99 As I See It (Yeah, it's long)

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

99 Seats or Art For Bucks

If you do not live in Los Angeles, you may not  care anything about the current debate over the proposed changes that Equity Council wants to make to the 99 Seat plan. But know that this controversy goes right to Equity's reason for being.

If you are a New Yorker, you may be familiar with the Showcase Code.  This code (as opposed to a contract) is only for productions in New York City.  The 99 Seat Plan (again - a code and not a contract) is for productions in Los Angeles and mirrors the Showcase Code in a number of significant ways, but the main similarity is that Actors and Stage Managers get little or no money.

Let's start with what most all of us agree on: the 99 Seat Plan is out of date and needs to change.

Unfortunately, there has been not so much dialogue, as sniping, much of it on Facebook and Twitter.  Social media are useful when planning a family reunion, circulating a petition and the like - but debate? It's pretty impossible, and so normally even-headed participants in such discussions soon devolve into malcontents lobbing bombs at one another.  We are all, no matter in which region or city one resides or whether Council member or rank-and-file, on the same side in terms of wanting to improve the lot of our members.  I write this a couple of weeks after the Town Hall meeting on February 23 where members and union staff and Councillors met face-to-face. I was not there, but it was, by all reports, civil and useful. Encouraging.

First of all, what is the difference between a Contract and a Code? In simplest terms: a Contract is a legal agreement between two parties, which states duties and services expected of both parties and has a mechanism for resolving disputes.  A Code, on the other hand, is suggested and less legally-binding. There are no grievance procedures if one of the parties does not deliver on the agreement.  Much AEA staff time and money - our dues money - has been spent on trying to enforce the unenforceable.

There are the three main points of Council's proposal. And remember - this is a proposal, not an edict from the tsar.  I am amazed at the number of members vilifying Council who have not even read the various materials provided on the AEA website, but have taken for gospel the précis provided to them second and third hand.  It's somewhat dry reading, but we should all read it and understand it in order to have an informed debate.  I will try to walk you through the proposal, below.

1) Members who want to self-produce on a per-show basis, would be able to use the Los Angeles Self-Produced Project Code. This means if a group of colleagues wish to produce a production of
HAMLET - they can, without an Equity contract.

2) The Los Angeles Membership Company Rule is the part of this proposal that most seem to take issue with.  Essentially, the number of membership companies in LA are frozen, as are their constituent memberships.  Company members would not have to be paid the California State minimum wage.  Under this rule, it is conceivable that Hamlet could be working for nothing and Rosenkrantz would be getting a salary.

3) There would be a new promulgated 99-Seat Theatre Agreement that Producers could employ that would pay our members the California State minimum wage.  This is an actual contract.  It is a good start.

Many people have taken issue with the word "promulgated" This is a legal term for an agreement that the union crafts when there is no bargaining partner to negotiate with.  AEA has several of these, including the Guest Artist agreement and Small Professional Theatre (SPT) contract. You will notice that on these documents there are no signatures at the bottom, like on the Production contract. There is not a bargaining unit of 99 Seat producers with which to negotiate.  For this reason, Equity will come up with its own terms, looking out for the best interests of the membership.

The coming referendum will be advisory. Why is it an "advisory referendum"? Equity's Constitution and By Laws state that:

"The general management, direction and control of the affairs, funds and property of the Association and the determination of the relations and obligations of members to the Association, of the Association to members, of members to each other and of members to employers, except as expressly limited and/or controlled by this Constitution and By-Laws, shall be vested in the National Council."

That means that it would not be possible for a vote from Los Angeles members to accept or do away
with the proposal.  But this also does not mean that the proposal is a fait accompli.  After a non-binding referendum, the issue goes back to Council where it is debated and then voted on.  Remember - Council works for you.

