Association or Union - A Century-Old Dispute Over Representatioin
By Pete Vriesenga
Denver Musician, Jan-March, 1997
Who should the American Federation of Musicians represent? A fair question as we celebrate the centennial of the Denver Musicians Association, and especially in light of the growing movement to restructure the AFM. The AFM devotes careful attention to musicians working in full-time orchestras, recording, theater, touring, etc., as these musicians generally work under union agreements and pay a large share of work dues that support the operation of the AFM. But this arrangement is flawed, because it compromises alliances with all professional musicians. This is a problem that was evident at the inception of the AFM, and must be resolved if the organization is to survive.
Until the late 19th Century, musicians were often regarded as rogues, misfits and frivolous entertainers. Early attempts to improve their conditions began around 1857-60, when musicians in Baltimore, Chicago and New York formed into local protective societies. While not very effective at improving wages and working conditions for musicians, these organizations provided fraternal services such as indigent care and respectable funeral services for their members.
In 1885 the National League of Musicians was established. Although desperate to improve their working conditions, NLM members were divided over the issue of representation. United effort that would have brought vast improvement for the majority was halted over the very question musicians are still asking a century later: Are we a trade union similar to those of carpenters and printers, or are we an Association, similar to organizations representing doctors and lawyers? Primary differences are that labor unions establish collective demands from a broad body of members, and associations use their exclusivity as a basis for establishing rates.
The rising American Federation of Labor was determined to include musicians in its ranks, but divide opinion within the National League of Musicians – trade or professional? – delayed a decision by the musicians themselves. Taking the matter into its own hands, the AFL began chartering Locals for the musicians, and in 1896, at a convention in Indianapolis arranged by the AFL, formed the American Federation of Musicians.
Because of the initiative of organized labor, musicians were now included in the growing popular support for fair wages and acceptable working conditions. Musicians’ working conditions improved as the AFL continued to advance issues of child labor, safety, job security and medical leave. These hard-won victories of Organized Labor brought about the wage and job protections that today’s musicians often take for granted.
The argument over representation that stalled the founding of the AFM is now threatening its existence with a dramatic loss of membership. Boasting 302,000 members in 1970, the AFM currently represents only 119,000 members, equivalent to AFM membership totals in 1925. Why is this happening? The 1991 and 1993 AFM Conventions approved substantial per-capita increases resulting in higher dues payments. Many have cited this action for a recent membership decline, but the larger issue appears to be representation.
Many of the musicians leaving the AFM are working for substandard wages, are given little respect from their employers, or find themselves performing for “exposure” with publicly-funded arts organizations. These musicians need representation just as much as musicians who work full time. Musicians performing in a symphony orchestra with a large operating budget and endowment, or musicians who record high-budget film scores have substantially more leverage to negotiate a fair agreement. Those who enjoy this degree of bargaining leverage should find comfort and assurance just by knowing that all AFM members support their efforts to raise industry standards, and will refuse to cross a picket line in the event of a strike.
It is imperative that the concerns of these few musicians do not burden those who are merely trying to put food on the table. It is wrong to suggest that struggling musicians are at fault because they cannot demand rates or agreements that are proven effective for only a very small percentage of the membership.
To equitably resolve this dilemma, musicians employed in symphonic work or recording are encouraged to join Players Conferences (Associations), which are organized to establish and maintain standards for their members. Players Conferences such as the International Conference of Symphony and Opera Musicians (ICSOM) and the Recording Musicians Association (RMA) effectively represent the interests of these musicians, and have become a powerful voice at AFM Conventions. The AFM and Locals such as the DMA, should preserve a balance of representation for musicians who do not fall into these categories.
The RMA maintains that firm national recording rates are essential to protect the interests of recording musicians. RMA’s responsibilities include direct involvement in recording industry negotiations for their 2,500 members; however, final ratification of agreements is then subject to a vote of all musicians who performed on AFM contract sessions and earn above an established minimum threshold of recording work.
And yet, the concerns of Colorado musicians are not fully represented in these negotiations because so few local recording engagements are under AFM contracts, and usually because of the inflexible terms of national agreements. Also, the fact the only four RMA members are also members of the Denver Local (two of the four live and work in Los Angeles), limits effective representation of local musicians. Otherwise, local considerations such as cost of living, size of budget, and marketability of the recording would be more visible at the bargaining table.
A few positive changes have already begun with the introduction of the AFM Limited Pressings Agreement, Low Budget Phonograph Recording, and Low Budget Motion Pictures Agreement. These new agreements have been well received, but their use is very restricted because some musicians fear a ‘race to the bottom’ if price controls are loosened further. But outsourcing began years ago; filmscores are often recorded by less costly foreign orchestras, and producers frequently opt for synthesized soundtracks.
A recent contract between a local producer and the Colorado Symphony Orchestra, to record the soundtrack for the new film Warriors of Virtue, has been the subject of this very issue. The producer would not sign an AFM recording agreement that would tie approximately 1% of gross sales to the Special Payments Fund (residual payments to the musicians). Bending the rules is not accepted practice with national recording agreements, and AFM Symphonic Services would like for the musicians to have refused to play without a signatory agreement. But this would have displayed poor judgement; a relationship with a new local producer would have been ruined, and this project would only have gone to a non-union orchestra.
Musicians must also question if nationally negotiated agreements have produced the best results. Bitter negotiations for a new three-year Phonograph Labor Agreement finally concluded January 31, 1996. Industry representatives presented a hard-line stance that included elimination of the Recording Industries’ Music Performance Trust Fund, even though MPTF allocations are computed on only 0.20475% of the manufacturer’s suggested retail price on sales in excess of 25,000 units. Fortunately, MPTF Trustee John Hall’s efforts to show that MPTF effectively builds audiences through contemporary programming and educational concerts temporarily saved the program.
It’s possible that the Denver Musicians Association, with the freedom to negotiate, could foster relationships with new producers that may be supportive of MPTF. The fact that in one year, the DMA has increased MPTF-sponsored school concerts by 61% may convince a producer to work more closely with us (This was accomplished despite a 17% reduction in the DMA’s MPTF allocation the same year). AFM Locals nationwide could display a polished MPTF program that may convince the recording industry to assume a greater responsibility and investment in music education. Considering the Recording Industries’ current goal is to eliminate MPTF, it is apparent that proper arguments are not being made.
The power of the AFM lies within the membership and Locals, provided union representation remains focused on the needs of the majority. Its was a local effort that successfully negotiated a new agreement with Denver Center Attractions, providing a 70% increase in wages and benefits. This effort led to a further review of all scales, implementation of the AFM-EPF pension fund, and more occurrences of collective bargaining. These changes did not come about by decree from the DMA or AFM office, or through existing documents that mandate compensation. This was collective effort in its most effective, representative form – a labor union.
Recent Comments