Officers Columns

Here are the latest posts from our officers

Ray Hair – AFM International President

It’s Time to Bring Film and Television Scoring Back to Musicians on This Side of the Atlantic

Before 2010, New York and Los Angeles were the leading centers for film scoring. Due to producers’ desire to cut costs, most nonsignatory film scoring has been done overseas in recent years. Although scoring makes up a small portion of a blockbuster film’s budget, often less than .05%, by 2018 most film productions that didn’t have union agreements had moved their scoring overseas. Many of these recordings are now made by nonunion orchestras in Central and Eastern European countries.

This spring, one of our primary focuses has been on state lobbying efforts to ensure that more motion picture and television scoring work is done in the US and Canada.

California: A Stronger Voice in Sacramento

The AFM has taken a strong, proactive stance to ensure musicians’ voices are heard in Sacramento by joining the Entertainment Union Coalition (EUC). This multi-union alliance is dedicated to advocating for entertainment industry members on public policy issues in California and collectively represents over 165,000 workers in the state’s entertainment sector.

I have appointed Local 47 (Los Angeles, CA) President Stephanie O’Keefe and AFM Director of Government Affairs Ben Kessler as our liaisons. Thanks to their work and dedication, the AFM now has a seat at the table among the other arts and entertainment unions and guilds, including California IATSE Council, Directors Guild of America, LiUNA! Local 724, Teamsters Local 399, Writers Guild of America West, and SAG-AFTRA.

The EUC has been a vocal advocate for the entertainment industry in discussions around California Governor Gavin Newsom’s 2025-2026 budget. When production companies are bound by our contracts, and more film and television production takes place in California, that means more work for AFM members. It is clear to me that Newsom’s proposed expansion of the California Film and Television Job Program to $750 million will benefit working musicians. The increase will make California’s incentive program competitive with those in other countries. It will do so as a true jobs package.

We thank our members and AFM local leaders throughout California who submitted letters of support for AB 1138 and SB 630 to key chair and committee members in Sacramento during April. These film and television modernization bills are critical to bringing back film and television jobs, strengthening the domestic entertainment industry, and ensuring California remains a global center for film and television.

New York State: Celebrating New Scoring Incentives

Last month, we celebrated new tax incentives for film scoring in New York State. To fight the offshoring of music scoring through legislation, AFM and Local 802 officers and staff, including former President Sara Cutler and current President Bob Suttmann, Financial Vice President Karen Fisher, and Chief of Staff Dan Point, traveled to Albany to lobby state legislators and build meaningful relationships.

Under a new provision, producers have a financial incentive to score their made-in-New York projects in the state. If they hire at least five musicians to record a qualified project in New York, they will receive a 10% uplift rebate or tax credit on scoring costs from the state, on top of the standard 40% credit. If scoring is conducted in Upstate New York, there is an additional 10% uplift, meaning producers could see rebates of scoring costs as high as 60%.

I appreciate New York Governor Kathy Hochul’s support for this legislation. This has been a passion project of mine since I became president of Local 802 in 2010. It is essential that the tax credit program truly benefits all aspects of the New York State creative economy, including AFM scoring musicians.

New Jersey: Closing Loopholes for Domestic Work

We are currently working with AFM local union leaders in New Jersey on film tax incentive legislation to ensure that film scoring work is produced domestically.

The Garden State Film and Digital Media Jobs Act, passed in 2018, gives tax credits to attract film and digital media productions to New Jersey. To get the tax credit, producers must spend a certain amount on hiring in-state workers and spend a certain amount on in-state vendors. It’s a great program, establishing New Jersey as a top-tier filmmaking destination but there is no direct incentive to keep the film scoring work at home.

Local 16-248 (Newark, NJ) President Tony Scally and Local 16-248 Executive Board Member Dave Schneck, along with Local 62 (Trenton, NJ) President Buzz Herman and Local 399 (Asbury Park, NJ) President Jim McIlvain and Secretary Curt Morton, have been working steadily to help move the bipartisan S4392 and A4382 bills through the New Jersey legislature. These crucial bills, sponsored by Senator Joseph Lagana for S4392, and Assemblymembers William Sampson, Barbara McCann Stamato, and Dawn Fantasia for A4382, aim to incentivize producers to hire domestic musicians for scoring sessions, rather than outsourcing the work to Europe. More information can be found at www.nj.fairsharemusic.org.

Continuing the Fight for AFM Member Jobs

Of course, this work extends beyond the impact of tax incentives; the important work to ensure more jobs for AFM members across the US and Canada continues. The AFM is committed to increasing work opportunities for all members under Electronic Media Services Division (EMSD) recording contracts by actively engaging with both musicians and local officers. This includes offering education, resources, and support to ensure proper contract filing and compliance. The EMSD works to demystify the various AFM agreements, from the Sound Recording Labor Agreement (SRLA) to specialized contracts for low-budget projects and new media.

By highlighting the advantages of union contracts—including fair wages, pension and health contributions, and residual payments for “new use” and supplemental markets—the AFM empowers members and encourages employers to participate, ultimately broadening union opportunities in the constantly changing recording industry.

Jay Blumenthal – AFM International Secretary-Treasurer

Click here for more from AFM Secretary-Treasurer

Is the AFM really serious about addressing sexual harassment, assault, discrimination, and bullying?

Yes it is, but sometimes this hallowed institution gets it wrong even with the best of intentions. The most recent occasion was on my watch as the AFM’s administrative officer overseeing the content of each month’s International Musician.

Over the past few months, IM has published information about the AFM’s newly expanded Code of Conduct, which addresses all forms of workplace harassment, including sexual harassment, discrimination, retaliation, intimidation, whether perpetrated by coworkers or by employers. As an adjunct to the expanded code, the Federation subscribed to the NotMe app, which offers a user-friendly process for a member to report a complaint. Reports received through the app are then confidentially triaged by one of the AFM’s legal staff members to assess the appropriate way to bring the concern or complaint to a good resolution.

Expanding the code and subscribing to the reporting app were two of six recommendations brought to the IEB last year by a group of local officers and musician representatives that had organized themselves under the banner of the Change the Culture Committee. The members of this committee invested a considerable amount of their personal time, drawing upon their own experiences and those of their colleagues. They offered suggestions for their union to develop meaningful policies, reporting structures, and preventative education in the realm of discrimination, harassment, and sexual assault to benefit all members, everywhere they work.

It took a few months to finalize the expanded Code of Conduct and vet the reporting app, both of which were introduced in the April issue of IM. However, in the months since that rollout, I have come to understand that the stage would have been better set with more introductory preparation and education for local officers and the membership. What followed over the next two issues of IM might therefore have had a very different trajectory.

Shortly after the April issue hit the streets, we received a Feedback letter critical of the fact that the committee members consisted of only women, that the Federation was unwittingly encouraging people to “inform” upon each other, and that it was fostering a culture of arbitrary enforcement. President Gagliardi authored a response to the Feedback letter in the May issue addressing the writer’s assertions and misassumptions.

After the May issue hit the streets, three more Feedback letters arrived criticizing Gagliardi’s reply, attacking the viability of the app—in particular, its anonymous reporting option—and implying that the union was sliding backward into communism. Guided by Feedback editorial policy, we dutifully printed those letters in the June issue.

That was my first mistake. Printing those letters, essentially variations on the same points made in the May issue, added little of substance to the discourse. Having made that first mistake, my second was in not producing a direct response to those three letters as had been done for the May issue. I relied on an erroneous assumption that the memory of Gagliardi’s reply in the May issue would carry over to the June issue. To counterbalance, we instead printed underneath those Feedback letters a simplified how-to-use the NotMe app to show members how to register with the app, see how it works, and understand its straightforward nature.

On a number of levels, that approach was inadequate. I like to think that I’m fairly adept at predicting how a thing will be received or perceived by another person. In this case, however, I completely blew it.

I failed to consider how printing the three letters with no direct response from the leadership would impact someone who had already been subjected to traumatic sexual harassment or retaliation, or how a new union member, upon receiving the June issue of IM as their first union publication, might see these three seemingly unchallenged letters as institutional disregard for the trauma, fear, and injury experienced by anyone subjected to sexual harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. For those failures, I am truly sorry.

There’s a reason the women of the Change the Culture Committee came together to address the IEB about this darker side of our industry’s culture: No one was visibly leading the way for change. For their determination and willingness to do so, they have the thanks and gratitude of every member of the IEB and its genuine commitment to tackle sexual harassment, assault, discrimination, and bullying throughout our industry.

Alan Willaert – AFM Vice President from Canada

Click here for more from AFM Vice President from Canada

Summer Sounds and Secure Futures with AFM Contracts

Spring transitioning into summer signals a break from the routine of many orchestras’ seasons and sessional teaching, and there is often a switch to music festivals, summer music programs, touring (jazz festival circuit), or finding time for much needed rest and rejuvenation or perhaps writing and recording. Whatever you find yourself doing over the summer, remember to file AFM contracts. Additional pension contributions can make a difference. Your local can help find the right contract to cover your work.

Having spent a few days last month at East Coast Music Week reminded me of the importance of the collective bargaining agreement we have there. It covers minimum scales for showcases, performances, the awards show, and has pension contributions for all the performers. Our relationship with East Coast Music Association also provides us the opportunity to speak on panels, hold town hall discussions, and have a booth presence.

Several AFM locals in Canada have had success negotiating agreements with local festivals. Local 553 (Saskatoon, SK), with just under 300 members, has agreements with their local jazz festival.

When musicians work with their local, there are opportunities to build community and create better working conditions that include pension contributions and improved remuneration. Municipalities and provinces fund many of these events with taxpayer money. With some planning and time, building organizing efforts in the freelance world can create solidarity in the community, build a stronger local, and unite musicians.

The Health Arts Plan that we circulated a couple of months ago might be a tool to negotiate contributions toward additional benefits for freelance members. What other possibilities are there in your local? How many festivals take place over the summer months that have live music performances?

However you spend your summer, may your travels be safe and uneventful.

In other news, I’m pleased to report we have completed negotiations with CBC for a new three-year agreement. The agreement is still being edited and should be sent for ratification this month. The highlights show wage increases of 9% and a small increase in pensions. A Generative Artificial Intelligence Side Letter creates guardrails on AI use and provisions for the negotiation of remuneration.

I want to thank our negotiating committee of Local 406 (Montreal, PQ) Executive Director Guy Bernard, Local 571 (Halifax, NS) Director of Operations Julia Jordan, Local 149 (Toronto, ON) Executive Director and AFM International Executive Board Member Dusty Kelly, retired Local 547 (Calgary, AB) Secretary-Treasurer Doug Kuss, Local 180 (Ottawa, ON) Secretary-Treasurer Robin Moir, AFM Electronic Media Services Division (EMSD) Director John Painting, and Canadian Office Executive Director Liana White and Director of Administration Susan Whitfield for their assistance, expertise, and patience.

Hip-Hop’s Billion-Dollar Beat Deserves Union Protection

Hip-hop has long been a global economic force. Hip-hop and R&B accounted for over 25% of all US streams in 2024. According to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), in 2022, hip-hop generated $15.9 billion from music streams and purchases alone. Yet, behind the impressive streaming numbers and sold-out tours lies a harsh reality: most hip-hop musicians are vulnerable to exploitation, financial instability, and lack of workplace protections.

According to data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics and Canada’s Cultural Human Resources Council, there are conservatively over 44,000 hip-hop and R&B musicians working across North America. However, this number is likely a significant undercount. Due to the somewhat informal nature of the music business—particularly with independent musicians—many hip-hop artists may not report their music income through traditional channels.

Union participation remains alarmingly low. Fewer than 12% of these musicians are unionized—a percentage far below other genres, especially classical, where unionization is the norm. This gap leads to one conclusion. Hip-hop musicians need to be part of our union.

While superstar artists like Drake, Cardi B, or Kendrick Lamar earn millions, they represent a tiny fraction of the field. Most hip-hop artists earn under $30,000 annually, after expenses, struggling to sustain themselves in an industry where streaming—an over $46 billion global industry—pays them mere fractions of a cent per stream.

Independent artists find it nearly impossible to break even, let alone build a career. The rise of so-called “360 deals”—where labels take a cut of an artist’s earnings from all income streams (touring, merch, endorsements, etc.)—has made matters worse. Artists like Lupe Fiasco and Chamillionaire have been vocal critics of these exploitative arrangements.

The major centers of hip-hop—Atlanta, Los Angeles, New York, and Toronto—are also hotspots for labor abuses. These cities have become ground zero for both artistic innovation and systemic exploitation. Attempts to organize hip-hop musicians have emerged over the years. The AFM and SAG-AFTRA have made outreach efforts, though progress is slow.

Some locals are leading the way. Local 10-208 (Chicago, IL), for instance, recently launched organizing drives in the hip-hop space. This model should be expanded across the Federation. Notably, some hip-hop figures are already part of the union family. Questlove, a member of Local 802 (New York City), is a longtime advocate for the fair treatment of musicians.

Union campaigns—such as the historic wins in motion picture and television scoring and the recent ratification of the Live TV Agreement with new grievance and arbitration provisions—prove that organizing can deliver real, tangible gains. If extended to the hip-hop community, such efforts could mean better streaming royalty rates, legal protections from predatory contracts, and vital financial literacy education for artists.

Critics sometimes claim unionization stifles an artist’s independence and creative spirit. But history demonstrates otherwise. Musicians working in theater, recording sessions, and classical music have all benefitted from collective bargaining without sacrificing their artistry. The freedom to create and the right to fair compensation are not mutually exclusive.

Ultimately, hip-hop’s cultural and economic success is built on the backs of thousands of underpaid and unprotected musicians. The AFM could be the structural support this community desperately needs—a safeguard for its artists, and a pathway toward long-term sustainability in an industry that too often chews up and spits out its talent.

Artificial Intelligence and Us

The technological challenges musicians face are not new. We can go back to Edison’s invention of the phonograph, which at the time, fundamentally altered the relationship between listeners and music. Audiences could now listen to recorded music on a physical medium, at any time, without having to go to a venue where musicians were playing. Musical performance was no longer an ephemeral art form. Later, radio, television, and the internet followed, with their share of challenges, to which artist unions and collective rights management societies eventually responded as best they could.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) to create music represents a significantly more disruptive shift than the introduction of the phonograph and electronic media. This transformation extends beyond altering the relationship between listeners and music; it fundamentally changes the nature of music creation itself.

You can now “create” a work from A to Z without owning a musical instrument, without hiring musicians or lyricists. While recreational use may have limited consequences, it is important to consider the significant potential impact of this technology on the profession of musicians and the music industry overall.

AI tools can offer new opportunities but they raise crucial questions about intellectual property. AI is redefining the challenges of creativity and musical performance.

“... Dive into our professional editing tools, your next song is just one step away.” This is an excerpt from the Suno.AI website. Suno is just one of an entire range of AI-based online authoring tools (Meta’s MusicGen, Google’s Music LM, FlexClip, AIVA, etc.) Some of these are aimed at trained musicians, but others can be used by people with no musical experience.

What these tools have in common is the ability to generate so-called “original” and “royalty-free” compositions by analyzing millions of existing tracks. In short, it’s a form of legalized plagiarism. Obviously, such tools will never replace a Paul McCartney or a Stevie Wonder, but AI can be used to generate background music for films, documentaries, or jingles—background music ... without paying any artist.

The challenge for artists’ unions is to limit as far as possible the use of such tools in collective agreements negotiated with media content producers. For example, the collective bargaining agreement between the AFM and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) “incorporates new protections against the encroachment of generative artificial intelligence (AI), providing compensation for musicians when their performances are used in conjunction with AI tools, and ensuring that human creativity remains at the heart of the industry” (AFM press release, April 2024). We must also highlight hard-fought efforts of our colleagues at SAG-AFTRA to protect the acting profession against the use of digital replicas of actors (voice and image).

Copyright is in dire need of new protective legislation. Composers receive no royalties for the re-use of their music by AI algorithms. The absence of transparency and source traceability is concerning, though upcoming European regulations aim to address this.

A study by the International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers (CISAC) predicts a 24% drop in composers’ revenues by 2028 due to AI-generated music potentially replacing certain types of creation. It’s reasonable to expect a drop in income for performing musicians, too.

Another troubling aspect is the distribution of AI-generated music on streaming platforms. The French streaming service Deezer has set a good example by implementing controls to detect the presence of AI-generated tracks. Its detection software has identified a growing presence of AI-generated music (10% to date and rising).

Unlike Deezer, other major platforms, such as Spotify, do not seem interested in the incursion of fake original music into their platforms. There are even fears that Spotify and others will become producers of AI-generated music content, so as not to have to pay copyright fees.

We must be vigilant and continue to make our elected representatives aware of the dangers of unaccountable use of AI. The fight to protect us from the harmful consequences of AI has only just begun, and the AFM will remain an important player in this field.

L’intelligence artificielle et nous

par Luc Fortin, membre du conseil exécutif international (IEB) de l’AFM et de la section locale 406 (Montréal, Qué.)

Les enjeux technologiques auxquels ont fait face les musiciens ne datent pas d’hier. On peut remonter à l’invention du phonographe d’Edison qui, à l’époque, a fondamentalement modifié le rapport entre les auditeurs et la musique. Le public pouvait désormais écouter de la musique enregistrée sur un support physique, à tout moment, sans avoir à se déplacer dans un lieu où des musiciens jouaient. La performance musicale n’était désormais plus un art éphémère. Plus tard, la radio, la télévision, l’internet, suivirent avec leur lot de défis auxquels les syndicats d’artistes et sociétés de gestion collective de droits ont fini par répondre du mieux qu’ils le pouvaient.

Avec l’intelligence artificielle appliquée à la création de musique on est devant un changement nettement plus disruptif que l’apparition du phonographe et des médias électroniques. Ce n’est plus le rapport entre l’auditeur et la musique qui est bouleversé, mais le rapport à la création musicale. On peut maintenant « créer » une œuvre de A à Z sans posséder un instrument de musique, sans engager de musiciens ou de parolier. Si ce n’était que pour un simple usage récréatif les conséquences seraient limitées, mais on se rend compte de plus en plus de l’impact potentiel énorme de cette technologie sur le métier de musicien et l’industrie de la musique en général.

Les outils de l’IA peuvent offrir de nouvelles opportunités, mais posent des questions cruciales sur la propriété intellectuelle. L’IA redéfinit les enjeux de la créativité et de la performance musicale.

« … Plongez dans nos outils d’édition professionnels, votre prochain morceau n’est plus qu’à un pas. » (Extrait du site web de Suno.AI). Suno n’est qu’un exemple parmi toute la panoplie d’outils de création en ligne par IA (MusicGen de Meta, Music LM de Google, FlexClip, AIVA, etc.) Certains de ces logiciels s’adressent à des musiciens formés, mais d’autres peuvent être utilisés par des gens qui n’ont pas de formation musicale. Ces outils ont en commun la possibilité de générer des compositions dites « originales » et « libres de droits » en analysant des millions de morceaux existants. Bref, c’est une forme de plagiat légalisé. Évidemment, de tels outils ne remplaceront jamais un Paul McCartney ou un Stevie Wonder mais … l’IA peut être utilisée pour générer de la musique de fond pour films ou documentaires, ou des jingles, de la musique d’ambiance … sans rémunérer le moindre artiste.

Le défi pour les syndicats d’artistes consiste à limiter le plus possible l’utilisation de tels outils dans les ententes collectives négociées avec les producteurs de contenus médiatiques. Par exemple, l’entente entre l’AFM et l’Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP) « intègre de nouvelles protections contre l’empiètement de l’intelligence artificielle générative (IAG), prévoyant une compensation pour les musiciens lorsque leurs performances sont utilisées en conjonction avec des outils d’IA, et garantissant que la créativité humaine reste au cœur de l’industrie » (communiqué de l’AFM, avril 2024). Il faut souligner aussi le dur combat de nos collègues de SAG-AFTRA pour enfin protéger le métier d’acteur et contre l’utilisation de répliques numériques d’acteurs (voix et image).

Le droit d’auteur a vivement besoin de nouvelles lois protectrices. Les compositeurs ne touchent pas de redevances pour la réutilisation de leur musique par les algorithmes d’IA. Le manque complet de transparence et de traçabilité des sources soulève beaucoup de préoccupations, bien que des règlements européens soient en préparation pour y remédier. Une étude de la CISAC (Confédération internationale des sociétés d’auteurs et compositeurs) prévoit une baisse de 24 % des revenus des compositeurs d’ici 2028 en raison de la musique générée par IA qui pourrait remplacer certains types de création. On peut raisonnablement prévoir aussi une baisse de revenus des musiciens interprètes.

Un autre aspect troublant consiste en la diffusion d’œuvres musicales générées par l’IA sur les plateformes de diffusion continue. Deezer a donné le bon exemple en mettant en place des contrôles pour repérer la présence de morceaux générés par l’IA. Son logiciel de détection a révélé une présence croissante de musique générée par l’IA (10 % à ce jour, et c’est en augmentation constante). Contrairement à Deezer, d’autres grandes plateformes comme Spotify ne semblent pas intéressées par l’incursion dans leurs plateformes de fausses œuvres musicales et on craint même que Spotify et autres vont devenir productrices de contenu musical par intelligence artificielle pour ne plus avoir à payer les droits d’auteurs.

Il faut être vigilant et nous devrons continuer à sensibiliser nos élus aux dangers de l’utilisation non responsable de l’IA. La lutte pour nous protéger des conséquences néfastes de l’IA ne fait que commencer et l’AFM restera un intervenant important en cette matière.

Art vs Politics at Kennedy Center; Workers and Audience Caught in the Middle

The Kennedy Center’s February 12 change in leadership has become the subject of much discussion among members of the arts community and beyond. Following soon after this announcement was the news that a number of high-profile artists had made the decision to withdraw from their commitments to the center.

Currently, artists, arts creators, and others are reevaluating their relationships with the Kennedy Center. This is their right. As President John F. Kennedy once remarked, “If art is to nourish the roots of our culture, society must set the artist free to follow his vision where it takes him.”

The Kennedy Center, a living memorial to the performing arts, has always been a testament to Kennedy’s visionary support of the artists in our society.

Donors and audience members have also begun to reevaluate their support for our national performing arts center and the programming featured there. With respect to the conversations taking place among these groups, little attention has been focused on the impact these actions have on those whose livelihoods depend on the Kennedy Center’s success. It is important to provide additional context to the discourse by considering the implications to these workers.

The participation of artists and art creators is essential to the mission of the Kennedy Center. The Center was created through an act of Congress. First among the obligations of the Center’s Board in the National Cultural Center Act is a duty to “present classical and contemporary music, opera, drama, dance, and other performing arts from the United States and other countries.”

This mandate, focused on presenting these art forms, is not possible without the direct involvement of dedicated artists in each of these disciplines. As Kennedy said, “I see little of more importance to the future of our country than full recognition of the place of the artist.” This message will not continue to be heard without the voices of the artists he championed. The opportunity to utilize this important platform in service of that message will then be lost.

Kennedy Center Artists and Workers

The Kennedy Center is home to two world class orchestras: National Symphony Orchestra and Washington National Opera/Kennedy Center Opera House Orchestra. Their member musicians are represented by Local 161-710 (Washington, DC). We are justifiably proud of the artistic accomplishments of these orchestras and the essential role they have played in establishing the Kennedy Center as a major arts destination.

