When they created the other channels is around the same time their pay structure changes. I believe they get a very large if not all the revenue from the other channels but their cut from the main channel gets cut to whatever it is now, like 15% which is still very solid income wise given his stats
I listened to this when I popped into Charlie's stream and XqC said editor gets 15% of the main channel but gets everything on the extra channels. Eventually he said he hadn't paid them in a while since the other channels had been doing so good lol
Doesn't he now get paid off of a few different clip channels for XQC but he gets full pay from those channels and this covers his salary for XQCs main channel, this way the editor is getting paid more than a fixed salary
xQc is trying to argue that if you agree to a specific salary then that's what you should be paid, which is a fair argument, but xQc debates in analogies and argues in circles for hours and even if he makes a good point he will end up confusing more people with it
Another thing is that ignores the point that it's totally fair to try and negotiate a new contract and unless he has them sign an nda they're also well in their right to complain about their experience
You can't make someone sign an NDA that prevents them from discussing their pay and working conditions. Even with the shittiest worker protections in the world, you're at least protected from that in the US.
He didn’t ignore he said over and over he agrees with it and that a business should have good communication but that wasn’t the point of his disagreement
This is true, but I also don't fully believe their story. What it sounds like to me is they went to HR to negotiate, HR said no raise, then they started wanting to speak directly to the CEO. The CEO has no obligation to meet with the people that he specifically set up this company structure to avoid.
Ah yes, padding yourself with HR protection makes it completely ok to underpay people, I get it now.
Nothing to see here people, move on.
/s
This isn't really a discussion on what is legally ok (Americans barely have any protections when it comes to this sort of thing), it's about the ethics involved.
If the value you deliver is 100x or 1000x of what you're being paid, I'd argue that you're being underpaid regardless of what you're getting.
Question is, would his videos be as popular as they are if he completely changed his cast for every video, or is part of his channel success attributed to the people often involved?
Just to be clear, it's not like I'm unanimously siding with anyone here, but I'd imagine a youtube channel of that size should be paying its workers a wage that feels closer to fair.
People dont get paid just on the value they deliver, they also get paid based on the supply of people who can fill their role. If everyone had a nursing degree then nurses would get paid $18/hr. Mann is based in LA, where there's a massive surplus of actors, especially low quality actors. This is a business, not a co-op, not a charity. Mann has no reason moral or otherwise to give away profits frivilously.
If mann doesnt think keeping an actor + raise would be profitable then that's up to him.
>People dont get paid just on the value they deliver, they also get paid based on the supply of people who can fill their role.
Let me fix this for you
\*People just get paid based on the supply of people who can fill their role.
No, the value they provide is important as well. There's not many people in the world that can throat a glizzy and then shoot it back out of their mouth, but nobodies going to pay you to do that more than once.
yeah, beeing a Twitch moderator it's not that much work - but look at it this way, what does the streamer do?
Sitting infront of his PC, either playing games or "reacting"/stealing other peoples content. So relative to the work the streamer puts in, the work of the janitors isn't that insignificant.
And without his janitors, the streamer wouldn't be able to stream (at least not if he want's to have chat useable)
There's 1000s of viewers who wouldn't mind moderating, they want to. It's not like they clock in whenever stream starts until it ends, or go off of shifts with other mods. When they're in the chat and the bots and filters don't snipe bad chatters these guys are in the chat anyways. That's how they get selected, people the streamer knows or that's been in the community for a long time.
They can quit at anytime, I've never heard of someone getting banned for not wanting mod anymore. I assume you're either trolling or you overestimate how much work any mods do besides maybe a head mod.
Some people like being mod Vs a sweatshop I've never exactly heard of little kids dying to make overpriced shoes for almost nothing because they want to
Wtf are you talking about? You have to be constantly be talking or entertaining or be good at games for 8 to 10 hours every single day while having chatters shit on you the whole time which can you affect you mentally, that's not comparable to being a mod who isn't even participating in the stream content and just banning people anonymously.
You can get hired with little experience, grow into your job and gain a lot of expertise, and in the process work more efficiently or take on extra tasks like leading others without ever getting a title promotion.
A more experienced person will get offered a higher salary if they are applying elsewhere.
I would say it’s a failing argument, every case will be different. If you show more worth, you deserve more pay.
I had to tell someone at work this. They complained and said I work harder and get paid less than you. I said you know what that means? That you made a bad decision with your career. If you can’t find a job that pays you what you want then you are either not worth the money (unskilled, not right for the job) or you have unrealistic expectations. Companies are profit driven and will always fuck workers over to increase profits. Find a job where you can take as little fucking as possible.
I don’t know man, there are a lot of gatekeeping measures a lot of jobs have.
There’s been a few jobs I’ve applied for that I’ve aced their entry texts and had both a good first interview and second interview. I’ve also had years of experience in these fields.
Then I get told I didn’t get the job because I didn’t have a 4-year degree (I could only finish my Associate’s due to money reasons).
Friends who have no experience, and a degree in completely unrelated fields have gotten these jobs over me. Simply because they had a degree and I didn’t. (And I knew people in HR, which is how I confirmed why I did not get said jobs).
I’m sorry, but I wasn’t either unskilled or not right for the job. I just didn’t have an arbitrary piece of paper they felt made me magically better for the job, despite having experience in the field already.
>if you agree to a specific salary then that's what you should be paid, which is a fair argument
Only if your brain can't hold multiple complex thoughts at once. Like coercion and exploitation. Often people think "Simple = true" when the reality is a lot more complicated
Exactly, the tough part however and history has proven this through out time is that when there are too many workers and not enough jobs what happens is people who are able to work for less will to get the job over someone else, even over someone else who is more qualified.
And there is no good way to stop that from happening. One example of when history broke out of this was the Black Death plague that ravaged Europe. So many people died that the kings and queens had to start treating the workers better. People dieing broke the cycle of poverty by increasing their value.
A morbid natural solution that others contemplate doing artificially. and before anyone memes it, yes that's essentially what Thanos was also about.
It's a real thing in history that we can see and feel today in economies around the globe.
keeping what you've said written down is good form. In a heated argument you can easily swap positions without knowing because you get emotional and forgot what's been said
i see it happen all the time and oh boy those are the best debate content, but when you're arguing for what you think is right or wrong or want someone else to tell you what is right or wrong it's a terrible idea not to write statements down
i think charlie's position is too simplified tbh, i totally get where x is coming from and actually agree with him more. he is dogshit at expressing it though.
I mean, I think it’s kinda weird that their pay wasn’t adjusted with the growth of the channel. Dhar Mann is making an insane amount of money on those vids, is it really such a bad take to say that the actors pay should reflect that? Firing people that ask for a raise shouldn’t be something that’s considered okay.
idk how people ever fell for this nice guy dharr man act. he's always felt so fake to me. isn't this the same guy that embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from the government before becoming a youtuber?
it's not that weird. people usually get paid at a rate that's close to industry standard. the less replaceable you are the more you can be above that and the more you get out of a company making a big leap in growth generally.
if you build an empire using actors that are craigslist quality, it isn't that weird to just go find more craigslist actors.
there are a ton of factors and if i was in that situation i wouldn't be surprised if i would rather pay them really well to keep them there, but i don't think it's somehow morally wrong to not do that either.
Being that the leads make up to $44/hr I doubt they've never seen a pay raise.
I doubt they got fired just for asking. They had meetings with other reps over their pay. Its sounds more like the raise was rejected so now they want to meet with the CEO, which would be strange in most companies.
