February 5th, 2010 The Committee
I. LETTER FROM THE SMALL LOCALS COMMITTEE
II. A RECENT QOUTE FROM THE LATEST RMA TRIPE
III. WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? - TEACHING BENEFITS
IV. COMMENTS
V. EVENTS
===========================
I. LETTER FROM THE SMALL LOCALS COMMITTEE
We just received this publication from the Small Locals Committee.
They are waking up to the threat of the RMA and their ilk to our
federation and are starting to fight back, as we all should!
We’re with you 100%! Let us know how we can help.
I WENT TO THE LIBRARY FOR SLC
John Leite, SLC Chairman, AFM
“1. Small Children should be seen, not heard
2. A Chinese man walking down to the ocean with a basket on
his back was stopped by his friend, who asked, “Where are you
going with the basket?” “To the ocean to dump it out.” “What’s
in the basket?” He replied, “My Grandmother, she is old an useless.”
His friend said, “Save the Basket”"
In Paul Gunther’s article, ICSOM December 2009: “Voting rights are
held not by individual union members like you and me, but rather
by a small number of elected delegates from locals. The number of
voting delegates, along with the number of votes assigned to each,
is determined by the size of the local. Each local — no matter how
small — is allocated at least one delegate with at least one vote.”
I guess that is not fair!! Or at least to the author of the December ‘09
issue of Senza Sordino.
He continues on:
“Although structured with an eye toward fair representation, this can cause
a lopsided voting system. Every small local - no matter how few members,
and perhaps with no symphonic members at all - has a delegate with one
or more votes. Yet larger locals may have only two or three delegates casting
all their vote.
For example, the Twin Cities Musicians Union (Local 30-73, Minneapolis
and Saint Paul) with two ICSOM orchestras and one ROPA orchestra,
and nearly 1,400 members, elects only three voting delegates. Therefore
a dozen small locals, each with 50-100 members, probably few to none
of them symphonic, would aggregate four times as many voting delegates
controlling all their votes.”
Members of Symphony Orchestras are not the only “Working Musicians”
in the AFM.
The RMA has “Working Musicians”,
The TMA has “Working Musicians”,
Small Local’s have “Working Musicians”,
Freelance players are “Working Musicians”.
In fact, all AFM locals contain what are called “Working Musicians”.
That simply means that we ALL contribute to the AFM coffers. Whether
paying Work Dues or Per Capita, which by the way is the same for ALL
Regular members throughout the AFM. There must be mutual respect
amongst all AFM members for us all to survive.
All Delegates deserve to vote on all candidates, laws, resolutions or other
changes in the bylaws. When the Delegates have made their decisions and
the Convention is over, we must all abide by the voting members. If a group
or an individual wants the bylaws to change, the ONLY place to do that is at
the Convention not in the Courts, Newsletters, Emails, Letters or elsewhere.
We all deserve to be represented regardless of the size of the local.
One thing that seems to be misunderstood by many AFM members is that the
number of Local delegates and the number of Local votes are two different
numbers.
For instance, a large local can have 5 delegates and 11 votes BUT not all Delegates
necessarily will vote the same way. Paul seems to be confused on this.
A representative democracy is especially important to the small Locals because the
system insures a voice for all, and the number of votes a Local has based on its
membership is the balance to the number of delegates a Local has.
Finally, the writer picked out three of the favorable, for his purposes, statements
from the AFM Mission Statement.
* We will have a meaningful voice in decisions that affect us.
* Our collective voice and power will be realized in a democratic and progressive
union.
* We must commit to actively participating in the democratic institutions of our
union.
Space prohibits the insertion of ALL of Article 2 Sec. 1 - Mission Statement
but these three do NOT reflect the total meaning of the AFM Mission Statement.
Please take the time and read the entire Mission Statement in the AFM Bylaws (Pg.2).
to understand the full meaning. ALL musicians are equal regardless
of their local’s size.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 2 Comments »
January 29th, 2010 The Committee
I. THIRTY-SIX SHOW FOR MEETING, SIGNATURE RESTRICTIONS PASSES, APATHY REINS
II. BILLY MITCHELL HONORED
III. SELA UPDATE
IV. COMMENTS
V. EVENTS
===========================
I. THIRTY-SIX SHOW FOR MEETING, SIGNATURE RESTRICTIONS PASS, APATHY REINS
There were approx. thirty-six people (including board members) at Monday’s
Local 47 General Membership Meeting. Thanks to a bylaw amendment
written by former VP David Schubach, the president had to open an
executive board meeting on the spot and publically vote on the signature
collecting resolution, thus not wasting the time of those who took the
time to come down to the meeting.