We also recognize that they are a part of a larger story. The fulfillment of the Kennedy Center’s mission would not be possible without the work of the many arts professionals represented by the International Alliance of Theatrical and Stage Employees (IATSE), Actors’ Equity Association (AEA), American Guild of Musical Artists (AGMA), and Stage Designers and Choreographers Society (SDC). The livelihoods of more than 1,500 artists and arts workers at the Kennedy Center are dependent on the robust support of the artistic community, audiences, and donors to ensure the continued vitality of one of the premier centers of American cultural life and performance. For more information, please visit https://kennedycenterunions.org.

Kennedy Center Audiences

Nonprofit arts organizations, such as the Kennedy Center, exist to connect audiences with the arts and to greater humanity. Kennedy said, “… art establishes the basic human truth which must serve as the touchstone of our judgement.”

The success of the Kennedy Center’s mission is as dependent on the support of its audiences as of its artists. While federal funding provides for the repairs, operations, and maintenance of the building, it is public support that ensures performances by the amazing variety of artists employed at the center will continue long into the future. Support focused on specific programs, such as the National Symphony Orchestra and the Washington National Opera, is important.

Throughout this column I have repeatedly quoted from President Kennedy’s remarks at Amherst College on October 23, 1963. His address on this occasion, in honor of the poet Robert Frost, is truly inspirational and worth revisiting in its entirety. I feel it’s appropriate to end with one last quote from that day, “We must never forget that art is not a form of propaganda; it is a form of truth.”

All Musicians Deserve Fair Pay and Safe Working Conditions

“It was the best of times; it was the worst of times …”

When I was a kid tagging along with my dad on his gigs and meeting his musician friends, hearing them perform together in a concert or nightclub was only part of the experience. I also got to hear them talk about the music they were listening to and the musicians they admired.

In that primarily Greatest Generation circle, they really loved music that incorporated South American rhythms, that borrowed from European folk songs, and of course, there was the omnipresent African American jazz and blues influence. Folks worshipped Oscar Peterson, Dave Brubeck, Antonio Carlos Jobim, Django Reinhardt, Miles Davis, and Chet Baker among others. Musicians have always shared and been influenced by each other’s cultures and experiences. Music has no borders.

But there are barricades to money and opportunity. Good instruments are expensive and opportunities to learn while you earn are few and far between. Some genres basically require an expensive education. Many musicians have teachers who also serve as mentors, but it’s not treated like a real apprenticeship.

Our profession has become increasingly complicated as entry-level, paid, live work has eroded. Recording is more accessible due to technology, but monetizing recordings is a challenge. Technology can be helpful, especially when it comes to education, but it’s always changing and comes with additional expenses. And exploitation of musicians by technology is rampant.

Political and societal changes are creating uncertainty. Technology has made the world smaller, while creating greater divisions. Musicians traditionally have been important in turbulent times, whether by documenting, empathizing, or influencing. I’ve been thinking about folks like Dmitri Shostakovich, Billie Holiday, Woody Guthrie, and Marvin Gaye. We can bring people together, lift up voices, give comfort, and inspire. But beyond making music to the best of our ability, another important role is in our union.

We are the American Federation of Musicians of the United States and Canada. We will work together to build strength in our union and make sure that musicians have a voice in any decision that affects us. We each have a responsibility to ensure that our workplaces are safe and free from harassment. We must make our local unions places where all musicians feel welcome, valued, and respected.

We all have colleagues who are not in the union. Now is the time to invite them in; ask them to join you in the effort to make a better life for musicians. Beyond having the ability to purchase and maintain instruments and pay off student debt, musicians need affordable housing, practice spaces, health care, child care, food, and reliable transportation.

Even if music making is a part-time job, there should be fair compensation and safe working conditions. Much of the work to be done is local, so we must build strong local unions to network with the rest of the labor community, identify community partners, and build relationships with elected officials.

I still have this ideal that success in music making should be based only on the sounds produced. If a musician makes sounds that others want to hear they should be able to develop a career. We have challenges that impact all music makers, and we need to call in all working musicians to unite against the exploitive and divisive forces we are all facing.

Thank you for your work!