ceecrb1 Posted August 20, 2009 Author Share Posted August 20, 2009 Also, did the client get the sound tech to leave site? if not and he kept him there to operate the event (with different mics) then its a bit unfair to then not pay him at least part of his money. If the client had decided not to pay him, then he should have told him and sent him packing and dealt with it, tbh sounds a little unfair on the tech who is being paid less than half of what my techs expect for the day. Personally I would probably offer the tech 50%, find out what the problem was and take steps so its not repeated. Yeah this was my initial thought and reason for opening the thread.... The long and short is even for the hours, the tech should need compensated in some way or form.. even if just to cover petrol and food for the day.... Unfortuntaly here in valencia the going rate is 100-150 EUROS a day.. no matter what the job or the skill level necessary..ITs for this reason that in this city.. the ability level of techs (in general) is extremely low... If clients dont pay the people who are more capable extra cash... why bother to learn something when you can just fudge it and get the same cash!? It really screws the good techs like myself over.. we cant charge more/what we should be cause we dont get work.. but the clients get us far cheaper.. it also means that nobody distinguishes between an engineer and a technician.. even in spanish.. the only word that exists in industiry is "tech"...This leaves engineers like me (there are very few of us) either out of work or having to charge the same as the illegal immigrant who unloads the trucks. Truthfully I HATE this industry, here, in valencia.. Its not like this in all spain. just here, at the moment.. Not much I can do though as my partner is from here and I'm not moving away from her, especially as were expecting our first littln in march :-D Dont get me wrong, I am happy here...</rant> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tolley1466 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Surly they'd have to pay if there was a contract involved? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Some Bloke Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Surly they'd have to pay if there was a contract involved? If you signed a contract for a plumber to install a shower and he couldn't get it to work would you pay him? I'm rather afraid that your post makes you seem 'naive', to be polite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sound In Gloucestershire Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 im sure he had more jobs than just plugging the radio mics together in this instance, id probably pay the tech, hes done a full days work and everything else has been satisfactory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmyP1955 Posted August 23, 2009 Share Posted August 23, 2009 I've seen folks come in to a gig with multiple wireless (same make and model) and have some work perfectly, but others be stepped all over by an unknown RF source. It happens. If this IS what happened, and the tech did not know enough to try other frequencies, then he was not the right man for the job. If the wireless were single-frequency units, then there was nothing to be done other than get different kit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceecrb1 Posted August 25, 2009 Author Share Posted August 25, 2009 I've seen folks come in to a gig with multiple wireless (same make and model) and have some work perfectly, but others be stepped all over by an unknown RF source. It happens. If this IS what happened, and the tech did not know enough to try other frequencies, then he was not the right man for the job. If the wireless were single-frequency units, then there was nothing to be done other than get different kit. Sennheiser evolution EW500 G2 kit.... so not single frequency... I have noticed he also was using them for instruments with the low cut filter in place...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lee Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 And he hasn't phoned you to explain what happened. Seems like you care more about the job than he does ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lightnix Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Even if the technician was unfamiliar with these particular types of mic, it might be a tad harsh to simply write them off as "incompetent". Why did the client not check, that the tech was familiar with the equipment they were to be using in advance of booking them? Was the tech supplied with a full equipment list and plot, prior to the gig - or just handed a (no disrespect) random pile of kit on the day and told to get on with it? As mentioned, we don't know what else the tech had to do; maybe the gig was understaffed and they just didn't have the time to sort everything that was expected. I've had the "just a little gig with a few lights" routine worked on me before; where I've shown up, only to find that I've been expected to rig points for everything and arrange power for the World & His Wife as well as rig, program and operate the lights (funny how "a few" can mean 70-80 generics plus movers) oh and there's a dozen make-up mirrors that need plugs putting on them and could I just take a look at this faulty hairdryer for a moment... And (of course) when the client doesn't get the Pink Floyd lighting experience they were sold by the hire company, guess which direction the fingers start pointing in... :( But, as Bryson pointed out, thems the breaks when you're a freelancer. Ask too many questions up front about the gig and you'll most likely