TV Home Forum

Channel Television during the 1979 ITV Strike

How did it continue broadcasting? (June 2019)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
SP
Steve in Pudsey
Si-Co posted:
Markymark posted:
Riaz posted:

Did the unions hold the same power and influence in CTV as they held in UK based ITV companies because the Channel Islands are not part of the UK so they have separate legislation?

tightrope78 makes a valid point about "there’s a serious lack of knowledge and understanding of the history of industrial relations in this country in this thread and how much the fabric of social history has changed in the past 40 years". Does anybody here have knowledge of the finer details of industrial relations in the Channel Islands during the 1970s and how they compared with the rest of the UK?

It could be argued that if CTV had provided a minimalist ITV service for the UK then it would have outwitted the unions, and even provided a frightening snapshot of an alternative future for ITV. In more recent years corporations have deployed tactics of outwitting unions and unionised staff by moving operations to foreign countries; dismissing staff and hiring non-union (and sometimes immigrant) staff; or outsourcing to other companies.


I think you’re overthinking it all. Channel was a tiny company, with a tiny level of staff. The local branches of the unions realised that any sort of action would quickly lead to bankruptcy for the station.


Forgive my ignorance, but why exactly?

Small potential target audience would suggest a comparatively small amount of ad revenue rather than the license to make money on the mainland. If they were only just staying afloat a period with no revenue would seriously damage the company.
MA
Markymark
Steve in Pudsey posted:
Si-Co posted:
Markymark posted:

I think you’re overthinking it all. Channel was a tiny company, with a tiny level of staff. The local branches of the unions realised that any sort of action would quickly lead to bankruptcy for the station.


Forgive my ignorance, but why exactly?

Small potential target audience would suggest a comparatively small amount of ad revenue rather than the license to make money on the mainland. If they were only just staying afloat a period with no revenue would seriously damage the company.


As it was, they probably lost most of the national advertising revenue, that Westward sold and collected for them ?
SP
Steve in Pudsey
Unless those advertisers made their own arrangements directly with Channel during the strike?
BL
bluecortina
Markymark posted:
Riaz posted:
Inspector Sands posted:
Also the main reason it wouldn't have happened is because only reason Channel was left broadcasting was because the unions agreed that it would have gone bust if it had gone off air. Turning it into a national broadcaster, and with government help, rather negates that agreement


Did the unions hold the same power and influence in CTV as they held in UK based ITV companies because the Channel Islands are not part of the UK so they have separate legislation?

tightrope78 makes a valid point about "there’s a serious lack of knowledge and understanding of the history of industrial relations in this country in this thread and how much the fabric of social history has changed in the past 40 years". Does anybody here have knowledge of the finer details of industrial relations in the Channel Islands during the 1970s and how they compared with the rest of the UK?

It could be argued that if CTV had provided a minimalist ITV service for the UK then it would have outwitted the unions, and even provided a frightening snapshot of an alternative future for ITV. In more recent years corporations have deployed tactics of outwitting unions and unionised staff by moving operations to foreign countries; dismissing staff and hiring non-union (and sometimes immigrant) staff; or outsourcing to other companies.


I think you’re overthinking it all. Channel was a tiny company, with a tiny level of staff. The local branches of the unions realised that any sort of action would quickly lead to bankruptcy for the station.


Indeed. Channel were not part of the 'White book' agreements between the ACTT and the ITV companies. it would be nonsensical to pay an engineer in the Channel Islands the same salary and working conditions as an engineer working for a major ITV company. Channel were never flush with cash and a prolonged loss of revenue would have been the end of them.
bilky asko, Markymark and Inspector Sands gave kudos
MA
Markymark
Steve in Pudsey posted:
Unless those advertisers made their own arrangements directly with Channel during the strike?


Perhaps, but for some they’d have been too fiddly to deal with ? The expense of producing some ads might have made them uneconomic if only to be shown on Channel?
TT
ttt
...
Last edited by ttt on 2 July 2019 2:30pm
SP
Steve in Pudsey
Markymark posted:
Steve in Pudsey posted:
Unless those advertisers made their own arrangements directly with Channel during the strike?


Perhaps, but for some they’d have been too fiddly to deal with ? The expense of producing some ads might have made them uneconomic if only to be shown on Channel?


I was thinking more of providing copies of the adverts they would normally have shown on the other stations. Dealing with Channel rather than Westward for a few weeks may not have been too onerous? Channel did have a London sales office, I think.
MA
Markymark
Steve in Pudsey posted:
Markymark posted:
Steve in Pudsey posted:
Unless those advertisers made their own arrangements directly with Channel during the strike?


Perhaps, but for some they’d have been too fiddly to deal with ? The expense of producing some ads might have made them uneconomic if only to be shown on Channel?


I was thinking more of providing copies of the adverts they would normally have shown on the other stations. Dealing with Channel rather than Westward for a few weeks may not have been too onerous? Channel did have a London sales office, I think.


My copies of IBA yearbooks are out of reach at present. I thought Westward/TSW/TVS just gave them a cut of their ad revenue. It’s a shame no recordings of Channel’s self sustaining output exists, it would be interesting to see what national ads there were ?
BL
bluecortina
ttt posted:
bluecortina posted:
Markymark posted:

I think you’re overthinking it all. Channel was a tiny company, with a tiny level of staff. The local branches of the unions realised that any sort of action would quickly lead to bankruptcy for the station.


Indeed. Channel were not part of the 'White book' agreements between the ACTT and the ITV companies. it would be nonsensical to pay an engineer in the Channel Islands the same salary and working conditions as an engineer working for a major ITV company. Channel were never flush with cash and a prolonged loss of revenue would have been the end of them.


Did those agreements imply similar pay and conditions between an engineer at a major company, and one at, say, Border?


Yes. Although National agreements (the 'White Book') was often supplemented by local company agreements to cover particular local circumstances. But basically an engineer employed at Border doing the same job as one in London would be paid the same with the exception of London Weighting etc. Local agreements would never be worse, if that's the correct expression, than the 'White Book'. in 1979 etc the structure and grading of jobs was much more formal, so a 4th year engineer at Westward would be paid the same as a 4th year engineer at Granada or Scottish or Thames.
SP
Steve in Pudsey
That was my understanding, but companies who would usually have bought advertising on Westward might have approached Channel directly as the only opportunity to advertise on TV?
TT
ttt
...
Last edited by ttt on 2 July 2019 2:30pm
BL
bluecortina
ttt posted:
bluecortina posted:
ttt posted:

Did those agreements imply similar pay and conditions between an engineer at a major company, and one at, say, Border?


Yes.


Border was more similar in terms of revenue to Channel than it was to Thames. Seems a little unfair that.


Unfair to who? (See my fuller edited post above).

Newer posts