# Is union helping or hurting film/Tv composers



## SamGarnerStudios (Nov 29, 2012)

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118062356

Interesting read. Unfortunately I'm not in LA, I'm a mere undergrad student at a college so I don't have too much real world experience to chime in with, all I know is what I've read over the years about unions in general.


----------



## gsilbers (Nov 29, 2012)

interesting. 

im in LA and deal with unions all the time. i am really against unions and im pretty liberal >8o 

i admire what they have done in history but i see first hand how they stifle competition. 

forces people not to deal with their fat asses.

id like to read from cinesample guys. i thought they were being cool about trying to bring in union musicians and give them a cut of sales but the article said AFM is not cool with that. (anymore?)_


----------



## mikebarry (Nov 29, 2012)

We've tried so hard to work with them but its near impossible. Its not just samples, but movies, tv and especially video games. 

You can hear more here:

http://vimeo.com/54047029


----------



## noiseboyuk (Nov 29, 2012)

As the Variety article says, the recent meeting was actually organised by CineSamples. The AFM changed their minds on the CineBrass deal with regard to future releases, and basically said "we don't want to do any sample libraries", along with library music I believe. It's started a major ruckus.

There's a 54min edit of the video of the meeting here - http://vimeo.com/54047029

EDIT cross posted with Mike, obviously!


----------



## José Herring (Nov 29, 2012)

mikebarry @ Thu Nov 29 said:


> We've tried so hard to work with them but its near impossible. Its not just samples, but movies, tv and especially video games.
> 
> You can hear more here:
> 
> http://vimeo.com/54047029



I understand. When I came to LA I tried to work with unions. It was painfully clear from the beginning that they have an agenda to stifle new forms of music making. Back then they had rules against overdubbing, rules against using samples along side live players( I think they've abandoned all hope on this one). They would penalize by charging extra fees for this. I felt like they were working against me. I was trying to use live players as much as I could and just ended up doing dark dates. I mean just try to convince some company that they have to give up a portion of their box office just to work with you because you're "union". That just isn't happening when you're starting out.

Funny thing is that when I was doing a lot of arranging, the union was like by best friend. So for more traditional ways of making income like arranging, copying, playing, they are very helpful. But for music production in the modern world they're more than likely trying to stop it from happening rather than encouraging new ways to make music.


----------



## Andrew Aversa (Nov 29, 2012)

Such a terrible situation, I feel bad for you folks in LA. When I worked on Soulcalibur V the whole production took place in Australia (Sydney) at some Sony studios there. As far as I know LA wasn't even discussed as an option.


----------



## Cinesamples (Nov 30, 2012)

This meeting has sparked some very good debate, and meetings with key people.

If anyone is interested in being part of the continuing conversation, join the facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/378212525602422/

Heck, all we want to do, ALL of us, game composers, film composers, trailer composers, is use our friends and record down the block at SONY or FOX.


----------



## chimuelo (Nov 30, 2012)

Unions are needed but just seem to screw things up more and more as they don't have the wisdom to negotiate with 3rd party arbitration as much as they use to.

Im surprised there isn't an apprenticeship program. In the Trade Unions during a bad economy using apprentices keeps the money flowing, and Unions still get their cut.

Always seems like the Union Leaders and the Upper management dont care who they hurt as their pay is secured. This is why 3rd party arbitration is worth every dime.


----------



## olajideparis (Nov 30, 2012)

This podcast features Mike Piatti and Mike Barry of CS sharing their experience working with and negotiating with the American Federation of Musicians. 

http://www.scorecastonline.com/2012/11/ ... nesamples/


----------



## reddognoyz (Nov 30, 2012)

Every single contract I get for shows on Disney and Nickelodeon have a "no collective bargaining" clause in there that says effectively. No union players allowed. The AFofM has zero clout in this instance.Every series I work on is geared for an international market and the Corporations that own this stuff want no strings attached. They are trying very hard to go non-union with the actors as well, and they are getting there. SAG/AFTRA is a MUCH stronger union, but only because the best talent won't work non-union, but that is changing bit by bit as actors go over to the dark side. Don't for one second kid yourself and think that the powers that be will cave because they only want the best talent. They could give 2 sh*ts about that, at least in TV.


----------



## Daryl (Nov 30, 2012)

The trouble with Unions is that they don't represent all of their members. They represent their own interests (money and power) and the interests of a vocal minority. However, this can only happen if the membership tolerates it, so if nothing changes, it's the fault of the Union members who keep their collective mouths shut.

