# Composers consider unionization (Variety)



## synthetic (Oct 27, 2009)

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118010470.html?categoryid=10&cs=1&nid=2248 (http://www.variety.com/article/VR111801 ... 1&amp;nid=2248)

Composers consider unionization
SCL mulling affiliation with Teamsters Local 399
By JON BURLINGAME

For the first time in more than a decade, composers and lyricists working in film, TV and videogames are considering unionization.

The Society of Composers & Lyricists was scheduled to announce at its annual membership meeting Tuesday night that an "informational meeting" about the possibility of affiliating with Teamsters Local 399 will be held Nov. 16 at the Pickwick Gardens Conference Center in Burbank, Calif.

The SCL, a nonprofit group whose estimated 1,200 members include many of the composers who work in pics, TV and vidgames, has not taken a position about union representation, SCL officials said.

Emails alerting members of SCL; performing rights orgs ASCAP, BMI and SESAC; and the National Academy of Recording Arts & Sciences were expected to go out this morning. A website has also launched at Composersguild.org.

Composers and lyricists are among the few creatives left without a collective bargaining agreement. Services like orchestration, conducting and music performance are covered by American Federation of Musicians (AFM) agreements, but not the act of writing music or lyrics.

They were represented in the late 1950s and 1960s by the Composers & Lyricists Guild of America, but after a 1971 strike and a 1972 lawsuit against the studios and networks over music-ownership rights, producers refused to negotiate with them. A 1984 attempt to restart the union failed when a Reagan-era National Labor Relations Board declared composers and lyricists "independent contractors."

The trouble with that ruling, many composers say, is that almost everyone in the biz is an "independent contractor," agreeing to perform services on a one-off basis for producers -- yet writers, directors, actors, cinematographers, editors and others enjoy protection under WGA, DGA, SAG, IATSE, the Teamsters and other unions.

Composer Alan Elliott, who launched this latest unionization effort, said he hopes that a greater sense of community and attention to the craft of creating music can also be fostered.

Casting directors affiliated with the Teamsters in 2006, achieving benefit and pension rights for more than 400 casting directors and associates in what was one of the largest successful organizing efforts in recent years. The composers spearheading this effort hope they can achieve the same ends. Others hope that minimum wage scales and working-conditions clauses will follow.

Exploratory talks with the Teamsters began about three years ago. Back in the mid-1990s, talks with the WGA and IATSE resulted in debate about possible unionization, but SCL members remained divided.

"There has been a tremendous devaluation of music," said former SCL president James DiPasquale. "Respect for composers has diminished. Technology has marched forward, and our income has plummeted. At the rank-and-file level, it's very hard for anyone to make a living."

Statistics on the website show that in hourlong TV, composers on average must write twice as much music as they did 30 years ago -- hourlongs today require twice as many minutes of music -- but the salary drops are astonishing: According to the site, for each score, they're averaging just 14% of what they did then, adjusted for inflation.

In films, it's even worse, with fees dropping precipitously even as composers must now write more than twice as much music while also absorbing technical costs (engineering, mixing, editing) that were once handled, and paid for, by studio or network personnel.


----------



## midphase (Oct 27, 2009)

Amen!


----------



## Dave Connor (Oct 28, 2009)

Amen!


----------



## Hannes_F (Oct 28, 2009)

Links:
http://www.thescl.com/site/scl/
http://www.composersguild.org


----------



## Brian Ralston (Oct 28, 2009)

Bruce Broughton announced this tonight at our annual SCL meeting. Most in the room was receptive. It is a complicated issue for sure and that is what the upcoming informational meetings are all about. They are not organization meetings. Just info only. 

More info to come for sure...stay tuned.


----------



## kid-surf (Oct 28, 2009)

Good news. 

Composers need a minimum...this could give them that leverage they've NEVER had.

Some of the top screenwriter guys in the biz want to do away with the WGA, but it's mostly that they want to 'own' the IP. I get that, if you're a Class-A screenwriter you're going to make a lot more than 3 Mil per script in that case. But doing away with the WGA would kill the newer screenwriter - same as it's almost killed the newer composer. 

If the Class-A composers have any "class" they'll get behind this thing (should the numbers/math add up).

It's about time...


----------



## poseur (Oct 28, 2009)

composers' guild:
http://www.composersguild.org/

a letter from alan elliott:

*"Hello-
At tonight's general membership meeting of the SCL, the Nov. 16th composers' guild/teamsters meeting was announced (see below) (the meeting will also be announced in Daily Variety tomorrow- see below article).

Please feel free to pass this info to fellow composers inside our community and please come visit the web site here:

http://www.composersguild.org

If you or any of your friends are interested in helping the cause, we are happy to have the help.

Lastly, attached below is a one sheet which we think answers some questions. Again, we hope you will share the info with other composers only and we hope to see you at the meeting Nov. 16.
Best-
Alan"*

the Meeting Notice:
*"Meeting Notice:
An organizing committee of working composers and lyricists would like to invite you to attend an informational meeting concerning union representation for composers and lyricists working in all forms of contemporary media. 

This event will be hosted by the Teamsters Local 399 which represents workers in the motion picture, television, commercials, and live theatrical production industries. 

For the past three years, an independent committee of working composers and lyricists has explored the possibility of achieving a collective bargaining agreement with producers by partnering with the Teamsters. Such a partnership would provide negotiating leverage in bargaining with producers for basic agreements covering Health Benefits, Pension, Working Conditions, and Wages. This informational meeting is the culmination of those three years of exploration by the committee. 

Composers and lyricists have not had a collective bargaining agreement with studios and producers since 1970. Over these last 39 years, the need for union representation, protection, and guidance has become a critical concern for all of us. 

We hope you will take the time to attend this meeting to hear about the possibilities for representation, the individual benefits to be gained, and the potential problems involved in unionizing. While there are currently no guarantees of success in achieving a partnership with the Teamsters, we believe that is in our best interests to at least explore the possibility of such an alliance. 

When: Monday, November 16, 2009
Time: 7:30pm
Where: Pickwick Gardens Conference Center
1001 West Riverside Drive
Burbank, CA 91506
-The Organizing Committee
www.composersguild.org"*


----------



## David Story (Oct 28, 2009)

Find out what a guild can do. "A" talent might benefit, if they're at the table.


----------



## midphase (Oct 28, 2009)

But how well? We have to remember that despite the fact that there are a lot of composers looking to get their foot in the door, many are pure crap!

Good composers should realize that their work is not so easy to come by.


----------



## David Story (Oct 28, 2009)

Smaller films sign with SAG, so it's possible to sell producers on working with unions. The Composer's Guild could have a low-budget agreement. And make it easy for both the composer and producer to sign up. 
This is a rare chance to improve our leverage, if we do it right.
Why not take a look at collective bargaining?


----------



## Brian Ralston (Oct 28, 2009)

David Story @ Wed Oct 28 said:


> Smaller films sign with SAG, so it's possible to sell producers on working with unions. The Composer's Guild could have a low-budget agreement. And make it easy for both the composer and producer to sign up.
> This is a rare chance to improve our leverage, if we do it right.
> Why not take a look at collective bargaining?



Those smaller films sign with SAG because if they want to use ANY known actor AT ALL...they have to. There are NO other options for Actors. It is SAG or non-union...which means their actors are a complete nobody. 

The same incentive to acquire music is simply not there. There are too many other options including licensing music from the plethora of libraries out there. Those same smaller films who sign with SAG also usually DO NOT sign an AFM agreement so their scores can have live union musicians play on it. They DO NOT sign agreements with the editors union so where they would have to pay union rates for sound editing, film editing, music editing. They also (while being signed with SAG) DO NOT sign agreements with the mixers union...or the teamsters for their crews, etc...

That is exactly what I am saying. The minimum will only apply to the ones who sign agreements. And as to having a low budget rate, I don't see any scenario where a composers guild agreement will allow for a film to have a full feature score for a few thousand measly dollars for example. (which is what is frequently offered any more). So unless that is going to be something offered for the low budget productions...they simply will not sign the agreement. They will be non-union. Now the composers who signed with the union are not eligible to work on those little gigs (which they use to do all the time in hope some indie would make it big at Sundance or something). 

Don't get me wrong...I think the issues this is trying to address are real and that something should be done. And I have not decided for myself either way. I am interested in learning more about this over the coming months. I also think that the long term implication of having a collective bargaining agreement is important for the future of composer royalties and residuals. In 10 years...I do not think BMI or ASCAP will be collecting the kind of royalties they do now. Most people then will get their TV and music from a download which is NOT a public performance based on current copyright law. So...the only hope of getting a future residual negotiated for those downloads will be under a collective bargaining agreement with a union. So the future of residual payments in my mind is with a collective bargaining agreement. 

Anyone who thinks that just because there is a composer's guild that all of a sudden their film productions are going to start paying them whatever that union minimum rate is...or they will stop being asked to write an impossible amount of music in an impossibly small amount of time is kidding themselves. Film and TV productions (especially the small indie ones that come and go from indie production to indie production) will fight this tooth and nail. I believe even to the point of "punishing" and not using union composers for a period of time.


----------



## kid-surf (Oct 28, 2009)

Brian -- I see your points and get where your coming from. Definitely, there are some obstacles. I don't feel it would be a seamless transition, it would likely be a bit clumsy after so many years. But I feel that in the long run it would be for the best.



> Yeah...but that minimum would only apply to any production company that actually became a signatory to the composers guild. There is nothing forcing them to do so the way I see it.



Well, it's kinda like any other guild/union: If you want to use our guys, vetted guys, best in the business guys, cool...otherwise...peace mutha fukka.

Hollywood would have a hell of a time making any money without WGA/DGA/SAG/AFTRA members. Hollywood signs on for CLGA because they've got no choice...assuming the big boy composers are down with it. It's contingent on them. Definitely.



> ...Just like I don't see an independent film becoming signatory to the AFM, or the editors union, or the DGA to get their indie film made...I don't see why they would become signatory to a composers guild contract either. So...now the union composers are locked out of the ability to work on those indie films...



Right. That's the catch, it appears. Once you are 'jumped in' you can never leave. But, think of it this way. That doesn't change anything in the lower budget indie market. Yet, once you are commenced on a union film, now you join the CLGA. Same as a screenwriter, he can write films for 5k in the indie world (or even for free), but once he crosses the threshold, now he's guaranteed a minimum. Why would you want to go back at that point?

BUT! I suspect there would be some sort of concession to allow a composer to score a small film under "x" budget. Just, he can't work a union film for less than "x" minimum fee. But he also can't work a union gig (i.e. studio film) without being a member of CLGA.

...something like that.



> I really only see possibly larger studios and well established production companies caving in and saying fine we will sign your agreement...but those aren't the level of films the "new guy" is able to get anyway.



Right. We're instead referring to the "new to the studio/high end prodco" composer, as opposed to the "brand new" guy on an "off grid" feature.



> And why would they sign on? They are already getting way above what a minimum would be. And they are able to do it without the "hassle" of anyone needing to sign a union agreement to do it as independent contractors. They get to play by their rules.



Thing is, their deals aren't going to change any. They don't have to do anything differently. Their agent(s)/lawyer(s) will still handle all the messy stuff. It's not as if these composers are negotiating anything themselves. They simply say "yes" or "no", in regards to their interest in scoring said film.

I just hope they are classy enough to get onboard in order to help save the craft. If composers are simply no longer able to afford to be composers the craft will suffer. Any Class-A composer who doesn't care about that is a fukking azzhole. They may say "well I had to fight my way to the top...so should they!" Fine, but this was before the 'we' were required to invest tens of thousands on studio gear (I've spent $100,000 easy), and before "all in deals" where you're mixing your own shit, coming out of pocket etc. It's harder to break out now...It's harder to just break even.



> My other fear is that many smaller productions will just turn to library music and not deal with a composer at all. Precedent has been set and it will be incredibly hard to break industry expectations away from that. But...that is exactly what this move is trying to do.



Said and done I see it this way: You tell someone to "pay me whatever you feel like paying" they will not pay you want you're worth (this goes for every sector of the worldwide marketplace). This is a cue to them that there is no accountability, that they can spend whatever they want on production and if there's anything left over...well...whatever, we know we can get a composer for whatever we've got left. If they know going into it that the fee is the fee, period...that they will NOT acquire a vetted composer if they cannot, at the very minimum, cough up "x" dollars - they will find a way to come up with that money. Yes! They found a way to finance this POS in the first place. They'll now, as if by magic, FIND this fee. After all, some agents, that's all they do is scout the world for investors, particularly in this climate. 100k is nothing...

Let's not over think that part. It's human nature at play...we'll witness the same antics on playgrounds across the planet.

The other benefit a union/guild has is that waives the red flag to let small time prodcos know that they are dickhead scum-bags. An entire industry of composers would be telling them so, instead of one dude keeping his mouth shut like a good little boy.


----------



## JFB (Oct 29, 2009)

What's most interesting to me is that they're choosing to align with the Teamsters. I always thought that when it came to going on strike, the Teamsters have more real power than SAG, DGA and WGA combined. Because if they strike, EVERYTHING comes to a screeching halt. Literally, the lights go out. Maybe some Teamster balls could positively influence this artisan called Composer, who often comes off as desperately needy, powerless and fairly easily exploited not only by producers, but by each other.

It also makes sense in that both Teamsters and Composers show up as "below the line" costs on the budgets. Or, not. I don't know.

What I do know is that the "composer-deliver-whole-music-package-from-soup-to-nuts" genie is WAY out the bottle and I can't imagine that changing with or without a union. Coming up with an objective minimum pay scale for composing services is going to be a bitch. And what would be the qualifications for membership? Who and by what standard gets to decide what those qualifications are? What if you have prospective members who string loops together into a musical result and get paid to do so - a skill that many established paper and pencil guys still disparage? Coming up with standards is going to be a hell of a debate.

I hope the first thing composer Alan Elliot said to the Teamsters was "teach us how to be a union".


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Oct 30, 2009)

Great move! I hope that this becomes a kick-ass union. A few things I'd like to see is an official web forum, where members can post questions, find out the very latest. Communication is KEY. Also, it would be nice if our role as mixers was also recognized in minimum fee negotiations. I see by reading some of the agreements in Quebec between our composer union (SPACQ) and broadcasters (and the NFB) that there's a minimum for composition (on average 250$/min), and for payment of musicians, but nothing for mixing.


----------



## midphase (Nov 16, 2009)

Well, the informational meeting is tonight, anyone in Los Angeles going?

When: Monday, November 16, 2009
Time: 7:30pm
Where: Pickwick Gardens Conference Center, 1001 West Riverside Drive, Burbank, CA 91506 

RSVP: [email protected]
http://www.theamcl.org 

An organizing committee of working composers and lyricists would like to invite Film Music Magazine readers to attend an informational meeting concerning union representation for composers and lyricists working in all forms of contemporary media. 

This event will be hosted by the Teamsters Local 399 which represents workers in the motion picture, television, commercials, and live theatrical production industries. 

For the past three years, an independent committee of working composers and lyricists has explored the possibility of achieving a collective bargaining agreement with producers by partnering with the Teamsters. Such a partnership would provide negotiating leverage in bargaining with producers for basic agreements covering Health Benefits, Pension, Working Conditions, and Wages. This informational meeting is the culmination of those three years of exploration by the committee. 

Composers and lyricists have not had a collective bargaining agreement with studios and producers since 1970. Over these last 39 years, the need for union representation, protection, and guidance has become a critical concern for all of us. 

We hope you will take the time to attend this meeting to hear about the possibilities for representation, the individual benefits to be gained, and the potential problems involved in unionizing. While there are currently no guarantees of success in achieving a partnership with the Teamsters, we believe that is in our best interests to at least explore the possibility of such an alliance. 

RSVP: [email protected]
http://www.theamcl.org


----------

