[Fmpro] Unions - The Indie Film Composer Argument

[Michael S Patterson]

Michael,
You know I hear the argument all the time...$60/hour isn't that much and 
that
LA session musicians are the best.

And I believe both of those statements are false.

$60 per hour, per musician is expensive for any producer making a
SAG ultra low or modified low budget or film. It is vastly more than
he is paying his actors. Even under SAG's low budget agreement
actors are paid less than $2,000 a week! Yep....less than $50 an hour.

Now a film needs actors, a film doesn't NEED musicians.

SAG does this because actors need to work and it builds relationships with 
producers.
The AFofM doesn't even attempt this, in fact it's low budget agreement is 
highly
suspect...Under $40 million is low budget?!?!?! Under 3 or 5 mil but $40....
who is the AFM trying to bargain with? And the electronic multi-track 
rate...I'm still
not exactly sure what that is and I'm not going to touch it.

So, what do I do when a producer gives me a budget of $40,000 or $50,000????
I shop around...I'm not going to pay $10,000 per session just for musicians 
with
all sorts of strings attached.

And the LA session musicians are the best argument is silly, sure the ones 
that are
doing all the work are great. The ones that pull a session here or there and 
the
ones that have very little experience are not.

You have the experience of a contractor, how often have you had to tell a 
low budget
composer or producer that it was difficult to fill up the orchestra because 
there are a
couple of studio pictures recording there score. Or convinced the composer 
or producer
to do evening sessions so musicians could do their "money gig." during the 
day. Only
to have half the musicians play as if they are the walking dead.

And the argument has become even more silly since session orchestras are 
popping up
outside of NY and LA. The orchestras in Seattle are great, Salt Lake City 
too and
internationally....I mean, come on...working with a National or Radio 
orchestra in
Eastern Europe, those guys kick ass.

The argument is based on fear, work in another city you'll get bumpkins, 
work in
Eastern Europe you get farmers that dropped their hammer and sickle and 
picked
up a violin.

AFofM is out of touch, they should look to SAG if they want to work in the 
indie community.


Michael S Patterson





----- Original Message ----- 
From: <MVPROD at aol.com>
To: <fmpro at nxport.com>
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Fmpro] Unions


>I know this thread might be about finished but I wanted to add my 2c and
> perhaps clarify a couple of the issues.
>
> 1. The Canadian issue is a misuse of the rules. That scale was created for
> Canadian composers writing for Canadian projects only. The fact that it is
> misused is the fault of greedy producers, composers, musicians and the 
> ineptness or
> intentional oversight of the AFM national.
>
> 2. The fact that the AFM is threatening its musicians is how it should be.
> That is how unions work. A group of people agree to not work below a 
> minimum
> standard. That is unionism. Of course any composer or producer has the 
> right to
> use non union musicians (if they themselves are not an AFM member or hold 
> an
> agreement with the AFM) whenever the wish. The threat should have happened 
> 10 or
> 15 years ago but once again it is the union to the rescue way to late.
> Seattle is established and will stay in business using non union but 
> qualified
> musicians. Score one for Seattle.
>
> 3. Buyouts simply do not  protect musicians. Producers want it both ways 
> they
> want to buy out the product for less than it is worth and then not share
> profits. The buyout would have to include substantial money to make it 
> fair to the
> quality of musicians they are hiring and producers simply don't want to 
> pay a
> fair price. The idea of special payments is to give the producer a lower 
> wage
> to get going in case the picture does not do well in trade for a very 
> small
> share of the profit.
>
> In the words of Gary Mule Dear  "If you will work for a little less every
> year you can stay in the entertainment field the rest of your life"
>
> Unfortunately the AFM has no control over musicians in London or anywhere
> else in the world because it is the American Federation of Musicians which
> includes Canada. It has jurisdiction no where else and does not 
> reciprocate with any
> other protection union for musicians around the world.
>
> Low Budget films pay $180 per a 3 hour call. That is $60 per hour. It does
> not limit the money a composer can charge and does not include music 
> production.
> As anyone knows that has lived in LA for any amount of time the non union
> rate 15 years ago was $75 per hour. The union (foolishly) started to 
> compete with
> the union musicians doing non union work and actually lowered the amount 
> of
> money on a non union session. I understand the frustration of fledging
> composers however many production companies and composers that are making 
> a whole lot
> of money on projects use these scales more than you would think and still
> charge very high fees. So it is a double edged sword.
>
> Consider. Getting up early in the morning driving 2 hours in rush hour
> traffic to do a 3 hour session for $60 per hour, less taxes and cost of 
> goods, and
> being prepared on your instrument (oh and driving back). Compare that to
> sitting in your living room for $60 an hour teaching (hopefully not in 
> ones
> pajamas). Also consider that if a musician does a $180 session 5 days a 
> week that
> comes to a yearly salary of $46,800 (again less the cost of goods, taxes, 
> etc.).
> Not exactly a power house living for a highly trained professional. So I 
> hope
> that puts it in a little perspective.
>
>
> The large studios have plenty of money and when they use it on musicians 
> it
> is never wasted. I wonder if those $70 million actors would seem as good
> without the expert music. Needless to say there is a lot of other waste in 
> making a
> picture and it is never the musicians.  Big budgets mean big results many
> times.
>
>
> Just as composers do musicians spend their whole life preparing for their
> profession. The don't just graduate from school and stop practicing or 
> investing
> in their instruments and craft.
>
> Composers should appreciate musicians and musicians should appreciate
> composers. Alas it is not a perfect world.  There are selfish interests.
>
> As far as the union. The Federation, the locals, and yes even the RMA have
> made big mistakes. Getting them to see the future and not myopically is 
> almost
> impossible. But I have to believe we are better of with them that without 
> them.
>
>
> I see the frustration on this list many times about the representation of
> Composers by any type of protective agency. Musicians are simply dealing 
> with the
> frustration of a slow moving non understanding union that has been around 
> for
> a very long time.
>
>
> OK that's the end of my little 2c and I hope it clarifies a few things
> without making anyone upset.
>
>
> FYI, my qualifications are. Musician, music contractor, producer, owner of 
> a
> production company, artist manager for Grammy award winning composer 
> Victor A.
> Vanacore, and 25 years ago a musicians union officer (should I admit 
> that). I
> have seen the business from many aspects and am sensitive to the problems 
> and
> frustrations that each entity encounters.
>
> I have enjoyed this list and trust that you will take my comments in the
> spirit given. Which is to enlighten from my perspective.
>
> Thanks for the forum.
>
> Mike Vaccaro
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Michael -
>>
>>
>> As you are clearly a strong AFM (American Federation of Musicians)
>> supporter, I'd be interested in your thoughts on the following:
>>
>> -----
>>
>> 1. Do you think it's right that the AFM, through it's Canadian division,
>> offers a low-budget buyout agreement for low-budget indie films in Canada
>> but refuses to offer a similar agreement in America? According to the
>> Canadian union folks, this agreement virtually wiped out 90% of the
>> "recording work leaving town" problem for low budget films and allowed 
>> them
>> to be recorded under Union contracts in Canada.
>>
>> 2. Do you think it's right that the AFM is threatening its member 
>> composers,
>> musicians, and other AFM members for having anything to do with scores
>> recorded in Seattle (yes, they're threatening AFM member composers as 
>> well!)
>> with $50,000 fines beginning today, but has excluded from its threats 
>> those
>> members working on films in London, Eastern Europe and elsewhere?
>>
>> For more on this, see:
>> http://filmmusicworld.com/mag/index.php?todo=showstory&storyid=181
>>
>> 3. The massive amount of recording work leaving Los Angeles for Seattle 
>> and
>> other locations is directly attributable to the fact that filmmakers want 
>> a
>> buyout on their scores and these other recording locales have chosen to 
>> make
>> that option available. According to some players I've spoken with in LA,
>> while the top 100 or so LA session players appear to have benefited
>> handsomely from the AFM's choice not to be more competitive with other 
>> union
>> recording locales including London and Seattle (both have unions) and
>> elsewhere in terms of offering a buyout option, the results of these
>> policies have cost LA musicians a lot of work as jobs leave town for more
>> competitive work environments that offer the filmmakers what they're 
>> looking
>> for - buyouts. Do you agree with this policy that seemingly protects the
>> benefits of a relatively small number of players but causes a large 
>> amount
>> of work to be done outside LA?
>>
>> -----
>>
>> Since you've offered your opinion on the list, I'll include mine - I 
>> believe
>> that musicians are far better off WITH a union than without, However, 
>> some
>> of the current AFM policies seem intent on preserving the benefits of a 
>> few
>> high-paid musicians at the expense of many, many other AFM musicians, 
>> which
>> I believe ultimately is hurting the AFM more than it is helping it.
>>
>> The "hardline" approach that the AFM is taking towards low budget film
>> buyouts (amazing when you see the AFM's own Canadian division offering 
>> them
>> to Canadian low budget filmmakers) is driving away a lot of small and 
>> medium
>> budget films to Seattle and elsewhere, creating skilled film score 
>> recording
>> orchestras elsewhere - the biggest threat to the AFM. If enough AFM
>> non-A-list musicians lose enough work because of this, I'll bet we'll see
>> the formation of a "Financial Core Status" Orchestra in Los Angeles - 
>> union
>> members who have elected this special status which allows them to work 
>> union
>> and non-union jobs without fear of union retaliation.
>>
>> The availability of a local non-union orchestra of talented musicians 
>> would
>> likely recapture a great deal of work going to Seattle and elsewhere -
>> especially on low and medium budget films - but could spell the end of 
>> the
>> effectiveness of the AFM as the studios could start designating that only
>> Core Status musicians may be used, just as the studios are saying now in
>> some composer package agreements that "No AFM Musicians may be used".  I
>> have to wonder how much lost work the AFM will tolerate to preserve the
>> benefits of those musicians in town fortunate enough to be working on the
>> big studio films. With every lost job, other orchestras become more 
>> talented
>> and proficient at recording film scores, and as those other orchestras
>> become more experienced at film scores, they represent a growing 
>> competitive
>> threat to LA musicians. This simple, basic fact seems to be lost on some 
>> in
>> the AFM as far a I can tell...
>>
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Mark Northam
>>
>>
>> On 10/1/06 10:05 AM, "Michael John Mollo" <mollovg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >The
>> >unions protect the players and all the other people who make their 
>> >living
>> >"freelancing."  And as a composer in Los Angeles, I am very thankful 
>> >that
>> an
>> >organization such as this exists. I always know that when I gounion, I 
>> >am
>> >getting the best quality performance.
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Mark Northam - Publisher
>> Film Music Magazine
>> The Professional Voice of Music for Film &TV
>> http://www.filmmusicmag.com
>> 1-800-774-3700 x702 / (310) 645-9000 x702
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> The Film Music Pro List is sponsored by Film Music Magazine -
>> http://www.filmmusicmag.com
>>
>> To edit your list options or unsubscribe, visit:
>> http://nxport.com/mailman/listinfo/fmpro
>>
>
>
> Mike Vaccaro
> www.MikeVaccaro.Com
> PH  562.424.4958
> FAX 562.424.2512
> _______________________________________________
> The Film Music Pro List is sponsored by Film Music Magazine - 
> http://www.filmmusicmag.com
>
> To edit your list options or unsubscribe, visit:
> http://nxport.com/mailman/listinfo/fmpro