Me? I am completely in favor of the intent of the proposals. Practically, I like two out of the three items in the new package. I see problems with the membership company issue as it is proposed.  Either new companies should be allowed to form in the future or there should be flexibility in existing companies future member rolls.  Perhaps even established companies could, under certain circumstances, utilize the LASPPC (above).  This tine of the fork is easily fixable.  Of course, this is a proposal to be voted upon by Council for its members. If its members then decide that it is not working there can be a redress.

I have seen some excellent theatre in L.A., both by established companies and one-offs.  I know of no one, Councillor or otherwise, who does not want it to continue. But for too long we have not valued ourselves as much as we deserve and many of those who produce us (I can not really say 'hire' us') have not either. What we are faced with is a leap of faith.  If this goes through, we are saying that our work has value. Please note that I am not calling anyone's work 'crap,' or some such.  I am talking about the life of the actor. I have found in my career that my worth is determined by me.  The first time I tried to ask to be paid over minimum salary I was terrified and sure that I would never work again.  I believe I asked for an extra $20 per week.  It turns out that the producer in this instance didn't even pause when he accepted my counter-offer. The only thing stopping me from getting more was my asking for it. The 99 Seat dilemma is more than about minimum wage.  It's about raising the floor for all actors and stage managers. As the economy continues to get stronger, arguably now is the strategic time to ask for a raise.  Later this year, we will begin negotiations on our flagship contract - Production. It will sure help our position if we show a groundswell of demanding more. Even Wal-Mart gave its employees a raise recently.

To some, AEA Council is, at the least out of touch or at worst, on a power-mad crusade to destroy 99 Seat theatre. I am glad that there is passion - which is the currency we most work with and for - on both sides of the issue.  At issue is the inherent value of the actor or stage manager. There is a bit of a "build it and they will come" aspect to the 99 Seat proposals.  Yes, it is a risk.  So was the Actors' Strike of 1919. Council is seeking to establish a floor, beneath one cannot grovel.

The contention of the ILove99s, as a cadre of theatre people have styled themselves, is that imposing this plan will kill theatre as it currently exists in Los Angeles.  The target in the sights of Equity Council is the producer who has a business model whereby its existence depends on actors as volunteers. My take on it is that the proposals, if adopted, will most definitely change L.A. theatre.  And for the good.  Realistically, of course, some theaters will close. Other companies will change their business models and new companies will form.  L.A. theatre will thrive.

Why do I have such a rosy view of the future?  It has been borne out by experience.  When the New York Musical Theatre Festival (NYMF) caused members to complain that this code was being abused by producers, Council formed a hybrid contract/code. It attempted to straddle developmental and contract work.  Many thought it was the end of NYMF, but the number of productions in the Festival has grown each year and those seeking to work under this agreement have ballooned, as well. Equity has intervened in similar situations.

A friend of mine gives his experience thus:

"I remember working at a theatre that will remain unnamed. . . when we worked for free, they abused our hours, called spur-of-the-moment rehearsals, and played on our good graces to give them more and more time. . . as soon as we went AEA and started getting paid, the hours and responsibilities were revamped and they made damned sure we were out on time so they didn't have to pay OT. . . the mark of being paid, regardless of the stipend, gives us the rights and respect of professional artists. . . unfortunately the only recourse we have with theater management is through the wallet and their respect, not for us, but for the $. . ."

These are not as in the days of Sam & J.J. Schubert.  Many of these companies are just being held together by duct tape and are not the monolithic entities of another era, getting rich on the backs of the actor (or stage manager).  And that is precisely why there are the other two provisions in the 99 Seat proposal.

Many will say that as a New Yorker, I have no horse in this race.  I disagree.  I constantly have to deal with people thinking that because I am an actor that I don't really work for a living.  I am not talking about civilians now, I mean from my fellow collaborators. There is a now infamous quote made during a major Equity contract negotiations where a long-time theatre producer was overheard to share indignantly with a colleague, "I hear actor are buying houses now!"

I will bow to the will of my Los Angeles brethren and sistern. I hope that they will take the leap.  Change is frightening.  Standing tall against strong opinion is daunting. The 3500 or so eligible members will tell the Council when the referendum results come in.  I hope they vote "Yes."

AEA Council Man On The Street Video

The ACTogether people who sponsored the Meet The Candidates event at the Players Club in NYC last week, made this man-on-the-street video, which is quite fun and in which you can see some of the candidates (including me) in action, rather than just our black and white still photos in Equity News. (NB: To the Snark Factory - no bad hair day jokes, OK?)

I Saw Your Brassiere on Facebook

Jimmy Ludwig and I and an occasional column in Equity News called Ask The Geeks. 

Here's one from April of 2009.  We are all wending our way through the morass that is or digital world.  Theatre people have special considerations not only due to the public nature of our work, but our untraditional work places.

Equity’s Committee on New Media and New Technology (lovingly named The Geek Committee) cares about issues concerning our Members and New Media.  (And there are tons of issues) So to help clear up some confusion, welcome to another edition of: Ask The Geeks

Ask The Geeks

Q.   Last week, on my birthday, a bunch of people burst in to the dressing room and videoed me in my bra.  I posted it on my Facebook page.  I think it’s hysterical, but my dressing roommate went postal because part of her arm and the back of her head are in it.  You can’t even tell it’s her but now she’s really cold toward me.  Am I right or is she having a cow for no good reason?

A.    No, the cow is well deserved.  If this were at your house, your only crime would be insensitivity.  The problem here is that you were at work.  Delete the video.

Q.   I’m building a website.  I found a pirated clip from my show on YouTube.  I want to lift a clip (just me singing and nobody else in frame) and put it up on my site.  Problem?  After all – it’s my image and I didn’t pirate it.

A.    But you don’t own the show in which your image appears – the producer does.  If you use ANY of that footage, you are as legally vulnerable as whoever pirated it in the first place.

Q.   I’m really pissed-off!  One night we had to stop the show and improv some dialogue until our set started working again.  Somebody in the audience recorded the whole thing and now it’s all over the internet!  A friend told me there was nothing I could do because it was news and therefore “fair use.”  (The incident made all the newspapers the next day) Is that right?

A.    The Doctrine of Fair Use is an exception to copyright laws.  This is major lawyer territory but basically, the copyright law says that fair use of a copyrighted work without permission can occur if it is used as (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching.

That said, what the audience member did was to steal your image.  Period.  If it was during a performance, he not only stole your image, but the property of your show’s producer too.  Catching the thief is the hard part, but if you can, you may be due damages.  Equity has been successful at having such footage removed.

Q.   In trying to promote myself, some friends and me have made an online webisode.  We’ve had a lot of hits.  We’re not making any money and I’m giving every cast member a copy.  No harm – right?

A.    Depends.  Do you or any of the other cast members belong to either AFTRA or SAG [SAG-AFTRA]?  If you are, did you get the proper paper work?  You could be in violation if you didn’t.  So much trouble can often be avoided with a single phone call.

That’s all for this month’s edition of ASK THE GEEKS!

Remember: Your image has value.

Your image (this includes your voice, photo and any other reproducible part of you) is yours to sell or give away as you please.  But it gets complicated anytime other people are involved.

The media landscape changes literally every day.  Wrapping ones mind around the concepts of New Media can cause crossed eyes.  Equity is there to help.  That’s one of the things you pay dues for.  Producers have deeper pockets and better access to lawyers than most actors do.  If you’re not sure about an issues dealing with New Media, call Equity or email taping@actorsequity.org.*  Your union wants to protect you – not punish you.

Under Equity’s collective bargaining agreements, the ways in which a producer may exploit your image are laid out very clearly. † There are penalties for the use of your image outside of the parameters of your contract.

Under federal law 18 U.S.C. 2319A, it’s a felony to “transmit, distribute or offer to distribute” sound or video to anybody anywhere (including posting them on social networking sites) without the consent of the performer(s) involved.

