Phyllisha Anne Answers Questions About The Entertainment Adult Union

Phyllisha posted this as comments but in the interest of fairness I decided to make them a front page post because they answer a lot of questions, Pay attention y’all Phyllisha wrote this not me I am not taking any stance here except to give Phyllisha the same voice that others have been afforded and to reiterate that I DO support performers coming together to make their lives better and the Entertainment Adult Union has jumped through many hoops to become recognized as the ONLY spokespersons for adult performers in the eyes of the Federal Government and the Department of Labor.  Phyllisha makes some good points in her responses.

I thought I would take a moment and answer all of these concerns one by one even though they are a few weeks old. I apologize I could not do it sooner, this is the first chance I have been given to catch up on things.

 

We are working very, very hard every day on creating the foundation and the correct structure of this Union. To all of us this is a new and exciting journey in life, so we are trying to make sure we have this foundation good and solid before we continue to make steps forward. We do realize that perhaps this step is taking to long, but we are figuring that, as important as this will hopefully become to each and everyone of us, that this is a step we need to make sure is done to the best of our ability at this current time.

 

We have a very very long list of goals and everyday the list seems to grow longer, with building our foundation we are beginning to create committees in which a team will help in reaching and work towards achieving each of these goals. We are reaching out to this industry and gratefully accepting all that are willing to jump in and help. The more of us who are willing to take the time to help the faster we will be able to reach these goals. I will make sure we place these goals on the website so that it is clear as to what they are.

 

We appointed Sean Michaels because we felt he is well respected, he is currently working as a performer in the industry and well, he is Sean Michaels 🙂   And anyone who has had the opportunity to meet and work with Sean, knows what a gentleman he truly is.

Evan Stone had decided not to take the position because he wanted a higher one.  As stated in the constitution of this Union “until, in which time this Union is created, the officers can  be appointed” because, well we have to start somewhere.

 We are not focusing all of our attention, at this very moment, in attracting performers to join so we can collect money. We are not at this time collecting any dues or asking for anything, except to join and please take part in the creation of something that will  become incredible and benefit all of our futures.

Instead we have been focusing on other things, and as stated above we will place all of our goals on the website so that our intentions are clear, even though these goals seem to grow on a daily basis.

The elections were a mess, I openly admit,  it was our first effort and it taught us that we have still have a lot to learn and we learned what not to do on that front.

Trying to scam a performer is the complete opposite of what we are achieving.  Everyone of the officers and board members, who will be announced the moment it is government approved, are performers themselves, why would they spend all this time trying to scam you instead of help you?  Every board member is someone that has been in this industry for a good amount of time. It is not a bunch of people who were never involved with this industry who do not understand the unique needs of this industry.

The two advertisements on the website  are there to take up space and balance the look until such time as we get real ads, yet you have found a way to make that an issue anyway. So yes if anyone would like anything placed in those spaces please send me an email we would be happy to put it up and no there is no charge to do so at this time.

We do not feel we need to demand anything, from anyone. That is not how we are trying to go about things.  We are more looking for ways which,  as an industry we can all come to an agreement that can benefit everyone.  Demanding that producers pay for testing is taking money out of the production cost to shoot the movie, so that is not our first approach. But if we had health insurance that could cover the cost of the testing plus, performers have insurance in case we do catch something,  it seems to be a win/win situation. Except for perhaps the testing centers. But they have made enough money from us, in my opinion, anyway.

The piracy link was placed by someone who had control of the website, that person no longer has control of website and that link has been gone now for awhile. Unless, perhaps I am missing something?

A credit union has been offered to us, and that is another thing we have been working on.  But it’s not that easy because as we stand now, our industry links us as a “high risk” profile. Therefore we have to start there first, working with the EOCC to create  a “can not discriminate against your source of legal income act.”   So that your job title can not hold you back from things such as loans, as long as you qualify otherwise.

For anyone to state they will not hire someone because of the union is  illegal.  And that is a law that has been in effect since the beginning of Unions.  So I would hope, no one would ever make such a statement.

We want to help all performers, if you really think about it performers who are putting  their life at risk, each and every time they do a shoot, they should have something to show for it but so many don’t because there was no one there to guide them.