In the short term I predict less and less work in LA and the UK, with more going over to Eastern Europe. There is no way that either LA or the UK can compete on price and will never be able to, until the Eastern European countries standards of living and income catches up to the West. However, there are other possibilities for creating recording work, but the Unions and ultimately musicians have to be open to the suggestion that they will be paid less and have fewer rights than they have traditionally been used to. Either that, or keep their current agreements and reduce the pool of musicians who can afford to remain in the industry.

D


----------



## José Herring (Nov 30, 2012)

CineSamples @ Fri Nov 30 said:


> This meeting has sparked some very good debate, and meetings with key people.
> 
> If anyone is interested in being part of the continuing conversation, join the facebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/378212525602422/
> 
> Heck, all we want to do, ALL of us, game composers, film composers, trailer composers, is use our friends and record down the block at SONY or FOX.



I was interested, but I have a feeling you guys hate me.  But, I wanted to respond to a few post there that made a lot sense to me.

I'll try again and wait for a response.


----------



## rgames (Nov 30, 2012)

Does the AFM even care that they're losing work to other locations?

Every time I hear commentary from the leadership they're saying they have plenty of work and it's increasing. Might be posturing, of course, but if you hit them with the "Lose Work" argument and they say "Who Cares" then why bother debating?

Seriously - nobody hides black dates or sessions in Europe. Contracts explicitly state "No Union" if that's a requirement. So nobody is hiding anything and everyone who wants it has a low-cost opportunity.

All the while, the union doesn't care.

Apparently both sides are getting what they want.

Where's the issue? Why so much discussion? It all seems so fabricated.

rgames


----------



## jeffc (Nov 30, 2012)

I don't think the union has that much affect one way or the other on TV/film composers. I believe the people that the union is really hurting is its own members. The musicians. There are many musician's that don't work because of all of the work that goes overseas. And with that, it hurts the copyists, orchestrators, arrangers, etc. The union will issue a press release that they just signed a new tv deal, but it really only affects a tiny percentage of the shows out there. The rest don't do it union anyway. But by not being forward thinking and seeing what is going on with work going out of town, it's only avoiding the real issue. Kind of like the record companies ignoring Napster and digital downloading. By the time they really addressed it, it was too late. 

As composers, however, we are in a strange spot because we're not required to be in the union as a composer. This fight, while we may be involved in peripherally, is not really our fight. Let's face it, all but the A-list of the A-listers, have no bargaining power whatsoever in determining if a film or tv show is done union or not. We simply must take what is offered. While sure we'd all love to be able to do it in town, with all the incredibly talented people here, for the vast majority of us it's not an option. And this is the problem with the 'marque' composers who speak out for keeping it in town. Simply put, they are afforded the budgets to realistically have the option of doing it here. But on many indie film package deals, there really isn't the option. If you've got a small budget, Europe is really the only way you can afford to have a real orchestra. And if that's the only option, then what are you going to do? I've had to go to Seattle and Prague countless times, not because it was my choice, but because it was simply the only way to afford an orchestra on the project. I don't see how that changes.

Back to the union, people can talk all day long, but it really comes down to two very simple issues - a buyout option, and some type of low budget buyout rate that can compete somehow with Prague. And that rate is most likely too low to ever become a reality. What will probably happen is they will eventually offer some type of buyout option in LA, but the rate will still be either the same as now or even more to compensate. Then it will again come down to economics, if you've got 20k in your package for recording, you can either do 12 players in LA or 70 in Prague. Your choice. 

It's a mess either way but a lot of talented musicians in LA aren't allowed to work and you've got to ask yourself if the union that's supposed to be protecting you, is really doing that by forcing you to not be able to work. There's theoretical and there's reality. The reality is that outsourcing happens in many other industries in our country, from information tech to cars, to iPads. Why should film production or orchestral recording be any different. The world is always changing, and people either must change with it or become obsolete. We can't stop progress and wish things were like the old days, in many areas of our lives, whether we like it or not....

J


----------



## chimuelo (Nov 30, 2012)

rgames @ Fri Nov 30 said:


> Does the AFM even care that they're losing work to other locations?
> 
> rgames



No they don't, they cling to traditions which are not represntative of the trade.
For example. nobody wants a stagehand to mix their show, so we are allowed to bring in a guy instead of cuttimg his wage, and helps out in other areas, except at the end of the night when they roll up snakes and mic cables for ever to avoid load outs.

Right to work in a Union State is the answer, appenticeship programs so you can try live players and even send them home if there are some who dont cut it.

Lounges are Non Union, Showrooms are Union, the compromise helps everyone.
And being a Union Contractor helps as you get the Convention gigs and the 10k gigs for a night that are rare, but come around, even the Green Sheet jobs pay 500 a man per night. 
So this is why I am also a Union Contractor breaking into the market with higher wages and less hours. My guys are whining since they are Liberal Non Union workers, that even get assistance as they pay no taxes, so the fair share from what I see is a chance for fraud and no accountability.
Perfect for the elite who will still avoid these taxes, that why 250k is the new millionaires tax....
Nancy Pelosi also agrees with most composers, at her Winery where the stimulus railroad went, she refuses to use Union Grape pickers....???
Real Democrats are union, and Liberals just seem to think they are really capitalists as they spread our money , suely not theirs. We expect this from Conservatives parts of the charade, not Liberals.........It's the same old Boss, new scams, new lies and hypocray at its finest, enough to fuel the Onion, Stewart and SNL for weeks to come.
They're still Union, I wonder if their reps caved in or actually represented them in the TV show musicians debacle....


----------



## Brian Ralston (Dec 2, 2012)

jeffc @ Fri Nov 30 said:


> Back to the union, people can talk all day long, but it really comes down to two very simple issues - a buyout option, and some type of low budget buyout rate that can compete somehow with Prague. And that rate is most likely too low to ever become a reality. What will probably happen is they will eventually offer some type of buyout option in LA, but the rate will still be either the same as now or even more to compensate. Then it will again come down to economics, if you've got 20k in your package for recording, you can either do 12 players in LA or 70 in Prague. Your choice.



No. Prague or other Eastern European orchestras are not LA's primary competition. There is a place for them at the lower price point too and LA's talent, proximity and second to none quality will never compete with that price point. But London is LA's primary competition in the global marketplace of live music. And at the moment LA is way higher than even The LSO...which is also amazing. The new video game agreement in effect yesterday puts LA almost 1/3 higher than London which assures video games will never be done in LA under than agreement. Producer's are on record saying that they will pay a premium for an LA group with a buy-out. If they offer that and then get their prices in line with London...this problem mostly reverses itself. The guys who were going to Eastern Europe would not have the money for that premium orchestra anyway. Which is why they also did not choose London with their buy-out scenario.


----------



## kclements (Dec 3, 2012)

Such an interesting and needed conversation. Thank you. I know so little about all of this. I am happy to have found some resources for study.


----------



## jeffc (Dec 3, 2012)

re: Brian's point.

I think we are in agreement, and I guess I was a little bit unclear. LA-London, obviously that's apples to apples for the top budget stuff. No question. I've had to price London a few times and it's no bargain. Close enough to LA (in the same ballpark) but agreed, since they offer a buyout LA loses a lot. And the union should address that scenario head on and find out a way to be competitive there, or right, LA will lose all of the big budget stuff.

I think I was talking about, something that I also think should be addressed is a lower scale buyout to try and compete (obviously not totally on price, as Europe is super cheap). This scenario would be to acknowledge that there are a whole lot of LA musician's, not the first call A-list cats, that don't get to play on ANYTHING. If the union were to come up with some type of ultra low budget / buyout scenario to get these people working, I think they would keep some of the work going to Europe. This would also keep a lot of the smaller studios working, engineers, music prep, etc. And the musicians would be playing everyday, getting better. There are obviously a few tiers in play, and as much as we'd all like to be in the top tier budget wise, that's not entirely realistic. 

So, ideally (2) scenarios:

- Top Tier - buyout option, rate competitive with London (for big films, big video games)
- new low budget tier - (for indie film, music library,) buyout option, lower rate to try and compete with Europe, to try and keep the younger less established players working and keeping more work in town.

Sadly, this will never happen, the union will still hold the line as long as they can, a few studios will close, and people will get so accustomed to going overseas, that it will be much harder to try and reverse the trend. At least that's what see happening. Hope to be proven wrong.

And one other thing, all of the arguments are based on the assumption that composers (or producers) are willing to spend more out of their pockets to keep work here. Most deals are package deals, and if you are faced with having to pay 50% more to do something here, is the final product 50% better? Because that is the true question at the end of the day. It's one thing to talk a big game about LA and how it's the best in the world (no argument here, by the way), but when you are writing the checks out of your profit, will you still feel the same way?

J


----------



## Brian Ralston (Dec 3, 2012)

jeffc @ Mon Dec 03 said:


> re: Brian's point.
> 
> I think we are in agreement, and I guess I was a little bit unclear. LA-London, obviously that's apples to apples for the top budget stuff. No question. I've had to price London a few times and it's no bargain. Close enough to LA (in the same ballpark) but agreed, since they offer a buyout LA loses a lot. And the union should address that scenario head on and find out a way to be competitive there, or right, LA will lose all of the big budget stuff.
> 
> ...



But the AFM has a tiered rate schedule for films and TV that does exactly that. Any film under $40 Million is considered "Low budget" and is on a lower budget rate scale than say..an AVATAR. (And most films any more are under $40 Million anyway). Any film under $10 Million is on the "low, low budget" rate scale and is even lower...somewhere around $65-70 per hour plus H&W. For access to the same first call musicians (who will take those gigs too)...at that rate for films under $10Million...it is really a no brainer. But why do some producers balk at the idea? Secondary payments. No buy-out. But really...if they get picked up by a Fox or Paramount as an indie...those secondary future payments get paid by Fox or Paramount...who are use to making them anyway. 

When post production is being done here...and the fact that you do not have travel expenses and if you are on a tight Post schedule where those extra days being lost to travel and prep for Eastern Europe orchestras would be better spent finishing writing more music...recording AFM here in town on lower budget films is very competitive and one just has to make successful arguments in educating producers that it can work and be financially viable...and for a much better product in the end. 

Now music library and sample library stuff is a whole different discussion because those are new markets the AFM does not have a history of working in. As such...they are unfamiliar with how they can work for them and currently they are unwilling to want to enter into those markets. 

With Video Games...the industry wants a Buy-out. Plain and simple. That is what they are use to...and what they want. With London...they get that. Here they don't. And in fact the new Video Game agreement raised rates so high in addition to no buy-out that no video game will ever be scored here again on this rate scale. So the union's push to have rates not competitive with the world market in this area has caused them to lose 100% of the work. And that...is a problem. That shows their leadership making these rates is out of touch. 

I also know the AFM will frequently argue that they are simply asking for what other Hollywood guilds already get in their agreements. But...those other guilds are not under the competition of a world marketplace like music is. They have to not compare themselves to SAG and IATSE....but to London, Prague, etc...but mostly London who is their direct most similar competition now.


----------



## gsilbers (Dec 3, 2012)

how about the seattle scene? 

wasnt it another choice outside LA? 

i know several top A composers go there. and heard mix reviews from using seattle.


----------



## David Story (Dec 3, 2012)

+1 Thanks Brian, for understanding the issues. 
I will take it a step further.

Hollywood has gone to London since the 50s for lower rates and buyouts. But they had a different sound that didn't always fit. Now they do American better. And movies are more global in their approach, especially the big ones. Even in Prague, the talent and skill gap is narrowing. 

All European orchestras have an advantage of government subsidys for health, pension and even wages. LA has to charge more to maintain the same standard of living, or make it up in quantity. Even seatle players have other gigs.

So when the current union leaders fade away, we can hope for the kind of changes Jeff mentions. More inclusive and lower rates.

Plus educating Producers about secondary payments.

There's a new group with a mission to educate pros and the public about film tv and game music. 
http://www.academyofscoringarts.org/ 
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Academy-of-Scoring-Arts/
We have chapters forming in several cities, maybe we can help the process.


----------



## midphase (Dec 3, 2012)

I find that these types of conversations seem to miss the main point. 

So let's say that AFM caves in, you get lower rates comparable to Seattle/London, etc. You get buy-outs.

Now what? How many of you are going to hire an orchestra in LA next week? [crickets] 

AFM has little to no incentive to appease the demands of most broke-ass composers because they know that it doesn't make much difference anyway. Let's be honest here, most of my colleagues are being offered to score movies-of-the-week for $5k nowadays....where in there is the money for musicians coming from? The few esteemed fellows who opt to record in Prague and the likes have usually decided to invest their own money into the affair or waived their composing fees to convince the producers to go with a real orch.

Also (sorry Mikes) I can't blame AFM for not wanting to play ball with sample developers, you guys have made it very difficult to argue to a producer for the merits of a real orchestra vs. samples. I don't buy for a second the idea that a better sounding mock-up will convince the producers of a film to want to hire a real orchestra, if the past two decades are any indication, then the next generation of sample libraries will make hiring real musicians that much less justifiable.

Lastly, as composers, we don't have a union, hence we tend not to give two shits about AFM when it really comes down to it. DGA, WGA and SAG members are much more compelled to fight for each other because they understand the system and benefit from it.

My opinion is that if AFM magically caved in to all the demands, it just wouldn't make that substantial of a difference to their musicians. Perhaps a little bit, but not nearly as much as this thread would imply. 

Let's all be honest with ourselves here, we want made-in-China prices and Wal Mart convenience for everything, then we have the balls to bitch about our rates falling through the floor.


----------



## Cinesamples (Dec 3, 2012)

midphase @ Mon Dec 03 said:


> I find that these types of conversations seem to miss the main point.
> 
> So let's say that AFM caves in, you get lower rates comparable to Seattle/London, etc. You get buy-outs.
> 
> ...



I hear you Kays, but you are missing the point. Big hollywood studio films, and every videogame in the world is scored in London and elsewhere. Most of the studios, and game companies are here, as are many of the composers. But we cannot record here.
As a result, we have three remaining scoring stages (there used to be 9), and they WILL close if something doesn't change. If that happens, it's all over for everyone. No coming back.

To rip a term from the current headlines, it is a "fiscal cliff" the industry is in.

Look, composers have nothing to lose, we have nothing to lose... but the musicians and engineers who moved out here to build a career have everything to lose.

Watch the meeting video if you haven't already: https://vimeo.com/54047029


----------



## midphase (Dec 3, 2012)

I hear you Mike, and yet I feel strangely indifferent toward the whole thing. 

If I ever again have the pleasure to work on a film with a budget for a real orchestra, I will look forward to the trip to London (or Prague...never been but I hear it's lovely).


----------



## George Caplan (Dec 3, 2012)

yes prague is photogenic.

when i first arrived to work in the uk in about 1980 their unions had all but destroyed the place. unions are from a bygone age.


----------



## midphase (Dec 3, 2012)

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater George. People who wish we'd rid the world of unions are essentially advocating for unregulated exploitation of the workforce...do we really want that?


----------



## JJP (Dec 3, 2012)

I think we also have to consider that as long as the producers can keep composers focusing on boogeymen like the AFM, they will be paying less attention to the fact that their own fees have fallen significantly over the last two decades. The willingness of composers to sign worse and worse deals has done far more to affect their lives than any decision made by the AFM over the years.

I was at the LA Scoring meeting, and while I commend the folks for the effort putting it together, I was rather disappointed at the lack of understanding by the panel about the contracts they were debating and how these contracts grow out of negotiations with the AMPTP. I felt I was listening to people who were debating points beyond their expertise.

Everybody was happy to pounce on the Film Musicians Secondary Markets Fund (FMSMF), but nobody on the panel had a clear understanding of what the FMSMF was, who controlled it, or how it really functioned. I don't think anybody had a clue about the fact that the FMSMF is set up as an agent for producers independent of both labor and management and that the producers actually have great control over the FMSMF. Panelists were constantly confusing Special Payments, new use, reuse, and residual structures in general (hint: films, and TV, don't pay into the Special Payments Fund). They were also woefully misinformed about the residual structure of other guilds like the DGA, WGA, SAG/AFTRA and IATSE to which they were making comparisons. (Yes, IATSE, the union that represents grips, costumers, and others has residuals. :shock: ) See here: Residual Summary Chart (Note this chart does not include the AFM.)

There was also the constant circular arguments about costs. People kept pointing out the problem that it's more expensive to record in LA, complete with big slides of estimated recording costs. Then the idea kept being thrown around that the solution was to create a buyout by building in any later payments into the initial session cost as a way to bring work back to LA. It was argued that studios would be willing to pay a premium to record in LA. Then the discussion would shift again to the problem that the rates in LA need to be lower because studios were running overseas. Huh? :?:

Perhaps my expectations were too high because I came to the meeting after spending the previous day at the AMPTP offices observing the AFM motion picture negotiations. At the AMPTP you had rooms full of people from the studios, other guilds, payroll companies, and the associated lawyers who were all very knowledgeable and were truly wrestling with some very complicated issues that affected the livelihoods of thousands of people. It was a very different situation at the LA scoring meeting.

Final note: I do not work for the AFM or the AMPTP nor do I speak on behalf of either group. I'm just a musician who believes that taking care of people who make music should be one of our highest priorities.


----------



## JJP (Dec 3, 2012)

chimuelo @ Fri Nov 30 said:


> They're still Union, I wonder if their reps caved in or actually represented them in the TV show musicians debacle...


Just a note to Chimuelo - the Live TV negotiations were actually a success. The union fought surprisingly hard which took the networks by surprise. The networks agreed to a 6% pay increase in 2013 with industry standard 2% the next two years, a 50% healthcare increase, and jurisdiction over usage in new media. That doesn't make up for all the lost ground of previous years, but it is going to do a lot for musicians playing in bands or doing guest spots on live TV. :D 

This was mostly thanks to the AFM leadership reaching out to the rank and file members who work on these shows and asking what they wanted. That's a nice change from previous years. Perhaps there is hope for the future.


----------

