Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Strike Votes _vs_ mgmt -vs- union-bustin


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ TubeNet BBS ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Jay Bertolet on September 12, 2000 at 06:40:47:

In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Strike Votes _vs_ mgmt -vs- union-bustin posted by honest, not bitter on September 11, 2000 at 23:51:03:

1) I disagree with your perception of tenure standards for regional orchestras. I know this story first hand because when I was hired here in 1985, the job paid under $15,000 annually. And I was on probation for two years. The conductor of the orchestra at that time was Pavarotti's touring conductor and he was hard as nails and very qualified. Getting tenure in my situation here is something I consider as a professional accomplishment! It won't get any headlines but it sure was hard enough to do. Besides, even if you assume that these players aren't as good as others the orchestra could get, is it fair to build a business on the work of these players in the early stages only to discard them later as the business begins to be successful. In Europe, they don't do this. I don't think we should here either.
2) I'm sorry to hear of your problems with the unions you work with. I hear this same story from others in different fields all over the country. I feel we, as musicians, are pretty lucky to have a union that basically isn't a problem. The AFM has its shortcomings but we never see stuff like what you described. But drawing lines, banding together, and "fighting" for our cause is the only way to effect change. The management and board of any symphony orchestra in the country is not going to better our working conditions or salaries one bit unless they know they can face a work stoppage from a unified group of musicians. If you get a chance, do some research into the genesis of ICSOM and see what things used to be like in Chicago.
3) I think you are mistaking good press for Chris Olka as good press for Seattle. Chris is a nice guy (I've never met him but I've heard) and a real good player. At present, the AFM isn't blacklisting members of Seattle because I think they are trying to convince the orchestra to rejoin the Federation. I could get into a long description of why they left the AFM but suffice it to say that this same thing almost happened here with my orchestra. A great deal of what goes into that kind of decision has to do with how the local services an orchestra. Orchestras provide a large percentage of the revenues to the locals where they work but sometimes the local turns a blind eye to the concerns of those musicians. If the situation goes too far, what happened in Seattle can occur. In any event, I guarantee you won't find players who are envious of the situation Seattle has. They have no strength because they are isolated and the costs are horrible. And what happens if management decides to start breaking their contract? They better have alot of money saved up...
4) I'd like to think that clear, productive discussion is always expected. Despite what has happened here over the last week, my emotions don't keep me from being clear headed about discussing these ideas. That may change as the deadline approaches, I don't know because I've never been in a strike situation before. But these issues are always
important. Especially so if we as musicians have any hope of maintaining or improving our lot. I sincerely hope you don't see my ideas as any sort of personal attack. My only desire is to put the facts on the table with the assumption that people will then make the choice appropriate for them.

My opinion for what its worth...


Follow Ups: