LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for TYPO-L Archives


TYPO-L Archives

TYPO-L Archives


View:

Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font

Options:

Join or Leave TYPO-L
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives


Subject: Re: Work for Hire--clarification
From: llion <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:TYPO-L Discussion of Type and Typographic Design <[log in to unmask]>
Date:Mon, 24 Aug 1998 02:47:42 -0500
Content-Type:text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
Parts/Attachments

text/plain (48 lines)


I should clarify that I mean no disrespect to all unions,  for instance
the writer's unions,  the Graphic Artists' Guild,  etc.  -- I meant to
refer specifically to those unions which have gotten so drunk on
worker's "rights" that they now dictate ridiculous conditions to their
employers.

I realize I didn't make this clear.  I was thinking specifically of
certain industrial unions, where conditions really have gotten out of
hand.

Supply and demand is a delicate creature:  the Graphic Artists' Guild
helps maintain balance by doing what it can to keep employers from
becoming too powerful over their employees and freelancers.  The unions
I view as destructive are those that have tampered with and upset the
balance in the other direction.

Those who understand and can work with the laws of supply and demand can
not only become rich,  but can contribute meaningfully in a profitable
way.  Those who cannot or will not accept the notion end up demanding to
be paid based on what they want,  rather than what they are worth.  If
you've got something to offer that a million other people can't just as
easily supply for less money,  and you know how to market yourself,  why
get all bent out of shape just because not everyone understands a good
value?

Of course attitude affects a lot too.  Characterizing all clients as
thieves who will steal your work,  etc.  makes about as much sense as
employers characterizing all employees as thieves who will steal from
the office,  embezzle and steal inventory.  Understanding both points of
view would probably net you a good deal more profit than those grudges
some of you carry.

As far as Disney,  if everyone quit trying to focus on changing them,
they could do like creatives did in the comic book industry when they
quit DC en masse to form their own comic book company.  Last I heard
DC is faltering and the independents are snapping up the market share
all over the place.  I understand film requires more funding.  I also
understand that Disney is a universally unpopular company,  even with
consumers who buy their product for lack of anything better on the
shelves.  They have a bad reputation for greedy business practices,
they're arrogant -- when they learned the Southern Baptists were
boycotting them,  they issued a snotty statement about how the Southern
Baptists need Disney more than Disney needs Southern Baptists -- and
they mangle the stories they try to tell:  the only thing they have
is gorgeous animation.  So why does all that great talent desire to work
for Disney anyway?

LL

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main TYPO-L Page

Permalink



LISTSERV.HEANET.IE

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager