> But there's nothing wrong with companies being allowed to get away
> with offering less than the best terms to designers and artists.
"Less than the best" is a tad euphemistic when describing a contract such
as what Jill turned down, dontcha think?
> Union workers are a pain and I understand why companies are training
> their own workers in third-world countries to avoid having to deal with
In terms of companies that offer full-time, salaried positions with
benefits, etc., yeah I basically agree that unions are unnecessary. But in
the creative industry it's a different situation. I have several family
members in the business, and unions provide them what the studios don't. I
mean, when shooting for a film wraps, it's over. You don't show up for work
the next day and say, "So what are we doing today?" You gotta find another
job. In between all thise, the unions provide them with health insurance
and other benefits. And maybe unions have increased production costs, but
it's nothing compared to the money the people "above the line" make.
I didn't find much to disagree with your comments. But I still believe
that if you're doing a lot of contract work where the other party is
writing the contracts and you're either accepting or rejecting them, you
should get an agent.