Atlanta Symphony Musicians Accept New Agreement Including $5.2 Million In Concessions

9/26/2012

Atlanta, GA, September 26, 2012:

The Atlanta Symphony Orchestra Players Association (ASOPA) announced that the musicians voted to accept a new Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) for the term of September 23, 2012 – September 6, 2014.

In an unprecedented and extremely painful move designed to keep the music going, ASOPA agreed to every dollar in concessions that the Woodruff Arts Center (WAC) and ASO management have demanded since the lockout began on August 25. In the interest of continuing to bring music to the community and opening the season on time, ASOPA has accepted $5.2 million in concessions over a brief two-year agreement.

The concessions were made against the backdrop of ASO board chair Jim Abrahamson’s claim that the ASO is “on the brink of extinction.” Despite its executives’ dire assessment, the only ASO gesture toward sharing the financial pain is an agreement that CEO Stanley Romanstein, his second in command Donald F. Fox (whose salaries alone were $314,000 and $291,000, respectively, according to the most recent IRS documents filed by the ASO) and three other ASO managers will merely have their aggregate pay cut by 6%. No staff running ASO subsidiaries, including Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre, will be affected. The musicians had proposed that all staff earning the equivalent of their base salary and above share equally in the musicians’ sacrifices, which would have yielded exponentially greater savings.

Those charged with overseeing the ASO have done historic damage to the future of the Orchestra by insisting on an arbitrary “musicians’ share” of $5.2 million. They have set the ASO back over 31 years in work weeks for the musicians and over 10 years in musicians’ compensation, not even taking inflation into account. This will make it all the more challenging to retain and continue to attract the talent that has brought international acclaim and national prominence to Atlanta’s Grammy award-winning ensemble.

The musicians’ costs were a mere 28% of the total ASO budget in recent years, a figure which will now drop to 24%. Yet the musicians will now produce the vast majority of the savings demanded by the ASO and the WAC, absorbing 17% and 14% individual pay cuts in the two years of the agreement. The number of musicians will drop from 95 to 88, a figure that is almost eclipsed by the current ASO administrative staff of 74. The season will be reduced from 52 to 41 weeks in 2012-13 and 42 weeks in 2013-14. The musicians also agreed to shoulder part of their health insurance premiums, and to increased flexibility in working conditions, allowing ASO management to utilize the orchestra in smaller ensembles simultaneously.

When the ASO was last the size and season length it is being reduced to now, the administrative staff was smaller than 15. The musicians are not, and have never been, the cause of financial problems at the ASO, and in light of these agonizing cuts cannot be cited as such in the future. Their world-class performance is in stark contrast to that of the ASO’s leadership, both current and past. Management must be held accountable for under-performance at nearly every level for the past decade. For example, the operations of the ASO’s expensive summer venues, Chastain Park and Verizon Wireless Amphitheatre (where the musicians will hardly play in the future) have repeatedly failed to meet revenue projections. These failures account for a huge proportion of the ASO’s recent deficits. The ASO and WAC boards and the public must demand serious results from management -- results that will begin rebuilding the ASO to major-league status.

The musicians of the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra have agreed to these deep concessions for one reason alone, and that is to do what they do best: continue to play great music for their public at an extraordinarily high level. They hope you will join them in support and recognition of this sacrifice by attending upcoming concerts, donating generously, and recognizing that the people on stage are the assets that must be preserved.

www.ATLsymphonymusicians.com

Facebook: ATLSymphonyMusicians

Twitter: @ATLSymMusicians

96 Comments

Paula Peace

9/26/2012 11:05:19

A somber day in the history of the ASO. There are no words to express the heartache and abuse the fine musicians have endured during this painful lockout. Shame on the deception and lying from ASO management. It will not be forgotten.

Kevin H. Moore

9/26/2012 11:10:27

I'm overjoyed. But I still feel like either the musicians were screwed by management. There should have been larger cuts to the executive branch of management. But then I don't have to live with this the way the players do. If you are all happy, then I'm happy!

Marie Ledford

9/26/2012 11:11:04

I'm so glad you have an agreement. I'm hoping for the best going forward.

Estrogena

9/26/2012 11:17:58

Can we make a donation that will go to the musicians and their expenses ONLY? My heart is full of respect for them but I have no desire to help those entitled douchewaffles in management.

Lachlan McBane

9/26/2012 12:35:40

Yes, just click the Donate button in the menu on this site.

larry link

9/26/2012 13:48:31

Gotta' love 'douchewaffles'. Thanks for bringing some cheer into my day!

Mary Lindsey Lewis

9/26/2012 11:31:49

I am indebted to the musicians who have sacrificed so that the ASO will again bring beautiful music to our city. However, the decisions bringing the ASO to the brink of disaster were made by the management who is sharing very little in the financial plan to solvency. The musicians have a soul - I'm not sure that management knows what that is.

Linda Oulton

9/26/2012 11:45:15

This is a sad day indeed for the arts community in Atlanta. The fine musicians in this orchestra are to be commended for their dedication to their craft and to their loyal patrons and the management of the ASO and especially the WAC should be ashamed of the way they have abused their most precious assets and shown utter disrespect for the souls who died in the Orly plane crash. They have made it very difficult for anyone who supports the musicians and the arts in this city to attend a concert knowing that the money spent on a ticket will not be used wisely by management and that the only people who can make the music happen are not being fairly compensated for their talents, hard work and sacrifice .My admiration for the musicians is tremendous and my disappointment in and disgust for the WAC knows no bounds.

Sharon Bolton

9/26/2012 12:06:59

Bravo, musicians! You have definitely taken the hign road. Let us know if the public can contribute to the musicians without going through the WAC.

Lachlan McBane

9/26/2012 12:38:21

Yes, just click the Donate button in the menu on this website.

larry link

9/26/2012 13:50:30

Sharon,
Pls read Lachlan's comment above^.
And thank you!

Sarah

9/26/2012 12:29:47

Sorry to interrupt the musicians' group hug here, but what did you expect?

In this country, arts are still a business, and if you want to make the argument that artists should be paid highly for producing beautiful music, then go and find the sponsors to pay them, to support your position. Seriously, if you have no positive solution, what have you brought to the table as a remedy?

Concert and endowment revenues are declining everywhere, operation costs are going up, and musicians who are being paid above market rate for their talents will have to either have a really compelling argument, or face the hard bargaining table.

Answer these questions for me:
-- *Why* should the musicians be paid at the rate they are? Give me some justification, other than "that's what they have been paid" to support the current typical salary level? "Maintaining a world class symphony" is not itself an argument -- how does that level of pay do that?
-- Related to that, how would a lower level of pay significantly decrease the quality of the orchestra? How many other (talented) musicians would still eagerly line up for the job if the pay were lowered?

If you can't answer these questions, then you don't really have the power to say why the other side is wrong. And you are not in a good bargaining position. Stop bringing out stupid meaningless statements like the dead forefathers of Orly, 31 years of lost workweeks, 10 years of lost pay, etc., etc.

Bottom line, if you can't "show us the money" or go out and raise it on your own merits, then it's not really the ASO's fault that they couldn't do it for you. Management doesn't have to justify itself in the same way you do. Musicians are employees. Management has to make their own proof of value, you have to make yours.

Don't take this too harshly, musicians. You lost this time, but it doesn't have to be the same next time. Come better prepared with the facts and backup to show why you should be paid what you are (if you should be paid at that level), and you can win next time.

Patrick

9/26/2012 13:05:43

Proof of value? I think the multiple Grammys won by the orchestra since 1986 is proof enough. The competition for a job with this ensemble is intense, and these musicians have proven themselves to be among the best in the country just by being in this orchestra.

How about management? Where's their proof of value? All I see is a poorly managed orchestra with some deep deficits. How exactly is that the musician's fault? Management's job is to get checks in the mail and to put the butts in the seat, and they've clearly failed to do so. Yet according to them, the musicians are the only ones who have to shoulder the consequences. It's clearly the fault of the evil, unionized musicians.

The more I think about it, the more nonsensical your post is. You're saying it's not management's fault that they couldn't raise money. THAT'S THEIR JOB! The musicians aren't hired to raise money, they're hired to play music. Also, I didn't realize that the ASO musicians were being paid above market rate. It seems like their pay is comparable (or at least was) to other major American orchestras. Or is "above market rate" code for "unionized workers being paid too much"?

