid almost all expenses.

The agenda of these meetings is based around reports from each country and resultant discussion. The predominant focus is on ‘big picture’ issues regarding the building of sustainable film industries where workers' contributions are valued, and the exploration of the role of film in social and economic structures. Great interest is taken in policy-based initiatives that nurture local filmmaking, particularly with respect to surviving the common pressure of global imperialism in the form of Hollywood.

Seoul

Arriving at Incheon Airport, I note: Seoul is swallowed by cloud. Sets of matching blue Air Korea planes, big and small like children’s toys, have docked in orderly rows around Jetsons-style terminal buildings of green glass and steel. Utility vehicles on the tarmac all seem perfect Tonka-toy yellow. I wonder where 13 hours have gone, and think: Seoul is a city of colour swathed in cloud.

It takes forever to get anywhere in Seoul. Somehow this doesn’t matter too much. The landscape has a sort of industrial beauty and seems to be filled with bridges. Parallels with children’s toys, Meccano, and Lego keep filling my head. Engineering fans would enjoy this drive. There are touches of greenery at every spot on our long taxi ride, and eventually, as dusk falls, we pass through the city to the fantastically named ‘Olympic Parktel’. Olympic Parktel is pretty much on the edge of nowhere unless you count Olympic Park as somewhere.

Especially constructed for – you guessed it – the 1998 Seoul Olympics, the Parktel is a public venture and has a sort of public service c.1980 feel. We arrive exhausted but manage a beer apiece in the surreal mirrored circular airport-lounge-style dining room before collapsing for the night. Owing to flight schedules, I have a day free before the conference…

On Day One, I ruin my chances of enjoying neighbouring Olympic Park. Being my only free day, I learn fast how to use local transport and cram in some sights. Insadong Gil is a pretty street in an arty area, and I stroll down it before attaching myself to a party of American and Korean Mormon missionary women (who else?) in order to view one of Seoul’s famous palaces. A guided tour is compulsory at Changgyeonggung Palace and Korean language is the only option left. Fortunately, the cheerful young missionary sisters are Americans paired with Koreans and we manage fine.

After a long, hot, but fascinating tour of extensive grounds, I should admit defeat.

Instead, I push on via the subway to Namdaemun Markets, where I search fruitlessly for a dragon souvenir, discover that not everywhere in Seoul has public seating, and find how easily one can get lost in tiny backstreets. I am already crippled after what seems like at least one thousand miles on foot and a long rush-hour subway ride when I discover that the ‘Olympic Park’ stop is not in fact anywhere near the Parktel! I walk for a painful hour through parkland back to my room – and make a mental note to take a taxi next time I am faced with navigating a new city alone.

Day Two – Conference

Entering the room on the first day is like entering a mini European Union or United Nations. A medium-sized conference room is set out with tables arranged in a ‘circle’ (actually rectangular, with all delegates facing in toward each other). Each place has an earpiece and microphone, while a dedicated team of instantaneous translators is trapped inside crate-like sound-proof boxes in the corner. Though a majority of delegates speak at least conversational English, all discussions are available through the earpieces in Japanese, Chinese, English, and Korean. This is somewhat surreal to begin with, but we soon adjust and give the translators hell with our rapid Antipodean speech...

Delegates from 10 countries make up 17 out of about 25 attendees, plus local media and sundry extras attending the three-day meeting. The Techos’ Guild is joined by Anna Cahill from the Screen Directors’ Guild NZ and Steven Gannaway of the NZ Writers’ Guild, as well as delegates from Australia, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, and Thailand.

We were later told that delegates from mainland China and India had been prevented from attending by political and/or bureaucratic forces. This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, that sobering realities put things into perspective for those of us from countries where freedom is largely taken for granted…

UNI-MEI’s director, Jim Wilson, a past leader of the American Film Technicians’ Union, was in attendance and participated for the full duration of the meeting. Jim champions a focus on issues in the Asia-Pacific region and has successfully convinced Heinrich Bleicher-Nagelsmann, the founding Vice-President for Media Entertainment Industries, to pay a visit to the conference despite a breakneck schedule. Jim asserts that history sees the 19th Century as driven by British influence, the 20th by American, and believes that the 21st will be ascribed to Asian-Pacific influence. I agree with Jim; and of course, economists have been signalling Asia's growing dominance for some time. It strikes me that this is an important trend to remind ourselves of when considering the future of both our industry and our country.

