ASO locked out musicians

September 5, 2012 at 11:41 AM · "According to Romanstein, the average compensation of the musicians is $131,000, including free health and dental coverage, free instrument insurance, pension benefits and eight weeks of paid vacation."

That seems comparable to what full professors are getting in STEM fields. One difference is that a STEM professor who wants to stay afloat in his field has to work through the summer on research whether (s)he can pay him/herself on an external grant or not. And the devil is in the details -- what are the pension benefits, what is the distribution of incomes, etc.

What's not clear from the article is among how many people the proposed $2 million in salary cuts would be distributed. What does $131,000 become after the cuts? If it's 100 people, then on average they lose $20,000 per year. That's a significant cut. But $111,000 is still better than welfare, and it's significantly more than my university pays me.

These situations are never simple.

September 5, 2012 at 04:08 PM · One thing I would like to see is the relative musician/management expense relative to a decade ago; if management is taking cuts, are they cuts following a decade of significant increase, or has it been fairly in pace with musician expense?

In some industries, while trimming expenses, management layers and cost actually increase, reducing the benefit of the offset.

September 5, 2012 at 04:20 PM · for further reading:

http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2012/09/atlanta-musicians-romanstein-is-misrepresenting-the-figures.html

http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2012/09/atlantas-war-of-words-lockout-king-accuses-musicians-of-untruth.html

and

http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2012/09/breaking-atlanta-locks-out-its-musicians.html

I personally find the cuts in management salary underwhelming, especially given their performance. I have similar feelings about the SPCO, who's administration to musician ratio is more than 1:1. ?? Really? Is that amount of admin. necessary? I think not.

September 5, 2012 at 05:47 PM · Drew McManus has statements from both sides posted on his blog.

I don't know what to think except it seems that the current model of how symphony orchestras are run needs to change.

September 6, 2012 at 02:12 AM · Well everyone knows that management salaries are superfluous. :)

September 6, 2012 at 03:45 AM · Are there any orchestra musicians with MBA degrees? I see the recent trend as an opportunity for musicians to take over the barnyard, and start the process of musician-owned symphonies. Look at the advantages:

-The management would have a better empathy for the musicians

-The musicians would feel more collegial with the management

-The management model could more easily include a shared governance process, reducing the overhead requirements for management

-The integration could allow a richer career path possibility to both the management and the players (more overlap and easier transition)

September 9, 2012 at 08:35 AM · I am a bit suspicious of a musician run symphony. While they may address the needs of the musicians better, my experience has been a much politicized orchestra full of power struggles. Also, I don't find most musicians to be qualified to run a multi-million dollar business. Most have advanced degrees in music performance, not business.

What musicians in a symphony experiencing fiscal problems don't seem to realize is, they can take a pay cut and keep working or they can put the orchestra out of business. In the cities that have folded orchestras under similar circumstances, the orchestra that rises from the ashes provides pay that is about 20-30% of what the original orchestra paid and the mass exodus of the best musicians to other major orchestras causes the quality to drop dramatically. Prime example: the Florida Symphony Orchestra replaced by the Orlando Philharmonic.

Ya know, those Braniff pilots struck for more pay despite knowing the airline would be out of business. Pay cut vs. No Job. Don't be stupid like the pilots.

September 10, 2012 at 03:24 AM · Musician run orchestras can work. It's really analogous to engineers running the entire company, just look at Google's top management. For a musician run orchestra to work, there has to be training internally to develop skills in management.

In response to Jerry's comments, I'm pretty sure musicians know exactly what's happening; they are on the front lines with a cloud of uncertainty hanging over their shoulders and are expected to do their job at a very high standard; this is true in any field today. Management and musicians need to work with one another in order to be successful. I don't know the entire story of why the Florida Philharmonic folded. I only know snippets based on wiki but apparently there seemed to have been a disconnect between management and the orchestra members along with competing interests with the Cleveland orchestra. In the end, not only musician jobs were lost but also management jobs as well. It's a no-win situation. I only did a 10 second Google search so correct me if I am wrong. And lastly, I really hope you don't say such things to the pilot of your aircraft. The last thing I want is a disgruntled pilot who is complaining about pay to the co-pilot and steward/stewardess and not paying enough attention to operating the plane. My life is far more important than that; pass the costs along to me please! I will gladly pay whatever amount he/she demands.

September 10, 2012 at 06:30 AM · Jerry: it's not necessarily an either/or proposition.

http://www.artsatl.com/2012/09/aso-musicians-woodruff-arts-center-nixed-potential-deal-orchestra-updated/

It appears that the Woodruff Center board was intent on reducing musicians' salaries. When the musicians and the ASO board came up with a plan that would actually save more money but not cut the musicians' salaries as much as the Woodruff Center board wanted, the Woodruff Center board rejected the proposal.

An example to show that this is not necessarily far-fetched: At the state university where I teach, the state legislature cut funding drastically. The university scrambled & juggled, rearranging course offerings and doing I don't know what-all to minimize the impact that the cuts would have on students. (I'm an adjunct faculty member so I wasn't involved in the decision-making.) Turns out the state legislature, or the faction within it that cared about such things, was annoyed because we didn't achieve the cuts by reducing teacher salaries, which is what they really wanted. There will probably be more cuts announced in the coming year, but this time I won't be surprised to see a stipulation that requires pay cuts for teachers.