I understand that the financial situation for Atlanta is serious. I don't think anyone can deny that orchestras all over the country are facing serious fiscal challenges. However, to claim that the musicians are the only ones who should suffer the consequences and that management can get away with not doing their job is ridiculous.

To the musicians, I'm glad you came to an agreement but I'm sorry that it had to be this agreement. I hope you guys can hang on, because when this comes back up in two years I would not be surprised to see the same kind of tactics being used against you. I wish there was something we could do to hold management accountable for their mistakes, but at the moment it looks like we're powerless.

musician

9/26/2012 14:07:33

SO off-base. Please take a long walk off a short pier.

Sarah

9/27/2012 07:25:15

SO off base?

Then why did you musicians just get your asses handed to you on a platter? Try offering some concrete discussion for a change.

Luann

9/26/2012 14:29:52

I'm appalled. Who is supposed to "go out and find the sponsors" you blithely speak of? Management, I kind of think. It is management that is overpaid, not the musicians. If they aren't bringing in the business, they're the ones who need to be taking pay cuts and at least sharing a meaningful amount of the pain with the musicians. Are you under the impression you can just go out and round up a few band directors and get the same sound the ASO produces? No criticism of the band directors intended, who are fine folks and essential, but don't be so cavalier about a level of excellence that is apparently beyond the capacity of some to hear or appreciate.

Matt

9/26/2012 15:05:28

"Maintaining a world class symphony" is not itself an argument -- how does that level of pay do that? "

I take it you didn't attend economics classes? If salaries drop, the ability to retain and attract the best talent goes down as well.

"How many other (talented) musicians would still eagerly line up for the job if the pay were lowered? "

I've played in community orchestras which get no pay at all. We play much of the same music. Not as well. At all. Not even close. Sure, you could fill the seats with lower paid musicians. Why? Why use the main product of the organization as the means to reduce costs? This is the recipe for a spiral down in both quality and in revenue.

" and musicians who are being paid above market rate for their talents will have to either have a really compelling argument"

You have not demonstrated (or even attempted to demonstrate) that they are paid above market rate. What is the market rate for a world class musician? What is the pay of the symphony's talent?

"Bottom line, if you can't "show us the money" or go out and raise it on your own merits,"

It is not the musicians' job to "go out and raise it". It is the job of other people. Tell me--are those people compensated at the same rate today as last year (or the year before)? Why ignore this glaring question: how well are the money managers, those handling the endowment, doing at their job? Perhaps they are doing well in a down economy. Prove it. Don't assume it.

I would ask you to come better prepared with facts, Sara. Please.

Sarah

9/27/2012 07:37:49

Thx for your relatively interesting response.

Let me clarify, so that the debate can be a little bit more productive.

I'm pretty sure I have a good grasp on microeconomics.

Obviously paying musicians a good wage gets good musicians in an orchestra. Everyone knows that, it's not a very profound point that I've missed.

The point you need to address is, why do we pay them, for example (just using hypothetical numbers here for debate) $100,000 per year? If you say that that gets us a certain quality of music, what does $80,000 get us?

If $80,000 - a pay cut of $20,000 -- still gets us very good quality musicians lining up to join and play for ASO, why should we pay them $100,000? Can you explain why you would pay $20,000 more for something than you need to? There is no shortage of musicians interested in playing for the ASO.

That is point 1. If you don't have information justifying why $100,000 is needed, then you're the one missing the facts.

Point 2: is related to point 1 -- let's not compare the wages to musicians at other symphony orchestras. The right comparison is to the wage of professional musicians, period. Let's find out how many professional musicians of a high quality would be willing to play at ASO, for the wage amount offered. You would be surprised.

Finally, point 3: It is the job of people in management to manage the money, and come up with revenue to support the orchestra, and find sponsors, etc. No denying that.

But if musicians are going to make the argument that arts are worth supporting on their own merits, and have given up the generation of revenue as someone else's primary responsibility, PLUS offer no concrete examples/plans to raise revenues, then as employees you just have to accept that what management does to you is somewhat out of your control. If you came with some solutions, you would be in a better position -- if you don't, then you're at a disadvantage in basically having to deal with what others generate for you. That's just a fact of how this place is organized.

Patrick

9/27/2012 08:54:01

So you're essentially saying that the musicians should be forced to shoulder the brunt of the cuts because they aren't doing management's job for them.

