I'm sure many of you read this article about the DSO musicians rejecting managements 'final' contract. I have to admit, I'm actually rather surprised that Board kept their word and canceled the rest of the season.
From the Detroit Free Press:
"The musicians rejected management’s final contract offer, and management and the board of directors responded by carrying out a long-promised threat to suspend the remaining 3-1/2 months of the 2010-11 season. Half the season was lost to the 20-week strike already."
Maybe the DSO should start thinking about the Supply and Demand argument that Rocco Landesman brought up.
Though, I am curious to know how much money the DSO saved during the 20-week strike by the musicians. And I'm REALLY curious as to know whether or not canceling the remainder of the season will save the orchestra even more money.
So, what is going to happen next season? No contracts have been signed, programming seems like a shot in the dark, and no ones happy. Where do we go from here?
A while ago I remember having a conversation with one of my professors about the current state of orchestras in the US. My professor presented a rather interesting question:
If you're faced with the choice of losing your dream or taking a pay cut - which do you choose?
:sigh:
Ah well. I guess we'll have to wait and find out.
http://www.freep.com/article/20110219/ENT04/110219009
Great thoughts. Maybe Rocco's comments were not just about dying theatre companies, but orchestras too.
ReplyDeleteI am really glad that the management stuck to their word about this contract, and I am curious what you, Adam, as a musician feel about this situation. Before I read the last quote from your professor, I was thinking the same thing. Why do you think these musicians were refusing to accept the contract? It seems that others on the DSO team were willing to take a cut-"take one for the team" in essence. Why not the musicians? What are your thoughts?
ReplyDeleteI think they should bring in some scabs. I would play for way less money.
ReplyDeleteCorrect me if I'm wrong, but I think a huge issue of contention in the negotiations was about requiring DSO musicians to do more outreach and education as part of their contract. I believe that some of the musicians argued that this would cut into their private lesson teaching time. It's a shame that this is an issue. Outreach and education responsibilities should definitely be in the contracts of professional artists--musicians, actors, dancers, etc.
ReplyDeleteNobody likes to take a pay cut, and certainly a 23% pay cut is a significant difference. However, if it comes down to having a job that pays less (and by less, let's remember we're still talking about a good salary in the $80K range) or no job at all, I'd take the job. I agree that the managers in this case made the right move to stick to their word.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of my classmates, ha!
ReplyDeleteI wonder where this musicians are going to find a job in this job-market. And I certainly hope that it is not a Siobhan mentioned and education wasn't an issue. Who are we (all of us involved in the arts)going to bring more people (younger generations) to the arts if we don't reach to them first?
I feel there is a huge sense of entitlement on the side of the musicians. With the inflation of capable musicians in the market and the decrease in jobs available, why would they risk giving up a full time job? Perhaps they should go back to the days of gigging to appreciate what they had.
ReplyDeleteThe musicians should keep in mind that most of the administrators that support the symphony most likely make about half of what they make. If musicians don't adjust their expectations about salaries in this economy, they will be contributing to an unsustainable business model that could jeopardize the entire industry.
ReplyDeleteIf you guys would like to know the point of view of the musicians, go here: http://www.detroitsymphonymusicians.org/
ReplyDeleteI've tried to do as much research on the subject as possible, and I've crossed over from supporting the view of the managers to supporting the view of the musicians. The musicians were never against a pay cut; all major orchestras have gone through pay cuts over the past few years. The problem was that the management was trying to switch the DSO from the major leagues to AA overnight, and that sort of change just doesn't work for anyone.
Question: If you had a $100,000/year job, found out your pay was going to be decreased to $68,000/year with less benefits, and know that you're good enough to win another job in a different orchestra that will still pay you 100,000/year, what would you do? I would take a $68,000 job, but I'm nowhere near good enough to get paid any more than that yet...
But who's going to hire these musicians? Yes, there are better orchestras out there, but there are more musicians than there are jobs. Not to mention, if the next orchestra doesn't have blind auditions, who's going to want to hire someone from the DSO? They have a history of "causing trouble." From my point of view it's less of a risk to hire some green person straight out the conservatory than someone who balked and then went on strike because there was a huge pay cut. Dear DSO Musicians, our economy has been in crisis for 3 years. Detroit has been hit harder than most. Calm down and look at the big picture. Love, Carolyne
ReplyDelete