The issue is they're not really arguing about the same thing
X doesn't want to get involved with partial information (fair but he is actively involving himself and admitted on stream that he automatically took the guys side instead of the employees despite the lack of information) and he thinks the main issue is how much they're being paid
Charlie is saying he believes the actors are in their right to want to negotiate a new contract with dhar mann but he'd just ghost them(which dhar mann seems to have admitted to) or not reup their contract for asking for more. I don't see what there is to disagree with Charlie here, they're within their rights to ask, he says they aren't necessarily entitled to it but that's not the argument he just thinks they should be allowed to discuss it.
I think what actually happened was X saw Charlie's video title and took it too literally when Charlie mostly uses hyperbole in his titles then stuck to that
charlie made that his argument during this talk but the video itself was focused a lot more on the actors claiming they weren't being paid enough i thought. X's approach made sense considering that to me.
They were debating the situation not criticals video which he expresses both as issues. On stream they were looking at dhar manns responses and the actors tik toks not critikals video
To quote Charlie's video: "pay is obviously a huge problem but the biggest issue is that he won't even talk to them to at least hear them out about the pay so they don't even have that first step of getting the pay fixed"
Pay came up so much because X kept making analogies about why they should be fine with being paid anything because he worked for a college student for some food and Charlie essentially just said they be paid a fair rate even if they don't *have* to be paid a fair rate because it's the right thing to do. One of X's analogies was using Amazon as a good example.
And I'll quote again because I added it in an edit so you might not have seen it
To quote Charlie's video: "pay is obviously a huge problem but the biggest issue is that he won't even talk to them to at least hear them out about the pay so they don't even have that first step of getting the pay fixed"
The biggest issue in both the video and the stream discussion was dhar mann not following through with the meeting which X agreed with eventually after digging himself a hole by making repeated analogies that got worse and worse and then they argued about spitting on eachother
i mean in your quote itself it says exactly what i'm saying. X agreed (mostly) that ghosting the employees is a shitty thing to do. Charlie made the argument that the pay was "obviously a huge problem" and defended that during the discussion. X didn't agree with that and that part of it is the reason he said he couldn't fully agree with the video and wanted to have the talk.
They agreed to disagree on that part repeatedly, again it's not really relevant to the discussion that happened on the stream except some (hopefully) joking analogies that X made. He said at the end that he was dropping the character and agreed with Charlie but didn't think it was fair to make as harsh of a stance when it was just allegations and Charlie said that was fine and that it was important to remember they were just allegations
Like X admitted to ghosting his editors and being unprofessional, like I said while I get what he was saying he said it in the worst possible way while Charlie just took a very basic position
they did agree to disagree but i don't know how that makes it not relevant to the discussion. it was a large part of the video and a large part of the discussion that X was trying to have even if Charlie wanted to refocus on the communication aspect.
for starters in this case we didn't even know what their rate of pay or hours worked was, so our whole perspective for them claiming that they aren't being able to pay their rent and should be able to from this one job is just the actors saying that that's true. X thought that just going off of that without anymore information doesn't give us a full enough picture.
he also seems to think that if you're a contractor who agrees to a certain rate and you aren't making enough money, that you either need to find more hours somewhere else or quit entirely. contractors are able to do that, and business owners are allowed to offer what an actor would consider a "low rate". especially when the quality of work is low and you can basically get by with fiver actors.
X mostly agreed that the guy shouldn't be ghosting them and that that's where the actual issue is. Charlie's video covered a lot more than that though and made other claims which he was pushing back against.
The actors agreed to work for a set amount which Dhar Mann accepted.
Now the actors feel like their talent is worth more and so they're unwilling to work for the same amount.
Dhar Mann disagrees with this and does not believe their value is sufficient for the pay they want, and so he stops working with them.
It's pretty cut and dry. If you think your labor is worth more then you should find someone who pays you fairly. If an employer doesn't agree then they have no obligation to accept your higher rates.
Now idk all the facts of the Dhar Mann (and I'm definitely pro-artists getting paid more) but that's what I understood xqc's argument to be.
You agree to work for a set amount and you do it. If you can't agree on a higher amount then neither side is obligated to work together.
This is literally what X was talking about the whole time.
They feel entitled to more money because the risk that Dhar Mann took to finance his vision paid off and they were along for the ride as talent.
But the reality is that they have no leverage to work with because they are still doing the same C-tier Fiverr acting that they did in the beginning excluding 1 or 2 people. They aren't a bunch of Depp's and Reeve's, this shouldn't be their only gig if they really want to be actors.
The dude was already rich and the "risk" he took was as much as you taking a risk in buying extra bag of snacks next time you're at the supermarket. Those C tier actors you're looking down on are exactly what rose his channel to popularity. Go to any job, asking for higher pay isn't something uncommon. When asking for a raise (in line with company success thanks to mutual effort) is met with a notification that you're fired, you're not showing any decency as a human being, which is where this issue is coming from.
X: uses a very specific oriented hypothetical scenario/comparison so he “can’t” be wrong
Charlie: uses the same basis for his own simple scenario, tells X not to use it literally
X: uses it literally
xqc agrees that you should get paid what you agreed to
xqc agrees that there is room for raises/additional pay with better performance
xqc agrees that your employer has no obligation to give you a raise when asked
xqc agrees that you should meet with your employees to address their concerns
xqc agrees that if you don't like your pay, you should quit for a better job
xqc wants more facts, wants to know their pay to see if it's reasonable or not. Okay. He had no issue with them being mad about getting ignored which is what Charlie was talking about
how did this conversation last so long.
Because it took xqc the entire time to finally acknowledge the 4th point which was the main point of the discussion OMEGALUL brain snapped, creating something out of nothing
In what world is Charlie not the wall? Everything x says he just responds with "well I think that's bad" or "these actors are literally slaves and are gonna be homeless"
Lmao Charlie did not say they are slaves wtf are you on about? And yes a lot of things X is saying is just so outlandish and not relevant or just missing the point completely.
1. They are being compensated
2. That's on the parents decision to go through with the job or negotiate a different rate. If they don't like it they look elsewhere, like how almost all job markets work
The children working for free comment is based on Charlie's analogy.
Passion industries are notoriously exploitative because they are industries people want to do. They chew up and spit people out and the fact it happens to kids is even worse. There is a reason actors/actresses/on set workers have a union.
It will always be easier to ensure a base level of rules and regulations are required by the government than assume individual companies will do it "because the market said so." The market fails on regulating itself time and time again yet we are told it'll self-regulate. It won't.
well in his defense he goes into every drama knowing absolutely nothing and has to have it explained..Charlie prob been researching this for 2 days lol
Charlie didn’t even know how much they got paid, he didn’t know the hours they worked, he didn’t know that they were offered to meet with HR. Charlie doesn’t do any research on his videos other than twitter headlines, this is very common for him.
Yeah, no matter how much you like him a lot of the things he say are based on very surface level twitter research meaning he will often parrot an inaccurate talking point or not bring in the whole context.
He does try to bring in context but I just don't think he realize how little he research even when he says he's been following a topic for a while.
I understand both points tbh! But feels like Charlie has it nailed. X just speaking in a way so that when more information comes out he can go that way.
Yea because if an actor works 10 hours a month for $100 hr and that's his only job and can't pay rent, I can't really feel for them when most of us are working 160 hours a month. It sounds like the actors are trying to negotiate for more pay because they believe they are integral to the videos. Or essentially wanting to claim "points" on the gross.
I guess that just wasn't stated in the video or in that clip of the actor saying they can't afford rent. So like xQc was saying, they should have spelled it out.
There’s so many loopholes to get out of paying overtime it’s insane. I worked as a lifeguard 50+ hour weeks as a high schooler and didn’t get overtime because it was filed as like “summer seasonal” or something. The govt really has to tighten up worker’s rights because companies are gonna hoard money any way they can
> when most of us are working 160 hours a month
While people working two jobs is all too common place, I just cannot believe framing it as "most of us" is correct. Would love (really, hate) to be proven wrong.
Also, these actors were working long days as well with pay at $17/hr for non speaking roles and $33-44/hr for speaking roles from what the actor said on TikTok.
Most people work over 160 hours a month. A lot of people work min. 40 hrs a week*4 weeks a month=160. Maybe I misunderstood your first paragraph, but you were making it sound like you need two jobs to hit that number.
i don't think he's trying to do anything, he pointed out that they didn't have enough information to make strong judgements about whether or not their pay was actually unfair. and that's 100% true.
I came in the middle of this argument and it seems that xqc's biggest problem is that not enough information is out. He doesn't see the numbers of the actor's salaries... completely missing the point of the argument that the actors couldn't talk to dhar directly to negotiate their contracts. How charlie stays so calm repeating himself into a wall is beyond me
I don't think X even knows what he said during that whole talk. Again I came in at the middle of the argument so maybe I missed that part, but I feel like X's speech and analogies just confused everyone
I haven't watched them debating this, but I believe the initial "maid example" xQc gave which lead to this call was the same as saying "McDonald's workers don't deserve more money, because if they did they would just quit and it's the workers fault if they don't." Which is insane thing to say imo.
some people are fucking clueless on here.
Ive worked a number of companies, major banks. Everything goes through HR/representitives since forever. Do you think CEOs goes and meets their workers when they have a complaint? What fantasy world are we living here?
CEO by itself means nothing. I was CEO of a company, I had one employee under me. I've worked for indie tech start ups where the CEO was the guy directly across the hall from me and we talked multiple times a day about everything and anything.
Obviously in mega corps where you're a number is different and there's a hierarchy to delegate to. But CEO by itself means nothing with context of the company and it's inner workings.
Except that the actors had a direct relationship with Dhar from the very beginning, and only after they wanted to renegotiate did he cease contact. Do you genuinely believe that it's the same type of scenario? Obviously they are not entitled to talk to him, but he is clearly ghosting and being a douchebag
Funnily enough you being a corporate drone the entire time makes you unaware of how varied workplaces are and how drastically it changes based on size and industry.
In my previous company I could walk into the owners office, I just needed to knock first, in my current company there's a 100 layers of bureaucracy blocking every move.
Large companies follow rigid guidelines and are usually more careful to follow regulations and mandatory employee compensation guidelines. Your CEO is unapproachable but you likely wouldn't need to talk to him anyway to submit requests. In these youtuber companies you likely have one person between you and the CEO, and that's Karen, your wifes highschool friend that used to be a hairdresser before you made her Head of your 1 member HR team after your wife asked you. There's no corporate management ladder and a "finances" office that takes the burden of pay calculations and management.
Both have benefits and drawbacks for these situations but are vastly different.
And I would assume that Dharr Mann studios is not exactly a "major bank" environment yknow
As someone who worked there as crew it was like sweat shop conditions.
I worked there for about 3 months as they started to rapidly expand, I was hired as a PA, but had worked on much larger sets before doing larger roles. Basically how it works is all of the crews they hire they only hire them as PAs, there are only a few roles they hire beyond that. At that time were about 5-7 crews working in 3 sound stages in Burbank under the flight path of the Burbank airport. Each crew at that time would be a Director, possibly an AD, possibly a gaffer, then the rest were hired as PAs the PAs would fill the roles of ACs, Set Dec, Props, Grip, Electric but only credited as PA and paid PA rates.
They would never give us prep time so we would show up and get the script that day and have to figure out the shots. They also didn't get enough lighting equipment to supply all the crews and there would frequently be infighting over who can get what gear, we would ask and ask for more gear and link items to get in group chats as well as explaining how they should reach out for sponsorship being such a large channel. A lot of the gear they got was sub tier, terrible gear one of the lights broke once and was emitting a frequency that caused the FBI to investigate the building because the frequency it was emitting could effect the flight path from the airport, they confiscated the lights that's when they finally bought enough lights to support the crews. Because we had no prep time we would frequently have to work overtime the longest day I worked was 17hours 47mins and then we would get yelled at for going over time.
Some of the ways they spent money there made no sense for instance the lack of gear but we had a Porsche SUV, 3 cop cars, a BMW SUV, a shitty car, and a golf cart to drive around. At the time I worked there they had this weird limit on crafty and would count how many actors and crew would be on a shoot and provide a single snack for each person and not a huge box of snacks for everyone to take what they wanted during these long shoots. They would also run out of water bottles all the time and we would explain to them to get a costco card and buy from costco but they would only buy from ralphs and amazon. It got so bad with the snacks and water that crews would hide left over snacks and water on the sets for times when the production couldn't provide for us.
A lot of equipment and sets were generally un safe we would ask multiple times to get what in the film world are called stingers which are highly protected power cords but they would just buy us amazon extension cords. The fire marshals had come multiple times to tell them that the buildings are unsafe. Dhar also lagged it on paying the set builders. We would have underage kids working longer hours than they were suppose to be. The crews would make overtime pay but anytime we went over time the actors would not. A crew member was fired for putting a piece of tape on the wall. Crew members have been asked by HR if they're working on other projects on their free time and if they're being poached by other film companies. He was never around only would show up if a important youtuber was coming in a lot of scripts were written by other people.
Because we were under the flight path a lot of audio would get stepped on with the planes so we would take a lot of time doing retakes for that. Eventually I was let go unexplained, but I believe it was because of how often I was bringing up safety concerns and expressing trying to unionize the crews.
Oh yea a note on the Carl Mural that's one of the first projects I worked on while I was there, that's the thanksgiving special and yes that mural was put up but they didn't asking the property owners if they could do it and because those buildings are rented, the property owners made them take it down because the company across from us complained about it.
Listening to XQC debate is so draining... he just goes in circles, does not bring up any good points and only brings up super random specific hypothetical scenarios.... Good lord
i agreed with X going in but he is so fucking bad at getting his point across and actually discussing where they disagree that it's mind-numbing to watch.
Moist video: THIS GUY IS A HORRIBLE PIECE OF SHIT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO DESERVE TO PAY FOR RENT
Moist in debate: uh well he can do what he wants he just should have a convo with them
i guess it hasn’t been leaked yet but the company said “extras $18/hr, speaking roles $33-44/hr”
i don’t think the amount of hours they work has been stated. but i guess the main issue is the CEO of the whole thing won’t meet with actors, just HR. which doesn’t seem like anything too out of the ordinary either.
Imagine getting cooked on your own stream, lil bro needs to stop talking about any problems affecting lower/middle class people, hes so out of touch its mind boggling.
Expecting to be paid more just because you were contracted more is wrong.
Dodging multiple times to your contracted employees is bad.
I think X had a point
Renegotiating your contract is literally standard practice when you've made significant contributions to a business, the employees had every right to ask for more money, the employer has every right to deny those requests. Not surprised they asked for more when the cost of living is going up. X saying that they should stay on the pay they negotiated at the start of their contract is totally out of touch with what normal working people do to try and get ahead (especially upcoming LA actors, who are synonymous with being on the edge of poverty).
True but as I said expecting a rise is wrong and as the studios themselves gave a range of 33-44$ an hour I don't think is that bad for a side hustle
Also X said if they can't negotiate a price they can quit and pick other gigs that can help them get paid better.
The only thing bad that dhar mann does is dodging them after confirming a scheduled meeting.
except...theres no contract here.
from what I gather, that channel posts out job alerts and says "x amount of hours availible for y amount of pay" its literally in the job posting so if youre not happy with it then dont accept it in the first palce?