Sarah, do you think management should take any responsibility for the financial situation of the orchestra? Do you think that the sacrifice should be shared by the entire organization instead of just the musicians? Or do you honestly think that Romanstein and his cronies should be let off the hook because they control the purse strings?

Matt

9/27/2012 14:30:12

Sarah,

based on the AJC's article, we can estimate that the average annual salary for musicians went from just under $90k to about $74k. Given principal chairs and concert masters tend to push the average up, the median values are even lower. Musicians are being paid less than the average salary for Atlanta now.
http://www.indeed.com/salary/Atlanta,-GA.html

So, the ASO is basically telling highly trained musicians, "come here and we will pay you below average salaries...and we reserve the right to cut that even more". How, exactly, is that going to attract excellent talent?

By the way, when you make statements like "why do we pay them", is that accurate? Are you a part of orchestra management? If not (which I suspect) then you are not paying them. They are not city employees, paid by taxes. You can't say, "why do *we* pay them". They are paid partly from ticket sales and largely from the endowment. How well is that endowment managed? That's the key to the financial health of the organization.

Matt

9/28/2012 06:10:37

I should correct this:

"By the way, when you make statements like "why do we pay them", is that accurate? Are you a part of orchestra management? If not (which I suspect) then you are not paying them. "

Even if you are management--*you* are not paying them. Management is not the ASO. Management is there to facilitate the organization accomplishing it's goals. Handle the financials and the other tasks needed so that the ASO can do the job which the audience and the donors expect. This is not a company where the management is or represents the owners.

For the record--I have no connection to the Atlanta Symphony. I am not even a professional musician. My only conflict of interest is that I am passionate about this music. Those who run this site are welcome to contact me at the email address I have given to confirm this.

Sarah, just to be clear--do you have any conflicts of interest in this discussion?

another sarah link

9/26/2012 15:20:16

i remember when i was sitting in organic chem classes how much faster things would go if people would think before they asked questions because they could often answer them before they asked them. did you THINK before you proposed these questions you asked? OBVIOUSLY in most situations a higher wage is going to draw a better player. show me an industry where that's NOT how it works. therefore, if your orchestra doesn't pay well, your orchestra's best players are slowly but surely going to flee to orchestras that pay better. and yes, there are lots of other talented musicians out there who are willing to play for less, but you neglect to take into account two things. one, we all belong to a union. unions tend to frown upon undercutting other union workers' wages. and two, we all know each other (we're all pretty friendly). thus, we support each other. we're good people. we don't enjoy people treating our colleagues with disrespect and we tend to respond appropriately.
arts in this country aren't ACTUALLY a business. they are a NON PROFIT. what that means is that it's management's job to go out and raise the money - not the musicians'. so really i'm sitting here wondering why management's salaries aren't being cut, because they didn't fulfill their end of the bargain. if operating costs are going up, wouldn't a great way to cut them be to shrink you're administrative staff? people don't buy tickets to see the administrative staff.
musicians may be employees, but they are not the employees OF the management staff. it's not a tiered system like a grocery store.

Elisha

9/26/2012 15:46:35

I'm not going to get all up in arms about this, but yes management does oversee the whole business. Comes with the title. Sure, they get paid a lot. But taking a 6% cut while the people supplying the product, the workers, take 4 times that? That isn't okay. It' just like the gas/ oil companies. Prices get jacked up out the wazoo and who has to pay for it? The little guy who needs to get to work, the people who work to keep the country going. Just because it happens all over doesn't mean it's okay. And with such a comparatively small organization, and a respectively large amount of money, there is no way I could fully comprehend anyone condoning this.

Sarah

9/27/2012 07:43:05

Hope you'll read part of my response above.

Not trying to union bust or get on that bandwagon -- no interest and intention of doing that. But I have a valid point I think you've got to concede:

Regardless of a union, there are many talented people who would be interested in playing for ASO for less money. I might even suggest the quality of ASO would not be markedly different if the top tier of those people were hired, and paid less.

So why, aside from union rules, should ASO pay $20,000 (for debate's sake) more than it should for a quality orchestra? If you can't explain why the orchestra should do that, then you're not in a good bargaining position at a time when everyone is in the hole financially.

