By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom on 18 October 2022
Edit Thread
sc94597 said:
JWeinCom said:

No.

Relative to means correlated with. And those things are indeed correlated. The more value they perceive, the higher a fair price should be and vice versa. And it's hard to argue that's not the case. Unless you'd like to argue that perceived value of the service doesn't have anything to do with what a fair price should be. I would assume you wouldn't want to argue that because it would be pretty stupid, but you can surprise me if you want. 

But that doesn't mean the perceived value of the service to the employer is the only factor correlated with fairness, and it should have been pretty clear from the post that wasn't even in the ballpark of what I meant. If it wasn't, now it is.

You said, "Sounds like they just really did not want her to work, but would be willing to change their minds if she was able to do it much cheaper than a voice actress they think was more valuable. If that's the case, I don't really fault them."

Is the bolded an ethical and fair mechanism of employing people in your opinion, given that the other voice actress is covered by a union that has negotiated minimums equivalent to the raised offers? You seemed to think is fine when you say, "If that's the case, I don't really fault them." But I don't know, it might be stupid of me to assume. 

Yes. If I think you're worth more I pay you more. Josh Allen makes more money than Sam Darnold. Seems pretty fair.

https://twitter.com/hellenataylor

Here is Ms. Taylor's Twitter. You will notice that on the page it says Actor, Director, Writer, Filmmaker & Barge Owner. Trained at LAMDA, Equity, SAG/AFTRA, US work visa & EU.papers

So yes, really stupid of you to suggest that I'm ok with them offering a non-union actor a lower rate to avoid paying the union minimum when they are in fact both in the union. 

And... you just said that unions don't matter because she's British and they're Japanese. So, you're arguing that unions are relevant and not at the same time. And that's not even how it works. SAG members are obligated to refuse non-union jobs anywhere in the world, which in turn means that Platinum has to abide by SAG terms if the want to use any SAG actors, which apparently they do. 

You're just pulling shit out of your ass, which reminds me of who you are and why I decided not to waste time on you, so I'll go back to doing that. Thanks for the reminder. You can respond to this if you like, but after that, do not quote or engage me pleaseandthankyou.

Last edited by JWeinCom - on 18 October 2022