November 27th, 2009 The Committee
I. COMMENTS ABOUT RUNAWAY SCORING AND THE COMPOSER MEETING
II. FILM MUSIC MAGAZINE ARTICLE ON COMPOSERS UNION
III. COMMENTS ON THE RECENT RMA MEETING
IV. ASMAC HOLIDAY PARTY AND BRUNCH!
V. COMMENTS
VI. EVENTS
=================
We at the COMMITTEE hope you and yours had
a safe and FILLING Thanksgiving!
=================
I. COMMENTS ABOUT RUNAWAY SCORING AND THE COMPOSER MEETING
There are 2 inherent problems with the statements
above regarding runaway scoring.
1. Composers are NOT in the AFM. No hours are credited for
composing and we receive no money, pension, or healthcare OR
secondary payments for our services as composers. Some
conductors and orchestrators are in the union, but there is
no way to fine any compositional work.
2. Composers (in almost all cases) do not choose to record
union or not. The production company owns the music and must
sign any assumption agreement. The composer has no choice and
can only do his or her best to persuade. Which brings me to
my main point:
*Most composers have said all along that much like any other
business, you cannot fine or muscle people into recording
here. At the end of the day (just like in any other industry)
you must offer a better product or service at a comparable price.
In order to keep work here, producers must get a better quality
product, with better service, quicker turnaraound, and it must
be done easier that anywhere else…if not they will go
elsewhere. Period.
In plain english, if producers can record a score here in town,
and it sounds better, and they don’t have to travel, and there
is no complicated contracts or back end language…they get a
great studio and great staff with wonderful equipment…and at
the end of the process, the price is relatively similar to them
going abroad (including travel, accomadations, and per diem),
then they will stay here with a smile on their faces…ALWAYS.
If the AFM and our music community cannot offer the scenario
above, then they will not.
Period.
It’s up to the AFM.
———————–
In response to the comment,
“COMMENTS ON RUNAWAY SCORING -
one possible solution…”
I’ve posted my comments here before, but with this issue having
become so persistent, I’d like to add my thoughts. While the point
in this comment was made that “most composers would probably
quit the AFM completely before any of this went down”, I think
that the idea of levying huge fines against composers or players
is the wrong approach and not an effective deterrent. I think the
problem of runaway scoring is really just a symptom of a shift
in the proportion of high-budget work to medium/low-budget work.
There has always been a cut-off point for employers as to when
they will hire union talent. This is not always based upon budget,
as many low-budget projects can easily afford union talent as
long as they are doing demo sessions or limited pressings, etc.
What has happened, though, is that there is now a larger percentage
of medium-low/budget work and at the same time a larger number
of professional musicians looking for work. The only remaining
question is whether our union wants to adjust and participate in
this new market paradigm.
The irony is that we ALL participate in this new market as consumers.
Think about this for a minute: 15 or 20 years ago, you probably would
never have gone to Costco to buy a flat-screen TV or shopped on the
internet for a new computer. But we now do this as a first option to save
money (and sales tax - can anyone say, ‘free shipping!’?). We all know
how the ‘mom-and-pop’ retail stores are being driven out of business
by the Costcos and Walmarts. Yet, do we fine consumers $50K for buying
from big-box stores? And many of us drive way out of our area to shop at
these stores. True, we have not all joined a union promising not to shop
from these retailers. But we do live in a different world now and have
changed our thinking patterns about spending money.
The federal government certainly makes an effort to control trade
imbalances with foreign countries by levying tariffs and other trade
negotiations; but the truth is that competition is here to stay in one
form or another. There will still be those of us that buy $10,000 HD
TV’s from the local mom-and-pop, either for convenience or because
money is not a big issue - which is another way of saying there will
always be rich folks who like to spend lots of money. And those same
folks will hire triple-scale union players and composers who won’t be
pressured to record in Madagascar. And it’s a good thing that there is
some pressure put upon employers by unions to offer fair pay and
benefits. It’s just that when that becomes an ultimatum, musicians will
always opt to first pay their rent and feed their kids before saying no to
non-union work. And most employers will always have another option,
simply because it’s a different market than it was 40 years ago.
So for the small percentage of our thousands of union members that
make a great living from union work, the threat of a fine may make sense.
But for the larger percentage of us, the only result of threats like this to the
membership is likely to be a much smaller membership, reduced income
for the union, and less bargaining power with employers. Many of us are
aware that there are those that want a smaller membership in our Local 47,
but will that really result in a stronger union and more union work for the
membership? Only time will tell.
———————–
from an English colleague…
Its doomed to heroic failure. It can’t work for every conceivable reason.
The strongest unions are those that represent people who can’t easily be
replaced outside the US i.e. writers and to some extent actors. Composers
aren’t in that category. Who is it going to effect - short film no budget
composers who do it for nothing anyway? Network composers who get
$20K an episode? The whole world is de-unionizing and the remaining
strong unions were established decades ago. We need a strong organisation
selling the value of composed music which is what is really under threat, not
the Teamsters of all people trying to apply 1970’s strategy to a 21st century
problem! We have students losing jobs to Indian and Chinese composers at
a fraction of the cost. This will only accelerate that process.
…. rant over
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 1 Comment »
November 22nd, 2009 The Committee
I. CLARIFICATION OF TV/VIDEO NEGOTIATIONS
II. TEAMSTER’S COMPOSER UNION INFORMATIONAL MEETING
III. MORE ON RESOLUTION THREE FROM THE LAST MEETING
IV. NOT RECEIVING OUR MAILING?
V. HONOLULU BANKRUPTCY
VI. COMMENTS
VII. EVENTS AND CONCERTS
=================
I. CLARIFICATION OF TV/VIDEO NEGOTIATIONS, AYLING A NO-SHOW
In our first section last time, we listed those who we contended had
actually attended the negotiations.
The list was actually those who were on the security list and expected
to attend.
As the comment below from President Lee will make clear, while RMA
International President Phil Alying was on the list to attend, he never
showed, then sent out the email attacking the conduct of the live TV/
VIdeo negotiations.
Also we, misspelled the name of Mary Landolfi with Mary Gandolfi
(Perhaps it was to many episodes of the Sopranos.) We sincerely
apologize to Ms. Landolfi for the mistake.
THE COMMITTEE
Below is AFM President Tom Lee’s email to us:
I have just one clarification on the TV/Videotape negotiation RMA
debacle. Phil Ayling notified me that he was the RMA rank and file
and would be coming to the negotiation. I placed his name on the
security list under that assumption. The fact is that he didn’t show
up. Instead, he used the RMA newsletter to blast me with his usual
smear stuff.
Also, you have Mary Gandolfi as attending the negotiation.
It is Landolfi–not Gandolfi.
=================
II. TEAMSTER’S COMPOSER UNION INFORMATIONAL MEETING
Last Monday night there was an amazingly well attended meeting (in
the hundreds) to talk about the possibility of a composers union
through the Teamsters.
All the ideas brought up were noble, logical ideas, that no composer
could disagree with, in a perfect world at least.
At the beginning of the meeting the teamster representative asked
if there were any press and if so that they leave, since they said they
wanted people to be able to speak freely.
Even though we are not press as such, we want to honor that, so we’ll
just give you the website again and you can check it out yourself.
If you attended the meeting and have comments or thoughts you’d like
to share we’ll be happy to share them on the blog, especially since there
was very little said at the meeting by the organizers that isn’t found on their
website.
http://theamcl.org
We wish them the very best of luck!
We will note however, that there were a large number of non-
composer players in attendance as well as players conference
organizers and even Local 47 officers.
Those included:
Phil Ayling: International RMA President
Jenny Hansen - RMA Board
Marc Sazar: RMA Vice-President and PMG Official
Andy Malloy: President and/or officer - PMG
The Secretary of Local 47, (non-composer) Leslie Lashinsky, was in
attendance as well. When the host asked if there were any employees
of labor unions present, she remained silent.
While we certainly think the AFM should have been able to hear what
was said, we would expect a Local officer, whomever it is, to be honest
enough to fess up when asked directly to identify themselves. She didn’t.
If it turns out that the RMA has a direct role in this venture, to, perhaps, put
a requirement on the new composer union contract to use only RMA members
or only a certain contractor or two, we will fight that vehemently from inside
and outside the group. There are 1000’s of players in town who are tired of
being shut out, and they deserve a share of of whatever work might be created.
THE COMMITTEE
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 3 Comments »
November 13th, 2009 The Committee
I. MORE RMA FOOLISHNESS
II. TV/LIVE NEGOTIATION EMAILS
III. TEAMSTER COMPOSERS UNION? (from Film Music Magazine)
IV. ASMAC HONORS BRUCE AND WALT FOWLER
V. COMMENTS
VI. EVENTS AND CONCERTS
=================
I. MORE RMA FOOLISHNESS
Some time ago, the RMA sent out a blurb complaining that
they were somehow kept from taking part in the TV/Live
negotiations.
As it turns out, it was a blatant lie.
Not only was the RMA LA represented by Phil Ayling
(President-RMA International), the RMAC, the NASHVILLE Local
(Former RMA President Dave Pomeroy), but also by the President
of the RMA New York David Blanc, RMA member Tom “Bones”
Malone, plus a couple of other RMA members.
In the end it must be said, the folks who write the RMA tripe
simply have no shame. And they are some of the ones
representing the RMA rank and file.
The complete list of those who attended the TV/LIVE
negotiations were:
-From the Federation
Thomas F. Lee
Sam Folio
Harold Bradley
William (Bill) Skolnick
Jeffrey Freund
Patrick Varriale
Charles (Chuck) Skorupski
Richard (Dick) Gabriel
Terri Cadiente
Jessica Lee
-From Local 802:
Tom Malone (RMA MEMBER)
Mary Gandolfi
Bill Dennison
Joel Le Fevre
David Sheldon
Diana Cohn
Roger Blanc (RMA NY President)
Juliet Haffner (RMA)
-From Local 257:
Dave Pomeroy President - Nashville Local President
(Former RMA Nashville President)
-From Local 47:
Vince Trombetta
John Acosta
Phil Ayling (RMA INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT)
Even knowing the facts above, the RMA put out lies trying to
create scandal where there was none, similar to what Dave
Pomeroy, Roger Blanc and Steve Erdody, among others,
have tried to do on this very list.
We actually knew they had been involved in the negotiations
before President Lee sent out his most recent email, but his
correspondence provided even more proof of the RMA’s
unprofessional, unethical conduct.
The information below was sent to all RMA members (Including the
RMA members on the COMMITTEE).
DON’T TAKE OUR WORD FOR IT
As we say so often, don’t take our word for it. Read it yourself.
Quotes are quotes, not hearsay.
See the next section…
THE COMMITTEE
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | 1 Comment »
November 7th, 2009 The Committee
I. MEETING MEMBER COMMENTS
II. COMMENTS
III. LEONARD SLATKIN HAS HEART ATTACK
IV. EVENTS AND CONCERTS
=================
I. MEETING MEMBER COMMENTS
If, as Gary Lasley represented at the meeting, we have to adhere to Federal
law, then why after all these years are we asked to codify something that
will have the effect of restricting participation of the membership in the
nomination election process? That’s because our bylaws are sufficient regarding
petitions and any resolution change to our election bylaws has to be considered
in the terms of whether the proposed bylaw tends to promote or restrict the
participation of the membership. The answer here is obvious. Resolution No.3 was
an attempt to restrict the participation of the membership in being able to collect
signatures for petitions. As far as where on the property a member cannot collect
signatures…..I would say “Administrative Offices only”. This will put all the
membership in having the same opportunity to collect signatures on the property….
where musicians are… and where they can be called to meet and sign a petition by
any member in good standing during business hours.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in Committee Newsletters | No Comments »