Officers Columns

Here are the latest posts from our officers

Ray Hair – AFM International President

Unity Is Key in Our Struggle for Fairness

Following is the text of my opening remarks to the 4th International Orchestra Conference in Montreal, Canada, May 12.

On behalf of the entire membership of the American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada, I am pleased to welcome you to Montreal for the 4th International Orchestra Conference, presented by the International Federation of Musicians (FIM) and the Quebec Musicians Guild, AFM Local 406. We are gathered here in this wonderful city, in this beautiful country, to share information, experiences, and ideas that will benefit and enlighten musicians performing in symphonic institutions around the world.

As we talk about some of the challenges we face, I want us to do so in the context of the greater challenge that affects relationships between all of us—the same challenge we’ve always faced.

Those of us in this room who are musicians understand our passion as musicians to perform perfectly, not just because that is our livelihood, but because that’s what gives meaning to our lives. It’s who and what we are. It’s also about the pride we feel when we can control our own destiny through the making of music, and when we believe we are reaching our potential as musicians. It’s about being fairly compensated for the artistic excellence and the joy we bring to the world.

From the time we began to organize sound, we eventually understood that strength and harmony came from unity, from aligning ourselves together perfectly as musicians because we are stronger together.

Our issues always rest on that greater challenge—how can we achieve fair compensation and fair treatment commensurate with the power of our music?

What we’ve struggled with since the beginning—we make all the music, while everybody else makes all the money—is our eternal contest. How can we achieve fairness for what we do? We can get there if we apply the same principle that we live by when we perform as musicians, and if we have the will to do it. The answer is unity.

There Is Strength in Unity

AFM was born in 1896, just as innovative technology began to alter how the public consumed music, from the live stage, concert halls, and theater pits to analog audio and visual broadcasting in the 1920s and 1930s; high fidelity in the 1950s to digital distribution in the 1980s and 1990s; and now, satellite and web radio with Sirius XM and Pandora, and on-demand audiovisual streaming with Spotify, Apple, YouTube, Hulu, Amazon, Netflix, and others.

For musicians in the US and Canada the opportunity to drive a fair bargain with well-capitalized media companies depends largely on collective agreements bargained by the AFM.

A fair bargain for media was far easier in the day when the means of production and distribution of music was less efficient, more expensive, and less integrated.

The technological landscape is far different today. In the 21st century, we live in a time of convergence, where the marriage of digitization, production, and transmission technology has blurred the lines between broadcasting, streaming, and social new media. We are experiencing an unparalleled surge of innovation, resulting in a global techno-economic paradigm shift.

Today, control over the means of production and distribution, formerly separate in the analog world, but now digitally unified, has produced winners and losers. All you have to do is follow the money.

Let’s look at Google, YouTube, and Facebook. Last month, CNBC reported that Google and Facebook together will earn $106 billion from advertising this year. Analysts expect Google-owned YouTube to top $10 billion in ad revenue in 2017. How many of you in this room today work with orchestras that have clips on YouTube?

A couple of days ago, I went to YouTube and searched for the Chicago Symphony Orchestra (CSO), clicked on CSO’s May 8, 2015 performance of Beethoven’s 9th. (Very popular clip—more than
6 million hits.) Before I was able to access the Beethoven clip, the first thing I got was an ad about nasal congestion relief. Funny, because I had recently searched online for information about allergy medicine. Google, YouTube’s parent company, remembered that and enabled YouTube to target my interest in CSO to spot-play a specific advertiser—Rhinocort Allergy Spray.

I then searched for the New York Philharmonic, clicked on a clip of the orchestra performing Stravinsky’s Pulcinella. But first, I was forced to view an ad for a spelling and punctuation error application. Funny, because I frequently use free online spelling, dictionary, and thesaurus applications, when I’m writing my columns for the International Musician. Google knew that and targeted my search with related advertising.

Then, to round out the exercise, searching for a foreign orchestra clip on YouTube, I clicked on the Iceland Symphony Orchestra’s Mozart Clarinet Concerto in A Major. There again was the same allergy medicine advertisement that I’d seen a minute earlier in front of the Chicago Symphony Orchestra video. I refreshed the page and got an ad for a website promoting six-pack abs.

Years ago, there was very little money in clip and excerpt use online. Today, it’s been monetized into the billions. In its advertiser supported streaming model, YouTube is using content posted by the Chicago, New York, and Iceland orchestras to sell allergy medicine, and lots more. Do those orchestral institutions get a cut of YouTube’s
$10 billion in ad money, and if so, will the musicians who performed so perfectly in those clips ever receive their fair share?

The managers and agents certainly recognize the value musicians add to media. When our talent improves the financial well-being of the media industry, our livelihood should improve as well. If we surrender complete control over media production and distribution, we lose our leverage and our stake in the content and we cede higher economic ground to management, middlemen, agents, and others in the food chain. We lose control of our destiny and our ability to reach our potential as musicians. But we can fight this and win. We can make a difference if we work together, because we are stronger together and because in unity, there is strength. Through the power of our music, as Eric Clapton said, we can change the world.

Sam Folio – AFM International Secretary-Treasurer

Click here for more from AFM Secretary-Treasurer

Unionism in the Age of Entrepreneurial Musicians

Recently I was introduced to a young man who makes his living as a professional musician but engages with today’s marketplace in a very different way than I did when I began my career. As a college student, I remember wanting very much to join the union. It was a rite of passage. Becoming a union musician meant I was a true professional, and therefore, allowed me to take my place among the wonderful and talented musicians who made their living making music. I remember carting my bass to what was a rather pathetic excuse for a union hall (a smoke-filled room with a desk). Behind the desk was an elderly, rather rotund man with a raspy voice made so from all the cigars he’d smoked, one of which hung from his mouth. Blue-gray smoke wafted up towards the ceiling.

He greeted me with: “So kid, you want to join the union.”

“Yes,” I said.

“Okay,” he replied, “play me a D major scale.”

I played the scale and he said, “Alright, kid … you’re in. That’ll be $7 initiation fee and $14 first quarter dues.” As I pulled the cash out of my pocket he asked me my name for the first time. I spelled it for him as he filled out my first union card. With that, he shook my hand, saying, “See ya kid.” I left floating on air. I had arrived!

Today, it’s quite different. An entire underground music economy exists, inhabited mostly by Millennials and Generation Z. Gone are the days when union membership was a necessary rite of passage. Many young musicians perform mostly nonunion work for cash and have none of the benefits or protections of a union contract. That said, they do make a living from this work. They are not necessarily opposed to the union, but are for the most part unaware of the labor movement and the contributions unions have made to improving wages and working conditions.

What many young musicians do want is health insurance. While health plans are offered by some of our largest locals, contributions to the plans come from being on a union contract. So, if these musicians can be educated about the union and offered the opportunity to participate in a health plan, they may become interested in union membership.

As I learn more about this underground music economy, I will follow up by letting you know of any progress that is made working with tomorrow’s professionals.

FIM International Orchestra Conference 2017

Having just returned from the 4th International Orchestra Conference (IOC) of the International Federation of Musicians (FIM), I was pleased to see how participation has grown since 2008. The IOC was established at the suggestion of former AFM Symphonic Services Director and International Secretary-Treasurer Florence Nelson when she was serving as a FIM officer. The conference takes place triennially. This year’s was held in Montreal, sponsored by the Guilde des Musiciens et Musiciennes du Quebec, AFM Local 406. Two hundred and sixty-one delegates, representing 30 countries attended, including a large contingent from Ghana! The official AFM delegation included AFM President Ray Hair, Vice President from Canada Alan Willaert, International Executive Board member and Local 802 (New York City) President Tino Gagliardi, Director of Symphonic Services Rochelle Skolnick, Director of Symphonic Electronic Media Deborah Newmark, ICSOM Chair Meredith Snow, ROPA Delegate Naomi Bensdorf Frisch, OCSM President Robert Fraser, and myself. I would like to recognize the Local 406 President Luc Fortin, Secretary-Treasurer Éric Lefebvre, Vice President Montréal Geneviève Plante, and Vice President Québec Jacques Bourget. In particular, I want to recognize former Local 406 Executive Director Myléne Cyr and Conference Coordinator Alexis Pitkevicht, who organized the conference and handled communications and public relations. They did a wonderful job working with FIM to put on an excellent conference.