Here are some rules of thumb:

·      Yours is the only image you have the right to promote, but…

·      Just because it’s your image doesn’t guarantee that you have that right.

·      If you tape (film/photograph) it – make sure you have the right to do so.

·      If you don’t have the right to film it – don’t.

·      If you didn’t film it yourself – you probably don’t own it.

Tune in down the road for more pertinent info.  Until then, stay in touch at taping@actorsequity.com.*

* updated email: capture@actorsequity.org

† this was written before many of the Media packages which are now standards in many of our contracts.

What You and Your Castmates Have In Common With Fast Food Workers

Fast food workers demonstrating outside a McDonald's in Harlem last year

New York City 18 March 2014 - I was happy to see a lawsuit by fast food workers today, seeking to be compensated by their employers for wage theft.  These workers are trying to form a union.

Traditionally, the AFL-CIO has not tried to organize these types of workers because the prevailing perception has been that the fry cooks, cleaning crew members and cashiers engaged at these jobs were teenagers and only working these jobs on their way to something else.  A union could never take hold was the thinking.  The demographics have changed, though.  Being a fast food worker is still an entry into the work force for some; a way to learn how to work before going off to bigger and better things.  When most of these restaurants were in suburban communities, the workers were teenagers and young adults usually with other support.  As fast food restaurants have become prevalent in urban centers, and as the economy has devolved to its current state, there are more who work at Burger King or McDonald's not for pocket change after school, but to pay rent and support a family.  (Read an article about one worker's plight.)

In America, we like to think that we live in a free market economy where all work is compensated commensurate with its "value."  It is a truism, accepted by many, that wages at such places should be low, because these workers are all replaceable; there is not a lot of skill involved in their work.  These people are not doing a "real" job.

You know - kind of like civilians think of actors.

Many AEA members are mystified as to why I go on about the Labor Movement and Equity's place in it.  You may not know that Actors' Equity is one of the most successful labor unions in America today.  Despite a major push to kill unions in Wisconsin, New Hampshire, Indiana and other states, our membership is growing every year.  Currently, we are just shy of 50,000 members, nationwide.

It is remarkable that theatre artists who are usually some of the most socially-conscious and politically-active people around do not make the labor movement one of their core causes.  Many view the labor movement through a sepia toned prism where muscle-bound, overall-clad men march with a wrench resting on their shoulders. The 1930s - 1960s was the labor movement's golden age.  It was certainly one of the major factors in the raising of millions of poor folk into the middle class.  The labor movement has also been one of the most dynamic engines of social justice and amelioration worldwide.

Martin Luther King Jr.'s favorite union was the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), local 1199.  His famous "I've been to the mountaintop" speech was addressing sanitation workers in Memphis in 1968 who were striking.  The International Ladies Garment Workers' Union (ILGWU) were instrumental in helping its membership, typically new immigrants, not only to have safe working conditions and a livable wage, but provided classes in English language, citizenship, money management and health among others.

So when I blow on about Big Labor and Equity's place in it, I am really talking about making the world a better place.  It's often difficult to see the direct line between the Triangle Shirt Waist Factory Fire of 1911 and the current company of Hairspray at a Stock theatre in New England.  There is, though.  We continually and directly benefit from the work of countless others who have preceded us.  Some of the problems that existed then are not our focus today, yet there are always new problems that Unions need to confront as a unified force.  The landscape is ever changing, and we must adapt - often just to not lose something that we think of as an unchanging done-deal from long ago.

A rising tide lifts all boats.

Our work together improves not just our lot, but all people.  Even the non-union theatre benefits from our work.  Non-union wages are based on union rates, and though they do not have benefits like pension and health, wages would certainly be much lower if producers did not refer to Equity agreements when budgeting these jobs.  Globalization has made manifest the difference in what our working conditions are compared to those in other countries. If you've been following anything about how smartphones are made or the conditions for garment workers in Asia who make clothes sold here for pennies, you know that there is gross chasm of inequity between us and them.

