Why aren't musicians striking?

[40Hz]

Is there actually a professional licensing board for performing musicians? Yes, I know they exist for music educators (school systems), music therapy, etc.

Riis

No for the simple reason that licenses require specific qualifications that grant defined privileges and make the holders of those licenses legally responsible for their actions.

Musicians aren’t required to meet any formal qualifications and have no legal responsibilities to the public for the safety and quality of what they produce. So what would be the point of a license?

 

[40Hz]

27670190[/URL], member: 147047"]What a wonderful statement to make when you know there is absolutely no way for me to prove it because you skipped over the part where I said it will never happen.

This isn’t a competition for points. It’s a discussion. My entire point was that without some exchange of value, no exchange has taken place. A one sided exchange is just a gift or an act of charity. And the social norm regarding receiving gifts is that acknowledging it with a simple “thank you” is all that is required or should be expected.

Would it be the "end of the world"? No of course not, but the movie writer strike or even sports league strikes aren't the end of the world either. But all of the parasites they feed off of musicians would certainly notice, and that no small thing.

TBH there’s far more serious issues going on in society right now that I’m involved with such that I really can’t get too worked up over someone grousing about how they’re only making $75K a year writing smartass monologues for some late night talk show. Or actors who, despite becoming multimillionaires by working for major studios, are now calling themselves victims. That’s got to be the first world of all first world problems.

 

[Jefenator]

If we were to organize locally, I've got a pretty good idea of who would be in charge and I'm not so sure I want that individual telling me where I can & can't play.
You want compensation, get a following. When I'm playing to an empty room I feel guilty for taking their $60. When someone tries to work the salsa band, we say that's cool, we'll just take our crowd of 150 dancers that we always draw to one of the other venues. And then they listen to reason.

 

[Sean150]

This isn’t a competition for points. It’s a discussion. My entire point was that without some exchange of value, no exchange has taken place. A one sided exchange is just a gift or an act of charity. And the social norm regarding receiving gifts is that acknowledging it with a simple “thank you” is all that is required or should be expected.



TBH there’s far more serious issues going on in society right now that I’m involved with such that I really can’t get too worked up over someone grousing about how they’re only making $75K a year writing smartass monologues for some late night talk show. Or actors who, despite becoming multimillionaires by working for major studios, are now calling themselves victims. That’s got to be the first world of all first world problems.

The fact that the big actors are striking is the point because they are not striking for themselves. They are striking for the profession as a whole which includes the actors who make their living with small roles (i.e shopkeeper or police officer #2). And the technology now exists that studios could replace the big names with CGI and AI if they don’t protect their rights.

Yes, there are lots of problems in the world today, but a lot of them could be solved if people stepped back, looked at the big picture (not just what they see on the surface) and then worked together to address each problem. It works in business and it would work in society.

 

[Wood and Wire]

And the technology now exists that studios could replace the big names with CGI and AI if they don’t protect their rights.

It's not so much the big names (I think Bruce Willis has this pretty well figured out, with regards to the use of his likeness in the future, now that he is unable to work. But who knows what the situation is with the data used to digitally de-age Jeff Bridges, Al Pacino, Robert De Niro, Sirs Patrick Stewart & Ian McKellen, Will Smith, or Harrison Ford?).

From the late 90's, to this day, many of the musicians that I know make ends meet (some even make the lions share of their income) working as an "Extra", or "Background Artist" in movies, and TV dramas.

If the less scrupulous Movie Studios have their way, that entire strata of the screen acting profession is extinct.

People (not necessarily even actors) will come in for a scanning session, and will receive a one-off payment for the use of their likeness in perpetuity, to fill out the background of shots, and populate crowd scenes etc.

I wouldn't expect that one-off payment to equate to much more than a few months rent + bills.

Even if they end up paying an additional per use license fee, it will be Spotify percentages.

 

[pepj]

Well, you can strike...just don't offer to play there if the terms arent agreeable, but dont be surprised if some other band takes the gig.
Good venues around here, pay the going rate; good bands know the going rate and gear towards that.
If you want substantially more, you have to be worth it.
A friend of mine used to get her girl friends out on special nights and priced accordingly. The girls drank the wine stock dry...despite the venue being warned that a large number of women were coming.
They were definitely worth the money in wine sales, but the fee had to be, standard fee plus bonus.
I think it all worked out at about 1 and half times normal fee. Understandably, the bar did not want to commit to that fee straight off, hence the bonus deal.
I thinks bars have no problem paying above scale if the sales are there.

But the underlying problem is music is not often valued as people are not used to paying overtly for it.
I've known many a so called music fan complain the drinks as more expensive on music nights...!!!!!

 

[40Hz]

The fact that the big actors are striking is the point because they are not striking for themselves. They are striking for the profession as a whole which includes the actors who make their living with small roles (i.e shopkeeper or police officer #2).

