 The Clarinet BBoard
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2005-09-29 12:18
New Jersey Symphony's New Contract
"The musicians of the cash-strapped New Jersey Symphony Orchestra have taken a 10 percent pay cut in a new contract. ... The pay reduction is the result of shrinking the season to 32 weeks from 36, the orchestra said, a cost-cutting measure that brings the base salary to $40,157. ... The musicians ratified the one-year contract on Monday. ... The orchestra opens its season under a new music director, Neeme Jarvi, tomorrow at the State Theater in New Brunswick."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/28/arts/28arts.html
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msloss
Date: 2005-09-29 12:25
Add that to the dust-up at Radio City and not a happy season in Mudville.
Note that the NJSO is being quiet about why they are cash-strapped. Now that Axelrod debacle wouldn't happen to have anything to do with it...
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-09-29 12:35
msloss wrote:
> Note that the NJSO is being quiet about why they are
> cash-strapped. Now that Axelrod debacle wouldn't happen to have
> anything to do with it...
So I'm guessing they won't be interested in buying my highly appraised and rare collection of vintage Buffet clarinets? ![[wink]](http://test.woodwind.org/clarinet/BBoard/smileys/smilie3.gif) ...GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2005-09-29 12:51
"Add that to the dust-up at Radio City"
huh?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2005-09-29 13:28
The NJSO still performs regularly at NJPAC.
I'm playing Eb clarinet solo on BOLERO with them on October 7th & 9th. at NJPAC.
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
Post Edited (2005-09-29 13:29)
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msloss
Date: 2005-09-29 14:08
Ed --
The buzz is Local 802 is working to preserve the overtime compensation arrangements for the pit orchestra for the Radio City christmas show. They put in some serious hours to say the least. No surprise management (Cablevision) would like to cut back on that, and has leveled the usual threats about going to tape, etc. Hopefully the show is too iconic for them to be able to get away with screwing the musicians and messing up their formula for success. I imagine JJM would have more intimate knowledge of the proceedings.
MS
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2005-09-29 15:44
msloss writes:
"The buzz is Local 802 is working to preserve the overtime compensation arrangements for the pit orchestra for the Radio City christmas show... I imagine JJM would have more intimate knowledge of the proceedings."
Unfortunately I have no first hand knowledge of the current status of negotiations, but Local 802 negotiating officials are on the case, along with the Radio City orchestra committee, and they are ironing out the problems.
This is another case of showing some of the younger players, how important it is to be in a Local of the AFM. We need protections and solidarity in times of conflict, the Union can us help in times of need.
BTW:
Speaking of need, the NYC Broadway musical community has raised and sent over $300,000 to the Hurricane Relief efforts in the South.
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Ed
Date: 2005-09-29 15:54
Thanks for the info. I heard rumor some time ago of this kind of stuff coming down the pike. I have a friend and colleague who is in the Radio City orchestra. I think he is still on the musicians committee. I will be seeing him this week at some rehearsals and gigs and will ask him about details.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Spiegelthal ★2017
Date: 2005-09-29 17:18
I find it an ironic juxtaposition to read this thread just after the new one about the beneficial effects of music on cardiac health......
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Grabnerwg
Date: 2005-09-29 21:43
I hate to be a pessimist, but I believe that our national economy is going to continue to go into a nose dive. I DO NOT want to get into a political discussion, [ you might say that, but the reality is that you would have started a political discussion with your comments, and I've yet to see one stay civil ... so a small portion of this post has been deleted. Mark C.]
As the economy gets tighter and tighter, we will see less and less money for the arts. Many corporations are now giving grants to arts organizations oly if they have significant communtiy outreach - or have stopped arts giving at all. I know, I have been on the board of two different arts organizations in the last few years.
When we have less money for the arts, Symphony Orchestras will have to cut services in order to balance the budget. they will have little choice, it's simply a financial fact of life.
Hold on to your hats...its going to be a rocky next few years......
Walter Grabner
www.clarinetxpress.com
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: sfalexi
Date: 2005-09-30 00:13
Incidentally, is it just in the US that the arts seem to be slowly disappearing? Is classical music/theatre/etc. flourishing more than ever in countries OTHER than my own, or does it seem to be a world-wide decline in interest?
Alexi
US Army Japan Band
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-09-30 01:52
The 20 weeks they get off - would wonder if they get unemployment during those weeks...........?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: D Dow
Date: 2005-09-30 03:06
Dear JJ and all
Without the risk of sounding sarcastic it may be a very long time until they(the NJ orchestra) get the percent they gave in pay returned into their contracta.
