http://btlnews.com/blog/archives/99 A BTL weblog. Fri, 21 Nov 2008 09:21:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 http://btlnews.com/blog/archives/99#comment-640 BP Mon, 17 Dec 2007 23:45:34 +0000 http://btlnews.com/blog/archives/99#comment-640 The pension trust document at the MPIPHP website looks like something that has been translated to English from French from the original Chinese. The word Residuals is in the document twice. Once in the table of contents and as a heading for a section about contributions from Receipts that is full of ambiguity about what a receipt is, what gets contributed and just what percentage of what they're talking about. Despite the word Residual being used, it doesn't look like anything I've seen like the documentation SAG provided me with regarding what they consider residuals in our contract. Also, it's not broken down on my husbands' or my MPIPHP statement every year. It shows hourly, investment and some other minimums contribution but nothing about residuals or receipt sharing. He's a shop guy so he doesn't work on individual shows per se so maybe this makes a difference. Back in 2001 they did list the pre-60's receipts with an amount of $0.00 even though he had a qualified year. Is this less clear than mud for anyone and what's a good source to find the real data? The pension trust document at the MPIPHP website looks like something that has been translated to English from French from the original Chinese. The word Residuals is in the document twice. Once in the table of contents and as a heading for a section about contributions from Receipts that is full of ambiguity about what a receipt is, what gets contributed and just what percentage of what they’re talking about. Despite the word Residual being used, it doesn’t look like anything I’ve seen like the documentation SAG provided me with regarding what they consider residuals in our contract. Also, it’s not broken down on my husbands’ or my MPIPHP statement every year. It shows hourly, investment and some other minimums contribution but nothing about residuals or receipt sharing. He’s a shop guy so he doesn’t work on individual shows per se so maybe this makes a difference. Back in 2001 they did list the pre-60’s receipts with an amount of $0.00 even though he had a qualified year. Is this less clear than mud for anyone and what’s a good source to find the real data?

]]> http://btlnews.com/blog/archives/99#comment-638 Craig Miller Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:37:45 +0000 http://btlnews.com/blog/archives/99#comment-638 The unnamed angry cinematographer is misinformed. That cinematographer is the one confusing apples with oranges. Individual members participation in the health and pension plan are based on the hours that member works. But the companies pay money into the plans based on the same residuals structures they use to pay the writers, actors, and directors. An episode reruns and money goes into the health plan and into the pension plan. Individual member contributions (paid by the employers) aren't sufficient to cover the costs. It's residuals payments that make up over half the money that funds the plans. The "set number of hours" determines if an individual member is currently eligible. The unnamed angry cinematographer is misinformed. That cinematographer is the one confusing apples with oranges. Individual members participation in the health and pension plan are based on the hours that member works. But the companies pay money into the plans based on the same residuals structures they use to pay the writers, actors, and directors. An episode reruns and money goes into the health plan and into the pension plan. Individual member contributions (paid by the employers) aren’t sufficient to cover the costs. It’s residuals payments that make up over half the money that funds the plans. The “set number of hours” determines if an individual member is currently eligible.

]]>