Apologies if I’m not so readily impressed by celebrities putting in an appearance at some cause du jour. How much genuine pushing for equity have they previously done on a regular basis prior to this strike? Has any of them ever gone on record saying if you want me to secure name draw in this big picture you’re making, you're going to need to provide the following contract terms and conditions to the rest of the cast? Has any of them ever declined a lucrative role because of how little somebody else is getting paid? I seriously doubt it. Because if the big names had been doing it all along the actor’s union would likely not be striking right now.

It might be worth remembering that somebody with seven or eight digits of net worth behind them is far more able to boldly take a stand and hold firm on principles than it is for someone living on a normal extra’s income. Moral support is cheap to offer. I’d be far more impressed if some of these top earners put a portion of those earnings into the union strike fund that provides some small income for its striking workers.

Yes, there are lots of problems in the world today,

You left out where I prefixed the word “problems” with the phrase “far more serious.” Which is something you’ll want to do if you truly are looking at the real bigger picture. Because in the larger scheme of things, let’s be realistic. This particular strike doesn’t amount to much more than a passing side show.

 

[Sean150]

You left out where I prefixed the word “problems” with the phrase “far more serious.” Which is something you’ll want to do if you truly are looking at the real bigger picture. Because in the larger scheme of things, let’s be realistic. This particular strike doesn’t amount to much more than a passing side show.

That was just efficiency of wording and a bit of an acknowledgment that different people have different ideas of what constitutes “serious”. But I’d agree that yes, it is not a particularly important issue when viewed outside the scope of arts compensation & rights.

 

[sleddogn]

wife told me I was striking...back in '96

 

[J Wilson]

I joined the Nashville AFM local when I moved here, and had heard the horror stories about AFM heavies hassling guys on 'off the card' gigs, by far the greatest number of opportunities. At that time, it seemed as if the Union only dug in its heels if you played the Opry or TNN or had a master (major label) recording date.

So I went to my first union meeting, and was stunned to see that they were stripping Hank Garland of his membbership, who'd by then essentially been a ghost of himself under his parents' care since a terrible car wreck in the 60's. His folks were down to eating or buying meds and had asked if the Union could somehow grandfather this famous Nashville player in after all these years. Nope.

A few days later, I go down on the row to the hall and have a sit-down with the then president, Harold Bradley, a session legend and Owen Bradley's brother. I told Mr. Bradley I was new in town and scratching around, and he knew just like I did I'd wind up taking whatever I could get to get in, and most likely 'off the card'. I inquired if there was any help the Union could offer, as I'd like to do the right thing.

There wasn't.

I let it expire later and was never approached by anyone, anywhere from the AFM.

 

[definenredefine]

Since the WGA/SAG-AFTRA strike has seen some discussion in this thread, I'll post this link to a podcast episode about it - The Do-Or-Die Stakes Of The Hollywood Strikes - Lever Time with David Sirota | iHeart

That's from the Lever podcast, and it's a discussion between David Sirota (a writer who I think is the principle for Don't Look Up) and Alex O'Keefe (one of the writers from the Bear). They have a point of view, to be sure, but may be of some use to the folks who were discussing that.

Beyond that, my own opinion is that we're seeing a mass mobilization of labor in this country. The article I posted to start the thread is about musicians and in the context of WGA/SAG-AFTRA, but it's important to note that there are nurses on strike. Amazon and Starbucks workers around the country have voted to unionize. Teachers have been marching. UPS and Teamsters narrowly avoided a strike. And there was the thing with railroad workers last year. We're in a moment.

As such, I thought this article was interesting. I'm glad it's sparked a pretty vibrant discussion.

 

[Tom Bomb]

"THE BELLS! THE BELLS!"
​

 

[Boneless]

No for the simple reason that licenses require specific qualifications that grant defined privileges and make the holders of those licenses legally responsible for their actions.

Musicians aren’t required to meet any formal qualifications and have no legal responsibilities to the public for the safety and quality of what they produce. So what would be the point of a license?

So maybe there should be.

 

[Boneless]

Apologies if I’m not so readily impressed by celebrities putting in an appearance at some cause du jour. How much genuine pushing for equity have they previously done on a regular basis prior to this strike? Has any of them ever gone on record saying if you want me to secure name draw in this big picture you’re making, you're going to need to provide the following contract terms and conditions to the rest of the cast? Has any of them ever declined a lucrative role because of how little somebody else is getting paid? I seriously doubt it. Because if the big names had been doing it all along the actor’s union would likely not be striking right now.

It might be worth remembering that somebody with seven or eight digits of net worth behind them is far more able to boldly take a stand and hold firm on principles than it is for someone living on a normal extra’s income. Moral support is cheap to offer. I’d be far more impressed if some of these top earners put a portion of those earnings into the union strike fund that provides some small income for its striking workers.



You left out where I prefixed the word “problems” with the phrase “far more serious.” Which is something you’ll want to do if you truly are looking at the real bigger picture. Because in the larger scheme of things, let’s be realistic. This particular strike doesn’t amount to much more than a passing side show.

The idea that there should be a moral side to the issue is laughable. People do what people should do within a system. A "capitalist" system¹ encourages individualism, is built to reward individualism, requires each actor (no pun intended) to act for their own interests. And it actively penalises people who don't do so. Therefore should people be heroes? Is that what you want? Who led the slaves' revolt? Was it a free man? Or was it Spartacus?

¹: trade unionism isn't even socialist in nature. It's simple worker organisation to protect their own interests within the system. In fact, there are several trade unions that are ideologically right-wing (UGL in Italy, for instance, or probably the Police Officers Union in every country there is one such union). By the way, capitalism is superficially individualist but collectivist in nature, since it requires individuals to subscribe to it, even against their own interests, "for the good of society". Socialism is superficially collectivist but ultimately individualist, as it seeks to protect the interests of each individual.

 

[Gravedigger Dav]

I don't understand the problem. In the late 60s I was making $100 per gig. I'm still making $100 per gig, so what's to complain about?

 

[40Hz]

So maybe there should be.

Why? I see zero point in licensing musicians any more than I see a point in licensing a watercolor painter. There’s no compelling societal concern since it doesn’t affect public health or safety. Licensing requirements are created for actual reasons, not just as something nice to have. You can’t just legally regulate something for no reason. At least not in this country.

 

[40Hz]

27672693[/URL], member: 85545"]The idea that there should be a moral side to the issue is laughable. People do what people should do within a system.

Should do? Let’s get real. People do what they’re going to do. Sometimes within a system, sometimes outside or despite it. A system is no guarantee of individual behavior.

A "capitalist" system¹ encourages individualism, is built to reward individualism, requires each actor (no pun intended) to act for their own interests.

That’s overly simplistic since there have been few if any examples of pure capitalism at work anywhere, except in situations where societal norms have completely broken down. Profiteering in a war zone ot in a country in the grips of hyperinflation being two examples of “free market” capitalism.

And it actively penalises people who don't do so.

Nonsense. Unrestrained and unrestricted self interest inevitably leads to societal collapse. The very framework that allows for capitalist economies to exist. [/QUOTE]

Therefore should people be heroes?

Why not? I’ve seen many people without a personal interest at stake step into a conflict on behalf of someone else because their moral compass directed them to.

Is that what you want? Who led the slaves' revolt? Was it a free man? Or was it Spartacus?

I don’t want nor have I asked for anything, so I don’t get whatever argument you’re trying to make with the above. Or how we got to Spartacus and heroes since we’re discussing unions and strikes. But if you feel you’ve made a point tossing in a false equivalency I suppose that’s fine too.

(note: Union workers are not slaves in any sense of either term despite their leadership sometimes equating them with slaves for dramatic effect when speaking to the press.)

27672693[/URL], member: 85545"]: trade unionism isn't even socialist in nature. It's simple worker organisation to protect their own interests within the system.

Ok. But I don’t recall saying anything at all about socialism.

In fact, there are several trade unions that are ideologically right-wing (UGL in Italy, for instance, or probably the Police Officers Union in every country there is one such union).

Ok again. But I also don’t recall saying anything about any person or groups political orientation, which to me is immaterial for purposes of this discussion. Your point?

By the way, capitalism is superficially individualist but collectivist in nature, since it requires individuals to subscribe to it, even against their own interests, "for the good of society".

I said much the same earlier about the ultimately self defeating nature of unrestrained self interest.

Socialism is superficially collectivist but ultimately individualist, as it seeks to protect the interests of each individual.

Huh? That’s a pretty unusual interpretation of what individualist stands for in relationship to collectivism. Collectivism denies the intrinsic value of “each individual” except insofar as that individual is part of the greater collective. And the collective has no moral issue at all with sacrificing one or more individuals for what it considers the greater intrinsic worth of the collective. That’s about as far away from individualism as you can get.

 

[Michael Milner]

If you do it for a living, then belonging to a union makes sense. But most musicians don't do it for a living, so does joining the union really make sense for one of those people?

 

[Lance Bunyon]

As a young man I walked into the AFM Boston to research my options. It happened to be in my hometown, just across from the high school.
Even in 1987 the options were dismal for a union musician.
"You need to pay your dues monthly. If you get a union gig we get a percentage..."
"Where are the union gigs?"
"Oh there are a few union shops. It's mostly for the classical crowd. Also, if you get caught playing a non union shop, you get a fine. We don't play non union shops...".

After slight rumination, it dawned on me that the AF of M was dead. I saw no point in giving money to a dead organization that had no pull.

 

[bertthebassist]

If we strike, the work will be outsourced to other countries like so many other industries in the past.