Members spoke for and against Gary Lasley’s proposed resolution with a
two minute time limit. Some asked questions and voiced concerns that the
resolution was too broad and ill-defined, inviting future problems. Among
those who spoke about those problems was a board member.
Member Helen Crosby shared her research on Labor law and information
shared with her by the DOL, and how the proposed restrictions are
problematic and will cause action later.
In the end, as predicted, the board voted to adopt the resolution
and codify it into the bylaws and in the process alienate Rank and
FIle in yet another way. We’ve been in conversations with ways to
fight this resolution. When we know, you’ll hear about it.
Of the board in attendance:
Those who voted for FOR the resolution:
-Vice-President Acosta
-Paul Castillo
-Judy Chilnick
-Pam Gates
-Secretary/Treasurer Lashinsky
-Gary Lasley (The writer of the resolution)
-Lesa Terry
Those who voted against:
Roy D’Antonio
Bonnie Janofsky
Don Muggeridge
With the resolution delivered for benefit of the incumbents, the
meeting was called at 7:40PM
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 1 Comment »
January 22nd, 2010 The Committee
I. LOCAL 47 MEMBERSHIP MEETING THIS MONDAY, JANUARY 25th, 7PM
II. COMMENTS ABOUT AMIE MOORE
III. ERIC HOSLER RESPONDS
IV. FILM MUSIC: THE WORLD VIEW
V. COMMENTS
VI. EVENTS
===========================
I. LOCAL 47 MEMBERSHIP MEETING THIS MONDAY, JANUARY 25th, 7PM
IMPORTANT COMMENT FROM A MEMBER CONCERNING THIS MONDAY’S MEETING!
We thank the member for the corrections to our previous mailing.
Hello!
If there is not a quorum then under the new rules (this will be the first
application), an immediate Executive Session will be called….pro-tem
appointed if necessary to make a quorum, and after reasonable discussion
(see your Overture for the exact wording) the Executive Board must vote.
So it will NOT be the NEXT DAY that this resolution will be decided…it
will be in front of anyone who is present Monday night.
Union members are guaranteed the right to free speech AND
ASSEMBLY both inside and outside union meetings. Speech
protected under the LMRDA includes not only the right to verbally
support a members’ choice of candidates, but also the right to
criticize election procedures and decisions which the member
feels are in conflict with the democratic policies behind the
LMRDA.
Even common sense dictates that for those rank & file members
who so desire, becoming a candidate for office should be a
process made as open and accessible as possible; not a
process that is difficult and prohibitive, and obviously favoring
the incumbents.
The Resolution at issue must be defeated and if it is not it will be
formally appealed to the Department of Labor after the election.
This proposed bylaw change is certainly not a reasonable rule
or regulation to be imposed on the membership, in fact, it prohibits
rank and file participation AND give the incumbent administration
an unfair advantage. The Office of Labor Management Standards
that has regulatory oversight for union elections has in place
procedures for such a challenge/appeal. This proposed resolution
to be voted on at Local 47’s membership meeting Jan. 25th will
make it much more difficult for the vast majority of the
membership who are not regularly employed in larger groups to
be able to get the requisite 50 signatures to run for office at
Local 47.
Such a restriction imposes a significant burden on those members.
Voting against this bylaw change at the next membership meeting
is VERY important. Incumbents inherently have a huge advantage
anyway. We should not vote to make it even harder for regular
rank and file members to run for office! PLEASE attend the next
Local 47 meeting to vote against this bylaw change!
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 1 Comment »
January 15th, 2010 The Committee
DON’T FORGET THE JANUARY 25TH GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING!
I. FMA REPORT AND COMMENTS ON SELAS
II. TITLED OFFICER CONTINUES TO SEEK COMPETiTIVE EMPLOYMENT
III. WHERE IS AMIE MOORE?
IV. COMMENTS ABOUT THE THE RMA, AFM AND THE UPCOMING CONVENTION
V. COMMENTS
VI. EVENTS
Make plans now to attend the JANUARY 25th, 2010 LOCAL 47
general membership meeting! Help stop the ban on election
signature gathering on our property!
=================
I. FMA REPORT AND COMMENTS ON SELAS
Hello FMA-L.A. Members:
Happy New Year!
SELA update:
On November 19, 2009 our H&W Trustees met to discuss the
future of the SELA contract. As you know, the three Management
Trustees are extremely concerned about their liability regarding
the four (documented) instances of possible fraud committed
in 2009.
——————————-
Local #47 Vice President John Acosta gives us the following
report from the Nov 19 meeting:
The Trustees deferred the decision due to what they explained
was “a lengthy set of new rules & regulations that Lewis Levy
had prepared”. From what I have been told they will be meeting
soon after the holiday to make a final decision.
I am writing my own letter to them, urging them to take
action, and will let you know when that goes out.
Best,
John Acosta
Vice-President
Professional Musicians Local 47
Tel 323-993-3173 Fax 323-461-3090
——————————-
Lisa Haley again:
I just heard back from my own Tax CPA, who outlined for
me the true cost of incorporating in California. The cost to
Members to incorporate (even at the lowest rate,) or use a
Payroll service is more than most of our Members can
possibly afford in this economy - (unless one was already
making enough money that one needed an extra $2000
per year tax write-off.) The idea that any employer is going
to come up with more money in order for us to use one of
the above alternatives is extremely unrealistic in this
economy.
We truly need our SELA back.
Several members have made the following statements, which
we just submitted to John Acosta, Lewis Levy and Leslie
Lashinsky:
1.) In other Unions where there is Federal fraud, the perpetrators
are punished; no system is shut down to penalize the rest of the
membership. Why is this circumstance different? Because the
H&W Management Trustees are trying to avoid being scrutinized
by Federal authorities… at our expense.
2.) If the H&W Management Trustees have committed negligence
which resulted in a lack of oversight, encouraging fraud; Then those
Trustees fully deserve to come under the scrutiny of the IRS and DOL,
rather than penalizing those law-abiding Members who are currently
unable to receive their H&W and Pension contributions.
3.) When the SELA is reinstated, every band leader in good standing
deserves to have their H&W and Pension contributions retroactively
reinstated. After all, they are fully documented. This “hiatus” of our
SELA should never have happened in the first place.
4.) When the minimum contribution amount was $600, the “rollover”
threshold was also $600. Now that the minimum contribution amount
is $900, the rollover should also raise to $900, and it should be
retroactive to Oct 1, 2009. Why should hard-working Members lose
up to $300 apiece in this economy?
5.) Members are extremely unhappy with PacFed and its negligent
practices and we should look for a new administrator.
Jan 25 General Meeting:
We have requested a “Report on the status of our SELA” on the
Agenda. It is important that we all attend!
FMA Members, please consider emailing our Executive Board if
you would like to see SELA discussed:
pres3@promusic47.org
leslie.Lashinsky@promusic47.org
vp@promusic47.org;
secretary@promusic47.org
judychilnick@sbcglobal.net
gumbah@sbcglobal.net
pamgates@aol.com
GHuckins@aol.com
BRJanofsky@sbcglobal.net
gary@arcobass.com
lesaterry@earthlink.net
pcklar@earthlink.net
dmugger@aol.com
Regards,
Lisa Haley
President, FMA-L.A.
==========================
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 5 Comments »
January 8th, 2010 The Committee
I. WE NEED YOU AT THE JANUARY 25, 2010 GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING!
II. THE SHIV IS IN
III. LA OPERA GET THE CALL
IV. COMMENTS
V. EVENTS
=================
I. LOCAL BOARD TRIES TO POTENTIALLY DISENFRANCHISE MEMBERSHIP:
WE NEED YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING JANUARY 25!
At the last general membership meeting, there was a resolution
presented that would forbid the collection of signatures on nominating
petitions to run for Local 47 elected positions anywhere on the Local 47
property. The membership sensed there was something fishy about this
resolution and turned it back to committee.
