Cinema Canada (Apr 1976)

ROUGH CUT by Robert Rouveroy C.S.C. Leader With considerable backing from my (more or less) devoted readers, I will attempt to bite the hand that feeds me, or at least gum it a little. Such endeavors have their obvious drawbacks for a freelancer and I must admit that I am more than apprehensive when I. tell you which target I have selected this time. It all began when I was completing a small assignment for a CBC production. I ran into Maurice French, the very able head of the CBC Film Services, and asked him if and when the CBC would review the fees and remunerations for freelancers. He replied that changes would be underway in the foreseeable future but that he did not know how much or what these changes would be. He expressed surprise that I was questioning these matters and informed me that he had not heard any other cameraman complain about them. I told him that maybe the other cameramen might have been afraid to bring these matters up, but Mr. French replied that it would be unthinkable that any cameraman could be penalized for expressing such views. This is of course good news, even if it does not particularly affect my position vis-a-vis the CBC film department. You see, since 1969 I have not had one call for freelance services from said department. The very few days a year I scrounge from the CBC come directly from producers who insist on my services when the Film Department has no staff cameramen available. Anyway, it is a pity that Mr. French seems to be unaware of the feelings of the freelance cameramen in regard to the rate structure at the CBC. Therefore I’d like to refresh his memory on a brief, presented to the CRTC on February 4, 1974 by the Canadian Society of Cinematographers. Copies were made available to CBC management, and presumably some copies trickled down to the Film Services. As is wont with such briefs, it disappeared totally within the maw of bureaucracy, never to be heard of Toronto’s “gimmick man”, Robert Rouveroy C. S.C. is president of Robert Rouveroy Films Ltd. and shares ownership in Cinimage. : 18 / Cinema Canada again. However, a few excerpts, updated, might be of interest. It starts off, thusly: ‘Declaring the urgent need for a mandate directing the CBC Film Service to consider Quality as the prime requisite in CBC film production and Outlining unfair policies and practices carried out by the management of the Film Services at CBC Toronto, as a result of this lack of direction.”’ Sound up “.. the Corporation maintains staff personnel to provide for its projected minimum daily activities and uses freelance crews for its requirements above this level... an advantage of this arrangement is that a state of healthy competition should exist, between freelance film crews and those on staff, not simply in terms of how cheaply tilm can be made, but how well it can be produced. Unfortunately, in catering to those producers outside the Drama Department whose concern is with budget and journalistic content rather than visual quality, the CBC Film Service has created an atmosphere in which both staff and freelance cinematographers are forced to work in a way that may bring short term savings but inhibits the development of a better quality product, which in turn discourages the potential of film as a medium for television.”’ A-Track “ ~ CBC Engineering will not permit the substandard production of video tape in order to comply with the desires of a producer whose aspirations exceed his budget. Film Services regularly assigns work to a cinematographer with the charge: ‘Do the best you can with the limited time and facilities that this producer’s budget allows.’ This puts the cinematographer in the impossible position of having to shoot an individual sequence which might be acceptable to that producer but is not of that quality by which Engineering used to assure the long term development of its video work. “(There is) an indication that the CBC can produce better quality and this is evidenced by the technical excellence of the CBC filmed dramas. The signi ficance here is that the Drama Producers make it very clear to the Film Services that quality, rather than economy, is demanded in film provided for them.” B-Track “The freelancer has to invest fifteen to twenty-five thousand dollars in equipment to service the CBC.” (In 1976 these outlays exceed thirty thousand dollars for a modest equipment package, based, say, on an Arri BL and Arri S, a few lenses, tripods and other paraphernalia — R.R.) “In order to get film work from the CBC, a cameraman has to sign a letter of agreement wherein he takes the responsibility for hiring the crew, paying the crew, being liable for the quality of the work of his crew (which brings non-payment for unsatisfactory work), being liable for accidents and injury, absolving the CBC for such accidents and injury. Because of prevailing limited budgets, etc., freelance cameramen are denied assistants and electricians that normally would be in a crew. These categories are manned when internal CBC crews carry out similar work. “The freelance cameraman then has the work of three people and bears a heavy work load, making it often impossible to deliver a product that answers the letter of the agreement.” C-Track “Many cameramen have no Union representation and hence are rendered vulnerable.” (The I.A.T.S.E. union, local 644, has shown no interest in speaking to CBC management. The C.U.P.E. covers ‘staff cameramen and in fact does a damn good job protecting their interests, but they are not interested in covering the freelance field — R.R.) “Film Service management, aware of this vulnerability, have used a “‘take it or leave it’ attitude, even denying the independent the right to negotiate for reasonable working conditions and rates of pay. Any individual cameraman who has protested conditions is subsequently rarely called for work.” (This particular sentence is worded rather strongly. As I said at the