I think with the numbers this Union is achieving, without even trying that hard, we shall soon prove to those in this industry that believe performers are not worth anything, that we actually do have the mentality to succeed after all.   Who knew? Eh ? 🙂

Raw Alex –  now see, that’s what hurts my heart.  Why would anyone want to take advantage of someone who would,  after a scene leave crying, puking, and running for the door?    This business is not made for everyone, for some it hurts their soul, and you can see it the minute you meet them, it is written all over their face and in their eyes.  Aren’t there enough performers coming through the door everyday, as you state, that when you see a performer such as this, that perhaps some one should explain to her the truth of what she is about to do, and shoot someone else instead?   And Don’t you dare make that statement ,  well that isn’t my job, she walked in the door by herself, I’m not her dad.  Because that’s the problem with this industry these days.  No body cares about anybody else.  Don’t you guys remember when we were a family?  Where we looked out for each other?  The only  thing that makes us not that way today is that shit right there.

So what if our family got bigger, that just means there is more of us to love…

Mike South, thank you so much for always speaking the truth and voicing your honest opinion, thank you for your criticism, as well for your guidance.  And thank you for having the balls to say a lot of things,  I wish I had the balls to say myself.   Thank you for the prep talks and the motivation you keep giving us. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

And Thank you lurking for voicing your support, with all our hearts.

Love Phyllisha Anne

36 Replies to “Phyllisha Anne Answers Questions About The Entertainment Adult Union”

  1. mharris127

    I have one comment regarding health insurance covering the cost of testing. Most health insurance companies are for-profit and even the ones that are not must cover their costs. No insurance company is going to pay for $300 per month in VD testing and only charge the members $30, that would be suicidal for their company. The only fair solution is for producers to pay, probably through a per-performer, per-shoot fee. Kink already pays for the VD testing for most of their performers, unfortunately there are only 2-3 producers doing so (I have read that Alex Braun also pays for testing for his performers but only because he wants a 7 day test instead of the standard 14) leaving them paying fully for a test that 3-5 producers use during its 14 day validity period. I estimate the cost to producers if testing were paid for through a per-performer, per-shoot fee would average less than $500 per four-scene movie (admittedly the 50-man gangbangs would cost a lot more because of the number of performers in the scene).

  2. MikeSouth

    I tend to agree with you Mat but at the very least producers should pay for testing as is mandated by law, that burden should not fall on performers. I think as the Union explores this they will come to that realization as well…on the other hand it doesn’t hurt to ask, and kudos to them for trying…who knows they may find an insurance companie that will work with them on this…God bless em if so.

  3. phyllisha

    When we attended the leader Union conference we were setting In The same room with the people who run health care. Setting at the same table with all the people and industry’s that run the world, right there. Face to face. Did you know that health care is the biggest industry in the world? And they have trillions of dollars put aside to work with people just like us. And it is amazing what you can accomplish when your setting right there at the table with someone, not trying to reach them on the phone. We are not currently working with any insurance companies we are working with the people who run health care themselves. And they assure us that we can find a way to work things out so that the people of the adult industry have a good affordable health care not only for themselves but their families too! We are still working out all the details but we are moving ahead even if it’s slowly, so cross your fingers this works. Performers will be able to get into rehab centers at little to no cost, medication covered, even perhaps a unemployment plan so we can stop working if we do catch something to stop spreading stuff. The government. Entities such as health care are excited to work with us because this is the first time that they have had any real communication between our world and theirs. And even I am amazed of how much everyone actually does want to help. If we will just open the door and let them 🙂

  4. phyllisha

    When we attended the leader Union conference we were setting In The same room with the people who run health care. Setting at the same table with all the people and industry’s that run the world, right there. Face to face. Did you know that health care is the biggest industry in the world? And they have trillions of dollars put aside to work with people just like us. And it is amazing what you can accomplish when your setting right there at the table with someone, not trying to reach them on the phone. We are not currently working with any insurance companies we are working with the people who run health care themselves. And they assure us that we can find a way to work things out so that the people of the adult industry have a good affordable health care not only for themselves but their families too! We are still working out all the details but we are moving ahead even if it’s slowly, so cross your fingers this works. Performers will be able to get into rehab centers at little to no cost, medication covered, even perhaps a unemployment plan so we can stop working if we do catch something to stop spreading stuff. The government. Entities such as health care are excited to work with us because this is the first time that they have had any real communication between our world and theirs. And even I am amazed of how much everyone actually does want to help. If we will just open the door and let them 🙂

