Will Peter Jackson get labeled a union buster on 'The Hobbit'?

I guess it tells us everything we need to know about the volatile state of labor relations in the entertainment business that long before "The Hobbit" has gone into production, or even received a greenlight, the much-heralded two-picture project has become the focus of a bitter dispute between the film's producer and expected director Peter Jackson and a host of actors guilds and international unions. They've thrown down the gauntlet, so to speak, stating that their members are "advised not to accept work on this non-union production."

In addition to inspiring reporters everywhere to begin their stories with phrases such as "All is not peaceful in the Shire," the unions' heaving of the gauntlet prompted an emotional response from Jackson, who blasted away in a statement at his tormentors, saying "I feel growing anger at the way this tiny minority is endangering a project that thousands of people have worked on over the past two years, and the thousands about to [be] employed over the next four years, [and] the hundreds of millions of dollars that is about to be spent in our economy." Jackson made it clear that if the unions don't back off, the big budget prequel to the "Lord of the Rings" saga will be moving to a region that is popular with Hollywood productions looking for a way to save lots of money. As Jackson put it: "There is a twisted logic to seeing NZ [New Zealand] humiliated on the world stage, by losing 'The Hobbit' to Eastern Europe."

I confess that, for once, I'm not sure who to side with in this dispute. Jackson has done more to raise the profile of New Zealand, and its filmmaking community, than anyone in recent history. He probably figures that he is being used as a whipping boy by the guilds, especially Australia's Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance union, which according to a very smart piece by Jonathan Handel, has not managed to unionize any productions in New Zealand, making that country, as Handel describes it, "a sore spot for actors unions across the English-speaking world. The unions allege that productions relocate to New Zealand specifically to avoid union terms."

Of course, Jackson is a native, so he has a different perspective. But at a time when showbiz conglomerates have been doing virtually everything in their power to marginalize unions all around the globe, it would be naive for Jackson to expect that a mammoth production such as "The Hobbit" wouldn't become a leverage point for union activists, especially when it comes to trying to establish better terms for actors and crewmembers. It certainly gives the "Hobbit" a black eye to learn, via the International Federation of Actors, that the nonunion contracts being offered to extras "provide no minimum guarantees of wages or working conditions, no payments for future broadcasts of the film and no cancellation payments."

And when it comes to looking like bully boys, no one can top New Line, Warner Bros. and MGM, the trio of studios involved with "The Hobbit," who have now released a statement that basically tells Australia's MEAA union to butt out of its business. The studios also raised the threat (whenever you read the phrase "we are exploring all alternative options in order to protect our business interests," you know it's a threat) of moving the movies to a country with a more docile labor environment.

Will cooler heads prevail? I'd like to think so. But I wouldn't be surprised, with studios showing less patience than ever with union demands and unions eager to pick a fight they might win, at least from a PR perspective, that "The Hobbit's" labor dispute is going to be a real humdinger. Jackson has every right to feel as if "we're being attacked simply because we are a big fat juicy target." But he shouldn't be surprised. His film is a target because showbiz unions have been getting their clocks cleaned by giant media companies in nearly every recent labor dispute. You might say, to use a phrase that's come back into the popular lexicon this year, the unions are mad and they aren't going to take it anymore.

Photo: Peter Jackson posing with the Oscar for best director at the 2004 Academy Awards. Credit: Jeff Haynes / AFP/Getty Images

Comments

[Honestrob]

Didn't hurt the "Star Wars" Prequels or George Lucas any, so I doubt it would hurt Peter Jackson or "The Hobbit".

Sadly, the Unions are, as usual, a step behind (New Zealand should have been unionized YEARS ago), and play catch up by making threats that are toothless.

Performers are slow to realize how much of a dinosaur our unions are in this new media world and seem destined to repeat their mistake of not learning from their mistakes of REACTING instead of ACTING first and forcing the producers to react.

my .02 - for what it's worth.

[Carl]

So the union is apparently telling actors, "Don't you dare join in on a project that doesn't yet have funding for production, doesn't have a green light, and, given the turmoil at MGM, might never be made if a buyer isn't found."???

