DonRoos
Subsequent to the previous discussions about venue's and band remuneration I have another issue. We did a free gig at a well know Pizza restaurant that provides live music on a Saturday afternoon. The gig went doen very well and we were well received. We then were offered a regular, paying gig on a 3 week cycle for December. We did those gigs and our following and support is growing.
We fully expected that we would continue to get regular gigs in January anf going forward. In stead, we were offered a gig in late January that wes "double booked" and we lost out. So we were then offered a postponement for February which we accepted and started publishing. Now I get a call saying that the person I was dealing with is not responsible for booking bands and that they can only offer us a gig in late March!
So, being a new band and me being very new to managing a bands I am wondering if thia is just the way things are done? Is it normal/acceptable to book and cancel bookings in this way? Surely if you book a band you should be liable for some cost if you cancel too late for a replacement gig to be organised? Is it reallt this volatile that we should just be happy that we have actually been offered a gig at all? The attitude just sucks.
In addition, the rate that is offered is pathetically low. It is entirely possible to have a bill larger than your earnigs for the night without even trying.
In just about every other industry there are unions to reglate the industry and ensure fair treatment of members. How long are we going to allow this kind of treatment before we stand up for our rights and demand fair treatment and pay?
singemonkey
Par for the course, I'm afraid. There aren't too many venues that can reliably offer worthwhile rates to semi-pro bands. Work at the ones that do is highly coveted.
The problem with unionisation and the situation in general, I think, is that it's a bit of a fringe industry. And the people that are making big cash (music producers) can not be said to be on the same team as us.
I think unionisation is highly desirable. But it's difficult to get momentum. Many rock (mostly white) musicians come from a history in which unions are for people who do physical labour. I think that makes this music demographic hard to convince. Because, like I mentioned, music is a small scene, the big union collectives are doubtless little interested in attempting to organise a union themselves.
And for the same reason, I don't think government is interested in the slightest in making laws or bylaws that stimulate live music - unlike in the UK where the music industry, and providing seedbeds for new talent, is taken seriously by government because of the economic importance of their industry.
gavin-taitz
I agree with you how much longer must we take this, I had a gig for 9 months in a hotel and without notice the hotel just said there is no budget and ended it, if i didn't have a safety net i would be on the street . One should always try and get something in writing if you can, because people are fickle and often see musicians are not seen as businessmen .
Arno-West
Welcome to the gig-scene DonRoos. It's been that way for the last 25 years. It won't change, ever. Being a musician is not regarded as an "occupation" in this country. And that is that.
[deleted]
In just about every other industry there are unions to reglate the industry and ensure fair treatment of members. How long are we going to allow this kind of treatment before we stand up for our rights and demand fair treatment and pay?
Absolutely, when I first started out things went really well for me, (in retrospect it was because I was charging way too little!). Then I started charging more and ran into the same problems as you. (And that's still not even charging enough.)
So at the time I thought is was just that I looked like a push over, which I really was not. I'm actually glad to see other people being treated this way, I feel a little less of a failure. So now I have no (performing) work, but a very good contract in case I do, ha ha. On the odd occasion I do get a gig, it feels like I'm negotiating a hostage situation!
And the treatment I get from parents who "want" their children to have lessons. If everybody in the world was treated this way the world would not work. I know teaching is not the same thing, but still illustrates how people don't take musicians seriously.
In fact, a union probably is a good idea. Lets start one!
Keira-WitherKay
in my experience....it's the small/local venues that are the problem NEVER the major hotels/functions/weddings and so on.... i perform as a full time muso and YES thesame experiences happen to me but like i said above NEVER when working for reputable event companies or agents or NEVER at international hotel chains....
BUT on the other hand many muso's i know would NOT abide by the "rules" of some of these well run music business models......
normally in the contract .....strict set up times are prescribed(often hours before the event) you given a sound check window ..... , so is a strict dress code, for many major hotels and in some agents contracts alcohol intake is often forbidden at the event , or before it too and written into the contract on threat of immediate dismissal for even it's 1 glass of wine to set the mood , even how neat the cables on the stage is can be a factor , start/break times are monitored and enforced literally to the minute ,
so basically yes a contract is drawn up and enforced but from both sides ..... the hotel.events company/agent ....will pay you the right fee and on time and double bookings or cancellations are all paid out at an agreed cancellation fee...BUT they want their proverbial pound of flesh as well ....
so as the expression goes "be careful what you wish for" ?
me i'm good and quite frankly used to by now following the time schedules and rules to the letter .... HOWEVER i know a lot of bands that are fabulous players that these very same events organisers and agents for hotels won't touch because of the bands attitude toward always pushing/testing the boundries or rules set in the contract and basic lack of discipline ....
but yes i agree and for ages been saying a union should be in place BUT i do know it will come at a price
Banditman
What's the difference between Al Qaida and a club owner? You can negotiate with Al Qaida...
Keira and Singemonkey make some compelling reasons for why musos battle to get paid decently for gigs or get treated as professionals by venue owners.