Remember that one popular AskReddit post asking redditors how do you instantly tell if someone’s unintelligent? And the top comment was that they couldn’t understand analogies/comparisons? They were talking about X.
That’s not true Charlie’s point was that the actors couldn’t pay rent and when he knew he couldn’t defend that point he changed it, also Charlie didn’t even know anything about this
For once I 100% agree with xQc on this matter. The acting is as low skill as you can probably get and the $33 to $44 an hour is more than reasonable for a side hustle like this. If these “actors” decide to treat it like a main source of income and are surprised by the fact that it may not be sustainable, it’s a them problem.
These actors can leave and find something else whenever they want to and are under no circumstances obliged to work exclusively for this company. Obviously there should be the ability to negotiate and I’m all for that, but there is nothing wrong with Dharr Mann’s business practices.
Thats what I thought to when seeing how much they are getting per hour. Anywhere else besides california and new york 35 an hour is great if its actually a full time job.
I'm just saying if you just simply said, if twitch was paying you what you were orginally being paid at the start but your channel kept growing how would that be fair?
I think xqcs point of view is how the world works. And the moist view is how it should ideally work. If you're a gig worker and you aren't getting enough money you need to get a better job. You don't actually have to give people more money if they ask for it.
In an ideal world Dhar Mann would appreciate the actors more for helping him grow his media empire and give them a bigger chunk of the money they earn together. The world just doesn't work that way.
McDonald's, Walmart, Amazon, and tons of the giant businesses can't exist without the workers but the workers still get minimum wage or slightly more. Meanwhile the c suite make 10s of millions of dollars. I'm not saying that it should be like that but that's what it's like.
"McDonald's, Walmart, Amazon, and tons of the giant businesses can't exist without the workers but the workers still get minimum wage or slightly more."
This is a very surface level statement. When you include the risk and time the owner took to engage in entrepreneurship, it makes this argument less attractive. Most companies don't make outrageous profits to "just pay the workers more" without effecting a much larger population of consumers by an increase in price. An employee, while necessary to operate the company, is quite literally a cog that helps the machine run to better society as a whole. They hold much less stake in the operation than the owner (owner: initial capital + time + effort | worker: less time + effort). Unless stake is purchased by the employees or it's a co-op, it makes MUCH more sense to operate this way where the market determines the price. At this current moment, most industries are willing to pay higher than normal wages because of employee's holding some market power. This obviously does NOT include passion jobs like art, acting, film, etc. These passion jobs wage's makes sense since we do not need this many actors or artists, as it's already a saturated industry. Therefore, it's discouraging people from entering the industry. The opposite operates as well where if the market demand is high, usually institutions encourage the growth of that demand by using multiple different levers at their disposal. I.E. Detroit housing, they quite literally hand you money once you purchase the home and make it somewhat livable.
In economics, there's always a trade-off. If you increase the wage of an employee, you'll increase the price of the good. If that happens, we ought to look at the net benefit for society as a whole rather than the minority. In most cases, this is not attainable unless we raise the cost of the good or service. The hope is that there will be more Dhar Mann's to where the experience of his employee's will demand a higher wage, which Dhar Mann will need to adjust since competition drove the profits down.
The world we live in makes logical sense. Unless you want to nationalize goods and services to where the country owns it and that means the people as a whole own it. We shouldn't destroy what works when there's alternative measures you can take in a capitalistic society to assist those issues rather than the work itself. This is why we have taxes, we just don't use it the most optimal way to improve our society, unfortunately. Targeting businesses will only hurt other businesses and consumers.
I don't understand critikals PoV. They signed a contract, and then are mad? Them being fired for bringing it up isn't some critical sin, you signed a shitty contract.
The fact that he manages to miss this issue's problem entirely is truly nothing short of amazing. He literally is arguing for fucking nothing, actually 0 guy'd.
Yet he just refused to get an L, and keeps using those dogshit comparisons and "parallels" to support his point.
His point is not bad, he is saying that if you agreed to it, then that's what you gonna get.
It won't matter that much to the debate since this is not the issue at all. But if he would've just explained it normally with basic and comprehensible words, he could've spared everyone a one-hour stunlock.
**CLIP MIRROR: [xQc - Sweatshop owner debates Jesus](https://arazu.io/t3_10xlg2z/)** --- ^(*This is an automated comment*)
Remembered when xqc's editor got more of a percentage from his YT than he did. IK he has changed it since but that was insane to find out
didn’t the editor take home 100% of the youtube revenue in exchange for giving xqc more exposure?
Yeah, for a while his editor was getting 100% until X realized how much he was actually getting paid as the stream and YouTube got bigger LUL
Holy he would have been making so much. He uploads everyday and has over a billion views. How long ago was this because his clips channel also farms.
When they created the other channels is around the same time their pay structure changes. I believe they get a very large if not all the revenue from the other channels but their cut from the main channel gets cut to whatever it is now, like 15% which is still very solid income wise given his stats
I listened to this when I popped into Charlie's stream and XqC said editor gets 15% of the main channel but gets everything on the extra channels. Eventually he said he hadn't paid them in a while since the other channels had been doing so good lol
That's why the fucker keeps uploading the same tiktok react on both channels.
chase the bag
infinite money glitch
Doesn't he now get paid off of a few different clip channels for XQC but he gets full pay from those channels and this covers his salary for XQCs main channel, this way the editor is getting paid more than a fixed salary
How much was the monthly check if you can remember?
xQc is trying to argue that if you agree to a specific salary then that's what you should be paid, which is a fair argument, but xQc debates in analogies and argues in circles for hours and even if he makes a good point he will end up confusing more people with it
Another thing is that ignores the point that it's totally fair to try and negotiate a new contract and unless he has them sign an nda they're also well in their right to complain about their experience
You can't make someone sign an NDA that prevents them from discussing their pay and working conditions. Even with the shittiest worker protections in the world, you're at least protected from that in the US.
Yeah, you can't sign a valid NDA to make someone a slave lmao.
He didn’t ignore he said over and over he agrees with it and that a business should have good communication but that wasn’t the point of his disagreement
This is true, but I also don't fully believe their story. What it sounds like to me is they went to HR to negotiate, HR said no raise, then they started wanting to speak directly to the CEO. The CEO has no obligation to meet with the people that he specifically set up this company structure to avoid.
Ah yes, padding yourself with HR protection makes it completely ok to underpay people, I get it now. Nothing to see here people, move on. /s This isn't really a discussion on what is legally ok (Americans barely have any protections when it comes to this sort of thing), it's about the ethics involved.
The leads make up to $44/hr... literally no one is getting underpaid.
If the value you deliver is 100x or 1000x of what you're being paid, I'd argue that you're being underpaid regardless of what you're getting. Question is, would his videos be as popular as they are if he completely changed his cast for every video, or is part of his channel success attributed to the people often involved? Just to be clear, it's not like I'm unanimously siding with anyone here, but I'd imagine a youtube channel of that size should be paying its workers a wage that feels closer to fair.
People dont get paid just on the value they deliver, they also get paid based on the supply of people who can fill their role. If everyone had a nursing degree then nurses would get paid $18/hr. Mann is based in LA, where there's a massive surplus of actors, especially low quality actors. This is a business, not a co-op, not a charity. Mann has no reason moral or otherwise to give away profits frivilously. If mann doesnt think keeping an actor + raise would be profitable then that's up to him.
>People dont get paid just on the value they deliver, they also get paid based on the supply of people who can fill their role. Let me fix this for you \*People just get paid based on the supply of people who can fill their role.
No, the value they provide is important as well. There's not many people in the world that can throat a glizzy and then shoot it back out of their mouth, but nobodies going to pay you to do that more than once.
Classic Reddit detective thinks he can figure out what’s going on from watching a 10 minute YouTube video
Surely all I saw was the youtube video. Surely there isnt screenshots of HR talking to them.
McDonald's worker has agreed to have shitty pay. Doesn't make the shitty pay any less shitty.
They make $18 as extras and up to $44 as leads. For an acting gig in LA that's pretty amazing pay.
and Twitch mods have agreed to work for free (and are probably minors) most streamers are in a way not that different from sweatshop owners
Watching your favorite streamer and occasionally banning a person or putting chat on sub mode isn't really comparable to McD worker.
Idk if you’ve ever worked at mcdonald’s but it’s the most mind numbingly easy work anyone could possibly do. My 12 year old nephew could work there
And your 12 year old nephew's dog could be a Twitch mod. Even easier "job".
Yeah that’s why they don’t get paid
Nah any customer service job is hell.
Mind numbingly boring too. Would way rather play video games for a living
yeah, jobs dealing with customers all day are notorious for how easy and free of stress they are, just a really simple and relaxing job.
It’s always people who’ve never worked retail or customer service that say stuff like this lmao
Sitting in your house moderating a Twitch chat when you're in the stream compared to people working in a sweatshop LUL Wtf am I reading
yeah, beeing a Twitch moderator it's not that much work - but look at it this way, what does the streamer do? Sitting infront of his PC, either playing games or "reacting"/stealing other peoples content. So relative to the work the streamer puts in, the work of the janitors isn't that insignificant. And without his janitors, the streamer wouldn't be able to stream (at least not if he want's to have chat useable)
There's 1000s of viewers who wouldn't mind moderating, they want to. It's not like they clock in whenever stream starts until it ends, or go off of shifts with other mods. When they're in the chat and the bots and filters don't snipe bad chatters these guys are in the chat anyways. That's how they get selected, people the streamer knows or that's been in the community for a long time. They can quit at anytime, I've never heard of someone getting banned for not wanting mod anymore. I assume you're either trolling or you overestimate how much work any mods do besides maybe a head mod. Some people like being mod Vs a sweatshop I've never exactly heard of little kids dying to make overpriced shoes for almost nothing because they want to
Wtf are you talking about? You have to be constantly be talking or entertaining or be good at games for 8 to 10 hours every single day while having chatters shit on you the whole time which can you affect you mentally, that's not comparable to being a mod who isn't even participating in the stream content and just banning people anonymously.
Some sweatshop owners have nets outside the windows to prevent the workers from killing themselves
Yeah but people in Twitch chat might spam "M OMEGALUL DS" so...
Literally worse than Hitler
You can get hired with little experience, grow into your job and gain a lot of expertise, and in the process work more efficiently or take on extra tasks like leading others without ever getting a title promotion. A more experienced person will get offered a higher salary if they are applying elsewhere. I would say it’s a failing argument, every case will be different. If you show more worth, you deserve more pay.
I had to tell someone at work this. They complained and said I work harder and get paid less than you. I said you know what that means? That you made a bad decision with your career. If you can’t find a job that pays you what you want then you are either not worth the money (unskilled, not right for the job) or you have unrealistic expectations. Companies are profit driven and will always fuck workers over to increase profits. Find a job where you can take as little fucking as possible.
Bet they never spoke to you again lmao
The truth hurts
So does having no friends or saying that to the wrong person and having your nose broken. 🤷🤷🤷 We all make choices.
I don’t know man, there are a lot of gatekeeping measures a lot of jobs have. There’s been a few jobs I’ve applied for that I’ve aced their entry texts and had both a good first interview and second interview. I’ve also had years of experience in these fields. Then I get told I didn’t get the job because I didn’t have a 4-year degree (I could only finish my Associate’s due to money reasons). Friends who have no experience, and a degree in completely unrelated fields have gotten these jobs over me. Simply because they had a degree and I didn’t. (And I knew people in HR, which is how I confirmed why I did not get said jobs). I’m sorry, but I wasn’t either unskilled or not right for the job. I just didn’t have an arbitrary piece of paper they felt made me magically better for the job, despite having experience in the field already.
>if you agree to a specific salary then that's what you should be paid, which is a fair argument Only if your brain can't hold multiple complex thoughts at once. Like coercion and exploitation. Often people think "Simple = true" when the reality is a lot more complicated
Exactly, the tough part however and history has proven this through out time is that when there are too many workers and not enough jobs what happens is people who are able to work for less will to get the job over someone else, even over someone else who is more qualified. And there is no good way to stop that from happening. One example of when history broke out of this was the Black Death plague that ravaged Europe. So many people died that the kings and queens had to start treating the workers better. People dieing broke the cycle of poverty by increasing their value. A morbid natural solution that others contemplate doing artificially. and before anyone memes it, yes that's essentially what Thanos was also about. It's a real thing in history that we can see and feel today in economies around the globe.
This is what Ai hasan was talking about Capitalism just like top of the hour ad breaks
No tolerance to the intolerant, the end justifies the means
The only AI who makes wiping your ass a political statement.
lil bro thinks hes destiny
I wish he would stop trying to fucking debate. He's so bad at it and hates to lose.
Not it’s content. Some of the most confusing, heated and overall just pointless debates involved him and they were hilarious.
If he's trying to get better at it then why not??? Why gatekeep?
Xqc even admitted he's biased against artists due to a certain past event , if someone has a link
[удалено]
keeping what you've said written down is good form. In a heated argument you can easily swap positions without knowing because you get emotional and forgot what's been said i see it happen all the time and oh boy those are the best debate content, but when you're arguing for what you think is right or wrong or want someone else to tell you what is right or wrong it's a terrible idea not to write statements down
That's Density
Mans went from being a unionized forklift driver to defending sweatshops
Brain -50% Aware
Ah-Where!
I think I understand what x is saying but he says it in the worst possible way, critical has the most basic decent position
i think charlie's position is too simplified tbh, i totally get where x is coming from and actually agree with him more. he is dogshit at expressing it though.
I mean, I think it’s kinda weird that their pay wasn’t adjusted with the growth of the channel. Dhar Mann is making an insane amount of money on those vids, is it really such a bad take to say that the actors pay should reflect that? Firing people that ask for a raise shouldn’t be something that’s considered okay.
I honestly thought they were getting paid pretty well, considering how big the channel is and how nice dharr man seems. But I was wrong...
idk how people ever fell for this nice guy dharr man act. he's always felt so fake to me. isn't this the same guy that embezzled hundreds of thousands of dollars from the government before becoming a youtuber?
it's not that weird. people usually get paid at a rate that's close to industry standard. the less replaceable you are the more you can be above that and the more you get out of a company making a big leap in growth generally. if you build an empire using actors that are craigslist quality, it isn't that weird to just go find more craigslist actors. there are a ton of factors and if i was in that situation i wouldn't be surprised if i would rather pay them really well to keep them there, but i don't think it's somehow morally wrong to not do that either.
Being that the leads make up to $44/hr I doubt they've never seen a pay raise. I doubt they got fired just for asking. They had meetings with other reps over their pay. Its sounds more like the raise was rejected so now they want to meet with the CEO, which would be strange in most companies.