Korea

Welcome speeches from our Korean hosts outline a complex situation in their country, focusing on issues such as the defence of freedom of speech, casual workers' rights, and social security. The harsh realities of the Korean situation are highlighted as I write now with the arrest of Choi Sang-Je, President of Korea’s National Union of Media Workers (NUMW). Despite having agreed to respond to a police summons, Choi was forcibly arrested at his home early in the morning of 27 July, handcuffed and barefoot, while his family watched on. His union believes this is an attempt to silence criticism of a controversial law allowing monopoly ownership of print and broadcast media.

Throughout the conference, we New Zealand delegates are struck by the activity, courage, and fight of our counterparts working toward progress for their members.

Before individual country reports begin, Professor Choi Hyung-ik of Hanshin University presents an academic exposition exploring possible roles for Active Labour Market (government) Policies in contributing to a growing screen production industry. Choi’s paper looks at factors affecting the strength and sustainability of the Korean film industry, particularly since 1997, when the smash hit local film Swiri brought industrial aspects of filmmaking to the attention of Koreans.

Quotas in Korea & NZ

Perhaps the most striking amongst many familiar themes in Choi's paper (e.g., risky starry-eyed investment schemes, growing pains of a young industry, low pay for film workers) is the existence of a Korean Screen Quota. The quota, initially a mechanism to broadcast anti-communist films, required Korean cinemas to show Korean films on 146 days each year. The effect was rapid growth in, and a significant increase in the quality of, output from the local film industry. In contrast to policies that provide incentives and initiatives that ‘push’ from the production end, this approach works by creating demand.

Choi's assertion that the quota impacted consumer demand reminded me of the history of NZ music broadcast quotas. In parallel with the NZ music experience, the eventual number of days Korean films were screened in cinemas was, in practice, higher than the amount prescribed in the quota. I recall the grumblings of early NZ music quota days and lingering fears in many minds that Kiwis would just simply never buy large amounts of local music. Of course, with hindsight, this looks incredibly pessimistic, as airplay of NZ music now far exceeds the voluntary quota; and the new generation of listeners that catapulted Smashproof's Brother to number 1, keeping it there long enough to break the 1986 record for most weeks in the top spot, is blissfully ignorant of anything else.

The ‘reverse engineering’ approach to nurturing local film content that the quota represents captured my imagination – so it was with dismay that I learned of the recent (2007) reduction in the quota level. It would seem that the quota, coupled with the development it encouraged, brought the Korean industry to a turning point where even Hollywood stood up and took notice: Before being allowed to even enter into negotiations for a free trade deal with the USA, the Korean government was asked, and agreed, to halve the level of the Korean Screen Quota.

(Editor's note: The Labour Government used trade agreement conditions with the USA as their excuse for not introducing a promised quota system to NZ broadcasting – after Marian Hobbs assured us at the 2000 SPADA conference, "There WILL be a quota…")

Film and Automotive Industries

In a search for transferrable lessons from other industries, Professor Choi repeatedly drew parallels between car and film production in the USA and Korea - car manufacturing being key in both economies. Apparently, free trade goes only so far when it comes to the USA, which simultaneously lobbies for further reduction and even abolition of the Korean Screen Quota, while seeking protection for a 10% share of the Korean Auto Market for American cars...

Professor Choi wryly entertains a future where the US is forced to ask for similar concessions for Hollywood films – noting that economic experts failed to predict the failure of the automotive giants GM, Ford, and Chrysler. It remains to be seen if the success of the Korean automotive industry can provide useful lessons for similar successes in Korean Film. What can be said is that the film industry’s unique contribution to both the economic and cultural wealth of a country provides a unique challenge to those setting policy. The elusive but real matter of film-as-culture is one of several recurring themes echoed in each country and throughout the conference.