PREVIOUS PRACTICE
The previous practice that has established itself over the years is:
You cannot collect signatures in the Local’s main building or the
rehearsals rooms, but the parking lot is fair game.
This is the most logical and fair system and believe THESE
are the terms that should be placed into the bylaws.
THE LAW
The law (see the Department of Labor-LMRDA) attempts to make
elections a fair playing field for ALL of the MEMBERS i.e. “rank and
file” who seek to participate in their union governance. While there
are laws regarding the use of union facilities by candidates, our
bylaws are not violative of the LMRDA or any other administrative
regulation. The mere presence of a RANK and FILE member on the
property to collect petition signatures DOES NOT and has not,
“under Federal Law”, meant that a member should be prohibited
from collecting signatures for election on Local 47 property. Indeed
this has been the past practice at our local.
Ask yourselves why this resolution has been put forward?
OUR PROPERTY
Our Local 47 property, is a unique property. Unlike and differentiated
from the carpenters union, the electricians union, or the plumbers
union…WE MEET TO WORK…on Vine Street!
The Local 47 facilities that WE PAY FOR contain our Rehearsal
Studios, and the Auditorium and are used for PROFESSIONAL
purposes.
As long as it is the policy of the Federal oversite agencies that
all parties are TREATED EQUALLY…it is absolutely fair that the
“rank and file” can collect signatures on Union property. Any
changes to the bylaws should make it easier to participate in
the governance of our Local, not harder. This resolution is an
attempt to restrict participation and disenfranchise members.
FAXING SIGNATURES
While electronic media is now being used in business and law,
including being able to sign your name, why is it we cannot use
fax signatures for petitions? We have heard the union’s attorney
use the argument that we have to do things a certain way because
much of the membership live a great distance from the local. Isn’t
that a good reason for candidates to be able to accept fax signatures
on their qualifying petitions?
Our incumbent elected officials have access to large groups of
musicians, e.g. backstage access to Los Angeles Philharmonic;
Hollywood Bowl Orchestra; all soundstages and theaters, etc. It is
not an even playing field now when it comes to getting signatures.
Not to allow the membership to “meet and greet” potential signatory
supporters where they can be found is a blatant attempt to restrict
participation and that is not the intent of Federal law, nor the true
ideals of unionism.
Protect your Local 47 colleagues rights! WE NEED YOU at the
meeting on January 25th, 7pm at the Local to stop the shutting
out of the membership.
If there is no quorum at the meeting on the 25th the board will
decide for all of us at their board meeting the next day.
One guess as to what they will decide.
When it comes to elections, members deserve a level playing
field with the present power structure.
Don’t let them tilt the field. Show up and be counted.
THE COMMITTEE
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 2 Comments »
December 30th, 2009 The Committee
I. FEATURED COMMENT: RICK BLANC RESPONSE TO DAVID POMEROY
II. RESPONSES TO THE LENNIE MOORE COMMENTARY
III. COMMENTS
IV. EVENTS
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL! Have a safe holiday.
THE COMMITTEE
=================
I. FEATURED COMMENT: RICK BLANC RESPONSE TO DAVID POMEROY
In reference to Dave Pomeroy’s response to Lennie Moore’s post:
Those of us who have lived in LA may often have a stronger
anti-RMA animus than one might find in other parts of the
country — for obvious reasons I suppose. Lennie Moore
presents a reasoned argument reflecting the views of a
lot of rank-and-file union members.
To give credit where due I think Dave Pomeroy makes valid points
also and I believe he sincerely wants to improve things. Fact
is, the RMA is part of the AFM democracy. Neither Nashville nor NY
is dominated or controlled completely by RMA, although RMA members
and former members are part of those administrations. But the problem
goes beyond Dave’s description, it goes beyond whether or not the RMA
has captured control of the largest locals: The RMA and Fareplay have
sued the AFM in the past and are suing the AFM currently at the appellate
level: Beyond that there is a great deal of animus and rhetoric directed
against Tom Lee and his administration.