Let's not get on to the verbiage of "disrespect" and posturing. We're grown ups doing a professional job. If the work and pay are right, you do it. If your negotiating position is not strong, you don't win -- you can call it "disrespect" or whatever you want, but that's reality.

Matt

9/27/2012 08:47:06

"So why, aside from union rules, should ASO pay $20,000 (for debate's sake) more than it should for a quality orchestra? If you can't explain why the orchestra should do that, then you're not in a good bargaining position at a time when everyone is in the hole financially. "

Why do we have to accept your premise if you haven't supported it with facts? Demonstrate that the quality will be the same. The only way to really do that is to do the experiment (which they are trying) and wait it out. Will this symphony decline in quality? If so, will this be a snowball effect where they are less capable of attracting audience and donors?

The endowment had a positive net worth of about $450,000,000 in 2010. I'm having a tough time reconciling that with the concept that without these concessions the symphony would cease to exist.

We are in tough economic times, which impacts ticket sales and donor revenue. Why make permanent changes during what is likely a temporary downturn?

Now, take the arguments you have applied and point them at the rest of the organization. Why target the orchestra members only? If one could get a president/CEO for, say, $200K/year less, why not pursue that option? If one thinks that in so doing, the quality would not change, why not ask the president/CEO to accept the lower compensation?

This illustrates one of the key arguments that was brought up, but you have avoided--why are the concessions only being asked of the musicians?

" If your negotiating position is not strong, you don't win -- you can call it "disrespect" or whatever you want, but that's reality. "

Do you really not understand one of the fundamental points of the discussion? Or do you just misunderstand how to manage people? Or are you trying to divert attention away from a weak point in order to "win" some sort of "debate"?

The condescending "we're grown ups" statement tells me that you likely just don't understand the discussion *and* how to manage people.

Many people who leave a position are leaving the management--not the job. The steps taken by the management here are disrespectful. To deny that is to make a huge mistake. One read of the action is this: "I know we asked you to move yourself and your families from all over the world. We promised you a good salary and the opportunity to be a part of a high quality organization. But we are going to reneg on that commitment. We are going to pay you less and accept whatever degredation comes to the quality of this institution that follows. And, no, we won't make any concessions or negotiate."

Try to waive away that as disrespect as much as you might. You can also stand at the sea shore and tell the tide to not come in. It's your right.

John

9/26/2012 16:14:23

Everything about your post is so unbelievably ignorant. Many others have addressed other points, so I will address your statement that, "In this country, arts are still a business". That's a ridiculous statement. If that were the case, organizations like the Atlanta Symphony would adopt business plans that were designed to maximize profits like any other business. Arts organizations, i.e. orchestras, museums, etc. are non profits. Their mission is to achieve an artistic ideal not to create revenue for stock holders. Tickets sales never cover operating expenses. Why? Because it is not a business! The goal is to achieve the highest artistic levels not turn a profit. And it's hard to believe that you can't understand that there's a connection between money and quality. (Is that the case in all other businesses as well? If Microsoft pays engineers 25% less than Apple, so you really think they'll attract equally qualified engineers.) The financial management is the job of the board and management (not the musicians as you seem to think) and they have clearly failed. And since you think it's a business why shouldn't management have to "justify themselves" the way a CEO would if the price of his stock tanked?

Shocked

9/26/2012 18:27:07

@Sarah- your comments are embarrassing and you obviously don't understand a thing about music, musicians, or the impact all of this has had on the musicians or their families! You should be ashamed of yourself for posting such comments...!

Jenny

9/27/2012 02:24:39

I heartily agree with all of the comments in response to Sarah's misguided one and would also like to point out that the musicians offer to close the gap included conceding to $4 million over two years. You seem to imply, Sarah, that they were not offering any financial/salary concessions at all.

