Unionization of composers? Last night's meeting...

A cozy place to hang out and discuss all things music.

Moderators: admin, mdc, TAXIstaff

User avatar
kevinmathie
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 657
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:25 am
Gender: Male
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Contact:

Unionization of composers? Last night's meeting...

Post by kevinmathie » Wed Nov 18, 2009 8:54 am

Here's an interesting article about a meeting held last night in LA:Teamsters Say They’re Ready To Help Film & TV Composers Unionize at LA MeetingDon't forget to read the comments below the article. I think they're just as thought-provoking.After you've read the article/comments, I'd love for you to come back here and discuss. What do you think about unionizing? What are the pros and cons for us -- the low-level composers who are trying to break into the business, also for those of us who are writing the library music that is currently being used by producers as a bargaining tool against custom composers (i.e., "Well, if you can't work for this amount, then someone else will, or else we'll just use library music on our project.")? This is a discussion that is going to directly effect us as composers, even those of us outside of LA; and if this movement gains ground, all of us will have to figure out which side of the issue we're on. What do you think about the call of these organizers to stop undercutting our fellow composers in LA (or anywhere else)? Are they up in the night? After all, it is a dog-eat-dog, capitalistic world out there. Is there value in worrying about the LA composers? Or should we worry about what's best for us and let them figure out their own issues in LA? Is there value for us in turning down work that is too low pay? Or has the music world simply changed too drastically, making it impossible to bring pay scales back up to the level they were in the 1970's? Is unionization in this glutted market even possible?Thoughts?

User avatar
kevinmathie
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 657
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2006 11:25 am
Gender: Male
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by kevinmathie » Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:05 am

FYI, here's an opinion article by Mark Northam:A Composers' Union: The Time Is Now

User avatar
sgs4u
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 3122
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 2:39 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Vancouver
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by sgs4u » Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:16 am

Nov 18, 2009, 10:54am, kevinmathie wrote:Is unionization in this glutted market even possible?C'mon Kev, let's start herding some cats... I've been a AFofM Union member for 30 years. My experience is that that musicians union does what's good for that union. Maybe a new composers union could be fantastic, but they'd really have to throw out the old expectations of how the biz used to work. Everything is just changing so fast now. It's very hard for big groups of people to agree on anything, but add staying on top of daily changes in technologies and markets... whoa. That's a very tall order. I think committed composers eventually rise up out of the fracas anyway, because of the quality of their work, and the quality of their relationships. Maybe this new union is a way to help composers starting out, but I think Taxi's model of charging money to learn (by offering pitching opportunities and a competitive environment) is more effective for composers that creating a union. It forces us to put our money where our talents may or may not lie. There is always a way to learn and advance thru cooperating with like-minded people, with or without unionizing. Participating in this forum was absolutely essential to my current career shift. And it totally sucked NOT to go to the Rally, but alas... I just didn't feel right about getting drunk in LA, without being clear about why I was there. I'd love to see everyone who makes music get paid... but it ain't gonna happen. And where should that line be drawn? And if this new union was created, there would be a lot of discussion about the pro and cons of joining Taxi. I can't see a Composers Union and Taxi getting along well. Maybe I'm wrong.I love my life!

User avatar
elser
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue Jul 24, 2007 9:32 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by elser » Wed Nov 18, 2009 9:50 am

I thought this reply was interesting,"One of the problems is defining what a composer is. We should not be mixed in with lyricists [not that there is anything wrong with being a lyricist] but this dilutes, confuses and compromises our goals as composers.Band members, song writers, may also be musicians, but are often not composers, again don’t be confused, a GUILD should be for composers only.A say we composers should be in a GUILD not a union. It’s the WRITERS GUILD, the DIRECTORS GUILD, get it?Yes, unions like any human entity gets too powerful; no reason not to have one.We should define what a composer is, and understand the implications of a GUILD versus a UNION."I completely agree with the need for collective bargaining power, but I don't think we should be represented by the teamsters, the same guys that represent the truckers or even stage techs for that matter. I think we've all seen the problems with unionized labor, the tendency towards an entitlement attitude and the lack of productivity that comes with it. But composers are a different lot and hopefully a guild something like the screen actors guild or directors guild which are very effective for there members would be a good thing for the members themselves as well as for the musical standards they are expected meet.The corporate environment in America is getting increasingly corrupt, Mr. Potter is buying up everything, we need this old Bailey's Savings and Loan if only to stand up to the Potter's of this world. (that was a reference from "It's A Wonderful Life" in case your wondering )

User avatar
Casey H
King of the World
King of the World
Posts: 14163
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 3:22 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by Casey H » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:19 am