Making a Living

Other recurrent themes include the struggle for film workers to remain consistently employed on a 'living wage'. Consideration of the role of employment opportunities from related industries (such as advertising or new media – for example, gaming) is seen as key when building a sustainable workforce.

Discussing the currently thriving New York film industry (with which he is very familiar), Jim Wilson notes that it is an industry built on advertising. Jim considers the question: What role do working conditions, including pay, play in a sustainable industry? He points out that American film workers are well-paid in a strong industry. He cites the ups and downs of the New York film industry over time as an example of change that is independent of workers' pay rates, therefore implicating other factors as being of greater importance. The implication of this is to negate fears of dramatic negative impacts on a film industry that pays its workers reasonable wages.

Jim asks us to consider how film workers are paid with respect to other industries within given countries, noting that Indian film workers are relatively highly paid, whereas Korean film workers are paid far less than workers in other Korean industries. It seems apparent that the particular evolutionary history of a given film industry contributes hugely to its current state in many ways – the sense of whether or not film workers even view themselves as workers is an example that speaks directly to consideration of industrial issues at the policy level.

Though thinking about our industries in this way is fairly daunting and mentally taxing, it is essential to prevent stagnation and assumptions being built on flawed logic. This is the value, I realise, above and beyond connecting with peers, of such a conference in contributing to the development of an employee like myself.

Australia

Individual country reports kick off with Erin Knott, Australian MEAA [5] Technicians’ representative, outlining a situation familiar in many ways to New Zealand crews. Erin notes, for example, that penalties designed to improve working hours for technicians, and thereby increase safety, often fail to function this way in practice.

The group is only just warming up at this stage, and discussion is minimal compared with the following days. On reflection, I wish more questions had been directed at Erin – but making connections with such counterparts for ongoing discussions is what it’s all about.

Erin’s presentation on Day Two considers the role of Health and Safety in film production. The presentation quickly lays to rest any doubts of the importance of H&S with a list of tragic and clearly preventable deaths, along with a clip from the affecting documentary Who Needs Sleep? [6].

Commentary following Erin’s presentation confirms that an attitude of dangerous machismo prevails in most countries when it comes to working on set. Sadly it seems workers throughout Asia-Pacific are just as likely to prefer putting their lives on the line to speaking up about issues of safety – as are Aussies and Kiwis, renowned for our ‘blokey’, ‘harden-up’ culture.

In NZ, it’s a bit contentious to speak of family and life outside film work, I’ve noticed, but I am glad to report that our peers outside this country deem these matters important topics for discussion.

Consider why it is that some film workers see themselves as so different from other workers. What role do the creative and cultural aspects of film play in this self-view? Why do some feel entitled to less than workers in other industries, in terms of conditions and benefits? Why would film crew support workers in other areas when they fight for improvements to conditions but accept the status quo in their own work? These are all fundamental questions to consider.

By and large, the workers represented at this conference were contractors. The picture is very similar in most countries, with employment within television networks and casualised labour or contracting elsewhere.

Pirates Aboard!

Intellectual property, piracy, and copyright were hot topics. Asia is perhaps a natural home for pirated products, and we hear a set of amusing but salutary tales from the delegate representing mainland China in the absence of his detained colleagues. This Hong Kong delegate finds himself spending more of his time on the mainland than on his native island; and makes it a habit, wherever he is, to visit stores and check out pirated DVDs.

On one particular day, he discovers some highly sophisticated box sets of DVDs. He notices a worrying similarity between the blurb on the box set and the words of an academic from the university adjacent to the store. He realises this academic is in all likelihood in on the racket; and he points out that involvement at all levels of organisations, including governments, is not uncommon, and on the increase in the piracy game.

He has, for example, found pirated copies of his own works with irrefutable evidence of involvement of members of the most highly-regarded award bodies and festivals in the film world. One pirated film was plainly based on a rough cut, but the sound was finished so well the delegate was moved to admit he preferred parts of it to his own!

Many examples of writers losing out on benefits from their work under appalling circumstances were given. In some cases, policies allow writers to receive nothing for their work at all. The relevance of such issues for crew includes the search for creative ways to get value out of local productions where budget restrictions are cited as necessitating low pay rates.

In an elegant example of how policy can be supportive of workers, a current German law allows unfair contracts to be voided, in order to provide the original creators with access to profits from the later success of their works.

In a story similar to that of supplementary sources of income for film workers from advertising and new media: possibly significant monetary contributions towards the sustainability of local film industries from residual or secondary copyright (on DVD sales, animations, TV broadcasting, and suchlike) must be taken into consideration. It is entirely plausible that deals could be struck whereby crew share in profits from runaway successes. In both cases – pay and secondary copyright – the landscape is changing rapidly. An assessment of the situation today is not sufficient to keep up with future possibilities.

Germany & USA: Pensions, Insurance…

Looking outside New Zealand, one might consider the contribution that mutual understanding within the internal diversity of a country can make to reduction of conflict worldwide. A presentation addressing diversity at UNI-MEI considers such enormous questions and relates them to industrial concerns in the form of labour diversity. Systems that support any labour market must reflect the reality of that market; and I think the point being made here is that changes in our societies often affect our industries in ways that are not taken into account fully or quickly enough.

The way in which workers are employed in film industries is unusual when compared with other industries, and as such requires solutions different in many cases to those applied to other industries.

Good news comes in the form of creative ideas benefiting film workers in other countries. The USA pension fund for film workers is supported by contributions from Intellectual Property / Copyright revenues. Regardless of the fact that American film workers are employees and most in Asia-Pacific are freelance, this is a revenue stream that can be tapped to benefit those who contributed to the creation of the original products.

A German insurance system designed to assist workers in artistic fields is a model of significant increase in success over time. Three parties finance the insurance that provides health, nursing, and pension assistance for workers in artistic fields: 1/ the state, 2/ employers (anyone employing anyone else for artistic work – typically publishers, broadcasters, museums, production companies, galleries, agents…) and 3/ workers (musicians, journalists, actors, film workers…).

The state contribution is seen as covering transactions where no employer exists, as in the case of a direct sale of a painting to a customer. This state contribution reduces the employer cost from 50% to 30%, helping to negate arguments from aggrieved employers lobbying to abolish the scheme. The upshot is a workable scheme that started small and has grown exponentially, providing insurance for those vulnerable workers in industries that are by their nature unstable.

The Malaysian Experience

With the review of the NZ Film Commission coming up, it seems timely to relate a situation involving a Malaysian Film Fund. The $US 5m fund is intended to assist film projects that get into trouble. Sounds reasonable. Unfortunately, the Malaysian experience is that of an unhealthy laissez-faire culture created by the security of knowing that when in trouble someone will bail you out. It's not something you might initially expect as a result of such a fund, but something that an industry considering long-term strategies for funding should perhaps be wary of.

The Malaysian experience presents another conundrum that I personally feel is relevant in New Zealand, and may well pose a growing problem if we do not bear it in mind.

Malaysia is a country of diverse cultures (the dominant three being Malay, Chinese, and Indian sub-continental) and equally diverse film audiences. Consequently film makers often divide down cultural lines. The identification of a Malaysian culture not entirely derived from outside (‘Bollywood in Malaysia’) is problematic, I would suggest, in a similar way to the identification of Kiwi culture as reflecting our indigenous culture and separate from English or American. The Malaysian Government has mandated a ‘One Malaysia’ approach to identity that doesn’t sit well with Malay filmmakers and is probably not the solution. As we reconsider the role of our Film Commission, we surely must consider the role of our films in our country and culture.

The fact that our membership is composed of crew ‘below the line’ doesn’t preclude a valuable contribution to such dialogue; and for those crew who define value in their jobs as contributing to local cinema, and thereby to local culture, it surely is essential.

Seeing Sights

On the last afternoon, it was clear that our time together had been far too short. As a final treat, we were piled onto a wildly decorated bus to visit a film studio outside Seoul. I don't know what it is about PAs on buses, but the brief introductory commentary was delivered with heavy reverb, totally deadpan – inevitably eliciting fruitless calls for a musical number from our host.

The long trip out saw many catch up on lost sleep, while the rest of us talked quietly or gazed out at the strange and intriguingly juxtaposed sights of Seoul. We relished a couple of hours roaming about 'Movie World' together, peering, chattering and – caught up with enthusiasm and unintentionally straggling – frustrating our immaculate hostess.

Glimpses into the history of Asian cinema were fascinating and full of compelling stories from behind the camera as well as in front. Movie World's highlights, though, have to be the full-scale ancient Korean village set built into the hillside (giant wasps notwithstanding), and the reconstruction of the Korean North-South border, complete with an imposing Eastern Bloc building and a colourful Pagoda bisected by austere meeting rooms straddling a 'borderline' painted on the ground.

The (even longer) trip back into Seoul left a small nucleus of hardened delegates roaming inner Seoul for a precious last few hours together. I at last found my dragon souvenir (phew!), and the night ended in semi-hysterical laughter as we headed off to sleep, trying not to think about saying goodbye.

Camaraderie

Aside from the food-for-thought UNI-MEI provided, I maintain great affection for the people I met there. Despite having only three incredibly busy days plus departure morning in which to get to know one another, and language barriers aside, a warmth and camaraderie prevailed at the conference.

In such an atmosphere, it was impossible not to grow fond of the company of the group. Breaks for refreshments and two dinner events were valuable opportunities to snatch moments of laughter and conversation. People's characters became rapidly evident, and it wasn't long before jokes leavened the formal daily meetings. Good humour and approachability characterised absolutely everyone at UNI-MEI, including the 'Big-Wigs'.

The brusque distance often cultivated by those high up in large international organisations was entirely and remarkably absent here. Catching a quick chat with Johannes Studinger, the incoming President of UNI-MEI, I suggested that I might contact his Brussels office for some information. His disarming reply was to get in touch with him directly. I believe this accessibility to be laudable and entirely genuine.

I am extremely grateful to UNI-MEI for enabling us to be represented at this conference, and equally grateful to our self-effacing, eloquent, and gracious Korean hosts. It's hard to believe that these same Korean counterparts were in the throes of a sometimes brutal industrial struggle. I know they are grateful to have UNI-MEI backing them in their campaigns. Over the conference, I came to appreciate just how well-connected and influential UNI-MEI is on the world stage.

To me, it follows that the potential benefits from a future association with UNI-MEI are likely to be many and wide-ranging; and therefore worth seriously considering.

In conclusion, and to play Devil's Advocate, I'd like to remind you: The World is run by people who turn up – and speak up. By inference, if you don't turn / speak up, The World (and your industry) will be run by someone else…

[1] The 2009 Asia-Pacific Film Workers Conference was sponsored by UNI-MEI, with contributions from a handful of Korean government and union groups, including the Federation of Korean Movie Workers’ Union.

[2] UNI: Union Network International. “UNI Global Union provides a voice and a platform for workers at the international level, in jobs ranging from the night janitor in your office block to the big-time Hollywood director of your favourite movie.”

[3] IATSE: International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Moving Picture Technicians, Artists and Allied Crafts of the United States, Its Territories, and Canada.

[4] BECTU: Broadcasting Entertainment Cinematograph and Theatre Union - for those working in broadcasting, film, theatre, entertainment, leisure, interactive media, and allied areas.

[5] MEAA: Media Entertainment Arts Alliance.

[6] See issues of NZTECHO from March and May 2006 for articles on cinematographer Haskell Wexler's documentary, a passionate cry for change in the film industry. DVDs available from www.WhoNeedsSleep.net.