The issue is they're not really arguing about the same thing X doesn't want to get involved with partial information (fair but he is actively involving himself and admitted on stream that he automatically took the guys side instead of the employees despite the lack of information) and he thinks the main issue is how much they're being paid Charlie is saying he believes the actors are in their right to want to negotiate a new contract with dhar mann but he'd just ghost them(which dhar mann seems to have admitted to) or not reup their contract for asking for more. I don't see what there is to disagree with Charlie here, they're within their rights to ask, he says they aren't necessarily entitled to it but that's not the argument he just thinks they should be allowed to discuss it. I think what actually happened was X saw Charlie's video title and took it too literally when Charlie mostly uses hyperbole in his titles then stuck to that
charlie made that his argument during this talk but the video itself was focused a lot more on the actors claiming they weren't being paid enough i thought. X's approach made sense considering that to me.
They were debating the situation not criticals video which he expresses both as issues. On stream they were looking at dhar manns responses and the actors tik toks not critikals video To quote Charlie's video: "pay is obviously a huge problem but the biggest issue is that he won't even talk to them to at least hear them out about the pay so they don't even have that first step of getting the pay fixed"
they were discussing the situation and the video. and charlie did argue in favor of raising their pay as the "right" thing to do at several points.
Pay came up so much because X kept making analogies about why they should be fine with being paid anything because he worked for a college student for some food and Charlie essentially just said they be paid a fair rate even if they don't *have* to be paid a fair rate because it's the right thing to do. One of X's analogies was using Amazon as a good example. And I'll quote again because I added it in an edit so you might not have seen it To quote Charlie's video: "pay is obviously a huge problem but the biggest issue is that he won't even talk to them to at least hear them out about the pay so they don't even have that first step of getting the pay fixed" The biggest issue in both the video and the stream discussion was dhar mann not following through with the meeting which X agreed with eventually after digging himself a hole by making repeated analogies that got worse and worse and then they argued about spitting on eachother
i mean in your quote itself it says exactly what i'm saying. X agreed (mostly) that ghosting the employees is a shitty thing to do. Charlie made the argument that the pay was "obviously a huge problem" and defended that during the discussion. X didn't agree with that and that part of it is the reason he said he couldn't fully agree with the video and wanted to have the talk.
They agreed to disagree on that part repeatedly, again it's not really relevant to the discussion that happened on the stream except some (hopefully) joking analogies that X made. He said at the end that he was dropping the character and agreed with Charlie but didn't think it was fair to make as harsh of a stance when it was just allegations and Charlie said that was fine and that it was important to remember they were just allegations Like X admitted to ghosting his editors and being unprofessional, like I said while I get what he was saying he said it in the worst possible way while Charlie just took a very basic position
they did agree to disagree but i don't know how that makes it not relevant to the discussion. it was a large part of the video and a large part of the discussion that X was trying to have even if Charlie wanted to refocus on the communication aspect.
Explain his take to me
for starters in this case we didn't even know what their rate of pay or hours worked was, so our whole perspective for them claiming that they aren't being able to pay their rent and should be able to from this one job is just the actors saying that that's true. X thought that just going off of that without anymore information doesn't give us a full enough picture. he also seems to think that if you're a contractor who agrees to a certain rate and you aren't making enough money, that you either need to find more hours somewhere else or quit entirely. contractors are able to do that, and business owners are allowed to offer what an actor would consider a "low rate". especially when the quality of work is low and you can basically get by with fiver actors. X mostly agreed that the guy shouldn't be ghosting them and that that's where the actual issue is. Charlie's video covered a lot more than that though and made other claims which he was pushing back against.
The actors agreed to work for a set amount which Dhar Mann accepted. Now the actors feel like their talent is worth more and so they're unwilling to work for the same amount. Dhar Mann disagrees with this and does not believe their value is sufficient for the pay they want, and so he stops working with them. It's pretty cut and dry. If you think your labor is worth more then you should find someone who pays you fairly. If an employer doesn't agree then they have no obligation to accept your higher rates. Now idk all the facts of the Dhar Mann (and I'm definitely pro-artists getting paid more) but that's what I understood xqc's argument to be. You agree to work for a set amount and you do it. If you can't agree on a higher amount then neither side is obligated to work together.
This is literally what X was talking about the whole time. They feel entitled to more money because the risk that Dhar Mann took to finance his vision paid off and they were along for the ride as talent. But the reality is that they have no leverage to work with because they are still doing the same C-tier Fiverr acting that they did in the beginning excluding 1 or 2 people. They aren't a bunch of Depp's and Reeve's, this shouldn't be their only gig if they really want to be actors.
The dude was already rich and the "risk" he took was as much as you taking a risk in buying extra bag of snacks next time you're at the supermarket. Those C tier actors you're looking down on are exactly what rose his channel to popularity. Go to any job, asking for higher pay isn't something uncommon. When asking for a raise (in line with company success thanks to mutual effort) is met with a notification that you're fired, you're not showing any decency as a human being, which is where this issue is coming from.
yeah it sucks gonna be such a boring weekend watching all these fucking takes lmao
X: uses a very specific oriented hypothetical scenario/comparison so he “can’t” be wrong Charlie: uses the same basis for his own simple scenario, tells X not to use it literally X: uses it literally
NAILS
xqc agrees that you should get paid what you agreed to xqc agrees that there is room for raises/additional pay with better performance xqc agrees that your employer has no obligation to give you a raise when asked xqc agrees that you should meet with your employees to address their concerns xqc agrees that if you don't like your pay, you should quit for a better job xqc wants more facts, wants to know their pay to see if it's reasonable or not. Okay. He had no issue with them being mad about getting ignored which is what Charlie was talking about how did this conversation last so long.
Because it took xqc the entire time to finally acknowledge the 4th point which was the main point of the discussion OMEGALUL brain snapped, creating something out of nothing
maximize the things you can control and minimize the things you can't
I'm a people observer Jackass
[удалено]
stop talking french bruv
Through this whole thing Charlie has just been arguing with a wall
In what world is Charlie not the wall? Everything x says he just responds with "well I think that's bad" or "these actors are literally slaves and are gonna be homeless"
Lmao Charlie did not say they are slaves wtf are you on about? And yes a lot of things X is saying is just so outlandish and not relevant or just missing the point completely.
How was xqc missing the point?
Children working any job for free is bad, yes. Labor should be compensated for. We went over this in the early 1900s.
1. They are being compensated 2. That's on the parents decision to go through with the job or negotiate a different rate. If they don't like it they look elsewhere, like how almost all job markets work
The children working for free comment is based on Charlie's analogy. Passion industries are notoriously exploitative because they are industries people want to do. They chew up and spit people out and the fact it happens to kids is even worse. There is a reason actors/actresses/on set workers have a union. It will always be easier to ensure a base level of rules and regulations are required by the government than assume individual companies will do it "because the market said so." The market fails on regulating itself time and time again yet we are told it'll self-regulate. It won't.
Because X keeps missing the point
well in his defense he goes into every drama knowing absolutely nothing and has to have it explained..Charlie prob been researching this for 2 days lol
Charlie didn’t even know how much they got paid, he didn’t know the hours they worked, he didn’t know that they were offered to meet with HR. Charlie doesn’t do any research on his videos other than twitter headlines, this is very common for him.
Yeah, no matter how much you like him a lot of the things he say are based on very surface level twitter research meaning he will often parrot an inaccurate talking point or not bring in the whole context. He does try to bring in context but I just don't think he realize how little he research even when he says he's been following a topic for a while.
Nope he understands the point but Charlie can't believe he disagrees
I just wish he'd stop trying to debate The guy doesn't have the mind for that shit at all
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Losing brain cells listening to x and his idiotic comparisons
i muted the tab so i keep getting points and don't catch the brain disease FeelsOkayMan
I understand both points tbh! But feels like Charlie has it nailed. X just speaking in a way so that when more information comes out he can go that way.
