Army TV Commercials - possibly sensitive

[Todd S. Malicoate]

I believe Dean E has in his post. Would you like to learn anything else, Todd Malicoate?

Very sarcastic, but I won't be baited into a like response.

I learned a great deal from both Dean E's links and Tom Holtz's extensive explanation. That's what we're here for, at least what I'm here for.

These regulations don't apply to off-duty personnel, or at least it would appear they don't. Take it up with the military if you feel slighted that some of their personnel are taking playing jobs you think you deserve. I suspect they would tell you the same thing Tom Holtz said in his post...

As far as individuals freelancing, what we play on our off-duty hours is our own business.

I have yet to see any "law" which applies to non-military personnel concerning who they can hire for a gig. Do you think everyone that hires a brass quintet or a jazz combo should check to see if some or all of the members of the group play in a military band? Why should they care?

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Here are the relevant sections of Title 10...

10 USC 3634:

(a) Prohibition.— Except as provided in subsection (b), no Army band or member thereof may receive remuneration for furnishing music outside the limits of an Army post in competition with local civilian musicians.

(b) Recordings.—
(1) Any Army band designated as a special band may produce recordings for commercial sale.
(2) Amounts received as proceeds from the sale of any such recordings may be credited to applicable appropriations of the Department of the Army for expenses of Army bands.
(3) The Secretary of the Army shall prescribe regulations governing the accounting of such proceeds.

10 USC 6223:

(a) Navy Bands and Members.— No Navy band, except the United States Naval Academy Band, and no member of any Navy band may receive remuneration for furnishing music outside a military installation when the furnishing of such music involves competition with local civilian musicians.

(b) Members of The United States Marine Corps Band.— No member of the United States Marine Corps Band, as an individual, may furnish music in competition with any civilian musician or receive remuneration for furnishing music except under special circumstances when authorized by the President.

10 USC 8634:

(a) Prohibition.— Except as provided in subsection (b), no Air Force band or member thereof may receive remuneration for furnishing music outside the limits of an air base in competition with local civilian musicians.

(b) Recordings.—
(1) Any Air Force band designated as a special band may produce recordings for commercial sale.
(2) Amounts received as proceeds from the sale of any such recordings may be credited to applicable appropriations of the Department of the Air Force for expenses of Air Force bands.
(3) The Secretary of the Air Force shall prescribe regulations governing the accounting of such proceeds.

I can only conclude that member is interpreted to mean "member on-duty." Otherwise, every time these musicians play a gig outside the base or teach, they would be violating Title 10. "Furnishing music in competition with local civilian musicians" is ridiculously broad.

[jtuba]

Let's try to interpret Title 10. You have a BQ and I have a military BQ for a wedding. You want $750 for the group, but I'll take $500 for the group and undercut you out of a job. I think that's the real spirit of title 10 and that's what the unions are trying to prevent.

If I'm also in the union, am I in competition with local civilians if they can't do the job as well as me? All things being equal, should the best players be hired for the job? Just some questions for thought.

Who gets calls is usually a result of long standing relationships and players sometimes have to wait their turn before calls start steadily coming in. Everywhere I've gone that's always been the case.

[Todd S. Malicoate]

Can you give us the date of Title 10 you quote please?

I copied the sections I posted by going to http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/search/ and typing in the 4-digit section I wanted (3634, 6223, and 8634). There is no specific date on the pages showing each section of the code, but there is a link on each page for "How Current is This?" which (when you click on it) indicates the last revision posted was Jan. 2, 2006.

Let me add that I also interpret Title 10 to apply to musicians in uniform, on duty, who are representing the DoD. As Tom Holtz pointed out, what military musicians do on their off-duty hours should be their business. The spirit of Title 10 would seem to me to prohibit a military musician using their position in the military to create an advantage in a competition situation with civilian musicians. I think we would all agree that would be immoral.

[Mike Finn]

I can only conclude that member is interpreted to mean "member on-duty." ...

That's the thing, isn't it? Do we go with the letter of the law, or the intent? And who determines what the intent is? If we look at recent/current practice, it favors Todd's interpretation meaning off-duty service-people can play civilian gigs as long as they're not in uniform or using government isuued equipment. That's certainly how I and my comrades interpreted it when I served.

However, let's not for a minute think that Mr Mojo is the only civilian upset about missing out on gigs; our local union raised a bit of a stink a few years ago, even going so far as to contact the post commanders (not just the unit commanders) to prevent active duty military musicians from playing in our one professional (paying) concert band. I believe a few of our esteemed posters enjoyed a season or two with this group while stationed at the AFSOM or other area post. Not no more!
A big band I perform with recently made the decision not to hire military folks, mainly because of the fact that their military duty comes first (obviously) and their schedules are subject to change at the last minute. This was touched on in an earlier post. I have taken the place of an active duty musician in one of the civilian BQs I play with, possibly for that very reason.

Now... about the OP's original question, how do we feel about civilians getting paid to play military gigs? (Though it seems that's not actually the case with the recording in question.) Frankly, there are a few other things that the current regime is spending my tax $$ on that I'd rather they didn't; throwing a bone or two to a civilian musician is not that big a deal in my very humble opinion.