I know of several orchestras who have done this... and taking years of collective bargaining before the scale they were at was returned to normal.
Sadly enought I also see the Arts in general being the next area to suffer with the way the Global economy is working...I am very serious in adding that it is rare that managements will return to the rates that orchestras asked for previously.
David Dow
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-09-30 03:11
D Dow wrote:
> Dear JJ and all
>
> Without the risk of sounding sarcastic it may be a very long
> time until they(the NJ orchestra) get the percent they gave in
> pay returned into their contract.
No big deal. Most of us in the IT world have taken 15-20% cuts in pay already - those lucky enough to still have jobs, that is.
Times are tough all over.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Katrina
Date: 2005-09-30 03:18
I wouldn't complain about a $40K yearly salary. Not at all...
I'd complain if I couldn't get a job with health insurance (at least partially employer-funded) though.
Katrina
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-09-30 09:12
I wouldn't complain about a $40K yearly salary. Not at all...
I'd complain if I couldn't get a job with health insurance (at least partially employer-funded) though.
-------------------------------------------------------
In that area it's nothing. Certainly not enough to raise a family on, send to college, etc (that's practically poverty level).
Would need to supplement that income big time.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2005-09-30 14:15
Playing under Jarvi should be worth the cut....
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: msloss
Date: 2005-09-30 15:26
I don't agree. That's like saying "I have a fabulous visionary boss, and I'm thrilled to take a 20% hit in pay just to work under him." These guys are still professionals, and just because they are having a terrific time artistically doesn't mean they don't have an expectation and a right to be fully compensated for their services.
I think job satisfaction only carries the discussion so far and then we are back to the economics of it. As with the airlines, autos, etc. labor is taking brutal cuts to keep working. Same thing with the NJSO. Doesn't mean they have to be happy about it.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BobD
Date: 2005-09-30 17:00
"labor is taking brutal cuts to keep working."
No argument from me on that count. I guess what I meant was that playing under Jarvi would be a worthwhile experience.
Bob Draznik
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2005-09-30 18:12
It seems to me that what they have actually lost is 4 weeks of guaranteed work (not necessarily a trivial thing to lose, BTW). Unless they are expected to continue to rehearse during those four weeks (which I doubt they are), however, they have traded a 10% reduction in salary for an 11.1% increase in uncommitted time. Whether they suffer economic loss, then, depends on what they are able to do (e.g., freelancing, driving cabs, painting houses) during those 4 weeks. Depending on their options, a few might have even welcomed the trade.
David B. wrote: "would need to supplement that income big time."
Of course they would. They have a job that requires them to be at their employer's about 20 hours per week, 8 months per year. That's higher pay and far fewer hours than most schoolteachers get and, viewed as a wage instead of a salary, works out to around $60/hr (and, remember, that's the minimum). IMO, it's unreasonable to compare this job to a full-time, year-round job. A better way to view this job is, again IMO, as a stepping-stone to a position in a full-time orchestra or the center of a career that includes teaching, freelance playing, composing, etc. A single person just starting out, sharing an apartment with two or three roommates can live OK, gain experience, have time for intensive practice and likely freedom to travel for auditions. A more experienced musician (or a rookie for that matter) has plenty of opportunities in the area to supplement the income.
Out of curiosity, I went to the orchestra's website and looked up the clarinetists. Both are obviously highly talented, highly qualified musicians and both do indeed supplement their incomes. The principal teaches privately and is on the faculties of Princeton University and William Paterson University. The second/Eb/Acting Assistant Principal is on the faculty of the New Jersey Conservatory, Drew Summer Music, Rutgers University, and William Paterson University. Both also have impressive lists of performances outside the NJSO. (See http://www.njsymphony.org/aboutus/musiciansstaff/m_musicians.htm if you are interested in more detail.)
Now granted, "being on the faculty" could simply mean they go out to the campus one day a week to teach a couple of students and some of the performances may predate their joining the NJSO but I don't think either is starving and I suspect alot of musicians would consider it a pretty good gig.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-09-30 19:40
No stepping stone, it's a final resting place for many of the players there. And that orchestra got a grant a couple of years back of instruments (string) which were HUGE bucks.
I don't remember the details, but it was major sym impressive.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: GBK
Date: 2005-09-30 21:14
DavidBlumberg wrote:
> And that orchestra got a grant a couple of years
> back of instruments (string) which were HUGE bucks.