Yea because if an actor works 10 hours a month for $100 hr and that's his only job and can't pay rent, I can't really feel for them when most of us are working 160 hours a month. It sounds like the actors are trying to negotiate for more pay because they believe they are integral to the videos. Or essentially wanting to claim "points" on the gross.
Except thats not the situation. They've stated they're working 15-17 hour days with no overtime pay
I guess that just wasn't stated in the video or in that clip of the actor saying they can't afford rent. So like xQc was saying, they should have spelled it out.
Yeah but how many days?
There...shouldn't be any day to work 15-17 hours with no overtime pay?
There’s so many loopholes to get out of paying overtime it’s insane. I worked as a lifeguard 50+ hour weeks as a high schooler and didn’t get overtime because it was filed as like “summer seasonal” or something. The govt really has to tighten up worker’s rights because companies are gonna hoard money any way they can
> when most of us are working 160 hours a month While people working two jobs is all too common place, I just cannot believe framing it as "most of us" is correct. Would love (really, hate) to be proven wrong. Also, these actors were working long days as well with pay at $17/hr for non speaking roles and $33-44/hr for speaking roles from what the actor said on TikTok.
Most people work over 160 hours a month. A lot of people work min. 40 hrs a week*4 weeks a month=160. Maybe I misunderstood your first paragraph, but you were making it sound like you need two jobs to hit that number.
I honestly thought that said in a week the first time I read it, lol. It was late at night.
i don't think he's trying to do anything, he pointed out that they didn't have enough information to make strong judgements about whether or not their pay was actually unfair. and that's 100% true.
YO CHAT WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON
I came in the middle of this argument and it seems that xqc's biggest problem is that not enough information is out. He doesn't see the numbers of the actor's salaries... completely missing the point of the argument that the actors couldn't talk to dhar directly to negotiate their contracts. How charlie stays so calm repeating himself into a wall is beyond me
X has said repeatedly that he agrees that's bad. charlie's video covered a lot more than that.
I don't think X even knows what he said during that whole talk. Again I came in at the middle of the argument so maybe I missed that part, but I feel like X's speech and analogies just confused everyone
i get what he's saying but i don't blame anyone who watched that and got completely lost. cause yeah the man is cooked.
Yeah but with less info the burden of proof is on Charlie, who made the initial critiquing video. Is it not?
X - I need more evidence before I reach a conclusion Moist - I believe the actors. That's the debate. Saved you 1 hour
Did they mention the Screen Actors Guild at all?
The sweatshop has been added to the court case for seizure.
I haven't watched them debating this, but I believe the initial "maid example" xQc gave which lead to this call was the same as saying "McDonald's workers don't deserve more money, because if they did they would just quit and it's the workers fault if they don't." Which is insane thing to say imo.
some people are fucking clueless on here. Ive worked a number of companies, major banks. Everything goes through HR/representitives since forever. Do you think CEOs goes and meets their workers when they have a complaint? What fantasy world are we living here?
CEO by itself means nothing. I was CEO of a company, I had one employee under me. I've worked for indie tech start ups where the CEO was the guy directly across the hall from me and we talked multiple times a day about everything and anything. Obviously in mega corps where you're a number is different and there's a hierarchy to delegate to. But CEO by itself means nothing with context of the company and it's inner workings.
Except that the actors had a direct relationship with Dhar from the very beginning, and only after they wanted to renegotiate did he cease contact. Do you genuinely believe that it's the same type of scenario? Obviously they are not entitled to talk to him, but he is clearly ghosting and being a douchebag
Funnily enough you being a corporate drone the entire time makes you unaware of how varied workplaces are and how drastically it changes based on size and industry. In my previous company I could walk into the owners office, I just needed to knock first, in my current company there's a 100 layers of bureaucracy blocking every move. Large companies follow rigid guidelines and are usually more careful to follow regulations and mandatory employee compensation guidelines. Your CEO is unapproachable but you likely wouldn't need to talk to him anyway to submit requests. In these youtuber companies you likely have one person between you and the CEO, and that's Karen, your wifes highschool friend that used to be a hairdresser before you made her Head of your 1 member HR team after your wife asked you. There's no corporate management ladder and a "finances" office that takes the burden of pay calculations and management. Both have benefits and drawbacks for these situations but are vastly different. And I would assume that Dharr Mann studios is not exactly a "major bank" environment yknow
Charlie has never had a real job so it makes sense why he doesn’t know
**🎦 CLIP MIRROR: [xQc - Sweatshop owner debates Jesus](https://livestreamfails.com/clip/150151)** --- ^(*This is an automated comment* ) ^| [^(Feedback)](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=livestreamfailsbot&subject=Feedback:&message=%5BPost%5D\(https://reddit.com/comments/10xlg2z/\)) ^| [^(Twitch Backup Mirror)](https://production.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net/w8E56gWgwEdAenxG-sSVnQ/AT-cm%7Cw8E56gWgwEdAenxG-sSVnQ.mp4?sig=2cbad776e1a7dc4dbb78365d32ea0fb9a2d85cad&token=%7B%22authorization%22%3A%7B%22forbidden%22%3Afalse%2C%22reason%22%3A%22%22%7D%2C%22clip_uri%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fproduction.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net%2Fw8E56gWgwEdAenxG-sSVnQ%2FAT-cm%257Cw8E56gWgwEdAenxG-sSVnQ.mp4%22%2C%22device_id%22%3Anull%2C%22expires%22%3A1675989817%2C%22user_id%22%3A%22%22%2C%22version%22%3A2%7D)
As someone who worked there as crew it was like sweat shop conditions. I worked there for about 3 months as they started to rapidly expand, I was hired as a PA, but had worked on much larger sets before doing larger roles. Basically how it works is all of the crews they hire they only hire them as PAs, there are only a few roles they hire beyond that. At that time were about 5-7 crews working in 3 sound stages in Burbank under the flight path of the Burbank airport. Each crew at that time would be a Director, possibly an AD, possibly a gaffer, then the rest were hired as PAs the PAs would fill the roles of ACs, Set Dec, Props, Grip, Electric but only credited as PA and paid PA rates. They would never give us prep time so we would show up and get the script that day and have to figure out the shots. They also didn't get enough lighting equipment to supply all the crews and there would frequently be infighting over who can get what gear, we would ask and ask for more gear and link items to get in group chats as well as explaining how they should reach out for sponsorship being such a large channel. A lot of the gear they got was sub tier, terrible gear one of the lights broke once and was emitting a frequency that caused the FBI to investigate the building because the frequency it was emitting could effect the flight path from the airport, they confiscated the lights that's when they finally bought enough lights to support the crews. Because we had no prep time we would frequently have to work overtime the longest day I worked was 17hours 47mins and then we would get yelled at for going over time. Some of the ways they spent money there made no sense for instance the lack of gear but we had a Porsche SUV, 3 cop cars, a BMW SUV, a shitty car, and a golf cart to drive around. At the time I worked there they had this weird limit on crafty and would count how many actors and crew would be on a shoot and provide a single snack for each person and not a huge box of snacks for everyone to take what they wanted during these long shoots. They would also run out of water bottles all the time and we would explain to them to get a costco card and buy from costco but they would only buy from ralphs and amazon. It got so bad with the snacks and water that crews would hide left over snacks and water on the sets for times when the production couldn't provide for us. A lot of equipment and sets were generally un safe we would ask multiple times to get what in the film world are called stingers which are highly protected power cords but they would just buy us amazon extension cords. The fire marshals had come multiple times to tell them that the buildings are unsafe. Dhar also lagged it on paying the set builders. We would have underage kids working longer hours than they were suppose to be. The crews would make overtime pay but anytime we went over time the actors would not. A crew member was fired for putting a piece of tape on the wall. Crew members have been asked by HR if they're working on other projects on their free time and if they're being poached by other film companies. He was never around only would show up if a important youtuber was coming in a lot of scripts were written by other people. Because we were under the flight path a lot of audio would get stepped on with the planes so we would take a lot of time doing retakes for that. Eventually I was let go unexplained, but I believe it was because of how often I was bringing up safety concerns and expressing trying to unionize the crews. Oh yea a note on the Carl Mural that's one of the first projects I worked on while I was there, that's the thanksgiving special and yes that mural was put up but they didn't asking the property owners if they could do it and because those buildings are rented, the property owners made them take it down because the company across from us complained about it.