MF

[Mojo workin']

So if you're thinking there's a "law" against anything being implied by this document, fuhgeddaboutit.

OK. Regulation. But there still is a regulation.

More to the spirit of it, military personnel already have a gig playing their instrument. I've seen plenty of civilian players not play gigs that they should have because a military player came in and accepted the gig. Tom brought something else to light-military functions trump all civilian gigs no matter what. Why hire a military player when the possibility of them bailing out at the last minute exists? I've been in orchestras where this has happened. No one is ever happy about it, especially the contractor.

Let me add that I also interpret Title 10 to apply to musicians in uniform, on duty, who are representing the DoD. As Tom Holtz pointed out, what military musicians do on their off-duty hours should be their business. The spirit of Title 10 would seem to me to prohibit a military musician using their position in the military to create an advantage in a competition situation with civilian musicians.

If this is true, then it is ludicrous. A military player is not a military player because he is not on duty, not wearing a uniform? Superman is always Superman whether he's dressed like Clark Kent or not.

[Yosef: Tubist]

Okay.. Hypothetically..

Say the Military started enforcing these regulations in accordance with Mojo's interpretation and stopped letting Millitary Musician's take civilian gigs. You still don't get the job.. Whose fault is it then? How bout this, Why don't you call your congressmen and ask him to limit everyone who beats you for a gig from competing for that gig?

geezzz.. there are reasons people get gigs, and I doubt it has a great deal to do with what their other jobs are, or what organization they're with.

[Mojo workin']

That is very easy for you to say, Bloke. You do not live where I live. And as far as what you say about non-military competition being present instead of military competition, they don't already have a full time playing job, therefore they are not in the position of being able to near monopolize the playing work to be had. Duh. By the way, I have the same complaint about full time orchestra players doing the same. One of my former teachers who has an orchestra job almost did this to me on one occasion, until he decided he didn't want the gig, then he gave it back to me.

You still don't get the job.. Whose fault is it then?

Are we not dreaming up things now? Let's talk about what I have said.

[tubacrow]

The reason these people have position in either military or professional orchestras is they have earned it. If I am beat at an audition, it is because of me. I was not the best Tubist there. While I understand we all want jobs, but we all want the best player representing our profession also.

[Mojo workin']

The reason these people have position in either military or professional orchestras is they have earned it. If I am beat at an audition, it is because of me. I was not the best Tubist there.

Would anyone else care to enter this discussion spewing nonsequiturs?

Who said anything about auditions? Do you think that is how people enter the freelance scene?

Have I made one claim as to the legitimacy of a military or orchestra player's worthiness of their job?

[tubacrow]

Would anyone else care to enter this discussion spewing nonsequiturs?

I assume you mean Non sequiturs?
If so, are you meaning logical fallacies, or a humorous comment that does not have anything to do with previous comments.

My logic is: all other things being equal, the best player gets the job.

[Tony Halloin]

Alright, the conversation is starting to stray. The interpretation of the regulations are as Tom Holtz described, plain and simple....well maybe not so simple. The military has rules and policies for just about everything so there can be no questions.

As for military musicians taking freelance work on their off-duty hours, it would be the same as a professional orchestra player taking freelance work outside of their professional commitment. Apparently Mojoworkin' has a problem with both scenarios. Realize, we are essentially practicing "survival of the fittest" and also the ideals of capitalism. Who can provide the best product, sometimes at the lowest price (or the set price)?

Mojoworkin' has a point that hiring a military musician can be risky as there is the possibility of not being able to make all the rehearsals because of last minute military commitments, but contractors are still hiring them. I heard the NSO didn't like hiring military musicians, but when they filled out their horn section for Mahler 2 and Heldenleben, they used some Marine and Navy Band people, all of which were members of the local union.

[NDSPTuba]

Mojo,

I understand your frustration. When I was first trying to get into the freelance seen while in college, I couldn't understand why these older freelancers were getting calls to plays gigs when I wasn't because I was a better player than they were, and in some cases a much better player. I complained pretty regularly at first, and all I accomplished was alienating myself from those who would be doing the hiring. Eventually I learned to keep my trap shut and play the few gigs I would get. Not long after that I was getting those calls and gigging regularly. The freelancing scene is a network and you have to network well to get in. Complaining about those in the network, regardless of it's legitimacy, will not help your cause.

It not like the military gigs pay so much that those musicians wouldn't like to earn an extra buck from time to time. And why wouldn't they do what they do best ( and can earn the most at ) to get that extra dime.

[kingrob76]

I've lived in the D.C. area my entire life (41 years) and have been "competing" with military players for side jobs for that last 20 or so (I also compete with civilian players as well), and there are a few observations I can share here that might be relevant.

