Constantly! In the corporate world while it bothered me, ...I continued to do it simply because I knew I benefitted in the long run. It allowed me to stretch, grow, and improve myself, ...plus when your income is commission based, you cover for and clean up other people's messes and incompetence if it's gonna affect your bottom line. Plus my boss and the company owners knew I went above & beyond the call of duty and rewarded me quite well for it.
In the film industry, I did it all the time there too, but it didn't bother me to do it there at all. There were constant pressures, fires flaring up 24/7, really messed up fukakta crap hitting the fan at any given moment, and everybody always up to their hips in alligators. What do you in that situation when you see a good person about to go down through no fault of their own... you toss them a life preserver. I've covered for others, others have covered for me. The only time I can remember refusing to cover for someone, was in the pilot for 'The West Wing'. This one actress kept messing up big time. We kept having to do take after take after take... but the rest of us kept going like pros. It kept getting worse, and the more she messed up, the more she lost her focus and the more her frayed nerves began to show. Unfortunately, we couldn't even move onto another scene and pick that one up later to give her a chance to recompose hersel. The pressure continued to get to her, ...and it was obvious to EVERYONE including her that she was out of her league and just wasn't cutting it. As far as I was concerned I was getting paid, ...we were already into overtime with a double meal penalty happening, so I was willing to re-do it as long as it took without complaint. After an especially egregious and amateurish error on her part, she tried to put the blame squarely on me, even though it was obvious to everyone I was trying to get her back on track. Any pro would have picked up on my signal and made a smooth self-correction, but not this chick. It was so blatantly outrageous, I burst out, "Oh Puleaze, don't even go there!" The crew burst out laughing at her audacity. I felt bad not accepting or falsely acknowledging the blame, ...especially since
she was the one in the hot seat and not me, ...but her brazen audacity just pissed me right off, ...especially since this was like take 32 or something. Thankfully for her, Marcia Cross came to the rescue. She jumped in saying "Oh no, it was my fault, I missed the timing and it just threw everything right off." I just marvelled at the way she did that. It left me and everybody on set completely speechless, and stopped me from reading her the riot act right there on the set (which in hindsight, probably would've only made the scene even more difficult for her). It allowed the other chick to calm down (after she had a little cry). When we finally got through the scene and wrapped out at the end of the day... the director gave me a hug for being such a trooper through it all. I was really impressed by Marcia and how she did that though. Just coming off Melrose Place, she was the biggest name in the cast and felt no pressure at all. Ever since that day I always made it a point to try to ease the pressure for those under the gun. Most pros don't need it, but occasionally desperation can get to even the best of them. I just wish the other chick had been more of an old pro. I remember when the same thing happened to Tom Cruise when we were shooting 'Cocktail'. He just couldn't get the line right. Take after take after take... we just kept going, but he was a complete pro about it. Despite blowing so many takes, he never lost his focus once. It got so bad that after a while there, the entire cast, crew, and roomful of about 500 extras didn't even bother to hide their displeasure with him {lol}. Each time he messed up and we had to go again, the groans were audible, and the dagger stares were palpable. {lol} Tom didn't give a poop. He kept his focus, didn't let anyone else's frustration get to him, and just dug into the challenge like a pitbull. Finally Roger decided he was beating a dead horse, and decided to move on to a different scene and come back and pick that one up later. Tom was still psyched to give it another shot, but Roger insisted upon moving on. We redressed the set and moved on. Later when we came back to that scene, Tom nailed it on the 1
st take. We did one more for safety, checked the gate, ...and called it a wrap. The same thing happened to Theresa Russell on 'Smoke'. We were doing what was supposed to be a quick pick up of a line about a month after the original shoot. It was only supposed to be a 4 hr call from start to finish, but didn't end up that way. It was only one line, but Theresa couldn't quite get it right to either her or the director's satisfaction. It got to the point where the director announced "ahhh... I don't want to put any pressure on anyone, ...but, ...ummm, ...we're almost out of film." {LOL} Too funny! Theresa focussed in, stepped up to the plate and delivered it, ...or not. We're not exactly sure. It could have been we just ran out of film, so they decided to piece it together from all the takes. Who knows?
In the film industry, it happens even to the best of them. The key is, don't let it faze you or make you lose your focus, or it's straight downhill from there, ...and anything you can do to help your colleague stay focussed on the task at hand, makes it better for everyone concerned.
In network mktg, I still cover for downline distributors occasionally, ...but I don't like doing it. Once you start, it can unfortunately become something that is expected of you. Usually allowing someone to make their mistake, or neglect an important aspect is enough to alter that pattern of behaviour. They only have to lose all their volume, or miss out on all their bonuses once to instill the necessary mindset of ownership over, and responsibility for their business' that's required. We're all independant business owners, not employees & management. But I will jump in, cover for, or do an end run around distributors in order to prevent the wrong kind of duplication taking place.