>
> I don't remember the details, but it was major sym impressive.
I don't think the orchestra has yet felt the final fall out from the Axelrod deal.
It might not be pretty ....GBK
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: BlockEyeDan
Date: 2005-10-01 03:07
Can you enlighten me, as well as all others, who are unfamiliar with "axelrod" and other aspects of the NJSO's current situation?
Thanks,
Dan
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-10-01 03:15
BlockEyeDan wrote:
> Can you enlighten me, as well as all others, who are unfamiliar
> with "axelrod" and other aspects of the NJSO's current
> situation?
Google is your friend ...
Enter
NJSO Axelrod
as search terms.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Chris Hill
Date: 2005-10-01 04:40
Mr. Kissinger,
They may rehearse and perform only 20 hours per week, but you have to count their preparation time, as you would for a college professor, or any job that requires prep time. That said, I agree with you that it is a pretty good job.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-10-01 15:12
Chris Hill wrote:
> They may rehearse and perform only 20 hours per week, but you
> have to count their preparation time, as you would for a
> college professor, or any job that requires prep time.
All jobs I've ever had require "prep time" (or time off the books) if you wanted to advance at all.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: allencole
Date: 2005-10-01 15:42
As several people have pointed out, pay cuts have hit in a number of areas, as have layoffs and outright firings. I would rather have a pay cut accompanied by less work time, than a pay cut that maintains the same amount of work time.
Things might be better in Europe, but only for certain people and at great collective expense. I wouldn't want to live under the burdens and restrctions on the average person that put so much icing on such a small cake.
The solution to our orchestral woes is very simple, even if difficult. Attendance! As I see it, there are three things we can do:
1 - Attend more orchestral performances and invite friends as well
2 - Promote in the schools the idea of field trips to see these groups. Each child should go once or twice during elementary school. (and bear in mind, GOING TO the concert has way more effect on the kids than having the concert come to your school)
3 - Work to have school music programs address classical music to an increased degree. My middle school played Tchaikovsky, Mussorsgky [sic], Handel, Purcell, & Bach. There should still be room for this even with all of the made-for-band stuff that has drowned it out in the last 30 years.
It is absolutely nuts that kids who spend seven years playing quasi-classical music develop no taste either for it or for the real thing.
Get these fixes in and government/corporate support will be much less of an issue.
Allen Cole
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-10-01 20:40
It's like any performer or athlete.
You have to put in lots of time beyond the group practice or event.
But of course we don't get paid like athletes do.......
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-10-01 20:48
DavidBlumberg wrote:
> It's like any performer or athlete.
It's like any white-collar worker; you always put in time beyond what your paysheet says, and sometimes work 2 or 3 jobs.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2005-10-01 21:46
Mark Charette wrote:
> DavidBlumberg wrote:
>
> > It's like any performer or athlete.
>
> It's like any white-collar worker; you always put in time
> beyond what your paysheet says, and sometimes work 2 or 3 jobs.
The typical evolving model for Knowledge Workers -- professionals who primarily charge for services based on a high level of achievement in a field such as medicine, art, information technology, law, etc. -- is that several part time jobs (often as independent contractors or consultants) are stitched together into a the equivalent of a 40 hour week or MORE for many highly trained individuals. In virtually none of these fields are individuals paid for practice or increasing knowledge development.
[As context, would you want to pay your computer consultant for the time that he spends looking up new Microsoft software bugs in a manual or your surgeon for the time she spends each year learning about new techniques or your CPA for the time he spent in a Saturday seminar learning about changes in the tax code that affect your tax return.]
More and more, highly trained professionals stitch together several "jobs" or large clients who buy large amounts of time at a lower rate with highly compensated small jobs. Within this context, think of the contract with the NJSO as being the equivalent of having 640 billable hours guaranteed at a rate of about $60/hour. For many types of skilled consulting this would be considered a great rate and base. And, then given that the typical year consists of 1920 or more billable hours, one could accept in the remaining open hours small jobs (perhaps a recording job or a concert or a house painting job) that had higher hourly rates of compensation. Were one just able to fill the remaining hours of the year at an average rate of that paid by the NJSO, there would be an annual salary of more than $100,000. On could, of course, make far more than this if highly compensated jobs can be located or the individual chooses to work more than an average of 40 hours per week, again not an unreasonable assumption for American knowledge workers in 2005.