Yes, the D.C area has a disproportionately high number of full-time professional musicians per capita when compared to other areas of the country because of the service bands (and not just the active members, but all the retired members that still live here as well). Unless you are in one of these bands, the National Symphony or the Kennedy Center Opera House, the only way you're going to make a living as a musician is if you teach, either in the schools or with TONS of private students (or both). That's just the nature of this business market. It's neither a good or bad thing, it's just the way things are.

And in those roughly 20 years I have only seen ONE instance of a military musician acting what might be called professionally unethically, and that was so far over the top and in such poor taste it's not even funny. You gig WITH these people, not against them. For a long time the Orchestra I play with regularly was comprised of mostly military musicians in the wind sections, and it was a GREAT group to play with (the group is now so bad we can't even get undergrads to sub). I've played in quintets as the only civilian. I've done Easter gigs as the only civilian in the bunch. Frankly, I've seen more cutthroat behavior from civilian guys than military guys (again, except for the one instance). If you're a good enough player you'll get work.

The point I'm trying to make here is that out of uniform, they're just like everybody else (except with funny haircuts, like Holtz's) and they're treated just like everyone else. And they are REALLY GOOD musicians, better than most which is why they get called in the first place. I've never seen or heard of an instance where a booking agent or contractor had a preference for a military or civilian player, but a military player is often considered as more reliable ESPECIALLY if he has to cancel because they will almost always find a sub for themselves, usually before anyone even knows there's a problem.

It appears that the way the regulations are written that these guys can do whatever they want off-duty in terms of music work as long it doesn't interfere with what they have to do for Uncle Sam, and Uncle Sam always comes first. No, they cannot use government property for those gigs. But if they couldn't gig the D.C. area (again, specifically this area because it's my home) would be a lot worse off in terms the quality of music being performed.

[Uncle Buck]

. . .
And in those roughly 20 years I have only seen ONE instance of a military musician acting what might be called professionally unethically, and that was so far over the top and in such poor taste it's not even funny.
. . .

Come on, don't leave us hanging . . .

[Tom Holtz]

Let's try to interpret Title 10. You have a BQ and I have a military BQ for a wedding. You want $750 for the group, but I'll take $500 for the group and undercut you out of a job. I think that's the real spirit of title 10 and that's what the unions are trying to prevent.

The regulations are in place because of a scenario more along these lines: You want $750 for the wedding, and the groom thinks, "I know the bandleader at Ft. Blahblah. I should see if he could get some of his guys to put a group together." Used to happen a lot, I guess, and it wasn't just the civilian musicians who weren't getting paid. Nobody got paid. Abuse of the players and the government equipment used to happen a lot more often back in the olden days.

In the scenario you set, well, some military musicians might try that. Some union musicians might, as well. Symphony musicians might, too. The d-bag factor can show itself anywhere. Sucks, but there it is. Been cut out of many gigs myself.

More to the spirit of it, military personnel already have a gig playing their instrument. I've seen plenty of civilian players not play gigs that they should have because a military player came in and accepted the gig. Tom brought something else to light-military functions trump all civilian gigs no matter what. Why hire a military player when the possibility of them bailing out at the last minute exists? I've been in orchestras where this has happened. No one is ever happy about it, especially the contractor.

Part A: I hear what you're saying. There's a lot of freelancing civilians around here who must beat their heads against the wall regularly. This is a different market than anywhere else in the country, and it's not easy to establish oneself, even if you're a military musician.

Part B: Like I said before, some contractors don't hire military guys anymore. Been burned once too many times, and won't go there again. Some keep hiring the military guys because they like what they get. To each, their own. I don't book gigs, so I can't guesstimate any more than that.

When I was in high school, way back in the early 60s... (snip) Next think I knew, I was on the scab list at the local union. I didn't even know about musicians unions...I was a high school kid, and I'd never been paid to do any music.

Some of the old-timers who were freelancing when I first got to town would talk about the 50's and 60's kind of wistfully, actually. I had one old trumpet player tell me, "Back when the unions were totally corrupt, if a restaurant manager screwed with the band one night, he wouldn't get his food delivered the next day." He may have been exaggerating, but I'm fairly certain that the atmosphere in CA was not too different when you sang that wedding gig. The union guys had a lot of clout back then, weren't afraid to use it, even if it meant reporting a scab just because they were too scared of the consequences if they DIDN'T report it. That may not have been the case with you, the guy who put you on the scab list may have just been a d-bag, but we'll never know. Those were different times, though. Go back to my first too-long post and hit the link for Tom Lee's bio. What he accomplished, considering how the union and the military butted heads back when he was just a piano player, it's really amazing he didn't get his hands broken.

they're just like everybody else (except with funny haircuts, like Holtz's)

If I could find the picture, I'd be beaming it up to TubeNet now, if ya know what I mean...

[Mojo workin']

nevermind.

[CTAYLOR]

Honestly Wade, you should be more careful in how you post sometimes. We're not all wusses out here who look up to you because you have an orchestra job. [/i]?

Just from reading his original post, I agree with you!

[TexTuba]

[sungfw]

I will say that a couple of gigs that I might have had, and should have had were because a military player was already established in the group. He would not have been established if that little regulation was followed.