ceecrb1 Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Wondering what people would call "standard procedure" for a situation which has just passed through our company. We are not directly related.. We hired 4 sennheiser evolution g2 radio mics.During the hire the "tech" was unable to make 2 "mics work" (not sure why not or how etc) and client had to source replacement dynamic mics at the last moment. The client arrived at our warehouse and the first thing I did was test all gear cables etc.Everything was "as it should be". No mute switches enabled.. all cables good.. batteries good.. all RX & TX well tuned etc etc and everything working as it should be. SO somehow it can only be due to incompetence/ lack of knowledge on the part of the sound technician at the job. The client then announced he wont be paying this tech.(this is where its all leading to) Would you find this acceptable to not pay a tech for a full days work? Admitadly the tech was seamingly unable to complete a simple task and due to whatever reason on his part the client had to spend more money hiring replacement microphones.. but I'm not sure it was SO bad as to say he cant charge €100 for the days work. I started to wonder, what if I was the tech.. and for some reason something went wrong and the cilent wasnt happy and decided not to pay me anything. (not a situation that has ever fallen apon me, and touch wood wont..) Comments? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lee Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 It is a tough one. If the tech sent himself out as a sound tech then I would say he was incompetent. Unfortunately, sometimes techs are sent out to fill in the numbers and find themselves well out of there comfort zone through no fault of their own. To make the decision you would need to be onsite. If the tech was so incompetent then surely they should have been removed from site? As you say, surely a compromise could be made - I.e withhold some money to offset the cost of fixing the problem. ps - just cause the TX and RX works at the warehouse there is nothing to say that it wasn't local RF causing the probs and he didn't know how to retune them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceecrb1 Posted August 20, 2009 Author Share Posted August 20, 2009 ps - just cause the TX and RX works at the warehouse there is nothing to say that it wasn't local RF causing the probs and he didn't know how to retune them. Very true and I'd also expect a "sound tech" to be able to read the displays on the RX and TX.. be able to sus-out the problem and retune... The REAL shame of all this is that the client didnt phone us, even though each RX, TX, power supply, case etc has a company sticker with the phone number... the job was about 3 mins walking from my house and I didnt know! Sods law. in the "real world" I'm waiting for a phone call from the tech to find out what he says (why I dont know, nothing to do with us really... we hired mics which... as far as we can tell.. work as they should) Currently got all the office staff wearing one each to give them an "extended test" through the warehouse radio.... they wont stop ordering coffee!! hahaha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lee Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 a "sound tech" to be able to read the displays on the RX and TX.. be able to sus-out the problem and retune... Agreed to find out what he says (why I dont know, nothing to do with us really... we hired mics which... as far as we can tell.. work as they should) Because you care, which is a good thing :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulears Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 If you are the production manager, employer or person with the money, then you can do what you like. The rights and wrongs can be disputed, but in general if you take on somebody who you don't know, and they have simply told you they are a decent sound technician, then if they're not, they've misrepresented themselves, and had you known, they wouldn't have got the gig. If, using my own people as a guide, you know they are good, then even if things go wrong like this, you pay them - and sometimes you'll never find out what went wrong. We had an act turn up very late, with just 5 minutes before the house opened. They presented my LX op with their radio mic receiver and power supply (A G2). From the back of the house I yelled purple cable! Nothing happened. I ran (rare for me) to stage and he'd taken the dangling purple cable I'd left and stuck it into the receiver. No power. I knew our rack of these was in the corner, so I told him to pull a power lead from that and use that. I went back to the desk. No luck. another run, and the turn was getting frantic one-two-one-two -it worked yesterday. Looking at him I noted he had an AKG pack! Wrong pack. It's a simple thing but it isn't fair to blame the skills of the technician. I can spot an AKG grey pack from a Sennheiser grey pack at 20ft, but you can't expect a LX person to do this - and not everyone is happy with LX and sound. The artiste, of course, just sees blacks and assumes 'something' - we can't control that. If on the other hand you have a truly useless technician, then get shot of them - they don't do anyone any good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just Some Bloke Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 To answer the original question a bit more directly, I'd suggest the following might be acceptable: The technician was unable to make a perfectly good mic work and therefore the client shouldn't be paying for that part of the job which involved setting up the radios. Let's say that was 20% of a 100 Euro job. So that's brought the cost down to 80 Euros. The client had to hire other mics instead so we need to refund that cost - say another 30 Euros so now the cost is down to 50 Euros. We need to give the client something to compensate them for the inconvenience. If they are a good client and we want to keep them then 40 Euros off the bill wouldn't be out of the question. It's really not worth charging the final 10 Euros as it's neither here nor there. So we end up with the same end, even though through different means. I would be tempted to send out the invoice as described above (refunds and compensation) rather than just saying you don't need to pay the technician, as that way it isn't describing the technician as useless which may not be the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyJones Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 If the tech is local, you could ask them to come in and set the system up in the warehouse, you would then find out if they can complete the task or not? Andy Jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceecrb1 Posted August 20, 2009 Author Share Posted August 20, 2009 If the tech is local, you could ask them to come in and set the system up in the warehouse, you would then find out if they can complete the task or not? Andy Jones Yeah I'm awaiting a phonecall from the tech and I have the mics here held aside.. if he can make it here at a time I know I've got little on I have no probs with him comming here.. cause lets be honest it might earn him his 100€'s back, and If it was me I'd be hopeful for that.. Honestly thought the local (to my town) techs are totaly appauling..To the level that I dont do jobs in my town so that I'm not seen to mix with them.. they reflect so badly on everything they touch.... There may be good ones in there.. but I'm yet to find them!(talking about the small town I live in.. not valencia city) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Diamond Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 The question should also be applied to the terms under which the technician was employed. A self-employed sound engineer, as a business in their own right, is liable for their own actions eg: incompetence. And in this example they should not be paid the full amount for an incomplete service as per the original purchase order if it is proven that they were at fault and the final rate based on a fair agreement between those involved. If the technician is an employee (full-time or casual) of the company in question then the employer must be responsible for ensuring that they provide a competent technician to their client to fulfil the requirements of the job and therefore their responsibility to ensure they know what their crew can or cannot do. Just because a guy says 'yes I can do it' doesn't mean he always can but the decision to place him on the job is the responsibility of the employer ie: who is more incompetent in this case? - the tech or the gaffer that put him on the job. Either way unless you can replicate the original setup including all the potential variables you might never find out why the bloody mics didn't work. I'm sure most of you have had gremlins in the past where there has been more questions than answers. It would hardly be fair to automatically blame the technician in the absence of any other reason. Hopefully he will be able to give a good account of himself and actions and it will be settled agreeably. Or he might well be useless and thats another one weeded out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lxdad Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 ... charge €100 for the days work.... If that is all you are paying for a days work, of course it did not work. There is a phrase about peanuts and monkeys that springs to mind. LX Dad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryson Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 I'm curious as to why the technician was unable to call for help. And why the client had to source the replacement mics. Much as I'm sure you'd like to blame the technician solely, I think you also need to look at your support mechanisms for the staff. I think the client is probably justified in not paying the company, but the company is not justified in not paying the technician. Whether you employ him again, is, of course, up to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceecrb1 Posted August 20, 2009 Author Share Posted August 20, 2009 I'm curious as to why the technician was unable to call for help. And why the client had to source the replacement mics. Much as I'm sure you'd like to blame the technician solely, I think you also need to look at your support mechanisms for the staff. I think the client is probably justified in not paying the company, but the company is not justified in not paying the technician. Whether you employ him again, is, of course, up to you. No WE soley dry-hired the 4 mics, they sourced their own tech etc etc.. I did ask the production staff why they didnt call our 24hr number which was printed on stickers attached to everything...the reply was "oh.. didnt think of that". Its still a massive shame as, as I said I live just yards away from where teh job was and didnt realise! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 The impression I get is that the technician was employed directly by the client and kit was a dry hire... Damn, typed too slow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryson Posted August 20, 2009 Share Posted August 20, 2009 Aha, I see. I guess it down to the client and the technician to negotiate this one: he was contracted to provide a service, and failed to do so. (If it was a kit problem, then he should have called you...) His risk, his failure, his problem. It's a shame, but them's the breaks when you're freelance. (Oh, and he needs to put his rates up!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JazzAV Posted August 20, 2009 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.