Professional means just that. It also means more than, "I do this full time" - it's your attitude towards your business. Love him or hate him, Gene Symmons makes some very good business points & he has a particular disdain for comments like, "It's all about the music, money's not important". No-one beyond the average clubber wants to hear music played with no passion, no soul and no meaning. Your message may be more important to you than the money, but be honest - you can't live on charity and good intentions. Those won't pay for petrol, strings or rent.
Which means you have to look at how you're doing things, whether pro or part-timer. Keira's points on dress codes, stage setup and times are very, very pertinent. I'll be honest enough to own up to not having been the best on timing (setup and soundcheck that is, but not missing the start time).
If music is your profession then you need to be professional about it, even if you're into a RATM anti-establishment vibe. And I think that this is where many of us do all of us disservice, especially in the white rocker brigade singemonkey mentioned. You see far too many rock genre bands, especially the younger ones (and we've all been there - be honest), who've bought into the rock n roll lifestyle but haven't earned their stripes to explain/justify their behaviour.
Banditman
Oops, hit POST.
The most irritating local gig I went to a few years back involved exactly this. Decent band, won some good competitions, resting on their laurels. If your name is something like Slash and you're so under the weather that you can't remember what you're doing, it's not entirely unexpected. Heck I'll give you a little leeway for the hardcore touring and lifestyle. If you're a local band without the record deals and back catalogue, then I expect you to do your job. Not forget lyrics because you're so p***sed that you're falling over while swearing at friends in the crowd.
Yes it feels cool wielding a guitar, having a crowd follow you and so on, but you still have a job to do which is entertain people to the best of your ability. If you couple an unprofessional attitude with playing for peanuts to get on stage, it will only reflect negatively on every other musician.
Generalised stereotypes aren't fair, but they exist whether you like it or not.
Which comes then to the hot potato of unionising. I worked as a motorcycle courier in London for several years. That's a high-risk profession with some real rebel characters in it. Riders regularly get a lot of tripe from bosses (stealth taxes, low pay etc. despite being the medium by which said bosses' companies work). There's been steady talk since the '80s about unionising, which would be a good idea. Long hours, very high risks (at one point, it was one of the 5 most dangerous jobs in the UK - may still be. I came off or was knocked off about 11 times in two years). It's also - and I think this is a key point - the kind of profession where union action would put a massive spoke in the companies' wheels. But still no union, and that's because the struggle is this:
Getting everyone on-board. Striking's not effective if you have no united front. One of the biggest problems with musicians/artisitic characters is ego. Who's the boss? Who gets to choose the rules and enforce them? Who's the band leader? Throw in the fact that pros will band together, but there'd be a lot of part-timers who'd cross the picket line and not care (because they don't depend on it for a living). Consider also that people get upset when petrol pump attendants strike (their cars don't work - big inconvenience), factory workers strike, and municipal workers don't clean streets.
Sadly - and I say this as a man who loves music and the arts - they just aren't valued enough to get public support. Most venue owners would take the view of, "You're on strike? No problem, I'll get a DJ."
[deleted]
- they just aren't valued enough to get public support.
hahahahahahahaha, that's pretty much the point!!! And with regards to not going to work drunk and being appropriately dressed...that's pretty standard for any job, just saying.
Sorry, that came across as a bit harsh. I guess if people don't really realise that music actually does involve them, that they're also a part of it, then they won't see the value of it.
Banditman
Viccy wrote:
- they just aren't valued enough to get public support.
hahahahahahahaha, that's pretty much the point!!! And with regards to not going to work drunk and being appropriately dressed...that's pretty standard for any job, just saying.
Sorry, that came across as a bit harsh. I guess if people don't really realise that music actually does involve them, that they're also a part of it, then they won't see the value of it.
Harsh? Not in the slightest. Bang on more like.
refuogee
I think unionising would be awesome.
I think it could also work on a tier like full time vs part timers. I think if something was organised and people made aware there would be signing up especially if bands knew that it would benefit them.
We could also get education institutions involved so that all facets of the industry were made aware and complicit.
Ie sound guys would not book a gig for a band/ promoter if they were not registered with the union etc etc.
From the venue side they could also be guaranteed to pay people maybe based on membership or something, so kids down the block start a band, apply for union membership which states they have only been around for X amount of months and based on that they should be guaranteed a minimum payment amount of X or bar tab = to X amount.
Based on that there could be 'open mic' nights but for bands that have been union members for a short time for instance to grow the pool of talent.
It could also be a good way of promotion because as a performer you would have to have some kind of profile based on genre etc and if people were looking for a 'swing band' to play a gig or were looking for similar sounding bands to play with in CT perhaps they could approach the union website for instance and hook it up through that instead of "Oh I know a few dudes in CT, I think I can organise a tour"
The thing is it would take a lot to manage this sort of thing. People would have to put in time to educate people, to put the databases together etc etc. Where would people even start?
