Issue link: https://digital.copcomm.com/i/1525020
think I will ever forget the feeling of that moment. It will remain pretty high on my list. Of course, the goal going into the day was to get additional staffing in our department. The AMPTP came back with "at this time, we will not add any mandatory staffing." Every local heard this same response when they asked for more staffing. Did I think I was going to come in here and get this decision in one round? While some heavyweight bouts have been decided in the first round, I knew this one had a better chance at going the distance. However, they did agree to add the term "Video" to Paragraph 56. Paragraph 56 is a provision in the Local 695 agreement that concerns additional staffing when conditions grow beyond the scope of one person. Previously, this paragraph only made mention of "Soundpersons." But with these negotiations, it has now been revised to read, "If production or equipment requirements create a condition whereby an abnormal demand is placed upon the sound or video crews, such condition shall be relieved by the addition of soundpersons or videopersons to the crew until such condition ceases to exist." This is an important resource that clearly states, when production expectations and demands are too high or unsafe for the current staffed position, they must remedy this by adding additional members to the crew. By adding "Videopersons" in this paragraph, this means that if production is refusing to add staffing after it has been requested because of concerns over safety or excessive workload, they are violating the contract. This will make it much easier for the Local to enforce the request and need for additional staffing. Like the long journey over the proper staffing of Non-Record Video-Assist, this too will take time to implement. The goal is for producers to add additional staffing to the budget prior to having to use Paragraph 56. During the pandemic, we were able to showcase our value to production. We broke out all the bells and whistles. They could not have done it without us. This worked in our favor at that time, especially with the producers federally funded COVID budgets which allowed us proper staffing for maybe the first time in the history of Video- Assist. We are now faced with the challenge of providing all Josh Levy monitoring Playback on set those services, often as a solo act, as we have all been told that funding has now expired. Fear not, as we are a resilient bunch and there is no way the membership or leadership is willing to wave the white flag on this matter. This will, like Non-Record Video-Assist, become a collaborative process between the members and the leadership. I really feel together with constant communication, new resources like Paragraph 56 and other strategies that are on the table, we will be victorious. The next negotiation will be here before we know it, as time flies by like the landscape out the window of a moving train. EVERY Video Operator has had my last Monday. Too many of them. We deserve to be staffed properly like all other departments. We deserve safety, health, and longevity. The day should start without being overwhelmed, faced alone with so many various tasks to perform. So, after all of this, you might ask, "Do you want to go back in to that big room with the AMPTP again? Sit face-to-face across the table and continue to fight for what is right and what is fair?" And my answer to you would be, "How could I not?" Thanks, that's a wrap! "Josh has been instrumental in protecting our Video Assist jurisdiction. In my mind, it was a no brainer to ask him to be a part of our Local bargaining committee. When he asked me what I wanted him to say, I replied, "You're the subject matter expert. Tell them what your needs are. He owned the moment and his presentation landed. We should all be grateful for the work he has done and continues to do for our Local." – Scott Bernard