TubeNet

I have been asked by one of my orchestras boards to sit on a committee of orchestra members to address a very serious complaint by a member against another member.

Looking for some approach advice on this process. While it is part of the orchestra's code to invoke such a committee should the circumstances arise, I do not believe we have had to do this before and I want to avoid any situation where we appear to be out of control or without guidance and script.

Any suggestions would be well appreciated by me and my fellow musicians thrust into a situation none of us want to be in.

You should make sure that the orchestra has errors and omissions insurance and that the insurance covers the committee. If not, I would not go near this. If one member ends up suing, you could be personally targeted.

chronolith wrote:I have been asked by one of my orchestras boards to sit on a committee of orchestra members to address a very serious complaint by a member against another member.

Looking for some approach advice on this process. While it is part of the orchestra's code to invoke such a committee should the circumstances arise, I do not believe we have had to do this before and I want to avoid any situation where we appear to be out of control or without guidance and script.

Any suggestions would be well appreciated by me and my fellow musicians thrust into a situation none of us want to be in.

Where is the Union?

This is one of those times that you can put those union dues to constructive use.

Curmudgeon wrote:If this is an unpaid, volunteer orchestra, I would decline.

If this paid, but nonunion, I would decline.

If this was a AF of M or other such union represented organization, I would let those paid to handle such an issue earn their pay and I would decline.

So, would you decline?

Curmudgeon wrote:People are nuckin' futs. All good intentions in such situations will lead to hell.

Or a lawsuit you don't want to be involved in.

Even if the orchestra has E&O along with an indemnity clause for those who serve administratively, it is a no-win:

1) You're stepping into what will be a lawsuit that will have costs, even if those costs are eventually "covered" by the orchestra insurance.
2) Any "final" decision will be considered nothing better than a pyrrhic "victory" by one side or the other.
3) Everyone will have an opinion, even if there is "confidentiality."
4) Because of #3, everyone will take sides.
5) Because of #4, you will be outcast by one faction or the other for the decision, simply because you were on the committee.

Bottom line: politely, but firmly, just say no, thank you. Let the administration deal with it. That's what they are paid to do.

You are being asked to be in a no-win situation.

As the player's representative to the board of the local symphony, I would suggest (and I realize that this a repeat of almost all the other advice here), players do not need to be in judgement of other players. The board can judge, and since my position includes voting privileges on the board; this is where I would recuse myself from any discussion or vote.

Thanks for the wisdom folks. I have respectfully declined.

If they have reported a criminal, or potentially criminal act, call the police.

If it is a civil matter, tell them to grow up.

Three Valves wrote: If it is a civil matter, tell them to grow up.

Collegial relations are important to most organizations. I expect to enjoy them in any organization I belong to. A breakdown of the seriousness described by the OP can threaten the well-being of the orchestra. The superficial advise – without even knowing what the original conflict is about - to tell the problem people "to grow up" is not well thought-out.

Hup

hup_d_dup wrote:

Three Valves wrote: If it is a civil matter, tell them to grow up.

Collegial relations are important to most organizations. I expect to enjoy them in any organization I belong to. A breakdown of the seriousness described by the OP can threaten the well-being of the orchestra. The superficial advise – without even knowing what the original conflict is about - to tell the problem people "to grow up" is not well thought-out.

Hup

Yeah. Negligence by a fellow orchestra member, say of the sort that resulted in the destruction of a tuba, would be an example of a civil matter. I don't think many posters here would appreciate being told to grow up after someone accidentally knocked their tuba down a flight of stairs.

Biggs wrote:

hup_d_dup wrote:

Three Valves wrote: If it is a civil matter, tell them to grow up.

Collegial relations are important to most organizations. I expect to enjoy them in any organization I belong to. A breakdown of the seriousness described by the OP can threaten the well-being of the orchestra. The superficial advise – without even knowing what the original conflict is about - to tell the problem people "to grow up" is not well thought-out.

Hup

Yeah. Negligence by a fellow orchestra member, say of the sort that resulted in the destruction of a tuba, would be an example of a civil matter. I don't think many posters here would appreciate being told to grow up after someone accidentally knocked their tuba down a flight of stairs.

If someone accidentally knocked my tuba down a flight of stairs, would I cry to the committee??

Or grow up and file an insurance claim??

bloke wrote:name-calling/insults/harassment/gossip - none of my business...Pass the popcorn...but let me put my horn in the trunk of my car first...
property damage - none of my business - belongs in civil court
criminal act - none of my business - belongs in criminal court

What if the guy sitting next to you has cooties??

Three Valves wrote:
If someone accidentally knocked my tuba down a flight of stairs, would I cry to the committee??

Or grow up and file an insurance claim??

I represent clients involved in insurance actions. Filing and collecting are two different things. I have no idea whether the committee is the right body to go to, but "grow up" isn't helpful.

Frankly, for a lot of situations, the committee probably is a good first step. I've worked on many peer-to-peer disputes where an informal process got the quickest, most satisfactory result. That's the whole reason large companies maintain their own ombudsperson offices.

Three Valves wrote:What if the guy sitting next to you has cooties??

Then he obviously touched something a girl touched without previously getting a cootie shot.

Biggs wrote:Frankly, for a lot of situations, the committee probably is a good first step. I've worked on many peer-to-peer disputes where an informal process got the quickest, most satisfactory result. That's the whole reason large companies maintain their own ombudsperson offices.

I have the vague impression that part of the case for refusing to be involved in this service has been that in some sense it isn't a really informal process, for example one might be held legally accountable.

If only it were still legal to kill someone in a duel! Then the two parties could select seconds, the seconds could meet to find an honorable resolution, and then failing that, pistols at 20 paces.

Gentlemen;

Such superficial advise – without even knowing what the original conflict is about - to tell the problem people resort to a duel is not well thought-out.

We are not amused.

russiantuba wrote:I like the idea of serving on a committee, especially if it means extra pay in a group, and to have that as an option for this, so it isn't a singular decision...especially if the contract says this committee has final say and has a clause to protect the individual from a lawsuit.

However, if it doesn't pay extra or is a duty, I would abstain from doing it. If it is a union orchestra, thats what your fees are supposed to go towards...

There are a lot of arguments in favor of having a committee of peers to evaluate and arbitrate squabbles, to try to minimize escalation to the usually inaccessible legal system. I can see that.

What I can't see is any reason why I or anyone I care about should be on such a committee. The committee does not serve the ombudsman role, where the ombudsman is independent of the normal operation and is appointed solely to deal with those issues. But an ombudsman's usual role is to represent those being administered to those doing the administration, not for arbitration of peer squabbles.

Also, it's not a union issue. Again, union members pay dues to be represented to management, not to work out conflict with fellow union members. Some unions may have ways of dealing with that, but that's not really their role.

But employers are paid to supervise, and when it becomes necessary to intervene in a dispute between employees, that's part of the supervisor's job. But then it becomes an issue of employees relating to management.

So, I get the need for peer arbitration, especially these days when we are seeing the results of educated people having grown up without any real training in courtesy.

But serving on such a committee is highly risky. The upside is that you might help two of your friends work out an issue they were unable to work out for themselves, so that they both come away from it feeling as though they won. Yes, it could happen.

But it probably won't. Probably, the outcome will be that one person will be the winner and the other the loser, or both will feel as though they are the loser. The arbitrator will take the blame from anyone perceiving themselves to have been a loser. If one party in a lawsuit loses a case, they will blame the judge for poor knowledge of the law, or the jury for being blind to the evidence, before they will blame the other attorney (and certainly before they will blame themselves).

Plus, the organization is now asking for amateur assistance where professional assistance is needed and not forthcoming. Being willing to pay the committee members for this auxiliary service is money that could be used to hire a professional arbitrator to come in and help the warring parties work it out.

If it was informal, it would be happening at the level of the warring parties, and there would not have been a request to serve on a committee. That request and the fact that the committee is a "committee" makes it formal, and everyone is responsible for their own torts.

Rick "who can't remember anyone enjoying being a personnel manager in a musical ensemble" Denney

Assuming this is a union contract, there should be no formal role for the musicians or the union in disputes between musicians. It is management's responsibility to work things out.

The union can, and often does, work informally to mediate the dispute before matters (and expenses) get out of hand.

I don't believe a musician in an orchestra should ever serve on a committee to adjudicate conflicts between other musicians in the orchestra. A Pandora's box, for sure!