It is not enough to define “working together” as simply meaning some
musicians should refrain from accusations that certain locals are RMA
controlled. The music business and private sector unions are on the skids
across the board. There is blame to go around. If we would “work together”
for purposes of AFM unity there will need to be adjustments made across
the board, e.g., more RMA flexibility, fewer expensive lawsuits, more
cooperation with, and less demonization of, the Lee Administration.
I would grant Pomeroy his point. But this is one point — perhaps one of
three in the pursuit of AFM unity:
1) As institutions reflecting union democracy we should not go overboard
accusing Nashville or NY of being RMA controlled.
2) We need to see some RMA flexibility, cooperation and a stop to the
litigation.
3) The RMA and certain others may be well advised to turn down the anti-Lee
rhetoric; if one doesn’t like an administration (read US administration;
I for one am not an Obama fan) one has to wait it out in the democratic
tradition until change occurs. Until all three of these areas see some
progress I don’t see how the process of “working together” is going to move
forward, although as Dave Pomeroy correctly asserts, working together and
AFM unity would inure to our common benefit.
RICK BLANC
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 2 Comments »
December 23rd, 2009 The Committee
I. HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
II. SECRETARY LASHINSKY RESPONDS
III. COMMENT FROM COMPOSER LENNIE MOORE
IV. LAWSUITS?
V. COMMENTS
VI. EVENTS
=================
I. HAPPY HOLIDAYS!
All of us at the COMMITTEE want to wish you and yours a
wonderful, safe holiday and a prosperous, equitable 2010!
=================
II. SECRETARY LASHINSKY RESPONDS
When we contacted Secretary Lashinsky about her thoughts
on the LA Opera members comments we gave her a deadline of
Thursday at 5pm for her response. Though she did send her
response at 4:53 PM on Thursday, as of 11:50 PM that evening it
had not arrived. It arrived sometime Friday morning. We thank
the Secretary for responding in a timely manner.
To “The Committee”:
These comments and accusations regarding my alleged involvement
in Los Angeles Opera matters are completely false and, as usual,
reflect your willingness to publish and promote the unfortunate
conclusions that come from anxious and ill-informed musicians
competing for employment in hard times. I have contacted the
Orchestra Committee of the Los Angeles Opera (I served on that
committee for years in the 1980s and ’90s. In fact, I was on the
negotiating committee that succeeded in gaining tenure for LA
opera musicians) to address this misinformation.
I have always been philosophical about the ups and downs in my
career. I roll with the punches as does every working musician. Yet
I remain steadfastly committed to music, the music business, my
colleagues and Union service to all members. Let me share with
COMM RESP 47 readers that contrary to what you might read in this
email forum, when I do show up on a job (and that’s once in a blue
moon), I’m greeted warmly by colleagues, offered words of thanks
for my Union service and commiseration for being subjected to the
abject trash conveyed by this blog and the person(s) responsible for
it.
In Solidarity and with deep respect for all musicians,
Leslie Lashinsky
Secretary/Treasurer
Professional Musicians, Local 47
Los Angeles
—————————-
THE SECRETARY THEN SENT THIS….
Once again, to “The Committee”:
As much as I detest the notion of taking direction from you, I did respond
to your email titled “Subject: Please respond by Thursday 5PM if you wish to
comment.”
My timely response (which I expect you to publish along with this one) was
emailed to you at 4:53pm yesterday, Thursday, December 17, 2009. Your
subsequent Comm Resp 47 email blast (later last night 12/17/09 at 11:52 PM)
said I “did not respond.” It further contained lots more inaccurate and
defamatory statements, revealing your lack of knowledge regarding our
contracts and the history of ballet orchestra employment in Los Angeles. I
contacted the LA Opera Orchestra Committee and have already begun
discussions they or any other musicians desire on related issues, in the
appropriate manner, not through your blog.
Leslie Lashinsky
Secretary/Treasurer
Professional Musicians, Local 47
[Secretary Lashinsky: As we said above, your email was sent at 5:43
Thursday but did not arrive in out mailbox until Friday morning.
We thank you for answering in a timely manner and regret that
either your server (or ours) held up the email.
Secretary Lashinsky, if you do not want to be criticized in these pages
for taking work from rank and file Local 47 bassoonists while making
a generous salary off the dues of those same members, simply don't
work in the jurisdiction as long as you are the secretary. That IS what
the bylaws say, unless the board gives you a pass, which they inexplicably
have on numerous occassions.
If the board doesn't want to be criticized for allowing the abuse of
your office by allowing the Secretary to take these jobs, they should
consistently refuse any such requests.
Allow the abuse, expect the criticism. It's as simple as that. No abuse,
no criticism from us on that front.
Please be specific as to the inaccurate and defamatory statements. Tell us
exactly what was incorrect in what we said. What was defamatory, what was
a falsehood. Be specific.
We gave a quite complete answer to the commenters, having
researched the contract, and even giving a possible legitimate job-related
excuse for you having a role in the situation. We could have simply printed
the comments without comment, or not given you a heads up and chance
to respond before-hand, but we chose to help the commenters understand
the situation more fully and potentially giving you an "out".
So then, Secretary Lashinsky, who is interfering with the LA Opera's
schedule? We pay your salary, so who is doing it? VP Acosta
doesn't seem to want to tell the membership either.]
THE COMMITTEE
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 4 Comments »
December 18th, 2009 The Committee
I. FEATURED COMMENTS FROM LA OPERA ORCHESTRA MEMBERS
II. TORRIE ZITO, PIANIST AND ARRANGER, IS DEAD AT 76
III. COMMENTS
IV. EVENTS
=================
I. FEATURED COMMENTS from LA Opera Orchestra Members
re: Officer meddling in ballet work.
The COMMITTEE received two comments from very concerned LA
Opera Orchestra members about reported attempts made by full-
time Local 47 secretary-treasurer and bassoonist Leslie Lashinsky
to allegedly scuttle work opportunities for the LA Opera
Orchestra. We present these comments in full below:
COMMENT ONE: Received 12/12/09
So if it weren’t enough that Leslie Lashinsky keeps trying OVER
and OVER again to take work away from the union musicians
she is supposed to represent, she is now attempting to block
an entire orchestra from working. LESLIE’S VENGEANCE!!!
The Los Angeles Opera Orchestra has been asked to play the
upcoming Joffrey Ballet’s Cinderella performances, but serious
objections have been raised - NOT by the ballet company, or
union players themselves, but from LESLIE, who in a very, very
minor coincidence plays with a pickup orchestra that also
performs ballet at the Music Center. Yes, that orchestra for
which she has asked permission to play with on occasion.
Hmmmmm…. conflict of interest? Trying to change out the
orchestra for personal gain? Or more?
Why, more! In a second very, very minor coincidence, Leslie
USED to play with the opera orchestra but somehow, like so
many of us with all of our free-lance groups, ended up NOT
becoming a tenured player. Bitter bitter bitter. Is it possible
that this just seemed like a heaven-sent opportunity to strike
back at a group that allegedly rejected her?
Nah, just a concerned Union Secretary doing her duty by all
musicians.
The upshot? The opera orchestra has not yet been hired for
any of the dates, mostly because of Leslie’s involvement.
As well, because of the dispute, they may end up taking a
lower wage than had been initially planned. WAY TO GO, LESLIE!!!!
You’re the freaking BEST!!!
——————————
COMMENT TWO: Received 12/14/09
I’m in the Los Angeles Opera Orchestra. I’ve been playing there
since Topper Smith hired the orchestra to take over from Los
Angeles Chamber Orchestra. I also have known our union secretary,
Leslie Lashinsky for many years. I have never considered her a
problem before. But now she is apparently holding up our
orchestra’s being hired for outside services for no particular
reason except that she feels another orchestra should get the
work instead.
Why? Except for that she plays with this orchestra, it’s hard to
determine. But this shouldn’t matter because she works at the
union, right? There shouldn’t be any favortism. The opera
orchestra has three months entirely off with no rehearsals, no
performances, nothing, so this one week of service is quite
needed by many of us.
I’ve been thinking about writing since Saturday, when the
orchestra was told - sort of - what’s going on in a meeting.
Please publish this - my first comment ever… - and if you can,
dig into what’s going on? I’m sure many of us would like to
know why this is going on, and would like to stop it from
happening again.