    And would you have rather tried and failed then to have never tried at all?
    That the little saying i keep taped to my bathroom mirror. Thought I would share

  5. mharris127

    I do agree that it is better to have tried and failed than to have never tried at all. Health insurance is now available on the health insurance exchange for whatever state a performer lives in, you won’t get it any cheaper and some performers would be eligible for a government subsidy to pay part of the cost. I also hope some form of disability insurance is available (most independent contractors aren’t covered on the California state disability plan) but I think producers are going to have to start paying for testing, preferably by a per-scene charge for each performer rather than the patch-work system the industry has now where if they work for Kink or Alex Braun they get their test paid for but otherwise they pay out the nose themselves. I think if a fair system was worked out which covered the costs and didn’t put a disproportionate share of the bill on a couple of producers the industry would do it just to get that OSHA monkey off of their backs. There will always be those third-tier companies that use the paper copy of the VD test results that have to be given to performers but most companies would likely participate. For most companies films it would likely cost less than $500 per film, obviously if there is a large cast the charge would be more as this would likely be a per-performer, per-scene charge.

  6. phyllisha

    Yah! thank you Mharris those are great and helpful ideas to help figure out how we can get things to work for the better. Thank you so much. When someone signs up for the union there’s a little box that ask, “What in the industry would you like to see changed?” And almost 75% of people have expressed their concern over the cost of the testing and how they would like the testing centers changed So the testing seems to be a huge concern from everyone :).

    So as many ideas that might work the better so that perhaps together we can figure this one step out 🙂

    Yah! Again thank you for the positive feed back 😉

  7. jilted

    The FIRST and most important aspect of any union is the safe, and legal working conditions of its employees. Phylissha, for you to advocate for anything other than for employers to fulfull their legal obligation to pay for any and all pre- and post employment testing and treatment is a complete red herring. AIM, and Sharon Mitchell searched for years for any insurance company that would cover anything close to the amount of voluntary std testing that performers are required to undertake,,,,THERE IS NO INSURANCE COMPANY IN THE WORLD that will ever do this, and to maintain that you are searching for such coverage is a pure waste of time, and gives a false impression that this might even be possible.

    THE LAW REQUIRES employers to pay for testing. Your reasoning that it would add to production costs and therefore you must find some way to get that cost onto someone else besides the producers, whose legal cost it is, is again ridiculous. As a union of performers you MUST advocate that the EMPLOYERS follow the law,,, not look for loopholes to get them off the hook for the costs that are legally theirs to bear. Regarding being at the table with people who run healthcare,,,well being someone who owns part of the patent on the test that the industry so lovingly uses, I wonder why I wasnt invited.(And I provided to the industry for years at the biggest discount price on the planet I might add, and then got ripped off for $650,000.00) ANd PLEASE, dont even try to tell anyone here that any insurance company is ever going to cover all the industry std testing,,,it aint NEVER going to happen, and actually, I think you know that already.

    PS..If you would like some help on how to get this aspect of your union done correctly, Mike has my email…let me know, I wouold be glad to help,,,if you want to do it RIGHT!!

  8. LurkingReader

    @Phylissha

    Several people here have tried and failed to point out major flaws to the proposals you’re telling us are possible. I’m not trying to knock you or bust your bubble, I’m hoping you’ll take a step back before making promises that will disappoint members who join the union with the specific intent of making those promises a reality.

    Like it or not the IC (independent contractor) vs IE (intermittent employee) issue is going to wreak havoc on most ideas you have. Most not ALL employers are bound by the NLRA. Just because a worker paid as an IC is considered an IE for this or that producer by OSHA,the courts or DOL doesn’t mean this applies to every producer.

    Exempt Employees is an other conflict I see you running up against because the union is (or was..haven’t checked new site) courting owners who are exempt to become members.

    Not for nothing health care professionals sitting at the table with you at a union leadership meeting are there to learn how to do their job just like you were. Everything you mentioned about the healthcare policies they promised is part of ACA…what they don’t promise is coverage for work-related health services ie testing.

    Workers Comp provides coverage for treatment & missed work but good luck proving a STD was work related in an industry with decades of experience using health privacy to cover their asses. In 2011 FSC used the LA Times to persuade workers to exercise their individual right of refusal to participate if the health dept came knocking. The FSC was doing their job … covering membership asses. It raises red flags to see the union joining forces with FSC before they have laid out plans to shift testing costs from performers to producers as a COGS (cost of goods sold).

    IMO pursuing a shared ‘stakeholder’ costing method ought to be a short term goal priority with royalties top of the intermediate goals priorities. Perhaps when Sabrina has time to explain European royalty processes i’ll change my mind but it seems to make sense lifting the upfront testing costs will benefit everyone. Strippers & escorts doing occasional scenes to promote their brand….new performers and cash starved one offs will perceive no testing expense as a better benefit than royalties for content they haven’t yet produced. Long timers who create their own content will benefit by taking advantage of the lower costs producers can negotiate while they mentor newcomers to negotiate royalties. Producers will have time to set up alternate revenue streams to offset the loss of their residual income and adjust to testing as a COGS expense.

  9. mharris127

    My understanding is most health insurance companies won’t cover the HIV-RNA test unless there is an HIV diagnosis, they insist on the cheaper Elisa/Western Blot series (probably good enough for a civilian but possibly not for anyone performing in the adult industry routinely — actually the best thing would be for a mandatory Elisa/WB series along with the HIV-RNA). Most also only cover any HIV test once or twice per year unless there are active symptoms that lead a doc to believe that HIV infection is a possibility. Even Medicare (which I have) ostensibly only covers one test per year (my understanding is that they do cover HIV-RNA or HIV-DNA, however — at least in my case they have and I don’t have HIV) unless someone is in a high-risk category or appears to have a VD. They are lenient on approving those claims but even they would never approve bi-monthly testing even for someone having sex with 20 different partners a month.

    Back to my suggestion that industry HIV testing use both HIV-RNA and Elisa/WB I make that suggestion because HIV-RNA has a quicker detection time but it is theoretically possible for someone to take appropriate medication for HIV and not be detected, the Elisa/WB series is slower to detect (about 30 days rather than the 10-20 the HIV-RNA test does) but once infected even on appropriate medication a person infected with HIV will always have a positive test. Some states have also legalized at-home Elisa HIV tests (which could be used on a set easily) that can be taken anywhere and a test result is available within 20 minutes, Mike uses them in Georgia along with an HIV-RNA test requirement and I would think he takes them to FL with him when he films there if they aren’t available there. I would have to research to see if they are available in CA (you could also take a trip to Walgreens to see if they stock them in your area, there is one in Chatsworth at the corner of De Soto and Devonshire, their phone number is 818–341–4339), I have never seen one up close to be able to elaborate further as they are not allowed to be sold in MI and the last thing on my mind is checking for HIV tests when I leave the state.

  10. rawalex

    Mharris: when it comes to the cost of tests, you are missing the key point:

    Will the consumer pay for it?

    See, it doesn’t matter if the producer or the perform pays for it out of their part of the pie, it matters how much pie there is. If the consumers are unwilling to pay significantly more for their porn in order to support hundreds of additional dollars of testing per performer, then it’s all moot.

    My take is that it’s a performer issue. If you want to drive a cab, you show up with a cab drivers license and current clean manifest to the get the job. If you want to fuck on camera, you need to get tested and show up with a clean, valid test.

    Part of the problem here is that a single test may cover more than one shoot. Producers would be pretty foolish to pay a testing fee every time if no new test is actually happening. A girl (or guy) gets a test, does 10 scenes – how do you break then out fairly, without fraud on either side? How much does the first scene pay? All of it? None of it?

    It’s not a simple thing.

  11. BT

    I may be wrong here – and I’m sure someone will point it out – but, I think producers paying for the test is the law, just as companies pay for mandatory urine tests to make sure employees aren’t on drugs. Licensing is a different animal – if there was a license for sex workers, then it would be up to the sex worker to obtain the credentials out of their own pocket, just like truck drivers pay for their operators licenses and dental hygenists go to school and then pay to pass the state boards. So, if the law is that producers should pay for the tests, the cost of the test isn’t the issue – in other words, a business cannot choose to not comply with the law because compliance is expensive.

    With regard to health insurance, if the union has enough members to attract a health insurer to provide coverage to union members, then the union could build testing into the policy – it wouldn’t be free; the insurer would factor that into the cost of premiums, just as I’m sure the insurers will factor in the cost of treating a higher incidence of venereal diseases.

    My gut tells me that performers would probably be better off getting health insurance from a dot.gov exchange under the affordable care act than a plan developed for the industry. The reason is the risk pool. Premiums are set based on the likelihood of the individuals in the pool needing health care. In this instance, you’d have a relatively small number of performers and, given the high risk nature of the work from a health perspective, a greater likelihood, if you’re an insurer, of paying for pregnancies, venereal diseases, HIV in male performers, or bruises and injuries from bondage and kink videos. Heck, think of a performer like Dani Daniels, who I like, from an insurer’s point of view – she has unprotected sex with men on set and when she’s off-set, she writes about her love of scotch and sky diving. From an insurer’s point of view, she’s a health insurance claim just waiting to happen.

  12. LurkingReader

    @rawalex

    “It’s not a simple thing.” hits the nail on the head as does “Will the consumer pay for it?” and comes full circle to it’s not a simple thing by asking who is the (industry std test panel) consumer?.

    What content consumers will or won’t pay for is a separate issue than who’s responsible for the cost of testing aka the consumer. Before there is a pie to split there are up-front costs and the risk that content (product) consumer price point won’t result in a profit. Performer payroll and location rentals are upfront costs that must be recouped before there is pie to ask which part pays. I’ll grant you that upfront costs to produce porn are a significant industry contribution to the overall societal economic pie.

    In the eyes of labor regulation agencies when a performer is booked with the condition that they show up to the shoot with a clean test it is considered ‘pre-employment testing’ with the expense assigned to the organization backing the payroll check.

    Shared costing means reduced test costs for each shoot which could be further reduced if agents pay for each escort gig they book and performers pay for each content scene they produce. Preventing fraud will be in the performers best interest if they want repeat bookings.

    Using a system of single access verification codes that require performers to grant each access makes them accountable for preventing fraud, gives them more control over their medical privacy. Each access code created during the test validity period reduces the cost for everyone.

    Transitioning to single access codes would require negotiating with test providers on the incremental billing process and regulatory agencies to accept those access codes to satisfy medical records compliance. “It’s not a simple thing.” 🙂

  13. LurkingReader

    @BT

    ACA changed a lot of the risk pool surcharge stuff so a union negotiated group plan will be cheaper with better individual/family coverage and lower benefits than any ACA plan.

    Given the nature of reported/reportable porn income, IRS income verification and subsidy processes its an invitation all sorts of nughtmares. Performers with low income last year landing on Medicaid this year winding up with sticker shock and no insurance next year.

    With the insurance industry trying to drop coverage for annual pelvic exams to once every three to five years you can bet it won’t be long before they object to paying for anything they can say was work related except HIV. Ripped & prolapsed asses aren’t communicable health risks…blah blah blah

  14. Karmafan

    Porn needs to learn from the music industry that it should be an ala carte type business model where fans can pick and choose what scenes they want to pay for. Say $1.29, $1.49, or $1.99 per scene and folks might go for that. Right now memberships to sites are $29-$39 a month with reoccuring billing and the fan might not like whats being offered at that site. Or a DVD is $49.99 and has 1 great looking girl (usually the box cover) and 4-5 worn out old blisters full of tattoos and implants to fill out the DVD so hardly anyone buys them any more. If porn wants to survive and be profitable again they need to think outside the box and give up the pipe dreams of the good old days where they ripped off the fans left and right and raked in the cash.

    People just aren’t reaching in their pockets for shit like that any more so piracy is rampant.

  15. rawalex

    IN a business where nobody trusts anyone further than they can comfortable spit the last load the swallowed, how do you suggest they calculate out a shared cost per shoot? Access codes? You know producers will pull once for as many scenes as they shoot… so how many again?

    Say a girl shoots only one scene during a test period. Does the shoot have to pay all of it? What happens if she says she is only shooting once, but does a “no manager cash deal” and shoots again? What happens if she also fucks on webcam for cash? Who’s paying?

    See, the reality is that it’s a PERFORMER issue. Just like getting a drivers license to drive and renewing it every year to keep your driving job, having a clean test that is current is a cost of being a fuck star.

    Now, here the thing: Producers should be paying enough for the talent to afford it. Perhaps having every producer pay an amount to the testing company under the performer’s account would be a good idea. Let’s say $25 per scene. Producer pays, and when the performer goes to get tested, there is an amount already on account. Do enough scenes, and your testing would be free. Don’t do enough scenes (that 1 scene per test girl) and you end up paying the vast majority of the test yourself.

    It’s the performers responsibility to show up at a shoot with a valid test, just like professional contractor shows up with a valid building license and pulls the permits to do the work. It’s a basic concept.

  16. LurkingReader

    @rawalex

    producers, agents & performers have shouted from roof tops how skilled they are at self-regulation, I’ve no doubt they can handle anyone who tries to cheat a shared cost system as adeptly deadbeat affiliate situations get handled.

    your contractor analogy is apt because producers are the contractor who sub-contracts the performer who isn’t on the hook for building permits etc contractors get to cover their ass.

    The only thing really stopping cash deals is consequences within the industry and the risk that not having a code (medical records) will land the producer in hot water with a regulatory agency.

  17. phyllisha

    I apologize if it seemed as I was making promises, I was however answering someone on what are the things we are hoping to achieve, that is one of them. If I had a penny for every time someone told me I would never get a union to pass through the government, I would prob have enough money to buy Nantucket. ;). This Union opens many many doors we have never had open to us, we are no where near the stage of “bargaining collectively” as of yet. And yes, again we would love and appreciate all the help and guidance we can get. Please fill free to email me [email protected] so we can speak. And again Thank you very much 🙂

  18. BT

    As someone who has made their living in the content creation business for more than thirty years, I’m a big believer in residuals. If the union accomplishes nothing else, but gets residuals for performers, it will have accomplished a lot. As a magazine writer, I’ve had any number of $5,000 assignments turn into $15,000 pay days because the original article was republished both in the US and overseas.

    When it comes to residuals, whether the producer turns a profit or not is not a factor – musicians and authors get a percentage of the retail sales price once the cost of an advance is recouped (if a publisher gives me a $50,000 advance, the books has to generate enough sales to pay back the $50,000 advance, but once that happens, I get 10%/12%/15% based on different sales levels – the same holds true for recordings). Meanwhile, musicians and actors receive residuals each time a song or a television show is broadcast, regardless of whether the record company, the production company, or the company broadcasting the song or television show/film is profitable. The same should apply to porn. Every time a scene is accessed, the performers should get a small cut.

    Again, think of a performer like Seka, whose content is still accessed nearly 25 years after her last performance.

  19. brendachicago

    Porn cant do what the music industry does. The music industry has multiple streams of income. They can go on tour , sell tshirts so if they make nothing on itunes they can make up for it. Where in porn,there is basically only one stream.

  20. Toby

    There are indeed multiple streams for adult performers. Sticking to just the legal ones… there’s live cams, feature dancing, legal brothels, adult product endorsements.

  21. phyllisha

    Yah! Please keep these comments going! Every suggestion and idea is helping hugely and we are greatly appreciating it and taking notes!

    None of these steps we hope to achieve are going to be easy, but these suggestions will help us get there further faster!

    Thank you again so much!
    Join Now http://www.entertainmentadultunion.com

    Love Phyllisha Anne

  22. Sam38g

    Porn shoots are NOT the only way performers can make money. There are many cam sites that have really upped their games & have decent contracts.

    There are many companies that want to be our business partners like Model Centro, Manvids, Clips4sale, Vuier, Cammodelstore.com, Customs4u.com, MyPornProfile.com, ExtraLunchmoney.com, Whosonlinexxx.com, sextpanther.com, verifiedcall.com and many more.

