at what cost?

The Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra is back to work, opening this weekend with old stand-by's Bolero, and La Mer and 20th century guru Olivier Messiaen's Poemes pour Mi.

Full details of the contract aren't out, but here's some of the breakdown from the press release:

• Graduated 5 year plan
• Pay drops initially 32% (!!!!) to a base wage of $53,000, rising up to $70,000 (10% pay cut) by year 5
• first 2 seasons will have 8 less weeks (37-38 weeks). After that, 38-42 weeks will be scheduled. this is down from the 45.5 weeks scheduled before
• 74 full time musicians, no layoffs (original offer had 5 involuntary layoffs)
• Benefits are kept and most pension benefits (no specifics)

The lack of specifics and pension benefits (what is "most?") makes it hard to figure this out.

Considering the original proposal from the symphony society, and their amended October proposal (side by side in the symphony society's press release) it doesn't look terrible. The society really low-balled to begin with, and forced the lockout. And there's one tid-bit tucked in the "joint" press-release that irked me 

"As a key ingredient to the success of a five-year contract, the ISO and musicians agreed to a 

short-term contract in order to put the musicians back to work immediately and to permit the 

$5 million in funding from new donors to be secured"

When I first read this, I thought- "Shit, people were donating, to the musicians, and it can't be used till the contract is signed." Then I remembered something from an earlier press release from the musicians. Drop down to the bottom:

"The termination clause proposed by the Society would be triggered if it could not raise $5 

million by March 31, 2013 in donations from donors who had not made any contributions to the 

Society or its related Foundation during the last two years."

Termination clause? $5 million new donations? OH, that's what the press release meant!

That they can now try and get $5 million in new donations by March 2013, or else they can renegotiate the last 2 years of the contract!

SO, if the management doesn't do it's job--the musicians have proven they aren't the problem with their benefit concerts playing to packed houses with standing ovations--then management gets a do over. All while they still don't have a CEO, development director, or marketing director? So, it looks like this will repeat itself in a few years.

It's a rough contract, but the musicians did well to keep benefits and pension. They gave the salary figure, so I'm guessing the musicians already decided that it was an acceptable sacrifice.

But 32%? Imagine if you lost 32% of your salary, right now. If I did, I'd be in trouble. I don't make much as it is, but if I lose almost 1/3 of my net salary, well...let's just say eating would be difficult.

At what cost is the symphony back in business? Honestly, I don't think the base pay is far off from what I think it should be, but it's the manner in which it was achieved that worries me. An instant drop off and a slow climb, with a possibility of losing all this work in a few years if someone else doesn't do their job. The musicians did what they needed to, but was it too much?

What would you do in that situation, especially considering the lay of the land in classical music these days? Is the cost too high, the initial jump too perilous?

What would you sacrifice to continue to have your art?

another one bites the dust...

When last I wrote about all the strikes, I mentioned Minnesota was up next on the chopping block. And here they are, locked out. They face a similar dilemma as what struck Detroit- not just normal costs, but they started a costly building process, got donations to cover it, but many are calling into question if they should have done a fierce campaign for that over building up their general fund. I don't have enough info to make a decision, but generally I feel like building any operating funds is more important, unless the building is in really bad shape.

And it looks like Atlanta took a deal. from the intro reading, it looks bad. It looks like musicians took a 16.5% pay cut from the base starting salary. What that means for veteran players, i don't know. And top management brass, who were making in excess of $300,000, took roughly a 6% decrease (that's 6% total, not from each person, so however that works out). They also decided to leave vacant posts vacant, not give backpay, and make no alterations to anyone else's pay. They also cut 10 weeks from the season, cut 5 full time positions, and require payment into benefits (which means the pay cut is, in reality, more than 16.5%, depending on how much they pay in). Yep, good deal. Here are details from the management press release

Atlanta musicians gave in too early. But there isn't a safety net for musicians. Management across the country is betting, hoping, that musicians will cave. And it looks like they are.

These are major problems- everything facing the orchestras effects all classical musicians. Hell, it effects all musicians. These fights decide what people feel the arts are worth, as a society.

Whether or not I am an orchestral musician doesn't matter. Whether or not I'll ever WRITE for orchestra doesn't matter. My opinion of the orchestra being little more than museum matters slightly, since I view it as one of the issues they face. But even that doesn't matter as far as being a reason to not look at the problem. It's something we need, as a society of musicians, classical, pop, or jazz, have to examine.

And that's the issue.

Since these lockouts have begun, I've never heard anyone say anything in my music course.

The teacher hasn't said anything.

When i brought it up to some students, they had no idea any orchestra was locked out. How can you, as a violinist getting a doctorate, actively looking for audition opportunities, not know?

I'm seeing the Ivory tower acutely these days- little music students locking themselves in their practice rooms, in their studios, in their classrooms, blind to the world changing around them.

We need to talk about it, keep talking about it, everyone in this wide society in music. We need to talk about why these groups are having the financial problems- identify the problems, see what their answers are, analyze their answers and come up with our own. Because while there are unique challenges to groups that large, some of the issues translate to a single person, just trying to make a name for himself.