——–
WHAT OUR RESEARCH TELLS US
There is a seldom used ballet orchestra collective bargaining agreement,
used only when the Ahmanson decides to do a ballet. It is on the Local 47
website, under ’scales’ in the members only section. (Not easy to get to,
but that’s another issue.) The name of the agreement is Performing Arts
Center of Los Angeles County. Under the Services Covered section:
Services Covered: This Agreement shall apply in full to all services
performed by musicians who are employed by Employer at the Ahmanson
Theatre or the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion for ballet productions
produced by Music Center Dance during the term of this Agreement.
Before this contract the L.A. Chamber Orchestra did ballet gigs as extra
work. Then the L.A. Opera orchestra did the same thing. Then the Performing
Arts Center did a contract only for the ballet gigs, which is exclusive. So if
the gig in question is from the Ahmanson, then it is really under that contract,
and other orchestras cannot bid on the work. It’s not up for grabs.
In this case however, according to the musicians we heard from, the Joffrey
approached the LA Opera Orchestra and every one was happy with the
arrangements until the Secretary or another officer got involved. It may
be simple contract enforcement for Secretary Lashinsky
(leslie.lashinsky[at]promusic47.org ) to insist that the correct orchestra perform
the work. even though the Secretary is not in charge of live performance
issues - that would be the vice president,
John Acosta (john.acosta[at]promusic47.org).
Secretary Lashinsky has performed in, and served on the negotiating committee
of this orchestra for a long time. She is probably tenured with this every now
and then orchestra.
Which brings us back to the question that Secretary Lashinsky could fix so
easily, but won’t. Does she intend to perform with the Ballet Orchestra?
From her track record we can expect her to fight to do the gig. Wearing
too many hats, she herself shows once again her own blatant self interest,
and lack of impartiality in conducting the members’ business. And of course,
somewhere there is a rank & file union bassoonist who may have missed a
house payment, or getting health insurance, or being vested in the pension
fund because a union officer took the gig.
BOARD INFORMED
With the first posters’ permission, we forwarded the first comment
to the directors, president and vice-president of Local 47 last
Saturday (12/12/09), letting them know that these comments would
be printed, and that they had a chance to fix the problem at their
board meeting (12/15/09). We’ve seen this “personal gain before
the needs of the membership” before and it should be stopped.
VP Acosta wrote back to the COMMITTEE Tuesday afternoon with the
following response:
———
We have received your email. Our general policy is not to
comment on internal Executive Board deliberations or Local
47 business. However, we can advise you that your information
is false.
Fraternally,
John Acosta
Vice-President
On behalf of the Local 47 Executive Board
———
We also wrote to Secretary Lashinsky for her thoughts.
She did not respond.
———
If our info from the LA Opera orchestra members is false, then
who is holding up the job? Who is responsible, Mr. Acosta?
The musicians of the LA Opera and the entire membership
deserve to know who is meddling in the LA Opera’s affairs.
If not for our dues, no one there would have a job. You work
for US.
The players should be able to confront whomever is responsible
for the hold-up of their booking. Is it the Secretary?
(leslie.lashinsky[at]promusic47.org) the Vice-President?
(john.acosta@promusic47.org). We all deserve to know the answer.
We thank the LA Opera Orchestra Members who wrote to us,
we’re against abuse where ever it happens.
If you are in the LA Opera orchestra, you are well within your rights
to call or email the local and demand the details and origin of the
Local’s or officer’s protest to your working with the Joffrey. When
you find out, please let us know. We know there are many outside
your circle who will want to know.
In the first comment, the writer refers to another group that
the secretary plays with. A few months ago, our board in their
infinite wisdom gave Secretary Lashinsky permission to take
10 (ten) days of work with the American Ballet Theater at the
Music Center.
This may be the group the Secretary or another officer is trying
to get the work for.
This one example shows that one or two people CAN make a
difference when they can be heard, and have a forum through
which they can voice their opinion.
MAKE YOURSELF HEARD!
THE COMMITTEE]
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | No Comments »
December 11th, 2009 The Committee
I. RMA TRIES TO BLAME AFM AGAIN FOR THEIR SELF-CREATED PROBLEMS
II. 6TH ANNUAL YOUNG ARTISTS COMPETITION
III. COMMENTS
IV. LOTS OF EVENTS!
=================
I. RMA TRIES TO BLAME AFM AGAIN FOR THE RESULT OF THEIR
OWN BUSINESS PRACTICES
In a recent RMA mailing you’ll find, in part, the following text
concerning VIdeo Games:
“We all know this is a mess and it is not getting any better.
2008 was a banner year for video-game companies, but
not for us. The companies earned historic all-time profits,
but AFM Video Game employment has nosedived. Sadly,
AFM wages for 2008 were half the wages in 2007. And
2009 is just getting worse.”
The RMA goes on to try to blame the AFM for the problem,
when anyone even remotely knowledgeable on the subject
knows that the RMA itself drove the video game work out
of Los Angeles, starting with their stunt on the SImpson’s
video game.
The video game companies have made it perfectly clear
what they need to return to Los Angeles, or to the AFM for
that matter. The AFM has been trying to accommodate video
game companies while creating and getting back work that
has left. The AFM actions have included increasing health
and welfare and pension payments on Video Game Sessions
while compromising on the back end payments.
FYI, video games almost never have after market payments,
since there is virtually never new use or broadcast use of video
game scores.
One of the problems is the work that has come back is mostly
going to locales like San Francisco, because companies simply
don’t want to deal with the attitudes and hassles of dealing
with the RMALA, when they’re forced to use that minority
subset of professional Los Angeles musicians. It’s just not
worth it, according to the companies we’ve spoken to.
If there was ANOTHER group of musicians they could deal with
we might have a chance, but not as long as the RMA and their
contractors control the game.
The RMA did it to itself (and all of us) here, No member of the AFM
national hierarchy, be it the President, Secretary or IEB member has or
could cause the loss of any video game work here. The RMA cannot
blame anyone but themselves, though they will try.
People simply don’t want to buy their buggy whips anymore.
So the RMA continues to flog itself and then try to say someone
else caused the scars.
THE COMMITTEE
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 1 Comment »
December 6th, 2009 The Committee
I. WELCOME BACK SBCGLOBAL / SOUTHBELL / ATT SUBSCRIBERS!
II. ANOTHER LARGE LOCAL FALLS TO RMA SYMPATHIZERS
III. HAPPY HOLIDAYS - SECRETARY TAKES MORE WORK FROM LOCAL 47 BASSOONISTS
IV. ANOTHER VIEW OF A COMPOSERS’ UNION
V. COMMENTS
VI. EVENTS
=================
I. WELCOME BACK SBCGLOBAL / BELLSOUTH / ATT SUBSCRIBERS!
WHERE HAVE WE BEEN? We’ve been here the whole time, sending
out our mailings on a weekly basis. Unfortunately SBCGlobal,
ATT and Bellsouth has been blocking our mailings to you for
almost a year and you’ve missed A LOT!
It could have been from their software but more than likely the
usual suspects have been filing complaints that got SBCGlobal,
etc. to block you from information the powers that be might
not want you to know!
Please remember that every mailing includes a remove link at
the bottom of the mailing, so if you do not want to receive our
offerings simple click the link and you’ll be removed. We do
ask that you not try to prevent others from reading our material
by lodging complaints, just use the remove link if you don’t
wish to be in the loop.
Also, if you want to catch up on what you’ve missed, our website
at www.responsible47.com has all of our mailings for your perusal.
The site is word searchable too!
With the AFM convention and our own elections coming up next year
it will be especially vital that every member is well versed in the
important subjects affecting our Local and the AFM and not just the
info the Local wants you to know about.
Again, WELCOME BACK! We’ve missed you!
THE COMMITTEE
=================
II. ANOTHER LARGE LOCAL FALLS TO RMA SYMPATHIZERS
Members being apathetic about their locals and the future of the federation has
handed the NEW YORK LOCAL over to RMA sympathizers. According to a vocal
anti-AFM Website, the winner of the recent 802 election, Tino Gagliardi, “represents a
faction of those unhappy with Tom’s presidency, and in particular his dealings with
recording musicians.”
Now the three largest locals in the federation are controlled by those sympathetic
to the RMA and their well-financed agenda. Last time it was the Nashville Local,
now it’s New York. The Los Angeles Local has been in the RMA’s pocket for years.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 2 Comments »