I recently attended an open meeting arranged by the CGGB and PACT. One of the topics heavily promoted and discussed was training in the industry. The overwhelming aspect that struck me, listening to the presentations and discussions, was an apparent lack of real technical experience of the industry by those on committees organising the training schemes. This forced me to wonder at the motives behind the fund raising and levies they are promoting in the name of training. Who really benefits? How much goes in administration and furthering the careers of the organisers? A handout sheet at this meeting showed accounts of an extraordinary amount of money spent on training but no breakdown.
Don't get me wrong, I acknowledge that it has to be organised and I actively encourage training from my own narrow Production Sound Mixer's perspective. I will always welcome trainees to the Sound Crew and happily spend the time of day passing on any experience or skill I might possess.
I hope it benefits those who are forced to listen! I do this because I remember being a trainee myself over 30 years ago. I particularly remember the frustration I felt at the 'old men' of my time who treated trainees with suspicion and a threat to their livelihoods and were thus reluctant to pass on their 'secrets' in case they lost their perceived advantage. I am determined not to be one of those! Like many of my contemporaries, I have, in recent years, experienced long periods of under employment. When I do work on a production and a new trainee turns up on the job, of course it forces me to think about my future. The good trainee is bright and inquisitive - was I once like that? The thought of new competition is uncomfortable since I still have a home and family to support and quite a few years yet before I can claim on my personal pension plan. But where do I go from here?
A member of the audience at the meeting brought up the subject of 'ageism'. We have all heard the stories of technicians being rejected for a job because they were too experienced! I try to put myself in the position of the person making this rejection and wonder. Why is my experience a threat to them? Why not use my experience to make the production better? Is it just another way of saying I am too old? A simplistic and maybe cynical analysis might suggest that the younger and less experienced technician is happier to accept poorer conditions of work, lower rates of pay, and will have the energy to work the excessive hours now demanded by productions. Even the use of the word 'excessive' puts me in a category of technician who knows things should be better! As my own list of credits gets longer, it also becomes more outdated. Maybe this suggests I am 'past it'. I am tempted to shorten the list to the most recent years, but these years have not necessarily been my best. A problem.
A couple of years ago, I was approached by a friend at the National Film School to help place a sound trainee on a production on which I was working at Pinewood. It is well understood by those running the Film School that only 'hands-on' experience will eventually qualify those people they train. But I remember the incredulity I felt when my request to the Production Office was turned down, not because it would add to the payroll (the trainee was 'free') but that it would be another person to feed and transport! Times are really hard.
On the Production Sound Crew, I need an experienced Boom Operator, whose skill is so often underestimated by people who should know better. Anyone who has had the misfortune to work with an incompetent one knows what effect that can have on sound quality, camera and actors. In the real world of professional film making, this is not a job for a trainee or the inexperienced. However, my Boom Operator can train someone with a bit of talent, and similarly I can teach someone the skill of being a Sound Mixer, given time. If training is to be taken seriously, the third man or Sound Assistant on the Sound Crew is a vital investment in the future. This is not to suggest that the Assistant should be a trainee but that a trainee needs a suitable grade to which to progress.
Recently, there was a reference to my young assistant just being the Sound Department 'tea boy' and, I must admit, I snapped! The tea was not the issue but the lack of acknowledgement of the importance of experience on the job. Theory study and student films at college are great ways to learn the basic skills and technology, but only a long period spent on the professional floor will make a good film technician. It is the relationship between the departments, the 'tricks of the trade', the politics, working under pressure and the sheer endurance that cannot be taught elsewhere. I like to think I am still learning!
I have to fight for a Sound Assistant nearly every production these days. I am asked if I really need one and then told that there is no money in the budget for it. I argue that a good assistant can actually save money. By helping to make that 'impossible' shot work for sound through a pair of dedicated hands to operate another microphone, we can improve the quality and reduce visits to the post-sync theatre. Or by having someone available to go off and record specific sound effects, often expensive and hard to reproduce in post-production. But if I promote the training aspect, I don't believe I get the same attention.
Perhaps what we need is less in the way of training committees but a more direct appeal to Production Executives to maintain the Assistant grades, and to even offer them some financial incentive to engage trainees. Perhaps take on a prescribed number of trainees and avoid the training levies, and that way, all the money goes directly to trainees. Perhaps the recently announced new tax breaks should have been linked to the Production taking on trainees, in a similar manner to the Irish Film Industry. I understand the difficulties companies have to find the finance for their projects, and that they want to put it all on the screen now, but it's the future of our industry that is at stake. Productions have benefited from previous generations of trainees - it is time to repay the debt. Just a thought.
SANDY MACRAE