pay cut for backup singers

[duff beer]

We are a weekend warrior/hobby band...singer, 2 guitars, bass, drums. We don't make a lot of money gigging, but no one needs the money as a source of income as we all have good day jobs. The drummer's wife and sister recently have begun to sing backup, and they do a very good job...and as a bonus, they are both attractive and provide a lot of stage presence. We don't really "need" them as both guitars also sing backup, but it is nice to have some female vocals. They come to most of rehearsals, and show up knowing their parts. They sing on about 40 of our 50 songs.

They have both said they don't want a full cut because we can get by without them, and because they don't sing on every song, but the band all believes that they deserve something.

What's a fair split? My thought is a half share each...so, as an example for a $600 gig, $100 to each member of the band, and $50 for each of the gals.

No one needs the money, but we want to be as fair as possible.

 

[xgator4u]

O.K.
Do they help with load in/ load out ?
Set up and tear down ?
Or do they JUST sing and look pretty ?

 

[mellowinman]

We are a weekend warrior/hobby band...singer, 2 guitars, bass, drums. We don't make a lot of money gigging, but no one needs the money as a source of income as we all have good day jobs. The drummer's wife and sister recently have begun to sing backup, and they do a very good job...and as a bonus, they are both attractive and provide a lot of stage presence. We don't really "need" them as both guitars also sing backup, but it is nice to have some female vocals. They come to most of rehearsals, and show up knowing their parts. They sing on about 40 of our 50 songs.

They have both said they don't want a full cut because we can get by without them, and because they don't sing on every song, but the band all believes that they deserve something.

What's a fair split? My thought is a half share each...so, as an example for a $600 gig, $100 to each member of the band, and $50 for each of the gals.

No one needs the money, but we want to be as fair as possible.

If they agree to it, then it's fair. It's a hard call to make. You have to look at all the variables, such as how much work everyone does on loading, setting up, etc.

You also have to look at how much they draw.

If they are a major attraction in the band, then their pay may have to go up. I would say work it out among yourselves.

 

[bluewine]

No one needs the money, but we want to be as fair as possible.

I hate to be a jerk, however I see this " we or I don't need the money" a lot on TB. I've even used it, because I have a full time career outside of my weekend warrior money. But I certainly don't turn down my cut ( I want every dollar I can get ) and I use the extra money.

This is my take, everybody needs money. If you don't need the money here's an idea.

Take the $600.00 and only pay the 2 back up singers. They get $300.00 each.

Blue

 

[duff beer]

Load in/load out/set up/tear down: They haven't gigged with us yet, their first gig is in a few weeks.

Do they just sing and look pretty: Right now, yes, but that's worth something when the rest of the band is 5 middle aged guys...

bluewine: No, we're not going to pay them $300 each. That makes no sense at all. We're trying to be fair, not give away money just because we don't need it to put food on the table.

 

[String Theory]

Are the drummer's wife and sister members of the band or not? The band should have discussed their pay and membership before they gigged. (Just saw above post - there is time to work this out).

 

[MartinG1957]

I'd say that in this circumstance,the idea of dividing the pot by 6 and giving the girls one share between 2 sounds fair - if they and all other members are happy with it - and on the proviso that they are specifically not asked or expected to help with any of the load in etc and everyone else does their fair share of that...just talk about it with everyone together openly and make sure that "yep I'm happy with that, that's fair" really does mean that and their are no simmering resentments from any direction, either the girls or anyone else who doesn't really want to see their share reduced.

 

[bluewine]

bluewine: No, we're not going to pay them $300 each. That makes no sense at all. We're trying to be fair, not give away money just because we don't need it to put food on the table.

Cool, I only mentioned it as an option because you don’t need the money.

blue

 

[duff beer]

Cool, I only mentioned it as an option because you don’t need the money.

blue

They don't need the money either.

 

[duff beer]

Are the drummer's wife and sister members of the band or not? The band should have discussed their pay and membership before they gigged. (Just saw above post - there is time to work this out).

They have been rehearsing with us for a few weeks, and have only done one unpaid charity gig. We will be discussing compensation at our next rehearsal, I was just looking for input from other bands that may be in a similar situation. We don't need them to gig, if they are unavailable, we can gig without them. That doesn't apply to the rest of the band.

 

[JimmyThunder]

I'd say that in this circumstance,the idea of dividing the pot by 6 and giving the girls one share between 2 sounds fair - if they and all other members are happy with it

+1

 

[agreatheight]

This probably should have been figured out before hand, lol.

A 1/2 share seems fair - assuming they just show up and sing, no loading in or out, no promotion duties, no hassles, and they could take time off whenever. But I'd be surprised if, in a year or so, they were showing up all that often. I could be wrong, but once the new factor wears off, $50 ain't too much money.

 

[bluewine]

They don't need the money either.

Well, if you meant, " we or the back ground singers don't do this for a living " your idea seems fair.

If you truely meant " they don't need the money " then you could tell them that and not pay them.

blue

 

[mellowinman]

All I'm saying here is, I only wish I knew two women who were good enough backup singers to justify having them on my stage all night, because that would radically change our set list, and for the better!

 

[sean_on_bass]

I think everyone would feel better if they are given an equal share..could curb some potential drama in the future too. It's just the right thing to do IMO.

 

[Bert Slide]

If noone needs the money then put everyones name in a hat at the end of night, pick one and WINNER TAKES ALL!

 

[jmattbassplaya]

If noone needs the money then put everyones name in a hat at the end of night, pick one and WINNER TAKES ALL!

Haha, this! But only because I HATE when people say no one needs the money. If so, why not just donate all your earnings to charity or to a local music program?

 

[electracoyote]

I always get a little skittish scrutinizing each member by how many notes they produce, how many pounds of gear they lift, how many songs they contribute to, etc. It's a slippery slope.

Since this is NOT for the money, and if everyone is contributing meaningfully and approximately the same value to the total output or visual appeal, split it evenly.

I play two keyboards, rhythm and lead guitars, sing some leads and tons of background/harmony vocals in my current party dance band. Objectively speaking, I am the hardest working member of my band. Should I be compensated more? I don't think so. My lead singers (male and female) often bolt right after the gig. They offer to help with tear down, but as we often use sound crews, it's not a big deal, so we let them scamper off and the drummer and I are the last to leave the room. And they're a couple of wusses who wouldn't get us out the door all that much quicker anyway. Should we cut the singers' pay?

Well, those two singers are the main attraction. They front the band very well. That makes up for any perceived lack of responsibility during set-up and tear-down, or not playing an instrument.

You have to weigh these things out and be practical and fair. It's supposed to be fun, there should be no elitism.

Now, if my sax buddy comes and sits in on a few songs, I might buy him a couple of drinks or offer him a Jackson at the end of the night (which he'd probably turn down).

Use good sense, treat everyone fairly and with respect, and factor in the intangibles that make your band better. Background vocals and harmonies, and eye candy, are a big PLUS in my book. Those girls probably deserve the same cut as everyone else.

 

[duff beer]

Well, if you meant, " we or the back ground singers don't do this for a living " your idea seems fair.

If you truely meant " they don't need the money " then you could tell them that and not pay them.

blue

No one does this for a living, and no one needs the income that gigs provide. But that has absolutely nothing to do with trying to split income equitably.

For example: I build decks on the side and can make $1200 - $1500 profit for a weekend of work. I have a good job and don't need the extra income, but I like building decks and I know the value of my work. My friend needs money and helps me and is paid $300 - $400 for his efforts, depending on the job. His value is grunt labour and he gets what he deserves. I am responsible for design, pricing, and ensuring the job is done to the customer's satisfaction. I don't give my friend the majority of the money I make just because he needs it more than I do. He is paid according to the value he brings to the job.

 

[duff beer]

Why do so many find it hard to understand that some people don't "need" the $100 or so they might earn from a gig? Everyone in the band is successful in their private life and we all earn far more at our jobs than any gig would ever pay. We happily play charity gigs for free, but we charge for private gigs because we are providing a service.