Los Angeles area orchestra to FIRE 65 MUSICIANS

[windshieldbug]

Unions have their place. Not the Jimmy Hoffa-Giant's end-zone-style place, and not the one that the public thinks of very much, but in SOME industries they do. Like classical music.

When I got my first sub gig out of school, the Personel Manager asked me if I had a card. "I've been trying to stay out as long as I can... " was my reply. And I had. Up until then, my experience had been much like what I understand bloke's to be, with rock and bop jazz bands my main experience. That was confirmed by what I read in the International Musician.

But I saw lots of management abuses. In a small state with lots of lawyers and corporate headquarters, the music buisness, espescially the classical music buisness is often full of egos. Patron egos, board egos. Often too big to put on one stage (and that's ONLY the conductor's ego... ). I saw people fired on a whim, particularly if they played correctly... ("Oh, it's not that I don't know the piece, if I cue you, YOU COME IN!", "...we don't need to schedule more rehearsal time, we ALWAYS go over and nobody demands overtime, if you don't like it, LEAVE", etc.).

It was in the 80's that we got our first meaningful contract. And the AFM was invaluable with that, providing similarly sized orchestra examples and background. Still, the corporate lawyers wouldn't commit to anything. It was the union solidarity that brought us anything.

During one difficult negotiation, we played for a year without a contract. It wasn't until we had non-binding arbitration that anything was accomplished. And the National supported us every step of the way, and gave us backing where we needed it.

Despite my poor initial expectations, I found the AFM critically helpful to our fledgling ROPA orchestra. A lot of abuses stopped. And, over time, more and more was settled "off the books" by simple cooperation. I am delighted to hear that SOME organizations do not need this assistence. But others do, and I would be remiss by no saying so here.

[Chuck(G)]

Mike, I think that one issue is that many musicians function as their own agents, leaving themselves open to abuse. When I did a lot of consulting, I wised up quickly and got a good lawyer to write my standard contract with teeth in it. So having a body with some clout to take your side is useful.

But some musicians have a steady engagement for years. Is having union representation any guarantee against abuse there? The union didn't get you the job after all.

[windshieldbug]

Mike, I think that one issue is that many musicians function as their own agents, leaving themselves open to abuse. When I did a lot of consulting, I wised up quickly and got a good lawyer to write my standard contract with teeth in it. So having a body with some clout to take your side is useful.

But some musicians have a steady engagement for years. Is having union representation any guarantee against abuse there? The union didn't get you the job after all.

No, I thought that I was confining my comments to orchestras, only, and tried to say so. And my experience in this area is limited to ROPA-sized orchestras.

I think that any classically-trained tubist will be required to follow the normal for any career path up progressively larger organizations, and I didn't want the aspiring orchestral tubist to think that the union was "only just a tax you need to pay".

[lgb&dtuba]

The quote levels are too nested to bother dealing with. If I've quoted you, then you know who you are.

Why is that a 53 year old steel worker makes 68k a year and has to sign his paycheck with a "X"

I think that your representation of steelworkers as illiterate says quite a bit about you and your attitudes.

Rather, I and others think the pay should bear some sort of reasonable resemblance to the cost of the job.

What the heck is the "cost of the job"? Perhaps you meant the cost of the goods or services? The pay is part of the cost of the goods or services.

Also, can you explain to me why a 53-year old steel worker should get paid $68k/yr while a 53-year old teacher with two degrees (or even a 53-year old college professor with three) should get paid 20, 30 or even 40k less than that??

Sure. Because that's what they each agreed to work for in their respective industries. It's the going rate. Should doesn't enter into it.

In many cases neither do degrees. Certain fields of endeavor require them and others don't. Having a wall full of degrees doesn't guarantee you a lucrative career. And not having alphabet soup after your name doesn't preclude one.

If you don't want to work for the going rate in any particular industry, then get out and get into another line of work. That's certainly one of the many reasons I'm in IT and not a professional musician.

It's not about how you view your own monetary worth, it's about how others view it. Specifically, those paying the wages.

[tofu]

--

[windshieldbug]

In orchestras, there's a small thing called "Dismissal For Cause".

If someone doesn't like the way I regard the bass trombone, they can kick me to the curb, same as anywhere. All tenure means is that when they do, they have to tell me why. If I'm not cutting it, I have to re-audition in front of the Music Director AND an audition committee, so it isn't just personalities.

Yes, it does happen. I've sat on a bunch of committees. And I've seen it go both ways, so in the classical music business, there ain't no dead wood, let alone only tuba players and only tuba fingerers...

[Biggs]

Teachers, paramedics, police, firefighters, etc. will never get paid on the same scale or by the same criteria for success in the marketplace as private business. Public service jobs are NOT market-driven, and they are designed that way. If the neighboring school or police force is much better than yours, you can't pay them more to come do their jobs in your community. There is no marketplace competition by design. The only competition is between the elected officials who oversee public jobs, and that helps no one. If politicians ran on the platform of getting public service workers salaries that were comparable to private sector, they wouldn't get past the primaries in election season. These jobs are deemed necessary to society, and as such, are government jobs, not subject to desires of consumers or the market . As a result, public service folk choose to work for whatever taxpayers are willing to give up and for whatever politicians are willing to risk their precious jobs and pathetic egos.

Public $$$ and private $$$ do not equate, rightly or wrongly. Don't like the pay in your public service job? Do something else.

Doc

I agree with much of your post except for the idea that "If the neighboring school or police force is much better than yours, you can't pay them more to come do their jobs in your community." The most affluent communities often have very strong public schools for exactly this reason; they can afford to hire the best, most experienced, and most well-trained teachers away from lower-paying jobs. Although the actual salaries are decided by the municipality in question, don't you think that the best school superintendents, police chiefs, city planners, etc. (any non-elected public servant) recognize their own marketability and consequently gravitate to jobs that can afford to pay them what they're "worth?"

Thus, my advice would be: Don't like the pay in your public service job? Get better at it.

For the record, I am employed in public service. My pay is competitive, but I am certain it could be topped in the private sector. If I were to seek the same job with a private organization, I have to imagine I would find myself competing for the job with individuals who have much more experience in the field.

[WakinAZ]

Aw, come on. The guys at work and my kids love that little guy that bashes his head to a bloody pulp over and over and over...