FYI . . . I have already called my business rep on this, but I am interested in knowing if any other people have run across this situation, and their response. All of this is sort of hypothetical.
A show is required to have 2 AEA SMs on contract (SM, ASM)
ASM has a family emergency and goes away for four days, and is sub-ed out, not by an AEA ASM, but an a PA type.
Theatre wants to deduct four days pay, and use vacation time in it's place.
I think that's a foul, because there needs to be two AEA contracts going, Theatre thinks it is covered under the non-paid leave portion of the contract. I feel like they chose to save money by having a PA cover the track, as opposed to the hiring a emergency cover for a week-minimum. I don't think they can have it both ways.
Just wondering other people's thoughts . . . I already know the ruling, but would like to know if any other people have run across this in their career. I am desperately trying to find different ways of looking at this, as truly I see it as just keeping two people on contract per the minimums in the book and the theatre is looking at is as personal time away issue.
(This is a hypothetical argument, because, in this situation, there was another show running, and four SMs are on contract . . . so, the minimum number of contracts were being filled . . . but for the sake of this discussion, lets assume this show is running on it's own.)