Posted by Tim Erdman on September 12, 2000 at 07:58:08:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Strike Votes _vs_ mgmt -vs- union-bustin posted by Joe Baker on September 11, 2000 at 23:20:25:
Hi, Joe: My name is Tim Erdman, secretary-treasurer of the Reading, PA Local 135-211. I am a trumpet player who accidentally stumbled across this web site and happened to read your viewpoint on unions. I appreciate the time and effort you took in composing your thoughts. Rather than attempt to address your every word, I would only like to comment on the restaurant-of-choice analogy you drew on freedom, to recite:
"Others of us, however, believe that freedom is the most important
consideration. The philosophy is that whoever is writing the checks
should be free to hire whom they like, and fire whom they like, and the
players should be free to accept, reject, or negotiate any offer
received.
If you go to a restaurant for six months, and suddenly they quit serving
good food, do you continue to go to it, or do you go elsewhere? You go
elsewhere. You 'fire' the restaurant. Are you "nothing more than a child
who plays with a toy for a time and then wants another toy, discarding
the first"? Of course not! You are merely exercising your freedom!"
From my point of view, the freedom of which you speak is a two-edged sword. Like every other industry in our society, abuses occur in the music industry. I'm not talking about not hiring an incompetent musician, but the excesses on the part of the contractor who is "free" to hire and fire at whatever whim happens to drive him or her during that particular moment...which in turn affects the "freedom" of the musician who gave him a good faith commitment. The "Strength in numbers" concept came about in order to protect the invididual rendering the service in return for a fair wage and fair working conditions, in other words, that a concept of fairness among all parties is ensured. Without it, there is no recourse when a contractor decides for whatever reason to stiff the performer after the job was played. If you are independently wealthy and merely have no feeelings one way or the other about insuring your livelihood through performing under fair conditions, then I can see why you feel the way you do. But to deny your fellowman and woman that same protection simply because it doesn't matter, then I would say Good Luck.
As I get up in my years I come to increasingly realize that the world is devoid of absolutes, including the kind of freedom of which you speak. Murphy's Law is all over this field: you give a contractor the total freedom to hire and fire, and expect a trail of abuse in his wake. A bold statement: but I dare you to poll twenty working club musicians and ask them whether any abuses ... and what kind ... occur in their particular venues. Just to cite one issue: How many times to we hear of sexual harrassment in the workplace? Well, I don't know your realm of symphony experience, but in my limited experience, I've seen conductors watching hemlines more than their scores. And woe to some I know who refused to "cave" to the condutor's "desires" after rehearsals. Do you think their contracts were renewed?
Let's get real. Tim Erdman