| Author |
Topic: Musician Union changes |
Bob Hoffnar
From:
Austin, Tx
|
Posted 11 Aug 2008 10:26 am |
|
In my personal experience most musicians that I know who are making a very good living are not doing it through the union at this point. The music industry is no longer as centralized so the collective bargaining model does not apply so well. The music industry I work within is more like a loose web of mom and pop businesses than a top down corporate structure. There are some people in the NYC local who understand this but they are not making much progress as far as I can tell. Lets say I do a non union session for $800. (Most sessions are non union at this point). There is no way for me to personally contract through the union without causing a pile of problems for the producer. The union only knows how to dig there claws into Mr Big and not how to work as a service/resource for players. In the classical music world players are getting more and more work off the grid that the union has no interest in. If there is not a major funding organization to shake down they don't know what to do. They destroy gigs on a grass roots level for legit players consistently. There is a big modern dance scene in NYC that rarely uses live music because of the union. I am pro union and would like to work with them more but they seem unable to function in the current musical world.
_________________
Bob |
|
|
 |
Jerry Overstreet
From:
Louisville Ky
|
Posted 11 Aug 2008 11:09 am
|
|
Agreed. Seems recently they create more problems than they solve. I opted not to renew my membership a couple years ago when the new rates became effective.
Honestly, I got some decent contacts through the membership listings and got offers for some dinner theatres and green sheet dates but overall, I felt better off on my own. |
|
|
|
Jack Stoner
From:
Kansas City, MO
|
Posted 11 Aug 2008 11:26 am
|
|
When I lived in Harrisburg, Pa., I belonged to the local musician's union as no one would hire you if you were not union. When I was in Nashville, I was only there for a little over a year, and never got around to joining the union but no one ever questioned whether I was or not (they probably assumed I was).
When I moved to Kansas City, Mo I had intentions of joining the union but after checking around and talking to other musicians, all the local there was really interested in was collecting their "percentages" from jobs and the local symphony orchestra members. They did nothing for members that were not a symphony musician. If someone called the union for country musicians the only ones that would get the jobs were the union officers and a few select friends, no one else got anything. Needless to say, I never joined that union. (And all the jobs I worked in 23 years living in Kansas City were all above the union scale).
I suppose there are areas that have locals that care about ALL the members, not just select ones. I've even heard gumblings about the Nashville local only caring about the session pickers. |
|
|
|
Joey Ace
From:
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
|
Posted 11 Aug 2008 11:36 am
|
|
Why, Bob ???
My experience is similar to Jack's.
Back in the 70s, in Pa., you had to be a member or no club gigs. My last card is from 1978. |
|
|
|
Dave Mudgett
From:
Central Pennsylvania and Gallatin, Tennessee
|
Posted 11 Aug 2008 1:25 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| ... If there is not a major funding organization to shake down they don't know what to do. They destroy gigs on a grass roots level for legit players consistently. There is a big modern dance scene in NYC that rarely uses live music because of the union. I am pro union and would like to work with them more but they seem unable to function in the current musical world. |
Bob, I think you have summarized the sad situation very well. I think a well-functioning union - for all kinds of musicians - would be great, but I just don't see this changing. I let my membership lapse after I stopped playing full-time several years ago. Luckily, around here, the local didn't aggressively interfere with casual gigs. I think they'd have problems if they did - most of the clubs I've worked at in the last 15-20 years would laugh if asked to sign a union contract. But on the other hand, I can't remember the last time a band I worked with was really stiffed. Sometimes we would disagree on head-counts on guarantee + %door deals, but I can't remember being stiffed.
Actually, I think this is a large problem in a lot of industries. Independent contractors working in a distributed system need pro-active representation more than typical employees, but labor unions really need to completely rethink their business model with this in mind. The closed-shop model just doesn't fit anymore. Unions need to think in terms of selling services they can provide to their clientele. I'd get back in if they would approach their role as individual member advocacy and put their money where their mouth was. |
|
|
|
Ken Lang
From:
Simi Valley, Ca
|
Posted 11 Aug 2008 7:58 pm
|
|
When the trio I was in worked our way out here to California we landed in San Francisco. Year 1974.
We were union members. We stopped at the Union hall to see about transfering to S.F. They said, "You pay us this large amount of money. We take your current cards away for 6 months and you cannot gig until you get your new card." It was basically you starve and too bad. You know our response.
We ended up in LA playing mostly non-union. The couple gigs we played as union members we signed as traveling members and they soaked us with what we had to pay them.
30 years of wasting my money. I quit and haven't been sorry. |
|
|
|
Bill Hatcher
From:
Atlanta Ga. USA
|
Posted 11 Aug 2008 8:15 pm Re: Musician Union changes
|
|
| Bob Hoffnar wrote: |
| Lets say I do a non union session for $800. (Most sessions are non union at this point) |
What kind of session is this you are doing for $800?? How long did you work? How many tunes did you do?
There is really no way to qualify this session because you have listed no parameters. Would you have made more if it was contract session?
If you are doing non union sessions for less money than the union session would have paid are you really better off?? You just traded your bargaining position for less money out of fear or whatever your reason was for taking the cheaper rate as opposed to working for the rate of the union you belong to. What kind of deal is that? You think the folks your working for are ever going to call you for a session and say "hey, I like you. I am going to pay you what you would have made if we were doing this under the union agreement". They will never do that. Once you work for them cheaper, that is what you will get from then on and then less and less as they get other players to work even cheaper than yourself. When you work under the negotiated agreements everybody knows what the bottom line is.
When is the last time you got a check from the Special Payments fund? Did these folks you did this $800 session for pay anything into your pension plan. Did they send you a reuse check for what you did or did you just let them have all that money for themselves???
The music biz has changed a lot, but one thing has not changed. Musicians who are negotiating on their own never have the bargaining power of musicians who are working together. |
|
|
|
chris ivey
From:
california (deceased)
|
Posted 12 Aug 2008 10:12 am
|
|
| most working country musicians realize the union is only necessary in the top echelon of recording and performance. anything short of that is a rip-off , inconvenience, and a visit by a fine-imposing 'little man' worried about keeping his job intact screwing people. |
|
|
|