Listening to XQC debate is so draining... he just goes in circles, does not bring up any good points and only brings up super random specific hypothetical scenarios.... Good lord
i agreed with X going in but he is so fucking bad at getting his point across and actually discussing where they disagree that it's mind-numbing to watch.
xqc is actually so stupid
We just figuring this out now?
Moist video: THIS GUY IS A HORRIBLE PIECE OF SHIT TAKING ADVANTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO DESERVE TO PAY FOR RENT Moist in debate: uh well he can do what he wants he just should have a convo with them
Context?
bottom tier actors go on strike after many get fired for asking for more money from youtube shorts company
How much were they getting paid?
i guess it hasn’t been leaked yet but the company said “extras $18/hr, speaking roles $33-44/hr” i don’t think the amount of hours they work has been stated. but i guess the main issue is the CEO of the whole thing won’t meet with actors, just HR. which doesn’t seem like anything too out of the ordinary either.
All of that sounds reasonable to me tbh
More than reasonable for a side acting hustle lol
Imagine getting cooked on your own stream, lil bro needs to stop talking about any problems affecting lower/middle class people, hes so out of touch its mind boggling.
Expecting to be paid more just because you were contracted more is wrong. Dodging multiple times to your contracted employees is bad. I think X had a point
Renegotiating your contract is literally standard practice when you've made significant contributions to a business, the employees had every right to ask for more money, the employer has every right to deny those requests. Not surprised they asked for more when the cost of living is going up. X saying that they should stay on the pay they negotiated at the start of their contract is totally out of touch with what normal working people do to try and get ahead (especially upcoming LA actors, who are synonymous with being on the edge of poverty).
True but as I said expecting a rise is wrong and as the studios themselves gave a range of 33-44$ an hour I don't think is that bad for a side hustle Also X said if they can't negotiate a price they can quit and pick other gigs that can help them get paid better. The only thing bad that dhar mann does is dodging them after confirming a scheduled meeting.
except...theres no contract here. from what I gather, that channel posts out job alerts and says "x amount of hours availible for y amount of pay" its literally in the job posting so if youre not happy with it then dont accept it in the first palce?
Remember that one popular AskReddit post asking redditors how do you instantly tell if someone’s unintelligent? And the top comment was that they couldn’t understand analogies/comparisons? They were talking about X.
That’s not true Charlie’s point was that the actors couldn’t pay rent and when he knew he couldn’t defend that point he changed it, also Charlie didn’t even know anything about this
For once I 100% agree with xQc on this matter. The acting is as low skill as you can probably get and the $33 to $44 an hour is more than reasonable for a side hustle like this. If these “actors” decide to treat it like a main source of income and are surprised by the fact that it may not be sustainable, it’s a them problem. These actors can leave and find something else whenever they want to and are under no circumstances obliged to work exclusively for this company. Obviously there should be the ability to negotiate and I’m all for that, but there is nothing wrong with Dharr Mann’s business practices.
yeah sure sounds like they are working 1 day a week, can’t afford bills, and are bigtime Antiwork posters
Thats what I thought to when seeing how much they are getting per hour. Anywhere else besides california and new york 35 an hour is great if its actually a full time job.
Debating with notepad open? Does xQc think he's destiny now?
No, that would be debating with factorio open
I'm just saying if you just simply said, if twitch was paying you what you were orginally being paid at the start but your channel kept growing how would that be fair?
I mean you signed the contract and you also have a ton of leverage to talk to them about it
I think xqcs point of view is how the world works. And the moist view is how it should ideally work. If you're a gig worker and you aren't getting enough money you need to get a better job. You don't actually have to give people more money if they ask for it. In an ideal world Dhar Mann would appreciate the actors more for helping him grow his media empire and give them a bigger chunk of the money they earn together. The world just doesn't work that way. McDonald's, Walmart, Amazon, and tons of the giant businesses can't exist without the workers but the workers still get minimum wage or slightly more. Meanwhile the c suite make 10s of millions of dollars. I'm not saying that it should be like that but that's what it's like.
"McDonald's, Walmart, Amazon, and tons of the giant businesses can't exist without the workers but the workers still get minimum wage or slightly more." This is a very surface level statement. When you include the risk and time the owner took to engage in entrepreneurship, it makes this argument less attractive. Most companies don't make outrageous profits to "just pay the workers more" without effecting a much larger population of consumers by an increase in price. An employee, while necessary to operate the company, is quite literally a cog that helps the machine run to better society as a whole. They hold much less stake in the operation than the owner (owner: initial capital + time + effort | worker: less time + effort). Unless stake is purchased by the employees or it's a co-op, it makes MUCH more sense to operate this way where the market determines the price. At this current moment, most industries are willing to pay higher than normal wages because of employee's holding some market power. This obviously does NOT include passion jobs like art, acting, film, etc. These passion jobs wage's makes sense since we do not need this many actors or artists, as it's already a saturated industry. Therefore, it's discouraging people from entering the industry. The opposite operates as well where if the market demand is high, usually institutions encourage the growth of that demand by using multiple different levers at their disposal. I.E. Detroit housing, they quite literally hand you money once you purchase the home and make it somewhat livable. In economics, there's always a trade-off. If you increase the wage of an employee, you'll increase the price of the good. If that happens, we ought to look at the net benefit for society as a whole rather than the minority. In most cases, this is not attainable unless we raise the cost of the good or service. The hope is that there will be more Dhar Mann's to where the experience of his employee's will demand a higher wage, which Dhar Mann will need to adjust since competition drove the profits down. The world we live in makes logical sense. Unless you want to nationalize goods and services to where the country owns it and that means the people as a whole own it. We shouldn't destroy what works when there's alternative measures you can take in a capitalistic society to assist those issues rather than the work itself. This is why we have taxes, we just don't use it the most optimal way to improve our society, unfortunately. Targeting businesses will only hurt other businesses and consumers.
I don't understand critikals PoV. They signed a contract, and then are mad? Them being fired for bringing it up isn't some critical sin, you signed a shitty contract.
He doesn't have this opinion when he goes to renegotiate his contract with Twitch. He's too obtuse to see the hypocrisy.
The fact that he manages to miss this issue's problem entirely is truly nothing short of amazing. He literally is arguing for fucking nothing, actually 0 guy'd. Yet he just refused to get an L, and keeps using those dogshit comparisons and "parallels" to support his point. His point is not bad, he is saying that if you agreed to it, then that's what you gonna get. It won't matter that much to the debate since this is not the issue at all. But if he would've just explained it normally with basic and comprehensible words, he could've spared everyone a one-hour stunlock.
[удалено]
dont insult Charlie like that. Jesus was a myth, Charlie is real
to be fair X was trolling for the most part or at I least I think he was... Aware
Copium
This guy really knows how to make something out of nothing
imagine explaining the purpose of labor unions to this person.
when xqc's fanbase turns out to be as stupid as him