We're fortunate that we are in an industry that is not out-sourceable.  We are in a strong position when we stand together for change.  Of course, our primary work must always be to better the lives of stage managers and actors.  And by our becoming ever stronger, we can then join with other labor organizations - in our industry as well as others - and make life in all of America (and yes, the world) better.

I know it's hard to get misty-eyed when talking about the Labor Movement. I come pretty close, though, thinking about the people I know who serve on Equity committees for no compensation other than the knowledge that they are doing good works. Even our paid staff, many of whom could probably find better-paying jobs, serve Equity's membership because they believe in something higher.

So, all that "proud Equity member" jazz in my playbill bio?  It's a big deal.

Can You Build Your Own Website? (Yes, You Can)

CAN YOU BUILD YOUR OWN WEBSITE? - YES YOU CAN!

By Buzz Roddy, Eastern Region Principal Councillor.

December 8th NYC Council Room of AEA - In an effort to help members more elegantly sail into the computer age, the Eastern Region Membership Education Committee sponsored a seminar entitled "CAN YOU BUILD YOUR OWN WEBSITE? - YES YOU CAN!"

"I'm a MAC…" declared the chiseled-jawed Jimmy Ludwig
"and I'm a PC," I countered (with a jaw not so chiseled.)

Buzz Roddy - PC user

Jimmy Ludwig and myself, fellow self-taught web site builders, hosted a seminar aimed at Members & Equity Membership Candidates (EMC's) who have thought a website might be a good idea, but had no idea where to start. Attendees were anxious about sticking their toes in the waters of the information super highway (pardon the mixed-metaphor) and were about 50-50 in their respective PC/Mac usage. Jimmy handled things from the MAC perspective and I, the PC. We fielded questions and tried to quash the fears of the web-phobic. In a lively 90 minutes, we went over how a website can burnish ones professional image and even directly lead to jobs. "Your website is a show," I said, "and you are not only the star, but the director and producer, as well."

Jimmy Ludwig - Mac user

"Why have a website at all?" asked one member. With the ubiquity of the internet in all areas of our business and much casting being done on-line, those who dismiss the web as a peripheral option will soon find themselves out of the loop and in the unemployment line. "We as performers have to keep in step with this technology," declared Jimmy, then holding aloft his iPhone, "in four years, even this will be out-of-date!"

Though not a technical tutorial, we went through the steps involved in getting ones website from being just an idea into a fleshed-out presence on the World Wide Web.

We cuddled up to dreaded terms like 'Domain Name,' 'Webhost' and 'HTML,' (Upon closer examination, they showed themselves to be not so threatening.) We discussed how building a website is a process and that it can cost very little money if you only do some homework. I saw not only the veil of trepidation lift from many faces, but the dawning of comprehension, and in some cases - even zeal.

Emphasizing the importance of keeping ones website current, Jimmy said "Having a website is like having a pet, you have to feed and walk it." Rather than an archival repository, it is better to think of a website as a living, growing document. And I always stress the importance of interactivity. It is good to have something for people to do on every page of a site. That said, just because one has a lot of mind-blowing technology at ones fingertips doesn't mean that one has to use it all. If your website is about you, the performer, don't overwhelm the reader's eye with too many animations; a list of your favorite movies or photos from your last trip to Mardi Gras. Both Jimmy and I are proponents of simplicity. My main rule of thumb - Make it fun, but always be professional.

Should I hire a professional web designer? Some came to the seminar pondering whether or not to hire a pro. Just as when interviewing a headshot photographer, asking to see past work is important, as well as making sure that you and your web designer are in accord about presenting your image. Cost, naturally, is an important consideration.

The questions from the floor came, at first with trepidation, much like the first day of Sex Education class. Web-wise, many felt embarrassed that they didn't know certain terms. Luckily, Jimmy Ludwig is the Dr. Ruth Westheimer of the web world and allayed any abashedness. As the room warmed up, questions came more rapidly as well as answers - not just from me and Jimmy, but from all over the room so that the seminar was more a dialogue than a class. As I said before, Jimmy and I are both autodidacts - everything we learned about web design was by trial and error. What we have learned is what works and what does not. For both of us our knowledge (and our websites) continue to evolve.

To paraphrase a common pop-psychology phrase, "Website design is a journey - not a destination." We gave a cursory page-by-page tour of our own websites and talked about desirable features: photos and resumes, of course, but we also touched on online video and audio demos and security. Many musical performers have need of web marketing for CDs (especially if they are not signed to a label). Some have club acts and want to keep fans updated. The web is an easy and low-cost way to accomplish all these. And in these days of blogs and instant disinformation, ones website can serve as a central source for press and official biographical info.

Jimmy, the MAC user, wanted to have apples available for snacks but thinking it would be partisan, we served oranges.

Buzz Roddy and Jimmy Ludwig are currently serving on Equity's National Council, (the governing body of the Association). Additionally, Buzz is a Vice Chair of the Eastern Region Membership Education Committee and Jimmy is Chair of the New Technology Committee. The Membership Education Committee presents seminars and workshops as a free benefit of Equity Membership. More seminars are planned - so check out the Equity website for specific dates and times.

from the Actors' Equity website December 17, 2008

Who's The Boss?

Poll your average Equity Actor or Stage Manager on how their union runs its business and those that have an opinion at all will usually answer in adjectives: lousy, clueless, out-of-touch, and other such.  Is your elected leadership really so incompetent?

It seems that the only time most members even think about what Equity's Council does is when they run up against some ruling or policy that seems to impede their progress.  And the story that they hear is usually from the producer side.  They don't know what went into a decision we made from our end.  I will not venture to say that everything we do in Council is perfectly realized. We get a lot of things right, but we have some notable misfires over the years.  But most members have no idea what goes on in the Council room.

Of course member apathy is a factor, but who can blame rank and file members for not feeling more connected to their union's leadership?  This divide between the membership and Council is a recurring topic with us. We are often stymied as to what to do, though.

We need your help.  Consider the daunting responsibility that you have entrusted us with.  We are responsible for managing millions of dollars of your money.   We make policies that directly affect you and your way of doing business.  We negotiate the contracts that set the conditions under which you work and the minimum salaries.  You should take an interest.  After all, you're the boss.  Officers and Council serve at your pleasure.

Do you know that any AEA member, in good standing and without interest conflicts (i.e. you're not also a producer) can come and observe Council meetings and Board meetings?  (Each member of Council automatically serves not only nationally, but also as a member of his or her regional board)  We have a meeting of each of these bodies at least once a month.  All you have to do is call your regional office in advance of the meeting and show up.

We always notice when The Boss is in the room.  I encourage you to become more involved.  Any member can run for Council.  Of course, Council service is not for everyone.  It takes up quite a bit of time, for which one is not paid.  Aside from Council service, we have dozens of committees affecting Equity's dealings on policy on many issues.  I invite you to join one or more.  If you have an Equity-related issue, there is probably a committee which deals with that issue.  You do not need any special knowledge to join a committee - just a willingness to show up.  The time commitment is not overly burdensome and work always takes precedence over committee work.  It is usually satisfying.  Sometimes it is even fun.

If committee work is not for you, please attend the membership meetings in your region, if you can. Membership meeting are exactly that - meetings for and about the Members.  Council members are not even allowed to speak during the member discussion period of these meetings - we have to listen.

Stay informed.  Read Equity News.  You can get it in the mail or online. Register for the Member Portal of the AEA website so that Equity can stay in contact with you.  Write letters to Council.  According to our by-laws, all member letters must be read out loud to us.

Learn our names.  And when you see us at an audition or at rehearsal, tell us what you think, Boss.

Inferiority Complex

 

Inferiority Complex