I'm not sure what I think about this unionization. My gut tells me there are simpler ways. Nov 18, 2009, 11:16am, sgs4u wrote: And if this new union was created, there would be a lot of discussion about the pro and cons of joining Taxi. I can't see a Composers Union and Taxi getting along well. Maybe I'm wrong.I don't see any relationship at all between Taxi and composer unionization. Taxi is in the business of connecting composers with end users regardless of how those composers get paid-- once a track is forwarded, their job is done. But like you, I could be wrong. Nov 18, 2009, 11:16am, sgs4u wrote: I love my life! Awesome! Casey

jonathanm
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 832
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 4:22 am
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by jonathanm » Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:54 am

Seems like an awfully tough row to hoe in creating such a union. It's not like an actors union, or one for directors, or techs or any other position where location matters. Composers are in a situation where, because of the internet, location does not matter.Those in a composers union are still going to have to compete against an increasingly global array of composers. Suppose they lock in all the composers in LA, or even all of California. Those members are still competing (on both quality and price) against folks in not only the rest of the US, but all over the world. Their customers know they can find people in almost any country due to the internet. So, what benefit does the union afford its members?
"Everyone always misquotes me." - Frederick Q. Larson

User avatar
ggalen
Serious Musician
Serious Musician
Posts: 1427
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2006 11:24 am
Gender: Male
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by ggalen » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:36 am

If there were fewer composers who could give them "good enough" film scores, then the price would never have fallen 86% while demand ffor music rose 241%. Worldwide there are a lot more people with the talent and the gear to give them what they need now.Each new composer joining Taxi and getting "connected" adds to the number of available composers. More composers = lower rates. Someone talented and new will usually be available to work cheaper to get started.A union or a guild is simply a way to limit supply, driving up the price.I don't see how a union or a guild could work when there are so many people who love to compose film music. ...and who can submit their work digitally over the Internet from anywhere in the world.

jdhogg
Committed Musician
Committed Musician
Posts: 793
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 1:00 pm
Gender: Male
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by jdhogg » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:52 am

mmm...if you write generic music expect to get hit.If you write great music with great melodies name your reasonable price and stick to it.

User avatar
hummingbird
Total Pro
Total Pro
Posts: 7189
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:50 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by hummingbird » Wed Nov 18, 2009 11:54 am

The one thing that perhaps a Guild might do is have the power to advocate on behalf of composers with governments regarding copyright, royalties for new media, etc. However, I think that's what our PROS should be doing. Certainly SOCAN is very busy in Ottawa working to raise their consciousness about our creative contributions to society as a whole, and specifically with regards to things like royalties for internet usage of our work.As mentioned by someone else today in a different thread, we composers make things worse for everyone when we accept less than our due. [I had the opportunity to have music in a film once... their offer was, they'd own the piece outright, they'd pay no sync fees, there would be no back end royalties, and I wouldn't get screen credit. I might have been willing to have screen credit only at that point, but I wasn't going to give them my music for nothing at all. Did another composer accept that deal? I hope not.]
"As we are creative beings, our lives become our works of art." (Julia Cameron)

Shy Singer-Songwriter Blog

Vikki Flawith Music Website

ernstinen
Total Pro
Total Pro
Posts: 5658
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 6:59 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Re: Unionization of composers? Last night's meetin

Post by ernstinen » Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:48 pm

I just read about this in an article in the L.A. Times, and my first reaction is that I'm all for it. My second reaction: Other than the elite few, composers get screwed so badly that any organizing for our rights is better than none, so --- I'm all for it! Some facts:* The composer for the critically acclaimed "Mad Men" doesn't get reimbursed for hiring musicians, paying for studio time, copying music etc. because studios (who used to do this) stopped the practice to "cut costs." Half of this composer's fee for his 13 episodes go to paying these costs, cutting his income from approximately $10,000 per show to $5000. He says he won't make enough to support his family now.* The average music in a one-hour prime time TV show has doubled from 15 to 30 minutes per episode over the last three decades, but the total music budget per episode has been cut by more than 50%.* Nearly everyone else on the set of a show gets, through unions, health and welfare benefits, some sort of minimum pay standard and some basic working conditions. Not composers/lyricists.* Composer and songwriter Alf Clausen works for "The Simpsons," and says it's one of "the few remaining TV shows that picks up all of my costs and that treats composers with that old-time diginity --- I'm more worried about my son and all the young composers out there."Personally, besides what is fair, the operative word is "dignity." Why should composers/lyricists be treated like dirt, the bottom of the bottom? Our work is such an important part of the making of television shows and movies, yet we are on the level of one of the only other non-unionized groups, "production assistants." Sure, someone has to get coffee for everyone else, so maybe they should be unionized as well. My 2 cents,Ern

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 64 guests