    Companies where you always make a percentage of the sales from 35% to 90%. Yes, you don’t get paid a certain guaranteed amount up front, but with hard work, self promotion & being able to create what you are into can be very profitable.

    What was great about attending Camcon.com is that they work hard to bring performers & companies together to build the kind of business relationships I’ve always dreamed about & wanted.

  23. Mr.Marcus

    Seems to have the best start out of all the unionizing attempts I have seen. And some of the comments I’ve read offer valid points that apply to performers and producers. It’ll be interesting to see this develop into something more.

  24. jilted

    The solution as to how to cover the cost of testing is so simple, and has been staring the industry right in the face for so long I can’t believe that they still don’t get it. Here’s a hint for you Phylissia, testing is VOLUNTARY, there is no legal requirement for producers to require tests. It wasnt until after Darren James in 2004 that producers started ‘requiring’ tests. Those who forget the past never learn the lessons that the past has taught you. The solution is as simple as A,B,C, gives power to the ‘union’ and even covers producers asses, but y’all are too blind to see it. The simplest solution is usually the best solution. Think about it, Mike has my email.

  25. jilted

    Testing IS voluntary. There is no law requiring testing. What producers are doing by ‘mandating’ testing is illegal. Requiring testing does not sheild producers from any liability. Prior to 2004 producers had nothing to do with the testing, it was performers who checked each others results. I wonder how many producers keep these records in compliance with HIPPA regulations, seeing as how it is illegal for them to have require the tests in the first place.

  26. LurkingReader

    @BT

    You’ll get no argument from me on the merits of residuals for writers or performers. To me the risks performers face puts residuals second to producers absorbing the cost of producer mandated testing.

    I look at contracted performer scenes in the light of commissioned written work. Writers get no residuals when commissioned work created isn’t published. If the producer wants you to work in a cubicle they can’t force you rent the cubicle from them. Freelance journalists commissioned to cover protests aren’t handed contracts with clauses like: show up with bail money to mitigate the risk of arrest ….if you get arrested call someone who cares cuz we don’t.

  27. LurkingReader

    @Jilted

    Producers can require testing as long as they are paying for the testing. The testing itself isn’t the issue from a labor standpoint…forcing performers to pay for it is.

  28. jilted

    No Lurk,
    No employer is allowed to test a prospective employee for HIV. It is illegal.You would never find any producer in the adult biz take the stand and say they require testing, they don’t. That is why the solution to this whole problem is so easy to see, that is if you know where to look.

  29. LurkingReader

    @jilted

    Its a grey area to be sure. Oil rig worker case carved out exceptions to hiv discrimination laws on the ’employee’ side, MMA created exceptions on the independent contractor/performer side of the labor equation … both prove the legality of allowing HIV antibody testing to be included in pre-employment physicals in limited situations.

  30. Karmafan

    I would think if any industry needed to have HIV screening it would be the porn industry. Doing away with that screening seems like a disaster waiting to happen.

  31. jilted

    MMA and boxers are licensed and the state requires testing for them. The testing is done through the State Athletic Commisions. And I never said anything about doing away with testing, I am referring to handling it differently in a way that protects everyone, even producers. LIke I have said, prior to 2004 no producers ‘required’ testing, it was all performers checking eachothers result.

    Karfman, of course you are correct that if any industry needed testing this is it, but the industry has also fought tooth and nail any laws to make that happen, simply because any law would require producers to pay up, and we all know we cant have that now can we.

  32. jilted

    I am being a little cryptic about the simple solution to this entire mess. Just want to see if the braintrust in the new ‘Union’ will be able to figure it out. Simple as pie, gives the union(performers) power and control of their information, and even covers producers asses about illegally requiring tests. It even provides a mechanism for performers to cover the cost of testing. Hint, think back before 2004. Think simple.

  33. CrunkleSchwitz

    Keep people like Mr. Marcus out of the industry and you wouldn’t have diseases and other conditions warranting to have scam, over priced unions. Unions just wouldn’t work today in porn. Too many suck asses and scumbags in porn . Oh yes, Stupid people too.

Leave a Reply