get, "Oh well, if you don't want the work / are going to be fussy about it, then there are several others I can call on..." So quit moaning and take it or leave it ;) And he hasn't phoned you to explain what happened. Seems like you care more about the job than he does :(Nonsense and really rather unfair. The guy wasn't booked by ceecrb1 - why is he bound to explain anything to him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lee Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Not nonsense at all - ceecrb1 said "in the "real world" I'm waiting for a phone call from the tech to find out what he says..." which implies that the tech was due to phone up and explain the problem but hasn't. The fact that he hasn't speaks volumes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lightnix Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 Not nonsense at all - ceecrb1 said "in the "real world" I'm waiting for a phone call from the tech to find out what he says..."ceecrb also goes on to say......(why I dont know, nothing to do with us really...)...which is my point. It's between the client and the tech. The client (at least in the UK) would have a Duty of Care, to ensure the competence of the tech in advance of making a booking; using investigative means - i.e. asking for training and insurance certificates plus verifiable evidence of experience. If the client didn't do that, then maybe they're as much to blame for the outcome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lee Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 I know that the problem lies between the client and the tech - but it appears that the tech has offered/ been asked to phone the supplier to explain the problem and has not done so. This could be for a variety of reasons - lack of care; embarrassment; lack of communication between client and tech; not bothered as he has been told he is not getting paid - we don't know, but if ceerb1 was told that the tech was going to phone and hasn't received the phone call yet it doesn't bode well for the poor tech who could have been dumped in it big time. edit to add: "If the client didn't do that, then maybe they're as much to blame for the outcome. " Thats my opinion as well for what it's worth ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceecrb1 Posted August 25, 2009 Author Share Posted August 25, 2009 well to clear up more posts. The original order was placed like so.The client (producion) called me looking for 4 mics.. then passed the phone over to the sound tech who gave me more information of what he wanted..4 (in his words) clip mics.I checked for clarity as to what he thought a "clip mic" was and we arrived at the agreement that he wanted 4 tie.clip mics. (not how I´d personaly choose to mic up a quartet... but he oreders, I hire.)I explained we only had wireless tieclips and told him they were the ew500s, giving exact model/make info etc ... because he didnt sound to sure on the phone!He said fine. End of conversation. So. tech had enuogh time to do some reasearch if he didnt know how to use them. also, yes this really is an argument between tech and client only.I really only brought up the subject as I wondered what other people had experienced or thought on such situations... Personally, I would´ve phoned, if only to gain my pay back!!! Thats the reason I was expecting a phone call.. mostly for him to defend his pay-cheque.He still hasnt phoned... Its not how Iwork! If I´m right or wrong I´ll still do all I can to help/improve the situation... However it is comming out good for me as the client has asked me to opp for him in the future.. Bad for one tech is more work/cash for me ;) The long and short of whats happing in the "real situation" is that we can only speculate as to what happened. Like I said.. the main interest for me in this thread was to see what others thought about out-right not paying a tech for only being able to correctly use 2 of 4 mics hired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin D Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 To come back to the original question, I guess it comes down to any contract between the client and the tech, and more fundamentally, whether the tech wants to do something about not being paid. On the assumption that this is in England and Wales, (may be dangerous, so I'll await the incoming Scud if the assumption is incorrect ;) ) then in law, almost certainly a contract exists between tech and client whether written or not. If the tech is aggrieved, given the small value he/she would be best advised to pursue the matter as a civil recovery through the small claims court where he will only have to show probability rather than proof. If the client then counters with a claim that his incompetence cost him money, then the client would again have to give evidence to substantiate that. The court is likely to rule either in favour of the applicant or to share the spoils. I.e the tech gets part payment. Just my 2d worth. Robin Edit: Typo's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Pearce Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 ceecrb1 is based in Valencia in Spain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lee Posted August 25, 2009 Share Posted August 25, 2009 No Scud but the OP is in Spain ;) It does sound bad for the tech - he was told what kit would be supplied, agreed to it and couldn't use it. Really up to the client and tech to sort it out now. Ceecrb1 has done his bit (and more) by trying to find out the root of the problem to make sure the kit he supplied was in good working order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.