The world has become a global marketplace. We now understand that what happens in the global marketplace affects the work of all professional symphonic musicians. Coming together to strategize, discuss common problems, and show support and solidarity for one another is an important function of the IOC. Look for additional coverage of the IOC in the July issue of the IM.

Alan Willaert – AFM Vice President from Canada

Click here for more from AFM Vice President from Canada

While Talks with WCMA Hit a Wall, New CBC Agreement Comes to Fruition

The Canadian Office continues to bargain with music festivals, award shows, and music industry events, with a view to having all such work under a union scale agreement. We were successful recently in negotiations with The Canadian Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences (CARAS), who each year present the Juno Awards, along with several days of young artists performing live in venues surrounding the host city. The three-year deal represents significant enhancements, including a pension and a streaming component that is separate from the broadcast deal. We are currently working on a similar agreement with the Canadian Country Music Awards (CCMA), another major event held in a different Canadian city each year. Saskatoon is the choice for 2017.

WCMA Stalemate

In pursuing what is best for musicians, we have run into the proverbial brick wall with the West Coast Music Alliance (WCMA), which since merging its event with both the Western and Prairie Music Awards, has hosted a festival and awards week called Breakout West. After several unsuccessful attempts to negotiate a more than reasonable agreement, the WCMA has refused to come back to the table.

There is much more at stake than making sure the awards show and live streaming are properly contracted and paid. Inexplicably, the position the negotiators took was: “Musicians should not think of Breakout West as a paid gig. They should consider it a networking opportunity.” In other words, showcasing at the event pays zero. There is no payment, no pension, and no protection against unauthorized recording and streaming.

Yet the organization receives roughly a half-million dollars in government grants and private sponsorship, let alone what it charges for admission and participation. Where does all that money go? Therefore, the CFM office had no choice but to request placement of the West Coast Music Alliance, and its board of directors, on the AFM International Unfair List. Members must not perform at, or in association with the Breakout West event in September 2017. While we continue to be open to bargaining, we are committed to all the pressure we can administer in an effort to bring fairness to this unconscionable working environment.

New CBC Agreement

On a more positive note, after two years of on/off bargaining, a new agreement has been reached with the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC). Along with substantial increases in fees, there are now residual payments on underscore and themes for episodic and dramatic series, along with older programming from the CBC archives (subject to limitations). Our agreement with Canada’s public broadcaster remains the only union contract to contain a guarantee of yearly expenditure.

Final language will be completed in the next few weeks, followed by the ratification process. I would like to personally thank members of the CFM negotiating committee, who dedicated many days of their time to ensure a fair deal for our members. They are: Eddy Bayens, president of Local 390 (Edmonton, AB); Doug Kuss, secretary-treasurer of Local 547 (Calgary, AB); Michael Murray, executive director of Local 149 (Toronto, ON); Francine Shutzman, of OCSM and president of Local 180 (Ottawa, ON); Robin Moir, secretary-treasurer of Local 180; Luc Fortin, president of Local 406; and Varun Vyas, secretary-treasurer of Local 571. Also special thanks to Canadian Office staff members Executive Director Liana White, Administration Director Susan Whitfield, Contract Administrator Dan Calabrese, and Symphonic Services Canada Director Bernard Leblanc.

SoundExchange Acquires CMRRA

Of interest to Canadian artists and publishers, SoundExchange has acquired the Canadian Musical Reproduction Rights Agency (CMRRA). For many years, CMRRA collected mechanical rights for artists and also handled synchronization rights. But for the past few years, CMRRA passed that responsibility along to the Canadian Music Publishers Association (CMPA). SoundExchange, now the largest Collective Management Organization (CMO) in the world, is expected to keep the operations separate, at least for the time being. Watch for more information in this regard.

Traveling Engagements—Who Plays and Who Gets Paid?

by Joseph Parente, AFM International Executive Board Member and President of Local 77 (Philadelphia, PA)

Over the next several months, outdoor venues will be presenting various types of entertainment in many locals throughout the Federation. These engagements provide added employment to many musicians. However, there seems to be an issue as to which musicians are to be employed for this work and what is the correct scale for these traveling engagements.

A symphony orchestra traveling to another jurisdiction to perform a symphonic concert is normally covered by their collective bargaining agreement (CBA), and is not at issue here. However, in cases where symphony orchestras are hired to travel to other jurisdictions to back a name act or to perform the soundtrack for a motion picture or video game, there have been problems.

AFM Bylaws cover both types of engagements. Article 14 Section 3(a) states:

A symphony orchestra may travel freely for the purpose of giving concerts of a symphonic type ... That seems to be clear. Article 14 goes on to say: In the cases where a symphony orchestra travels as a back-up unit to an artist or in a commercial venture that is not self-produced … or the orchestra is not the main attraction ... the wage scale of the home Local or the Local having jurisdiction over the engagement, whichever is higher, shall be payable to the musicians …

Again, this means playing for an act, motion picture, or video soundtrack.

Article 13 covers traveling engagements defined as … an engagement in which any member performs outside the jurisdiction of that member’s home Local. This applies to symphony orchestras as well as freelance orchestras traveling to other jurisdictions.

Article 13 Section 10 states:

Except for services that are covered by a CBA with the home Local or the AFM that provides for wages and other conditions of employment … the minimum wage to be charged and received by any member … for services rendered on a Traveling Engagement shall be no less than either the Local wage scale where the services are rendered or the Local wage scale where the musical unit has its base of operation, whichever is higher.

So there is no misunderstanding, other than an orchestra traveling to give a concert, the orchestra’s CBA is irrelevant. Terms of employment are governed by the local’s (either home local or destination local) wage scale book. Obviously, a promoter or presenter would love to pay only traveling expenses (per diem, lodging, etc.), while the cost of the orchestra is being paid by the orchestra’s management who is burning services under their weekly scale.

Incidentally, this situation doesn’t merely occur during the summer. There are just many more engagements in the summer because of outdoor venues. Similar engagements take place during the year with regional “mini-tours” such as Il Volo, Salute to Vienna, Mannheim Steamroller, and Trans-Siberian Orchestra. These are usually freelance engagements, but the same rules apply. Contractors, locals, orchestra committees, and musicians need to communicate with each other before these jobs take place so there is a level playing field for all musicians involved. Once the job takes place, it’s extremely difficult, if not impossible, to make things right. Local musicians should not and cannot be cheated out of work that is theirs in order to accommodate others who circumvent the AFM Bylaws.

Help Us, Help You

by Dave Pomeroy, AFM International Executive Board Member and President of Local 257 (Nashville, TN)

Most musicians don’t fit the stereotypes that some people like to place on us. We are hard-working, productive members of society who provide a soundtrack to the lives of those who may not know what it means to be creative or to try to and make a living in the arts. Many of us are involved in our community as teachers, volunteers, and mentors to the musicians of the future. Musicians often have more obstacles to overcome than the average worker could imagine—yet, somehow we persevere.

The fact that we love to play should never be an obstacle to taking care of business. The major reason why the AFM exists is to help you navigate through the challenges of a constantly changing music industry.

I come from a family of nonmusicians, but I fell in love with the bass at age 10. My love for playing and determination to succeed have helped make many of my childhood dreams come true and I am very grateful for that. I only knew one person in Nashville when I moved there at age 21. I joined AFM Local 257, which helped me connect the dots and have a successful career. My first gigs were as a touring musician. Then I made a gradual transition into studio work, as well as writing, producing, and releasing my own musical projects. For years, my dad would ask, “Are they paying you, son?” And the main reason I could say to him, “Yes, they are,” was because of the AFM.

As I got more involved in my local, I began to see the administrative side of the equation, and recognized the importance of getting employers to sign AFM Agreements in advance of a session or engagement. Nothing is more effective than a bandleader, session leader, or sideman asking that all-important question, “Is this a union session?” and helping to get a signatory agreement in place before the gig happens. Once the gig is over, it is much more difficult to get people to take responsibility for doing things the right way.

Our job is to arm players with the right information, and to help explain to employers that an AFM contract protects everyone involved. For example, when a record is used in a TV show, film, or commercial, the new use payment comes from the third party that is using the recording, and not the original employer. Otherwise, it becomes a game of cat and mouse—the employer hopes the musicians don’t find out about the new use, and the musicians can do little but complain and try to get a piece of the license fee. Without an AFM contract, the chances of that happening are almost nil.

Unfortunately, at almost every turn, there are unscrupulous employers who will try to take advantage of musicians who take them at their word. When these people sign an AFM agreement—whether or not they ever intended to follow through—we have the leverage to make it right. I recently concluded a 4 1/2-year quest to get musicians paid for reruns of TV shows done under an AFM Agreement more than 20 years ago. I have been chasing another deadbeat musician/producer for nearly 10 years, and have recovered more than 25% of what is due, with more coming.

This is all because of the legal protections our contracts give musicians who do AFM work. If these projects had not been done under AFM agreements, I would not have been able to get the musicians involved paid for their work. This has not been easy, but it is important to stand up for treating musicians with respect.

Here’s the bottom line: for 120 years the AFM has been looking out for musicians. Help us, help you, and let’s work together to make things right. If we don’t have your back, who does?

The Truth About Right to Work (For Less)

by Tino Gagliardi, AFM International Executive Board Member and President of Local 802 (New York City)

When the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), the legislation that protects the rights of employees and employers and prevents employment practices that are harmful to workers as well as to businesses and the overall economy, was enacted in 1935, a wide swath of the country immediately and bitterly opposed it. Republican leadership and the business community criticized the definition of “employee,” the act’s encouragement of collective bargaining, and the preservation of employee rights and protections at the expense of employer rights.

This debate, commonly referred to as “right to work,” still rages to this day. However, today’s political climate and the gains the right to work movement has made over the last two decades are making it more potent and dangerous for the labor movement than ever before.

On February 1, Congressman Steven King (R-IA) and Joe Wilson (R-SC) introduced the National Right to Work Act in Washington, DC. Similar legislation has been proposed and defeated in the past, but the Trump Administration, coupled with Republican control of both houses of Congress, could mean that right to work advocates have the political and legislative strength to win a victory at the national level.

Though Congressmen King and Wilson claim that they are fighting for the rights of workers by “erasing the forced-dues clauses” and unburdening Americans from the yoke of organized labor, don’t be fooled. This type of legislation, already passed in 27 states, has nothing to do with worker rights and everything to do with undercutting a worker’s strongest tool and ally—labor unions.

NLRA and Right to Work

Labor unions are vital to the health and vibrancy of a strong, safe, fairly-treated workforce, as well as an efficient economy. After the Taft-Hartley Act banned “closed shop” practices in the United States, unions found themselves advocating for fair pay and treatment of all workers, even those who were not union members. This was not only reasonable, it was a great thing for our communities, our families, and the vibrancy of our country.