$100,000 annually is a great income level in the U.S. in 2005 for individuals who have spent years getting through a Ph.D. program, medical school, law school, or to the highest levels of a performance career. But, that is what you get paid when you stitch together several sources of income.
And, consider the following. The folks who tend to support the arts in the U.S. tend to the Knowledge Workers. Most do not see orchestral performers as deserving to be paid at a much higher level, using different criteria, than they are.
[Ok, I know that next somebody is going to say it is unfair that MLB or NBA or NFL players get paid obscene annual salaries of up to $10,000,000. The simple reality is that they get paid so much because the overall general public is willing to pay obscene amounts for tickets to athletic performances in these leagues, and also base their purchasing decisions for soft drinks, beer, cars, clothes, snack foods, and other items on the commercials they see on television during these performances. It is "obscene" compensation to some on a theoretical level, but is also the way our society works. And, people in our society will keep paying more for athletic tickets, beer, potato chips, athletic shoes, etc., in order to keep the best players on their local teams happy and winning.]
At any rate, the model of stitching together several different sources of income for Knowledge Workers is one that works well in the consulting firm in which I am the managing partner and majority owner. The model should also work well for highly accomplished musicians.
George
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-10-01 21:58
"Within this context, think of the contract with
the NJSO as being the equivalent of having 640 billable hours guaranteed
at a rate of about $60/hour. For many types of skilled consulting this
would be considered a great rate and base."
-------------------------------------
For a skilled consultant that would be almost slave wages. They often range from $60 to over $300 an hour.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-10-01 22:14
DavidBlumberg wrote:
> For a skilled consultant that would be almost slave wages. They
> often range from $60 to over $300 an hour.
Hello Dave.
I have to admit you know diddly-squat about prevailing wages in the information sector. I've worked in that sector for 25 years now and know the prevaling rates - worldwide. What a company bills and what a worker receives is a difference of billing rate, burdened costs, and profit.
George is accurate. You aren't.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-10-01 22:29
Ok, those were just the wages of my 2 wifes who are also in that sector.
Both were over $150 hr. Not that they made that, but their work sure charged the companies they did work with that.
And Lawyers, psychologists also start at about $150 hr nowadays here.
So I do speak with a little bit of experience, but not as much as yours.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Mark Charette
Date: 2005-10-01 23:15
DavidBlumberg wrote:
> Ok, those were just the wages of my 2 wifes who are also in
> that sector.
>
> Both were over $150 hr. Not that they made that, but their
> work sure charged the companies they did work with that.
Wages and billing rates are two separate entities. "Ok, those were just the wages of my 2 wifes [sic]" "Both were over $150 hr. Not that they made that ..."
Either wages or rates, not both. You've mixed them. Read Computerworld or any similar rag for wage info.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2005-10-02 01:59
Dave,
I concede from all of your posts that you are an expert on clarinet performance and clarinet technical issues at a level that is light years above my current expertise or any level that I could ever hope (in my wildest fantasies) to attain.
Having owned a succcessful consulting firm for 17 years, I do know a little about billing rates, overhead, employer taxes, malpractice insurance, healthcare insurance, office space costs, electricity bills, mileage reimbursement, and the difference between what a consultant's time is billed for and what she or he is paid. I also am very knowledgable about the prevailing average compensation rates for various kinds of professionals including various kinds of physicians and nurses, attorneys, and information technology folks because I need to make sure our employees are fairly and competitively compensated at the same time we bill their time at fair and competitive rates.
It strikes me that if a highy trained Knowledge Worker were to have about one-third of her or his time guaranteed for a salary of about $40,000, then that individual would -- if they worked hard and were smart about how they worked, as opposed to just being smart and working dumb -- could have an income in excess of $100,000 if they were willing to put in the typical work week for a senior Knowledge Worker (in excess of 50-55 hours per week). Given the average salaries in the U.S. for all folks, and the median salaries in other highly-skilled Knowledge Worker professions, this is not a bad annual income by any standard.
The $150/hour rates you are quoting for attorneys and psychologists cannot be multiplied, in most cases by 40 hours/week to yield a weekly salary. About 50% of those billing rates go into overhead. And, most of those individuals do not bill at those rates and do not bill 40 hours per week. I know you know folks who get those rates and get them 40 or more hours per week, but that is NOT the typical professional.