I wouldn't be surprised if there were still some Hollywood noses bent out of shape over those 11 Oscar wins for Return of the King. How absolutely dare Peter Jackson do it so well (and so profitably), and outside of Hollywood! It sure says a lot about Hollywood, doesn't it?

The Rings Trilogy wasn't filmed under union contracts. No one pulled a hissy fit about those films! Why, all of a sudden, is Jackson being targeted? Is it the fact the previous films did very well financially? Is greed the underlying motive for this? Does everyone want a piece of the Hobbit pie?

[Alister]

.Honestrob - NZ WAS unionized... Unions got a bad name in NZ in the 70's with public transport coming to a halt every school holidays (to name just one dictatorial union tactic). This is still happening with teachers - on strike every other year near final exam time.
I don't particularly agree with the current NZ film industry tactic making ALL workers 'contractors' to the production, but do fear the stupid and illogical demands seen by some unions (especially Aussi unions).
PS: I've not been unionized for the last 20 years - which suits me.

[J. Thur]

Peter Jackson released the following statement in reaction to the seven unions that have told their members not to work for The Hobbit films in New Zealand. You can read what the unions sent to their members on Friday here.

Here is Peter Jackson's statement:

Statement regarding The Hobbit and claims by the Australian Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA):

The Australian Labour Union, the MEAA is using our production The Hobbit in an attempt to widen it's membership, and power within the New Zealand film industry. As a New Zealand filmmaker, who has nothing to hide or be ashamed about, I'm not going to see this threatening behaviour continue without some form of sensible discussion about the "facts" and "truth" behind their various allegations.

It's incredibly easy to wave the flag on behalf of workers and target the rich studios. It's not hard to generate an emotive response, nor is it hard to sway public opinion, since nobody seems to like the facts to get in the way of a good story in these situations.

Behind the claims of exploiting actors who are cast in the "non-Union" Hobbit production, and claims that various high-profile stars will refuse to take part in the films, there are clear agendas at work. As usual with these agendas, they are based on money and power.

I am not a lawyer, nor am I an expert in unions and how they operate - but I like to think I have a degree of common sense, and that's what I'm basing my observations on. Let me run over a few facts:

-- Personally speaking, I'm not anti-Union in the slightest. I'm a very proud and loyal member of three Hollywood Unions - the Directors Guild, the Producers Guild and the Writers Guild. I support the Screen Actors Guild (SAG). All these organisations (I must confess I'm not entirely sure what the difference is between a "Guild" and a "Union") do terrific work on behalf of their members.

-- Many Actors are members of SAG, but many are not -- especially younger actors and many Australian and New Zealand performers. MEAA claims we are "non-Union", but whenever we hire an actor who belongs to SAG, we always honour their working conditions, their minimum salary agreements and their residuals.

-- The SAG residuals is a small pot of money that comes from the movie's profits. The DGA and WGA have similar schemes. An agreed upon percentage of movie profits is placed in a pot, which is shared amongst the members of the guild who worked on the film in question. Despite MEAA claims that The Hobbit is "non-Union", our studio, Warner Brothers, is honouring these residuals, and making the profit sharing available to all the various Guild members - just as it did on The Lord of the Rings, and Universal did on King Kong.

-- These residuals can be worth tens of thousands of dollars to an individual if the film is successful - however the normal situation is that if an actor is not a member of SAG, they do not share in the profit pot.

-- This has always struck us as unfair, since most Kiwi actors are not lucky enough to be SAG members. For the Hobbit, Warner Brothers have agreed to create a separate pot of profit participation, which will be divided up amongst non-SAG actors who are cast in the film. This was not done because of any pressure from Guilds or Unions - it was actually Warners doing the decent thing, and New Zealand and Australian actors will be the principle beneficiaries. SAG members have their pot, and non-SAG members now have theirs. We have introduced the scheme to Kiwi agents and it's now part of all our Hobbit cast deals.

-- Whatever damage MEAA is attempting to do -- and it will do damage, since that's their principal objective in targeting The Hobbit - we will continue to treat our actors and crew with respect, as we always have.

-- As I said earlier, money and power lies behind this threatening behaviour from our Australian cousins, and to fully understand that, you simply have to step back and look at the greater picture in context.

-- It starts with "NZ Actors Equity". This is a tiny organisation that represents a small minority of New Zealand Actors. They are not a Union, and have none of the legal status of a Union. They are a ... well, a smallish group who have some New Zealand actors as members. How many actors are members of NZ Equity? They guard that information very closely, but various reports I've seen put their membership at 200, although somebody in the know swears it's nearer 100.

-- How many professional actors are there in New Zealand? Somewhere between 2000 and 4000, depending on just how you describe a "professional actor". Obviously most Kiwi actors have other employment too, but there's certainly over 2000 actors available to cast in a film production.

-- So taking the most generous numbers, NZ Actors Equity represents 200 out of 2000 Kiwi actors, or 10%. Perhaps I'm wrong, and if so, NZ Equity will no doubt reveal their real membership numbers.

- Now there's nothing wrong with NZ Actors Equity representing 10% of the actors in this country. It's great that they offer that service, and if an actor chooses, there's a supportive group they can join. Obviously the more actors that join NZ Equity, the better, since these organisations usually survive by taking a small percentage of their members acting fees. I'm guessing that Equity do something like that. Recently they have been part-funded by MEAA.

- Over the last 10 years our relationship with NZ Equity has been rocky -- whenever we cast an "overseas actor", we get a letter telling us why such and such Kiwi actor would be so much better in the role. In most cases we have already auditioned the actor in question, and formed our own opinions -- but what strikes me as unfair, is how this "helpful" service of suggesting better choices only includes the "Equity 200". If you happen to be a good actor who doesn't belong to NZ Equity (and many don't), you're automatically not good enough to be put forward.

-- What really does strike me as wrong, and this is my personal opinion, is the why that the MEAA is using NZ Actors Equity as a vehicle to represent the voices and opinions of New Zealand actors. A couple of years ago, the members of NZ Actors Equity voted to join some kind of alliance with the Australian MEAA group. At the time, there were voices of alarm at how this relationship could damage the interest of Kiwi Actors, but the merger went ahead - and now we're about to find out just how damaging it's going to be.

-- As far as I know, the membership of NZ Actors Equity was allowed into the MEAA, meaning that the Australian MEAA organisation represents 200 out of 2000 Kiwi actors. I don't believe it represents non-Equity NZ actors. It speaks on behalf of a tiny minority of our actors.

-- The management of NZ Equity are clearly happy to be used as a political football by the Australians -- but my sympathy goes to the 1800 New Zealand Actors who are not part of the "Equity 200", but who are going to suffer the fallout if this Hobbit thing goes nuclear.

-- I also feel a growing anger at the way this tiny minority is endangering a project that hundreds of people have worked on over the last two years, and the thousands about to be employed for the next 4 years. The hundreds of millions of Warner Brothers dollars that is about to be spent in our economy.

-- Why is this endangered? Because the "demands" of MEAA cannot be agreed to, or even considered - by law - and therefore the only options that remain involve closing the Hobbit down, or more likely shifting the production to Europe. It could so easily happen. I've been told that Disney are no longer bring movies to Australia because of their frustration with the MEAA.

-- The MEAA is demanding that the Hobbit production company (Warners owned, 3foot7 Ltd) enter into negotiations for a Union negotiated agreement covering all performers on the film.

-- I personally have a problem with any organisation who represent a small minority, but attempt to take control of everyone - but that's not the real issue. The complex web of NZ labour laws are the reason why this demand will never be agreed to.

-- NZ law prohibits engaging in collective bargaining with any labour organisation representing performers who are independent contractors, as film actors clearly are. The NZ Commerce Act claims it would be unlawful to engage with an Australian Union on these matters.

In closing:

My personal opinion is that this is a grab for power. It does not represent a problem that needs a solution. There will always be differing opinions when it comes down to work and conditions, but I have always attempted to treat my actors and crew with fairness and respect. We have created a very favourable profit sharing pool for the non-Union actors on The Hobbit -- and now the Union is targeting us, despite the fact that we have always respected SAG conditions and residuals.

I can't see beyond the ugly spectre of an Australian bully-boy, using what he perceives as his weak Kiwi cousins to gain a foothold in this country's film industry. They want greater membership, since they get to increase their bank balance.

The conspiracy theories are numerous, so take your pick: We have done better in recent years, with attracting overseas movies -- and the Australians would like a greater slice of the pie, which begins with them using The Hobbit to gain control of our film industry. There is a twisted logic to seeing NZ humiliated on the world stage, by losing the Hobbit to Eastern Europe. Warners would take a financial hit that would cause other studios to steer clear of New Zealand.

-- Seriously, if the Hobbit goes east (Eastern Europe in fact) -- look forward to a long dry big budget movie drought in this country.

-- Others gain from that too. SAG would much rather have it's members hired on movies -- as opposed to non-SAG actors. The easiest way to control that, is to stem what are called "runaway productions", which are American funded films made outside of America. The Hobbit is one of them, as was King Kong and LOTR. SAG, which is naturally supporting MEAA, would see it's own benefit in studios having a miserable experience in Australia/New Zealand. That may well be pushing the conspiracy theories one step too far, and it's perfectly natural that one Union would support another - but the point is that in the complex web of Hollywood intrigue, you never really know who's doing what to whom and why.

But it sure feels like we are being attacked simply because we are a big fat juicy target - not for any wrong doing. We haven't even been greenlit yet! It feels as if we have a large Aussie cousin kicking sand in our eyes ... or to put it another way, opportunists exploiting our film for their own political gain.

Peter Jackson

[bda616]

Cue the union bashers in 3... 2....

Aw, too late.

Note to Times reporters: if you want to get a lot of comments on articles, mention the word "union" and you're guaranteed to get a bakers dozen just seconds after you hit the send button. If you're not bothered by spelling mistakes, all CAPS and random exclamation points, all the better.

[lee]

If the Hobbit film project is unionized, it will double the movie's costs. Not only will every performer have to be paid union fees (right now only actors who belong to another country's union), but also every crew member will be paid outrageous amounts. For example, in the states, a producer or director or anyone wants to move a film camera they can't because there's a guy who gets paid 100k to move it, and that's all he does! That's his only responsability! movie a camera for more than most people make! And this is just one person out of hundreds involved. The first two Lord of the Rings movies each cost 90 mill and the third one 130 mill. If the Hobbit movies are forced to be union projects they will each cost more than 250 mill! It becomes cost prohibitive at that point, and productions are forced to rewrite the script so as to keep costs barely conceivable to fund. Unions, stay out of the Hobbit's way; in fact, stay out of everyone's way or suffer the consequences.

[Steve]

The legions of Tolkien fans who will ultimately decide if this movie is a success or not will accept nothing less then Middle Earth in the same place the LOTR was filmed.This movie has the potential to make a billion dollars. Are the studios that greedy as to not pay union scale?

[Donovan]

I am pro union, in most cases. But what you have here is a very small "foreign" union (MEAA is from Australia and has very few members in New Zealand, like <100) that is, by most accounts, meddling with a NZ issue. If this film gets moved from NZ, there will be more angry people (1000's more, including those precious "extras" they are talking about) than if the movie stays. Weigh that one out: principle vs. reality.

[Hank]

Unions are no longer needed. There are Federal laws in place to protect workers,including fair wages, equal treatment, and other labor issues in all developed countries.
Dismantling labor unions, and their socialist agenda would bring movie making back to the US.
Unions are a creaking dinosaur, and

[David]

Sir Peter Jackson says, "There is a twisted logic to seeing NZ [New Zealand] humiliated on the world stage, by losing 'The Hobbit' to Eastern Europe."

The above quote doesn't sound like the Jackson who in 2003 fought a loosing battle all the way to the New Zealand Supreme Court to prevent a model maker working on the Lord Of The Rings Trilogy from obtaining the legal status and accompanying rights of an employee.

The case, Bryson v Three Foot Six Limited established principles the courts here in New Zealand continue to apply. Having won his case I wonder what fallout Bryson encountered for having taken on the company. Perhaps some one can tell us. In any event it appears the fallout for taking on Jackson this time may be substantial.

Jackson seems to be saying that fighting him is not worth the cost to New Zealand. He is wrong. He is wrong because any self respecting artist or artisan simply has no other choice but to stand his or her ground and demand fair treatment. Seems that not all "extras" in New Zealand are Mexicans with cellphones. Some of them have lawyers.

Good on ya.