This advocacy in “union shop” businesses has resulted in enormous gains for workers, including higher wages, safety laws, weekends, health and pensions, and scheduling practice standards (among others) that are now an assumed part of our daily lives. These protections help us ensure that hard working Americans can secure a decent living for themselves and their families.

Under the guise of benefiting workers, right to work legislation does the opposite. By incentivizing workers to benefit from union advocacy without paying dues, they are encouraging a “tragedy of the commons,” or “freeloader” mindset that ultimately undercuts the financial viability of union work and undermines the power of collective action.

Right to work advocates claim that this type of legislation creates jobs and allows for free-market economic growth. But nationally, wages in right to work states are 12.1% lower ($6,109/year) than in “union shop” states, and employees are less likely to receive health insurance or pensions from employers. Why? Because workers don’t have the strength or protection of collective action and representation that is vitally important.

The Right to Work … for Less

Who actually gains from right to work? The employers. Right to work legislation games the system, working around the NLRA to avoid employment requirements and ultimately takes worker rights from employees.

What workers and musicians across this country must realize is that right to work legislation is an insidious effort by employers to wrestle away the rights of employees. Nothing these politicians and right to work advocates publicly claim to desire is needed. The NLRA already allows for non-union workers to work in union shops, with the only expectation being that they help pay for the benefits they receive from working that healthy and protected environment. So why is it necessary? Ask the employers, large corporations, and political stakeholders that benefit from a weak workforce and the destruction of labor union values. Just follow the money that isn’t making its way into your pocket.

“… Indivisible …”

by Tina Morrison, AFM International Executive Board Member and Vice President of Local 105 (Spokane, WA)

My dear brothers and sisters to the North, please be patient, I’ve got a few things to talk about that are primarily a reaction to concerns very much on my mind since the US presidential election.

This article will be turned in first thing Monday, December 19, which also happens to be the day the electoral college will meet and finalize the outcome of this tumultuous US presidential election cycle. Even if there is some kind of unprecedented surprise, it won’t change what we’ve collectively experienced. We are entering a new year with additional new challenges.

As musicians, we don’t always like each other, but when we make music together, we have to listen to each other and blend our respective voices. Everyone loves good harmony; and although there’s real beauty in dissonance, there’s also a sense of relief when it finally resolves. Sometimes it takes a while.

With all of the “isms” that have been thrown around over these past months, I wear my unionism proudly because it takes all of our diversity and builds consensus to come to resolution. We develop consensus for our workplace negotiations, for decisions at our locals, and our Federation. It takes a lot of work, but it’s a great system for giving us a meaningful voice in decisions that affect us. By working together we have helped to create levels of fairness and safety in the workplace. Unionism lives and breathes because we are the union. “An injury to one is an injury to all.”

Unionism gives us a path on which we can find our way through interesting times. We have processes that enable us to work through tough issues and find solutions most of us can live with, most of the time. Unions are necessary to give working people a voice. Recent examples are the strikes in Pittsburgh, Ft. Worth, and Philadelphia.

Employers belong to groups and associations because they realize the value of networking and joining forces around issues and interests, the costs of which are usually covered by the business. We will need to actively oppose anti-union legislation at every level with a special eye on “right to work” (for less) legislation, which undermines our ability to push back.

Music blends many different cultures with themes and variations developed over the lifetime of humanity, but all of it has common threads of tones and rhythms. We care about our family and friends and want them to be safe, happy, and healthy; we want fair treatment and appropriate compensation for our work; we care about our communities; and we want future generations to have opportunities to thrive and live up to their full potential.

The “Ghost Ship” fire on December 2 in Oakland, California, is a wake-up call that there is work to be done regarding safe performance environments, which also support and encourage emerging musicians. “Mourn the dead and fight for the living.”

In this New Year, let’s resolve to listen to each other and blend our voices, embrace our diversity, and stand together against adversity.

... with liberty and justice for all ...