Such an awesome idea and in reality sure it probably won't happen and that could be more due to the fact that in SA music is an afterthought to most people/ govt etc but still we can dream.
Arno-West
......a few posts have mentioned the "bar tab"-issue that must be negotiated or at least trynegotiate/specified when discussing fee and conditions with the person who wants to book the artist/band. Personally, I think it's pretty pathetic if bands/artists get upset when there is no bar tab. I also think it's pretty stupid to even bring the bar-tab issue into the discussions from the band's/artist's side. I am a pro-musician. I have been for 25 years. I couldn't care less about bar tabs included in the deal. If I want a drink, I'll pay for it. Would a doctor/advocate/accountant or any other professional person specify that they want free booze included whilst performing their services?
Do you really want to get known as "Oh yes, him......I know him. He plays for a pizza and a 6-pack." Huh?
Lastly, a free bar-tab doesn't pay the rent. I'd rather have the money and decide whether I want to booze it all out or not myself.
So, a word of advice, if you want to be taken seriously as a working artist/musician, f**ck the bar-tab.
PeteM
Arno West wrote:
So, a word of advice, if you want to be taken seriously as a working artist/musician, f**ck the bar-tab.
+1
refuogee
Loud and clear I guess I meant it more for some kind of equivalent rate.
People have an issue with part timers ruining things for the pro-musicians in terms of charging etc and what I meant by that was some kind of guide. "You've been gigging for 2 months, you fall into bracket X, you can charge up to R500 which if you are happy to have in the form of a bar tab then so be it"
Not everyone is trying to make a living off money or need to but those people would still have to be part of the union and respect the union rules etc so this would still be something that comes up BUT we're nitpicking who cares if its cash money or hookers coupons the fact is that is not the issue at this point.
AlanRatcliffe
Arno West wrote:
So, a word of advice, if you want to be taken seriously as a working artist/musician, f**ck the bar-tab.
+1.
As to the union thing... I've been saying that for years. Sadly the truth is every time someone tries to start up a union (every couple of years) they discover that working with musicians is generally like herding cats or nailing jelly to the wall. They are also a tight-fisted bunch when it comes to paying dues (like many venue owners, they don't think the service provided should cost much). ?
Banditman
Arno West wrote:
Lastly, a free bar-tab doesn't pay the rent. I'd rather have the money and decide whether I want to booze it all out or not myself.
So, a word of advice, if you want to be taken seriously as a working artist/musician, f**ck the bar-tab.
Amen to that. And to your comment Alan. That was basically the same problem with the bike couriers - herding cats. :?
refuogee
Yeah I wonder if we could approach sociology units within a university to possibly do this as research or something because if all stakeholders could be shown the benefit of such a union then there would more than likely be buy in.
chris77
I agree that nobody should be exploited and that where income is generated by a performance the performer should be fairly compensated for his/her contribution. But musos have to be realistic in their expectations as well. Entertainment is a luxury and not an essential service, so the leverage that an entertainment union might have when negotiating for their members is not nearly in the same league as what a labour union would have with employers. Any negotiations entered into will be from a position of weakness and not strength.
It might be worth it for the owner of a venue to get a good professional band to perform and pay them a fair fee because he knows that it will be worth it in takings on the night as well as promotion for his venue. But what motivation does he have to pay for a young and upcoming act still earning their stripes? Nada. If they are good (or at least entertaining), his patrons will be happy and spread the word that his place is a good choice to see some live music and his business will grow, but if they aren't the opposite is true as well. He carries all the risk while the performer is guaranteed his/her agreed upon renumeration. So if owners are forced by either law or unionization to pay certain fees across the board they will just try and figure out which bookings will profit them most and not bother with the rest. No union can force a venue to hire a performer if the venue does not deem it worth their while and it will lead to a situation where some bands ( mostly the safe bets) will get gigs and the rest will not.
refuogee
Completely agree.
My thinking though is with a union or something of the like is that possibly there could be competitions for opening slots etc or something of the like. Owners wouldn't have to hire no-name band for their big evening slots but would more than likely agree that the first 2 slots could go to lesser bands (with some kind of evaluation process). These lesser bands may have less rights as they are junior so possibly getting no fee or a very minimal fee.
These are all the details that are more than likely never going to come into being so its a waste probably to even discuss it but we can dream!!
AlanRatcliffe
Unionising does not eliminate all non-union bands and venues (but it gives both something to aspire to), so there are still gigs for the part-timers and up and coming bands. In fact, I think little would change on the low end of the scale - bands will still get stiffed and venues will still end up with bands that drink their fee.
The biggest/best employers and musos (hotels, resorts, cruise lines, SABC, etc.) are already operating in a responsible way (on the whole) anyway. Where the real benefits come in for union members are with the power of being a large group, able to negotiate good rates on medical and insurance, etc.
A big thing a union could shoot for is fixing the mechanical rights in advertising. No more one-time payments, but the option of royalties. SA is far behind the world on this and a lot of composers have been screwed.
