Posted by Mike Ross on June 16, 2000 at 17:34:55:
In Reply to: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who is he? posted by Jay Bertolet on June 16, 2000 at 16:45:56:
I see two points in this discussion that may be pertinent.
Firstly, I see the issue of pay scales for musicians to be much more of an issue of supply and demand than it is an issue of the ability of an Orchestra to make a profit (although the two may be related). If there were not a generous supply of "adequate" musicians available to meet the desires of the Orchestra's board, there will be downward pressure on the salaries of the professional musicians. This BBS has often discussed the difficulty of winning auditions, and on the competitivness of these auditions - so what happens to all of the unsuccessful auditioners? This would seem to me to be a generous supply of competitive musicians to man the cost cutting Orchestras.
Second, however, the union may have a legitimate complaint, even in a right to work state, if the competing Orchestra is mis-representing itself, its players, or the capabilities of those players. Ultimately in this environment, it should be possible for the union, potentially working with Orchestra boards, to define a differentiation between players who have been hired by being the best (as judged in an open audition) vs. those that are just cheap, and then addressing any mis-representation which may occur.
Having said that, I do think that the music profession does face a fascinating catch 22. On the one hand, in order to have an ample audiance of appreciative fans, we need to actively educate people in music, music appreciation, and at least the basics of playing an instrument in an ensemble. On the other hand, each of those fans is a potential competitor for a job, especially if they would rather play than listen.
By the way, I'm liking this thread, and I do think that this is an issue which needs to be discussed.