Montreal: Production representatives of the Hollywood studios in Canada say they could boycott Quebec as a location if they are obliged to work under conditions set out in collective agreements signed by the Quebec producers association, the APFTQ.

The threat has raised alarm bells in the Montreal service sector.

The issue centers on a dispute between Canadian representatives of the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers – which represents the production interests of the U.S. studios – and the APFTQ. It appears to be as much about power and control as substance, since virtually all the U.S. productions shot in Quebec are already produced under collective agreements signed by the APFTQ, film technicians in the STCVQ, performers in ACTRA and others.

The issue came to a head because APFTQ is in the process of applying to a Quebec administrative tribunal to become the exclusive representative of film and TV producers in Quebec. If APFTQ is certified by the Commission de reconnaissance des associations d’artistes et des associations de producteurs, then all film and TV producers shooting in Quebec would be required by law to shoot under the minimum conditions set out in collective agreements negotiated by the APFTQ. (The commission was established under the Quebec Act Respecting the Professional Status and Conditions of Engagement of Performing, Recording and Film Artists, which sets out minimum working conditions for artists.)

A Montreal executive delegation discussed the issue with producers in Los Angeles in mid-November, and there are unconfirmed reports that no less than three Quebec government departments have asked for meetings with various players this week.

Michael Prupas, president of Muse Entertainment Enterprises, which has serviced productions on behalf of DreamWorks and the American TV networks and their suppliers, says the current conflict is a ‘classic case of failure to communicate.’

APFTQ representatives told Playback they have not had any communication with AMPTP’s Vancouver-based VP representative Don Cott. APFTQ hasn’t called Cott’s office, and he hasn’t called theirs, they say. Cott did not return calls from Playback.

There is additional evidence that a lack of understanding is the problem.

The representatives of the U.S. affiliates have filed documents, according to APFTQ, and have made declarations, reported by the local papers, stating that APFTQ jurisdiction should be limited to ‘French’ production, thus seemingly lumping ‘English’ productions with ‘service’ productions.

APFTQ says half of its member companies either shoot exclusively English, or in both English and French.

‘We need some level heads to prevail here,’ says Prupas.

Foreign service production hit a record $368 million last year and this year’s total is expected to be in the same range. The City of Montreal says the full value of U.S. production here, including spinoff benefits, is more than $1 billion annually.

On Nov. 5, the Canadian affiliates of Sony, Paramount, Touchstone and MGM, filed a motion in Quebec Superior Court asking the court to overturn a decision by the Commission de reconnaissance that denied their participation in recent hearings on the APFTQ application. The studios, through a local lawyer, showed up on the final day of the now-completed hearings, and were told their request had been filed too late.

The initial phase of the hearings was completed last month, but if the court rules in favor of the four studio affiliates, the hearings may reopen.

Film technicians in STCVQ have also come out in opposition to exclusive representation status for the producers associations. Patrice Houx, STCVQ president, says the real problem is the APFTQ’s absolute desire to control all production, including U.S. production.

‘The problem is [U.S. producers] have to go through APFTQ to be able to talk to us. We can no longer talk with American producers,’ Houx says. ‘We are ready, if we sign an agreement with an American production, to file it with the APFTQ, and they can use it if they want.’

One primary objection raised by both AMPTP and STCVQ is that they wish to retain the right to negotiate directly, and not through the APFTQ. However, what makes the issue even less clear is that U.S. producers shooting on location in Montreal do not pay minimum rates as established in the APFTQ-STCVQ convention. Rather, they negotiate with the STCVQ – at higher than minimum rates for each individual position.

Technicians and performers are eager to work on U.S. studio shoots – because they pay more than local productions. Approximately 46% of STCVQ salary mass this year is from U.S. productions.

Houx says no one works at minimum collective agreement rates, and unworkable or outdated conditions written in the agreement, such as extended rest time rules, are subject to modification and ‘give and take’ negotiations, he says.

‘This is a question of equity and respect for the whole industry,’ says Claire Samson, APFTQ president and CEO. Samson says it would be prejudicial against Quebec producers if different norms applied to foreign productions, particularly when domestic production makes up 70% of film and TV production.

APFTQ says that up to the present time, most American producers have had no problem using the collective agreements negotiated by the APFTQ. The producers say the administrative tribunal process only formalizes a situation which has prevailed for years.

If the Quebec Commission certifies APFTQ as the exclusive representative of producers in Quebec, the producers say the studios will still be allowed to bypass administrative fee payments to APFTQ. The fees would instead be paid to STCVQ, ACTRA, DGC and other contracted parties. In practice, the ACTRA 4% rule (against salaries) makes that option prohibitive. The formal difference (following APFTQ certification) is that U.S. producers would be obliged to operate under the minimum pay rates and conditions as set in the collective agreements negotiated by the APFTQ.