Some have asked my views on the 99-Seat situation in Los Angeles. Here are some thoughts:I am an actor first and a trade unionist second. I consider my Equity brothers and sisters in Los Angeles County fellow professionals. I have seen great brilliance in productions in Los Angeles' intimate houses. I do not sneer that Angeleno actors are "fighting for their right to work for free." I have friends and colleagues who regularly perform as well as produce in small theaters. I want this art and community to continue. I also want actors and stage managers there to be under Equity contracts. I took issue with the original Council proposals which were put to referendum. My main objection was the rule about membership companies. The final Council-adopted rule is better, but not perfect. Also, Equity's typical ineptitude as regards communication made things much worse than they had to be.
Putting aside the viability of California minimum wage or Hat-to-99, the main reason I want my brethren and sistren to be under contract is for the protections that the institution of a contract would provide. Remember that the (newly) old 99 Plan was a code and not a contract. What this means at its base is that it was unenforceable. Equity contracts have the best safe and sanitary protections compared to similar contracts anywhere. The various clauses in our contracts cover almost any situation that can occur in a theatre. With the old 99, if there were problems, one could call the union, who would in turn have a staffer call in a stern voice and admonish the producing entity to repent and change, but as for muscle - there was none. The codes assume adherence to industry practice, but the actor or stage manager is essentially on his own.
The other reason that I want to do whatever we can to establish contracts is participation in the health care plan and pension credits. I don't think I have to elaborate on why health care is important. It's harder to qualify under the SAG Producer Pension and Health Plan and the AFTRA Health And Retirement Funds than ever. (O may they one day merge!) Having access to an alternative health care plan under an Equity contract would be a boon for L.A. area actors.
Many members, especially younger ones, don't give retirement much thought. Under the Equity League (our health and retirement plan) one need only work two weeks of covered employment out of a year to qualify for a pension credit. After ten years (not necessarily consecutive) one is vested and can receive a pension when you reach the right age. And while it's early to even broach this subject, (not to mention beginning a sentence with 'and'), many of our contracts include 401(k) savings plans.
Another element to all Equity contracts is bonding. This is an element of the contract that AEA members rarely have even a passing relationship with. Equity requires each producer to put aside two weeks salary - a bond - so that if something goes wrong; the production runs out of money, the production is prosecuted, etc, the actors are the first to be taken care of. This is one of the bedrocks of Actors' Equity contracts.
Stage Managers. I'm sure I do not have to inform anyone as to the difference between an Equity Stage Manager and one who is not. A contract would require that the PSM be an Equity member. 'Nuff said.
All the above is what we aspire to in establishing contracts in Los Angeles. This is not immediately the result of Council adoption of the new 99-Seat rules. It is, however, the eventual goal.
Now - Salary.
This is the thing, of course, that has caused the rift between L.A. members and their union. The minimum wage floor has now been set by the union for those that would qualify (see link, above) and this does not even include the above fringe benefits. This is cheap as compared with the national average salary, but still unattainable for some producing entities using their current business models.
And changing the business model is the whole point. There was heretofore no incentive to change the actor and stage manager line items in a show's budget. I am a realist, though. I know that some producing entities will fold. These theaters are not just items on a spread sheet. They represent actual human beings: colleagues, lovers and friends. These theatre collectives contain memories and some of our collective theatrical experiences, both as creators of art and as a society. They have also provided showcases that have allowed industry folk to consider us for further work.
My feeling is that L.A. intimate theatre will not go away - but it will change. Theatre is created by humans for other humans. The human actors and stage managers are still in Los Angeles. They will adapt, as they do in every other community around the country. Those that produce, be they producer/actors or full time producers will learn how to do so with the new rules. It will be more difficult. It will be different.
Most of my work is not in New York City. I work quite a bit in theaters around the country with shoe-string budgets. (And some can't even afford shoe strings) Some of these have existed for decades, despite the vagaries of economy, the waning and waxing of charitable giving and other circumstances and situations which seem to conspire against them. I daresay that what these long-suffering (but thriving) theaters share with some of the venerable smaller theaters in Los Angeles is an individual or very small cadre of committed individuals, without whom the structure would collapse. The theatre may have dozens of artists and other volunteers who are passionate about their mission and would do anything asked of them to keep their theatre alive, but when push comes to shove, as the old saying goes, it is this tenacious person upon whose shoulders living or dying is decided.
My prediction is that in each extant theatrical organization or collective there will be that one person who seeks to make the organization thrive despite whatever rules or other road blocks are presented before them. Essentially what the new rules are forcing L.A. intimate theatre to do is to learn a new producing model.
Some of these individuals will not wish to produce under a new model or these newly-needed skills may not be in their wheelhouse of talents. If another within the organization does not step-up, that organization may fold. Or it may morph into a new entity. The new rules will also see new players create new theatre. This is what happens to theaters all over the country.
Now, before you say, "Fuck you, Roddy, you don't live here (that is, L.A.) and couldn't care less about us. Go back to living in your own private Idaho where unicorns and rainbows abound," let me tell you that I have seen this scenario repeat itself time and time again. Theatre keeps re-inventing itself. I see this in communities with nowhere near the funding potential that Los Angeles has. I have worked in a theatre for the last couple of decades which is the third generation of the original. Many different buildings, charters, mission statements, boards and donors and different Equity contracts - same artists, though.
Long Beach Playhouse, as you might know, recently posted on its Facebook page that it is "first and foremost, a community theater. We are not, and never will be, a professional theater..." Though I am sure that the Equity members who worked there previously did wonderful work, LBP is now saying that keeping a working relationship with professionals in not a priority. I'm not disparaging Long Beach Playhouse. They will probably do wonderful work in the future, but they don't seek to be a professional theatre. One does not need a union card to make art.
There is an implicit compact that one agrees to when one joins a union. It is a political act. For the betterment of my fellows, there is some work that I agree not to take, so as to raise the tide for all boats. I have been offered, dozens of times, plum roles that I was itching to play if would only work off the card, under a different name. Being a union member is a solemn pact to me. Another actor may not have the union zeal that I have. Lacking passion for, even hating ones union, does not mean that ones actions do not affect others. We are all connected, in a very deep way.
To establish a beachhead in terms of a contract, a group of people (a union, if you will) has to establish a minimum or no progress can be made. I know that we're not dealing with Sam and JJ and this isn't 1919. There are some who should have gone to contract years ago, but the cases of actual wage abuses are rare. Just as important as stopping unfairness is establishing a mindset within ourselves that will make ameliorating the condition of the actor and stage manager in the upper areas of our psyche. There is a canard that I have heard for decades now that making a living in L.A. theatre is impossible and never will be possible. I don't believe it.
Part of changing 99-Seat, be it this change or not this change, was to get rid of the Settlement Agreement so that we may find bargaining partners to negotiate with. This is how contracts are established.
I will leave it those who are actually working under them to tell me how they view the other tines of the new rules, namely the 50-or-Less showcase and the Los Angeles Self-Produced Contract Code. It seems to my eye that these, combined with the contracts above cover most bases. I know that there are still AEA members in Los Angeles who are unhappy - even lividly angry - over the new rules. It is not an attempt to mollify you to say that I consider this a still evolving situation. Having served on contract committees and a term on Council (2004-2009), I can tell you that at heart, Equity wants its members to work. When pressure is brought to bear by the members, (as it is now) change happens. Rumors of the Council cynically toasting each other behind closed doors over the adoption of the new rules is false.
To be Pro-99 or not to be? That is no longer the question. The reality for us all is what Council has voted up. I do think establishing a contract is a high priority. I also don't pretend as though it is a settled matter. Even with the new rules, it is still a work in progress. I am glad that the Los Angeles theatre community (and others around the country) have stepped up and passionately raised their voices. I sincerely hope that we will all continue doing so. Union matters can often be tedious and the minutiae of NLRB rules, state and federal work rules and clause-and-sub-section contract language can make many a crusader lose interest or run screaming into the night. Stay in it.
Anyway, I hope this tells you where I stand on things 99-Seat. Whether this influences your vote or not, please do vote for someone. It's very important. I know it is a difficult choice when all you have to go is a 250 word blurb in Equity News, but not voting at all is a huge mistake. I am open to learning and I would love to hear from you. Please visit my candidate website and you can always email me at buzzforcouncil@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment