Klarinet Archive - Posting 000617.txt from 1998/02

From: Roger Garrett <rgarrett@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: "Professional" vs. "amateur"
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 1998 11:40:37 -0500

I will ammend the wording to my previous post below to read:

"Professional status is not deterined by schooling, degrees, titles, etc.
It is often, but not always limited to, determined by your association
with:"

Thanks for the information regarding Arizona......there may be other
states in the same predicament or choose to remain non-union. To those
who may not understand the advantages and disadvantages of a strong union,
a few include (but are not limited to):

1. Protection of abuse from management or politically motivated
conductors/administrators.
2. Fair wages that often include recording fees and/or overtime
clauses.
3. Benefits such as medical, dental, etc.

Please believe me when I say that musicians unions are not absolutely
necessary, and in some cases are problematic, to a professional status.
However - my experiences have led me to believe that, from a personal
status, it is better to be associated with one that to not be.

Roger Garrett

> On Sun, 15 Feb 1998, Roger Garrett wrote:
>
> > Professional status is not determined by schooling, degrees, titles, etc.
> > It is determined by your association with:
> >
> > 1. A Musician's Union
> > 2. Your contract(s) with various employers
> > 3. Your income
> > 4. Your known playing status/position in the performance world
> >
> <Snip>
>
> > your professionality.......if you are not a member of a musician's union,
> > you are not considered a professional musician.
> >
> > Roger Garrett
> > IWU
> >
> >
>
> Hold it right there, Roger! Arizona, for one, is a non-union state -- I
> am not a member of the union because 1) I don't have to be, 2) the local
> union does very little in terms of serving its constituent musicians (now
> whether that's the chicken or the egg, I can't say) and 3) I don't feel
> that I should have to pay a portion of my performing income to a local
> organization that does nothing for me. If I lived somewhere else, I would
> probably feel differently, or perhaps would be required to join the union
> in order to get a contract, but that's not the case here. I do subscribe
> to the AFM newspaper as a non-member.
>
> Our Opera contracts are drawn up using standard national union rates and
> language, and considering we are "small potatoes" in the grand scheme of
> things, are kept pretty simple. We just got a new contract for
> '97-98/'98-99 retroactive to October which gave us a 5% per-service raise
> and a new meal per diem for the out-of-town run. (The reason we were
> without a contract until now: the local union was given an opportunity to
> counter-offer and never bothered to submit one! After 6 months, their
> time ran out.)
>
> Just to clarify that, in Arizona at least, one is not required to join the
> union in order to be considered a "professional".
>
> Jacqueline Eastwood
> University of Arizona/Arizona Opera Orchestra
> eastwooj@-----.edu
>
>