IATSE-2nd2018_web

With reference to the theatrical unions and their effect
upon production, I believe that certain producers and
managers took unfair advantages of their employees
and were directly responsible for the existence of these
unions today,
For many years, the belief persisted that theatrical unions were
mostly responsible for the decline of the legitimate stage. Authors,
producers, and theater owners alike scapegoated stagehands,
musicians, and even actors for the high cost of producing shows.
Yet the reality was that producers and owners were all too
willing to share their losses, but never their profits, as Alliance
leaders knew very well. And as another leader of the League
of New York Theatres, George Abbott, stated, “I cannot say
that I know of any instance in which union trouble caused the
abandonment of a play.”
What they refused to acknowledge was that the shows
failed for one reason: the plays themselves were simply not
good enough. As the actress Lynne Fontane said, “We have read
scripts by the hundreds ... but the vast majority had neither
writing nor story value to commend them. They were so bad
that you couldn’t chain your thoughts to them, no matter how
hard you tried ... ‘Author! Author!’ is the vital cry.”
As conditions grew worse, it inflamed tensions among the
various theatrical unions — the Alliance, the Musicians, the
Dramatists and the Actors. This played into the hands of the
producers, making it even easier to blame organized labor for
everything that went wrong. The Alliance was entering a period of
great struggle in New York — but things were just as challenging
out West.
21