# Alternatives to a Composers' Union



## noiseboyuk (Oct 1, 2011)

[EDIT - thread topic amended on Oct 2 2011 to reflect alternatives to a union, since there is a already a sticky in this thread on the basic union subject]

Since this has come up again and does deserve its own thread, so here's its own thread.

I guess the basic notion is that composers are increasingly getting screwed, undercut, and its getting to the point where some people think it's hard to earn a living and can only get worse. The only solution, it is said, is to unionize.

So some opening gambit questions. Who might organize this? How successful might recruitment be? How would the union be recognised by productions? How widespread could it be (geographically and levels / sectors of the industry?) Obviously these questions can have nothing but speculative answers, but as someone who is very sceptical about the whole prospect, perhaps this is a space to knock some ideas around that might make the notion more plausible (if it can be).


----------



## Daryl (Oct 1, 2011)

*Re: A Composers' Union*

Guy, this question really can't be answered, because the answer is radically different according to geography.

Having said that, there is much more chance of a Composers' Union in the UK than there is in the US, because the latter has such stifling union laws that all employers will fight tooth and nail not to have to deal with a Composers' Union.

Considering how little the Musicians' Union does for the majority of musicians in the UK, what do you think the Composers' Union role would be?

D


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 1, 2011)

*Re: A Composers' Union*



Daryl @ Sat Oct 01 said:


> Guy, this question really can't be answered, because the answer is radically different according to geography.
> 
> Having said that, there is much more chance of a Composers' Union in the UK than there is in the US, because the latter has such stifling union laws that all employers will fight tooth and nail not to have to deal with a Composers' Union.
> 
> ...



Quite! I'm personally extremely sceptical that this could work at all. But the subject keeps coming up here, and I was interested enough to try to give it a proper airing and examine the idea a bit more closely. Without the belief that it can happen, it never will.

The other question is... if not a union, then are there other strategies that might be more realistic?


----------



## Daryl (Oct 1, 2011)

*Re: A Composers' Union*

I really don't know how to answer this. Unfortunately we are in a sector that nobody wants to pay for. For example, many parents know that their children download music illegally, but don't really see this as a crime. Therefore, if music should be free, why should anyone have to pay for it.

I think that a union does not solve this. If there was a Union, there would always be Union gigs, which would be paid reasonably, as they are now, and non-Union gigs, which would have small to cr*p budgets, just as there are now. I don't see how a Union changes anything? The only way that could change would be for the broadcasters to agree that they will only broadcast programmes that have union involvement. That's never going to happen.

I think the only answer is that directors and producers will eventually get what they pay for. If there is no budget, the music that they get will be produced on no budget. If they are happy with that, then so be it. I really don't see that there is anything to be done about this. If it means that there is less paid work for composers, then that's the way it is. So some people can't follow their dream. Welcome to life. :wink: 

D


----------



## David Story (Oct 1, 2011)

*Re: A Composers' Union*

Unions succeed in improving working conditions for everyone. They brought you the weekend. Which composers took off in the studio days, when unions were strong legally. And how did you get royalties at all? Union style action.

The teamsters get higher pay and benefits like health insurance, compared to freelance truckers. That matters in the US. SAG actors get better pay and benefits, even on low budget productions. Indie productions sign SAG agreements.

Those terms and more were negotiated in long hard battles that for some unions, required they strike in the face of armed police attacks.

The apathetic posters would be the dead weight in those struggles, or worse, the strike breakers. Soon ostracized for disloyalty to their colleagues. Get spine and ethics guys.

If you think your job is safe or pays based on relationships alone, you haven't seen much yet.

Unions are as helpful as their members are united. If we all stand together for ownership, minimum rates, health insurance, or royalty payments- we can effectively negotiate with media companies. That's how they deal with you.

Even get laws passed that favor our rights. It's happened before, including a recent decision on rights reverting to songwriters in England.

Anyone can find fault, find solutions instead. Respect your colleagues and yourself. Start setting standards for what is fair treatment, and what isn't. Begin in your town with a physical meeting of composers, songwriters and sound designers.


----------



## PMortise (Oct 1, 2011)

*Re: A Composers' Union*



David Story @ Sat Oct 01 said:


> Unions succeed in improving working conditions for everyone. They brought you the weekend. Which composers took off in the studio days, when unions were strong legally. And how did you get royalties at all? Union style action.
> 
> The teamsters get higher pay and benefits like health insurance, compared to freelance truckers. That matters in the US. SAG actors get better pay and benefits, even on low budget productions. Indie productions sign SAG agreements.
> 
> ...


 =o


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 1, 2011)

Nice words, David, but... I'm not trying to be negative but I guess my reason for starting this thread was wanting to test the waters with now anything this big might get started in practice, given the prevailing tide. I've read quite a few posts like this, it all sounds great, but a little bit theoretical perhaps. I'm asking for other people's ideas cos I really don't have any. Where do you begin?


----------



## midphase (Oct 1, 2011)

Guy,

Surely by now you must we aware that for the past 3 years, there has been serious attempt at unionization by Los Angeles area composers (estimated anywhere between 2000-3000 people). There is an informative sticky thread already in place as well.

By far the biggest hurdle to unionization is ourselves. Composers of all calibers are simply afraid to rock the boat enough to get anything done. Everyone is scared to death of being replaced that they will put their concerns aside and take anything that's handed to them.

I have personally discussed the issue of the lowering of our standards with several composers who continue to accept very low paying wages, and in return do a more than adequate job. They look at it as survival, and it's a very difficult conversation to have.

As someone pointed out in a related thread, the main problem is the over saturation of the market with levels of new comers at historical highs and rising, that is compounded with a funky economy pushing all manufacturers to be as efficient as possible. It's a deadly mix impacting most creatives, but ones without unions are even more vulnerable.

One could say that this type of public discussion on a forum like VI Control is helpful. Another step in the right direction would be for schools to teach a modicum of business education before letting composers out into the world.

We can all agree that things are looking pretty grim for most, especially newcomers. Except for a relatively few lucky composers who have been able to position themselves with good TV shows and films,the majority of guys simply can't create a sustainable monetary flow for themselves. Those composers end up having to rely on spouses or families to finance their creative aspirations as they continue to go after low paying project after low paying project hoping that one of them will finally open up that elusive door to the next level of earning.

So we're getting ready to see a mass exodus of composers without financial backing who are forced out into fields such as teaching, or even creating sample libraries for others (a field that is also running the danger of becoming over saturated). 

Wages will have a chance to come back up once the supply has dried up and the demand has risen. Whether this will actually ever happen or not is a guess that I'm clearly not qualified to make.


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 1, 2011)

*Re: A Composers' Union*

If I were in LA and this was taking place I would contact the Teamsters and let them know who you are. Then you donate your free time to organizing, as this will put a feather in your cap and give the Teamsters inside information on where to start protests. That is same word as " Union Organizer. "

If this succeeds you will be in a position to meet all of the people who never returned your emails and phone calls before.
And keep in mind you will now have people who don't know you begging to help them in return for a kickback or favor, and trust me, that is the Union way, regardless of all the " I'm for the working man " speeches, and rhetoric.

I am a long standing member of the Musicians Union here in Las Vegas, and I first joined in 1977 in St.Louis, where the real Unions are located.
I am also a retired AFL-CIO Concrete Laborer.

And in the real world, just like capitalism, you'll have the less successful always being on the out of work list because they suck, or there just isn't enough work. While they are suppose to move up on the work list I can guarantee you that all of the folks working in the Hall, all of the business agents, safety inspectors, etc. Their relatives will always have a gig and not need to be on the out of work list more than a week or so. 
They can come and sign in after each contracted job is over, but they will go and collect unemployment immediately so they can enjoy some time off while collecting cash, then call the Hall when they're ready to work again. They will not be on the list long, that's where the chumps and peasants stay.

And the beauty of that is these poor schmucks all have to pay monthly membership dues and if they fail to do so, they are removed from the list. Once they square up they can be put back on at the bottom again.
But for some reason everybody thinks Unions are so great and care for the little guy. IMHO and my years as a member, they require a much larger percentage of failures than the regular working class gigs unaffiliated with Unions.

Once I became 50 years old I started getting the gravy gigs because I knew everyone who hired people. The Union never got me a job, but they did provide me a great wage, great benefits and a very healthy pension. 

As far as the Musicians Union goes here and in LA, it's sad at best. You get Health Care Group rates but still must pay for it yourself and cannot miss a month for any reason, they dont care.
Burial benefits are all I will get from the Local here in Vegas, and even as a Non Union contractor I still pay montly dues and once a year MAYBE, I get a call about some green sheet job in 110 degree weather playing in a park ampitheater, in some shitty band with shitty charts and no audience......

As much as we would all love to have a composers utopia where everybody gets a gig, it just isnt the way things work in the real world.

But if California ends up having the Soviet Model they strive for by 2020, Hans Zimmer will be spreading his success to all of the more unfortunate composers since in such a society there will be no losers, no winners, just loving brothers and sisters where everyone gets a grammy.......eventually.
Hey Steve Martin just got a Bluegrass Banjo playing award, even if it took decades.......


----------



## nickhmusic (Oct 1, 2011)

midphase @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> One could say that this type of public discussion on a forum like VI Control is helpful.



Yes, it absolutely is - for all concerned. Thanks for your input everyone. o-[][]-o


----------



## midphase (Oct 1, 2011)

"But if California ends up having the Soviet Model they strive for by 2020"

Would you mind clarifying what you mean by this?


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 2, 2011)

midphase @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> Guy,
> 
> Surely by now you must we aware that for the past 3 years, there has been serious attempt at unionization by Los Angeles area composers (estimated anywhere between 2000-3000 people). There is an informative sticky thread already in place as well.



Man alive, do I feel stupid - I simply didn't see it! I think I have a blind spot to stickies... my eyes just scroll down to the first non-sticky topic in each thread for some reason.

So I've just spent half an hour catching up on it all. Bottom line, the very limited bid failed. Personally I can't see it as a realistic possibility in today's climate.

These seem to be the other alternatives I've seen discussed, and one of my own.

1 - "value ourselves". Just don't work for peanuts, full stop. If enough people do this, goes the theory, wages go up.

2. Some kind of voluntary code for productions, a little like the FairTrade concept.

3. Move the fight to royalties, not upfront payment.

And no3 is my own take on it. Here goes the theory - any attempt to unionize is doomed because productions can just opt out, and we're starting from ground zero. Voluntary codes are voluntary, so can and will be ignored. "Valuing ourselves" is terrific, but overall too nebulous a concept to work in practice in the chaotic system of film / tv / game production. However, maybe we're approaching from the wrong end.

There's already mechanisms in place that affect composer's income around the world at all levels - the royalty system. But it seems wildly diverse... if I understand correctly in the US you don't get royalties for adverts, cinema showings etc. Don't know about video games. In the UK you get royalties for pretty much everything, even the radio playing in the local cafe means that cafe pays a small sum per year to the PRS.

This is a system which exists and it works. Why try and build a new one from the ground up that will almost certainly fail, when all that energy and effort could go into improving what we have? Get the Associations to lobby for better rates and broaden the fields which are covered. And move to get legal challenges to the practice of productions forcing composers to sign away part of all of their own writer's rights in order to get the gig. This is basically extortion, and is a fight that could and should be taken up around the world.

Discuss....

[thread title amended]


----------



## Daryl (Oct 2, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> midphase @ Sun Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Guy,
> ...


Guy, that discussion is almost totally irrelevant to those of us in the UK. We don't need "benefits" or any of that nonsense. :wink: 




noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> These seem to be the other alternatives I've seen discussed, and one of my own.
> 
> 1 - "value ourselves". Just don't work for peanuts, full stop. If enough people do this, goes the theory, wages go up.


We can value ourselves, but then the work will just go to those people who are prepared to work for less. The kicker will be how good are these people? I can tell you that there are a lot of very good composers who have no work, and there is no reason to expect that they would take one for the team.




noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> 2. Some kind of voluntary code for productions, a little like the FairTrade concept.


Any company that signs up fo this woud already be treating their team fairly. if they chose not to, they wouldn't sign up for it.




noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> 3. Move the fight to royalties, not upfront payment.
> 
> And no3 is my own take on it. Here goes the theory - any attempt to unionize is doomed because productions can just opt out, and we're starting from ground zero. Voluntary codes are voluntary, so can and will be ignored. "Valuing ourselves" is terrific, but overall too nebulous a concept to work in practice in the chaotic system of film / tv / game production. However, maybe we're approaching from the wrong end.
> 
> ...


I agree about Royalties being the most important thing that should be sorted out first, and it is doable. Furthermore, we already have an organisation, PRS, that is authorised to deal with our music, so they should be upgraded to work for us at the forefront of the Industry. This is where we could help ourselves. If there are certain production companies that won't pay properly, PRS could refuse to allow members to work for them. As PRS is the only organisation in the UK that deals with Royalties, this could work. Of course the work might then just go abroad, but somehow I doubt it.

Thoughts?

D


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 2, 2011)

Daryl @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> I agree about Royalties being the most important thing that should be sorted out first, and it is doable. Furthermore, we already have an organisation, PRS, that is authorised to deal with our music, so they should be upgraded to work for us at the forefront of the Industry. This is where we could help ourselves. If there are certain production companies that won't pay properly, PRS could refuse to allow members to work for them. As PRS is the only organisation in the UK that deals with Royalties, this could work. Of course the work might then just go abroad, but somehow I doubt it.



I think the PRS already do a really good job, and I agree I think there remit could be expanded a little. I guess already they can take a production company to court for non-payment, not sure how that works. But I'd like to see them taking up a few causes, and the racket of production companies forcing composers to sign away their writer's share should be illegal, plain and simple. It would be great if there was a place to go like the PRS where they could just contact the company direct and say "you're breaking the law" with some authority (and then a mechanism with the police I guess to enforce if they don't comply).

One other huge advantage of the PRS is that you're no longer dealing with production companies for payment. It all happens at the distribution end of things. With the BBC, for example, no matter how limited a production budget, this isn't an issue - the royalty payments all come out of one big annual amount the BBC pay to the PRS. And its true for independent films too - AFAIK its the distributor who buys it who will end up paying the royalties.

EDIT - before someone else says it, this royalty issue isn't a panacea for things like independent film. It works best on mainstream TV production, and movies where distribution is in place. In truth, for most independent movies, you'll likely not receive any significant royalties because the film will likely not make any significant sales.


----------



## Daryl (Oct 2, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> I think the PRS already do a really good job, and I agree I think there remit could be expanded a little. I guess already they can take a production company to court for non-payment, not sure how that works. But I'd like to see them taking up a few causes, and the racket of production companies forcing composers to sign away their writer's share should be illegal, plain and simple. It would be great if there was a place to go like the PRS where they could just contact the company direct and say "you're breaking the law" with some authority (and then a mechanism with the police I guess to enforce if they don't comply).
> 
> One other huge advantage of the PRS is that you're no longer dealing with production companies for payment. It all happens at the distribution end of things. With the BBC, for example, no matter how limited a production budget, this isn't an issue - the royalty payments all come out of one big annual amount the BBC pay to the PRS. And its true for independent films too - AFAIK its the distributor who buys it who will end up paying the royalties.


I have three other thoughts:

1) Most Publishers are not Publishers. They just use the title as an excuse to steal half a composers' Royalty. Therefore a system could be put into place that if they have not exploited the music, over and above the original commission (which is the remit of a Publisher) then the rights return to the composer for secondary usage. Actually I would prefer to see Publishers have to prove that they have the infrastructure to exploit secondary usage before they are allowed to become a Publisher. The advantage off this is that there is no real argument against it.

2) Composers who use Ghost writers/assistants/orchestrators who write the cues for them should be stamped on. Hard. They are committing fraud, and should be treated like and other white collar criminal. This would help to share out work more equally, as you wouldn't have the same composer taking on 5 or 6 projects, when they have no intention of writing the music themselves. If they employ ghost writers, an the like, the names should go on the cue sheet. Not only is that fair, but it's also the only legal way to do it.

3) PRS should accept Tunesat registrations, or at the very least be willing to start an investigation based on the findings. This would increase the usage of Tunesat, which would also increase the number of channels that they police.

D


----------



## Windle (Oct 2, 2011)

Daryl,

That's the best solution for the Publishers problem I've heard. 

If you don't mind I'd like to throw that to BASCA and see if I get a reaction. (For those who don't know BASCA is a British organisation that represents the interests of composers and songwriters - probably the closest thing we have in the UK to a Union for composers and much more pro-active than the MU).

I had a situation where a production company/publisher didn't even bother to register the work so that there was no first time payment never mind secondary usage. In the words of Homer Simpson, "D'oh!"

W.


----------



## Daryl (Oct 2, 2011)

Windle @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> Daryl,
> 
> That's the best solution for the Publishers problem I've heard.
> 
> ...


Of course you can throw my suggestions to your organisation. I would also suggest that unless you have been coerced into allowing the production company to be the Publisher (or have chosen this route yourself), you should always register the cue sheet yourself.

The big problem is with the interpretation of the word "exploit". Successive film companies have used it to mean "we release a soundtrack album at a slight loss, and in return we can have half your Royalties on the film for ever and ever, amen". This is where the fight has to start. If there is no infrastructure or secondary licensing, then there should be no Publishers' agreement with the company in the first place. Unfortunately PRS deals with Publishers as well as Writers, so there will be an internal fight. However there is no real argument against it, IMO.

D


----------



## lux (Oct 2, 2011)

i dont help


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 2, 2011)

This is in serious danger of becoming a very productive thread...



Daryl @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> Of course you can throw my suggestions to your organisation. I would also suggest that unless you have been coerced into allowing the production company to be the Publisher (or have chosen this route yourself), you should always register the cue sheet yourself.
> 
> The big problem is with the interpretation of the word "exploit". Successive film companies have used it to mean "we release a soundtrack album at a slight loss, and in return we can have half your Royalties on the film for ever and ever, amen". This is where the fight has to start. If there is no infrastructure or secondary licensing, then there should be no Publishers' agreement with the company in the first place. Unfortunately PRS deals with Publishers as well as Writers, so there will be an internal fight. However there is no real argument against it, IMO.
> 
> D



This is all well worth pursing. One more question / thought - there needs to be provision for self-publishing, which is usually the best scenario of all for composers, but few of us pursue secondary usage.


----------



## Daryl (Oct 2, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> This is in serious danger of becoming a very productive thread...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's the beauty of my suggestion. Once the charlatan Publishers are cleared away, then the Publishing could automatically be assigned to the writer.

D


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 2, 2011)

Daryl @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> That's the beauty of my suggestion. Once the charlatan Publishers are cleared away, then the Publishing could automatically be assigned to the writer.



I've occasionally had a problem with some BBC stuff that they demand publisher info or else they won't use a track, saying it can't be cleared. My solution is that I'm about to register my company with the MCPS, so I become a proper publisher (on paper). Perhaps that's quite unusual, I don't know, and I'm only doing it to satisfy some box-tickers. But it could put me in a tricky situation in your otherwise-excellent plan... being automatically assigned publisher rights is one thing, but if I'm an on-paper proper publisher and I don't really publish anything, I'd be in trouble!


----------



## Daryl (Oct 2, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> Daryl @ Sun Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > That's the beauty of my suggestion. Once the charlatan Publishers are cleared away, then the Publishing could automatically be assigned to the writer.
> ...


Yes, but we're talking about changing things anyway, so this self-Publishing thing could even be a new category. After all there are times when one has to give exclusive usage rights for the music, and in this case nobody could be the Publisher, other than the writer. In fact I would imagine this will become a common solution, for those film companies that usually just steal the Publishing as a way of getting more income. Obviously they would rather that the music only ever got used on their original film, so in this case the self-Publisher route is the only possible one.

D


----------



## Windle (Oct 3, 2011)

Daryl @ Sun Oct 02 said:


> Of course you can throw my suggestions to your organisation. I would also suggest that unless you have been coerced into allowing the production company to be the Publisher (or have chosen this route yourself), you should always register the cue sheet yourself.
> D



I have, thank you, and will look forward to their response.

In many instances nowadays it is a case of "Here are our terms and if you don't like them then there are many others who will accept them."

In the case I mentioned I managed to negotiate that they would have the publishing for a limited term of five years after which all rights will revert back to me. It's not ideal by any means but it does mean that the music is not gone forever. And I think I got this only because I already had a good relationship with the company and they knew I'd deliver a quality product.

Not easy out there.

W.


----------



## noiseboyuk (Oct 3, 2011)

Windle @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> In many instances nowadays it is a case of "Here are our terms and if you don't like them then there are many others who will accept them."



Yes, this is what has got to change. Much of this is a legal issue, so I'm more optimistic of getting somewhere. The issue of signing over writer's rights should already be against the law - it's basically extortion. And I think the issue of what constitutes a publisher should be looked at carefully.


----------



## Daryl (Oct 3, 2011)

Windle @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> Daryl @ Sun Oct 02 said:
> 
> 
> > Of course you can throw my suggestions to your organisation. I would also suggest that unless you have been coerced into allowing the production company to be the Publisher (or have chosen this route yourself), you should always register the cue sheet yourself.
> ...


This will always be the case. However, in my scenario, they don't have to prove to you that they are going to "Publish" your music, they have to prove it to PRS. In which case, if they are not real Publishers, just asset strippers, they can't include Publishing in the terms that they offer you, because PRS shouldn't accept them as Publishers in the first place.

Of course there are shady ways round all of this, but we have to start somewhere.

D


----------



## Daryl (Oct 3, 2011)

noiseboyuk @ Mon Oct 03 said:


> Windle @ Mon Oct 03 said:
> 
> 
> > In many instances nowadays it is a case of "Here are our terms and if you don't like them then there are many others who will accept them."
> ...


It already is illegal in the UK, AFAIK.

PRS already has the power to choose whether or not to accept applicants as Publishers. They just have to be persuaded to use it.

D


----------



## robteehan (Oct 3, 2011)

Just had a thought - up here in Canada we have an organization called the Canadian League of Composers which was formed as a "sort of" union, loosely organized, but still working together for the interests of composers. But it's really only for legit/classical music. 

Still, as someone who works occasionally in this field, I find it useful to be able to quote when I'm asked to write a piece for an orchestra/choir etc. and say, "the canadian league of composers recommends a minimum fee of XX for a piece like this." These days organizations are rarely in a position to pay such fees, but it's helped start negotiations and, I'm positive, has gotten me a lot more than I would have otherwise. (this is their schedule of fees: http://composition.org/clc-lcc/content/ ... ning-rates)

It seems like composers are reluctant to commit to ironclad minimums that union membership would require. But I wonder if it would still be helpful to have an "advocacy group" that "recommends" minimum fee scales depending on the budget of the film.


----------



## midphase (Oct 3, 2011)

I think what would really help is a composer advocate organization where any composer could go and submit a request for advice on terms of particular deal and possibly get some negotiation advice and even legal advice.

VI Control is a good place to come to, but you'd be surprised how many professional composers have never heard of this place when I mention it to them. You would also be surprised at how many read these posts regularly but have never posted themselves or even created an account.


----------