The median salaries for attorneys, psychologists, surgeons, IT professionals of dozens ok kinds, internists, pediatricians, nurses, and other Knowledge Workers are available on various U.S. government web sites. These statistics are compiled from tax and other public records. I think that you will see, that while you can always find a couple of people in any profession who get "outrageous" salaries, the median salaries or the 75th percentile salaries are not in the stratosphere for most of these highly-skilled occupations that require 20 or more years of formal education and in a number of cases, professional licenses that are not simple to maintain.
The Knowledge Worker group is, again, probably the biggest group of folks who buy tickets to orchestras, participate on their boards, and donate funds to sustain these organizations. For this reason, a board of attorneys or physicians or IT professionals is probably not going to recommend paying orchestral salaries that represent higher hourly compensation rates than are earned by other skilled Knowledge Workers with comparable levels of education, in fields where there is high supply of qualified workers for the number of jobs available.
And, BTW, to put this NJSO discussion back in context, how many of the highly skilled (and in most cases very famous) NJSO members -- located as they are in and near Manhattan -- do not put in a lot of time in recording studios, teaching, recording, playing Broadway shows, etc.? It strikes me -- since I believe the posts that are are elsewhere on this Bulletin Board -- that the person who started this thread and plays as a soloist wit the NJSO probably can bill as many hours at relatively high rates as there are hours in the day because he is willing to be creative, combine many revenue streams, and be flexible about the work he will accept.
George
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: John J. Moses
Date: 2005-10-02 02:17
An interesting thread, but we've gotten a bit off course.
George writes:
"And, BTW, to put this NJSO discussion back in context, how many of the highly skilled (and in most cases very famous) NJSO members -- located as they are in and near Manhattan -- do not put in a lot of time in recording studios, teaching, recording, playing Broadway shows, etc.? It strikes me -- since I believe the posts that are are elsewhere on this Bulletin Board -- that the person who started this thread and plays as a soloist wit the NJSO probably can bill as many hours at relatively high rates as there are hours in the day because he is willing to be creative, combine many revenue streams, and be flexible about the work he will accept."
Well, George, you've got it right! That's exactly what I do and have been doing for many years. I'm a bit hesitant to admit my yearly income from all those musical sources, but suffice it to say, I'm living comfortably in a small NJ town, 2 miles from NYC. I try each day to help my students, friends, and colleagues with their studies and careers.
I am very lucky to be able to play the clarinet (and a few other horns), and be very happy with my work. Playing music is a beautiful thing!
JJM
Légère Artist
Clark W. Fobes Artist
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: ghuba
Date: 2005-10-02 03:11
John,
Thanks for weighing back in. The point I have been trying to make -- in part for some of the folks who are younger and starting careers in music or any other Knowledge Worker field -- is that flexibly combining different kinds of related work is currently the way to the top of most fields that require high levels of technical skill and professional judgment. This is as true for consultants in many different knowledge fields as it is for musicians.
George
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: David Lee
Date: 2005-10-02 16:15
There was a recent article in the Seattle Times stating that the Seattle Symphony starting salary was $75,000. I was really surprised. Was that a misprint?
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: DavidBlumberg
Date: 2005-10-02 22:45
Seattle is a very good group. Also I would think that the income in that area is pretty high due to the tech industry.
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
Author: Jack Kissinger
Date: 2005-10-03 03:11
Here's an article from the September 14 Seattle Times that discusses the orchestra's recent contract agreement:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002493402_symp14.html
As David says, the Seattle Symphony is a very good group (not to take anything away from the NJSO but Seattle is organized as a larger operation.) The Seattle Symphony is closer to a year-round orchestra than the NJSO (45 week season vs. 32 weeks) and, from a brief look at their calendar, also appears to have more performances and more different programs each month than the NJSO. That probably translates into more hours of rehearsal each week when the orchestra is in season. I suspect that the hourly rate is still a bit higher.
Seattle has made numerous recordings and appears to have a larger number of regulars (e.g., 3 clarinetists compared to 2 for NJSO). The annual budget for Seattle is around $25 million. The Achilles heel appears to be the endowment (a problem similar to that faced by the St. Louis Symphony) which is only $25 million. Note that, according to the new contract, some future raises are contingent on an increase in the endowment. For comparison purposes, St. Louis was recently successful in *increasing* its endowment by something over $80 million -- a $40 million challenge grant from a wealthy patron that the orchestra was able to raise sufficient funds to match. Even so, I believe St. Louis' endowment is small compared to Chicago, NY Phil., Philadelphia, Boston and, probably, Cleveland.
Best regards,
jnk
|
|
Reply To Message
|
|
The Clarinet Pages
|
 |
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=small}
