Probation Processes: A New Model to Advance Fairness, Equity, and Safety

October 1, 2024

Rochelle Skolnick  -  AFM Symphonic Services Division Director

In the August IM, I wrote about taking action to change symphonic workplace culture around sexual misconduct. In that column, I highlighted the ways in which power differentials and boundary violations contribute to a culture in which sexual misconduct occurs and has too often been allowed to persist.

There are built-in hierarchies in our workplaces. In a 2016 decision affirming the employee status of the musicians of the Lancaster Symphony, the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit observed that a conductor “exercises virtually dictatorial authority over the manner in which the musicians play.” Musicians hold their own kinds of power, including input on the creation of sub lists, hiring order, and input on hiring and grants of tenure through participation on audition and tenure committees.

Our system of tenure helps to mitigate power imbalances for musicians who have attained it, giving them a certain measure of protection against arbitrary dismissal and the liberty to take artistic risks. But for those without the protection of tenure—subs, extras, and probationary musicians—continued employment can be precarious and often dependent on elusive factors that seemingly have little to do with how they play their instruments.

For probationary musicians, this precarity has not been lessened by the relative lack of standards, safeguards, and transparency that characterize the process of attaining tenure. In many regards, our collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) are complex and mature documents that detail most aspects of what is to occur in our workplaces. But they fall woefully short when it comes to the standards and procedures that should be applied during a musician’s probationary period.

Many of our contracts say absolutely nothing about what is supposed to happen, only (at most) that the first season or two are probationary and that if a musician is given a contract for a subsequent season, they are then deemed to be tenured. Some provide a little more structure, but almost without exception, our contracts include no substantive or procedural safeguards against discrimination or pretextual decision-making, let alone other abuses of power.

In the absence of bargained-for structures, the ways in which orchestras actually handle probation and tenure are as multifarious as the orchestras themselves. In an ideal world, this would mean that each orchestra developed a fair and transparent process that worked well for that orchestra’s unique circumstances. In practice, the lack of structure has left probationary processes susceptible to bias and a lack of accountability. These processes provide probationary musicians with little support and even less ability to challenge adverse actions.

In its second letter to American orchestras, issued earlier this year, the Black Orchestral Network (BON) drew attention to these and other failings of our system of probation and tenure. I encourage you to read BON’s well-researched and well-reasoned call for action here: www.blackorchestralnetwork.org/open-letter-2024. As they reported then, the experiences of Black musicians “highlight and underscore … concerns about dignity, equity, respect, transparency, and inclusion in the tenure process.”

But BON also pointed out that “while grounded in and too often experienced by Black orchestral musicians, these accounts also speak to challenges faced by all nontenured musicians.” My own 20-year experience of representing musicians bears this out: our current systems simply do not work well for any of the musicians who engage with them.

This dysfunctional paradigm must come to an end. There is no reason why probation cannot be reimagined as a process during which a musician who has already prevailed in an audition is provided with the support they need to become fully immersed into the fabric of an orchestra—a process not of elimination but one of integration into a greater whole. There is no reason why expectations, both substantive and procedural, can’t be spelled out in a binding, legally enforceable document that can be relied upon by all involved, especially the probationary musician. The current chaotic lack of structure harms musicians and does not make our orchestras better, stronger, or healthier in any respect.

Over the past several months, I have engaged with the leaders of BON and others in our field to reimagine a probationary process that addresses the failings of existing structures. What emerged from that dialogue is a set of model standards and procedures—boilerplate language—that provides a template for codifying processes that previously have been ill-defined and far from uniform in our symphonic CBAs.

As of today, the “Model Standards and Procedures for Probationary Period” document is available in the Symphonic Services Division Resource Center in the Document Library of the AFM website and is accessible to any member of the AFM.

The document is intended as a model to be used in the collective bargaining process between employers and local unions of the AFM. It could be adopted in its entirety as a new CBA article or an exhibit/addendum to a CBA. It can also be used as a reference for how to update and improve aspects of existing processes.

“Creating language and tools that steer us collectively closer to equitable outcomes is a critical component of BON’s work,” observed Weston Sprott, Metropolitan Opera Orchestra trombonist and BON founding and steering committee member. “Collaborating with the AFM to support orchestras that want to bring their intentions in alignment with action is a meaningful step towards progress.”

In most respects, the document speaks for itself. Nonetheless, I and others on the staff of the AFM’s Symphonic Services Division are available to help stakeholders better understand the document and the concerns that led to its creation. We also stand ready to support locals and orchestra committees as they negotiate with employers to establish more just, equitable, and productive probationary processes for the benefit of all musicians and the entire symphonic sector.

---