James H

9/27/2012 02:41:35

It appears that quite a few people have already said what needed to be said, but if I could interject what I think is the most important answer to any of your questions. You ask why musicians should be paid at that level. (First off, the ASO was making around 75% of under other US "top-tier" orchestras, but I'll just pretend that doesn't matter.) Well, as a music student right now, I can tell you up front that these orchestras are not making mere investments in "mere" intangible qualities of the musicians, such as talent, passion, and ability to work effectively and efficiently with other people. I consider it more of a return in the immense financial investment required in a musician reaching the "top-tier" level. The instrument alone, the medium through with musicians express themselves, can set you back five or six figures. Top that off with what is most often an extremely expensive music education (not only college, but also costly private lessons for many years before college), and, well, you have someone who paid more to get to where they are than a lawyer did. Musicians aren't asking for $250,000+ salaries, either. I think, if anything, you should be asking, "why weren't they making more before the cut?" And if you don't think that a music education is a good "use of money," then, well, sorry. People do it because they're human and it's not only what they can do best, but it is the best method by which they can contribute to society. (Tangent: it'd be an utter folly to trivialize the importance of music in everyday life. After all, what about those hundreds of millions of figurative sheep listening to Gangnam Style all day?)

Also, what did you mean by your last sentence, saying that the musicians weren't prepared with the facts? I'm pretty sure they were; the thoughts I expressed are far from revolutionary. The reason things didn't work out was largely in part to corporate greed, at risk of sounding like a hipster.

David

9/27/2012 03:18:43

It is clear that yes, in the SHORT run there are any number of young people, music students and early-career professionals who play pretty darned well on five- and six-figure instruments, who would jump at the chance (and enthusiastically ask "how high?") to be a member of the ASO at quite a low salary. I know quite a few (some like family, if you know what I mean). But in the LONG run it seems clear that the operation of market forces (as basically a lifelong liberal, it does pain me a bit to tote out that expression, but it applies here) will mean that more competitive salaries will result in an audibly better orchestra with more stable membership. If somebody more knowledgeable than me (e.g., ANY of the musicians, or conceivably someone from management with real and relevant facts at hand based on the experience of other comparable orchestras) wants to disabuse me of this notion, please do so.

Sarah

9/27/2012 08:43:40

Thanks for one of the better thought out contributions here.

I respect that musicians have paid a lot and invested a lot in their preparation. But labor value in this country is not that you get paid based on what you put into it. If that were true then philosophy and literature grads would be pulling down 6 figures for their knowledge of metaphysics and Latin -- and musicians for that matter. No, rather, people get paid based on what *demand* there is for their services.

An for musicians, in our case, if there is not intrinsic "knocking-on-your-door" demand, then we leave it in the hands of others fundamentally. And when we bargain, it's based on our position strength, which isn't that great at the present moment.

Thanks.

the other sarah link

9/27/2012 11:25:29

sarah, i've read all of your responses. based on your insistence on equating the arts with all other forms of labor you've opened the door to the following discussion. what you are implying is that a painting by van gogh should cost the same as a painting painted on broadway by a homeless person. it doesn't matter how much training went into the creation of the painting, it's about what they can get passers by to pay for it. and by the way, "disrespect" and "posturing" are quite a bit more than "verbiage." perhaps you are new to the classical music contract negotiating scene, but a similar situation of management trying to screw an orchestra happened in louisville. management was advertising for musicians on Craigslist. i'll let you go ahead and research whether or not the verbiage of disrespect was influential in filling the empty positions.

James H

9/27/2012 23:30:07

Hi, David:

It appears you cannot reply to replies of replies, so hopefully you can still find me here. Many people are aware that the profession is quite competitive, but few are sure about specifics. I have gone through auditions in which as many as 300 people applied, and about 150-200 showed for an audition with the opportunity for ONE person to get the job. Some compare the competitiveness to becoming a professor at an Ivy League university. One of my great teachers (who was in the Chicago Symphony for some time, so I think he's well worth his weight) once said, "don't go into music unless you are okay with not knowing where you'll live." I also know of people who have made a major concertmaster position without getting past the preliminary rounds of "second-tier" auditions. There's absolutely no predicting your job prospects, so you'd be just shy of the "idiot" label if you are so discriminating as to not bother applying to the ASO to this end. For many, they have to seize the opportunity when they can. Thus, the ASO is built on reputation, not as much salary. Not to mention that many of the better-paid orchestras are also in regions with a higher cost-of-living, which adjusts for this discrepancy some.

James H

9/27/2012 23:30:13

David

9/30/2012 07:13:32

David

9/30/2012 07:23:53

James H, thanks for the enlightening specifics about the nature of the competitive audition situation, and the valid subtle points about the limited effect of raw salaries. Even if I didn't have family/friends who hope soon be on the orchestra musician job market, I can easily identify with both your comments and those that you attribute to your CSO teacher. Much the same is true in the academic job market, also. If you want the substantively professionally best job/career possible, you can't be picky about geography unless absolutely necessary due to the parallel professional concerns of a family member or some other compelling personal reason. That's actually how I ended up in Georgia, although I like it here just fine, plan to stay, and would make the same choice again. Also the point about salary relative to local/regional cost of living is a crucial one that may seem obvious to many but I think is nevertheless often largely ignored.

Doris Preucil

9/26/2012 12:31:44

This is heartbreaking! How can management even hold its head up in public?

FJS

9/26/2012 12:52:46

And John Sparrow is laughing all the way home in his Mercedes Benz.

William

9/26/2012 13:21:52

As a 24-concert subscriber, I am elated the season will go forth.

This current situation is an outgrowth of the dismal state of this nation's current economic state. We are slowly becoming a nation of subjects whose primary mission is to support an ever-growing federal government and its endless regulations, fees and taxes.

Simply put, the more money that goes to the public sector, the less that is in the private sector (to spend on things like food, houses, cars, and yes, the arts).

If you want to improve the arts universe, then improve the economy as a whole. "A rising tide lifts all boats."

The long term solution is to reverse the trend that brought us this economy in the first place. Cutting government spending and leaving more money in the hands of the people is the only real solution to combat the economic problems within the arts community as well as the nation as a whole.

It may seem antithetical to what we've always heard, but next time you have a choice between voting for a local or national candidate who promises more spending (maybe even on the arts), and someone who wants to cut spending (maybe even on the arts), perhaps you should consider the global [outside your little world] consequences of your voting decision. Because in the end, the people are able to spend money much more efficiently than any government entity.

This comes from someone who loves the arts dearly, and moved to Atlanta from another state largely because of this city's orchestra. Indeed, if the ASO were not here, neither would I.

larry lemaster link

9/26/2012 13:54:54

William,
Your thinking is so very much like mine. Are we by any chance related?

larry lemaster link

9/26/2012 13:55:07

William,
Your thinking is so very much like mine. Are we by any chance related?

JoBlo

9/26/2012 20:18:00

Is there an echo in here?

Christina

9/27/2012 04:22:02

Not taxing people as if this will miraculously find ways to the orchestra world in the US is nothing but a ridiculous pipe dream that has no basis in fact. Countries where orchestras thrive are countries who fund their orchestras with government funding. Almost every town in Germany has their own orchestra. Large cities have multiple orchestras. That aside, these German orchestras operate with their funds going mainly toward their product; the musicians, music, concert production, advertisement of their concerts etc...Because there are none to little government funding of orchestras, US orchestras spend a lot of their budgets hiring people to work in the bureaucracy of fundraising, ie begging the wealthy and corporations for funding. This has very little to nothing to do with the product itself.

Julie

9/26/2012 13:43:58

I cannot believe that the ATL musicians agreed to this travesty, after a 4-week lockout. I suggest that the public be appraised of this article: http://www.artsjournal.com/slippeddisc/2012/09/breaking-atlanta-lockout-is-over-as-players-cave-in.html

Something is rotten in ATL.

Terry Orcutt

9/26/2012 13:50:26

@Sarah

#1 Why are the musicians paid that rate? They are paid that precisely because that is the going rate for symphonic musicians near the top of their field. The Atlanta Symphony is in the echelon typically called the 'second tier' (as opposed to the traditional 'top five':Philadelphia, Cleveland, Boston, Chicago and New York) with other esteemed orchestras like San Francisco, LA, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, etc. These groups all pull talent from the same pool. They, consequently, have mostly equivalent pay structures. This is because they have determined that this is usually the minimum amount they can pay for the talent they strive to attract.

#2 How would less pay affect this? Relating to my previous response (and just as in sports), if you don't pay for the talent, it will go elsewhere. Young VERY talented players (the pool of young players that can play at THIS level is smaller than you think) will follow the money. Seasoned players will be VERY tempted to leave for better paying orchestras if nothing is keeping them at their post. This is precisely how this will have a detrimental effect on the ASO.

And to your other point that musicians should 'find sponsors' and management 'doesn't have to justify itself in the same way you do', this is VERY naive. The whole PURPOSE of the board and management is to a) justify itself by b) finding sponsors. This is the job of the board to oversee the institution their predecessors worked so hard to build by putting a viable management team together. This is the job of the management to develop a working symphonic organization, find the sponsors, crunch the numbers and be beholden to the board for DOING THEIR JOB!

I am a classical musician and have been a stalwart fan of the ASO for many years. From my vantage point, the ASO musicians are almost without equal. They have continually produced album after album of exquisite musicianship that can be held up against the highest standard and the equal of any other recording orchestra. To my eye, the musicians HAVE done their part. They have more than lived up to their end of the bargain set forth by the institution to be the best orchestra they can be. The management and board have chosen to ignore this and paint them as the greedy bastards.

James H

9/28/2012 21:36:23

This isn't horribly relevant to the discussion, but I mentioned earlier that I think the somewhat lower salary for the ASO is mostly attributed to cost of living rather than it is an inferiority complex to the "Big Five". That term is fairly dated by now, and many will argue that the very best are ones other than these "Big Five". I think the top echelon is a bit larger today than in the past.

Myth buster

9/26/2012 14:19:31

Runaway govt growth = demonstrable myth except the military and medical expenses.
Rich can keep all their money minus 14% now. (ask Romney)
ASO arose when they could give 90% to govt. or 100% to ASO. That's a tougher sell for any arts exec, much less horrifically incompetent ones like these.

larry lemaster link

9/26/2012 14:31:56

Actually the fact that we're $16,000,000,000 in debt is proof to me that we have runaway government. When 47% of people pay non Federal income tax a lot of rational people would say that's part of the cause. We don't have a taxing problem in this country, we have a spending problem!

Dominique

9/26/2012 14:39:24

Dear ASO Players,
As a member of the ASOC, I have been privileged to have the best seat in the house on numerous occasions. Even in works where we do very little singing and quite a bit of waiting on stage, I feel connected to you. I breathe with you when Spano gives you a cue and even find myself leaning forward with you during crescendos. The audience also feels the connection. This is most evident during “Christmas with the ASO” when they join us all in performing familiar carols, singing with abandon, the joy visible on their faces.

My feeling of connectedness continues today and my heart aches for you. I am saddened at the loss of players that this deal means and worried about future losses as some of you may choose to leave the ASO and play elsewhere. I am ashamed of the WAC for how they’ve treated you and I’m outraged at the disparity between the sacrifices you have agreed to compared with what upper-salaried WAC management was willing to concede.

Please know that you matter. Your music matters.

As a member of the “amateur” chorus, I don’t get paid by the WAC. I don’t sing for them. I sing for you, and I’m so thankful that I will have the opportunity to share the stage with you again this season.

I will be in the audience on October 4. While I normally dress up for
symphony performances, that night I will be wearing our new T-shirt. . . because thanks to you, The Music is Ongoing.

Thank You,
Dominique Petite
Alto I
ASOC #365

larry lemaster link

9/26/2012 18:32:28

Dominique, I think you may be the love of my life. From the bottom of my heart, thank you for your support.

Joseph Robinson link

9/26/2012 15:43:21

My wife Mary Kay and I were members of the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra when Robert Shaw first began to create in Atlanta a first-rate ensemble and the finest symphonic chorus in America. It was a time of the so-called "Culture Boom" in America, when the Ford Foundation representing private philanthropy and the Natonal Endowment for the Arts representing unpreceedented public support actually worked together to encourage orchestra expansion. It was also a time of the beginning of professional orchestra management, created as a cartel by Ralph Black and the American Symphony Orchestra League. Now that music directors are parttime, board members musically unenlightened, and players still disenfranchised, it is managers like Allison Vulgamore who are in charge of the orchestra world. Theirs has been a very fast track to corporate wealth and power---and never more than now, when they are rewarded for cannibalizing their own institutions to save their employers' money. Retrenchment is the only strategy exhibited by orchestra managers in America today. For $300,000 a year can't Romanstein think of anything better than that? I have seriously advocated an unprecedented approach to public engagement with symphony orchestras for fifteen years. Challenge St. Louis to "symphonic supremacy" in home and away concerts this season and watch Atlantans' interest in and support for their orchestra go once again through the roof!

larry lemaster link

9/26/2012 18:39:09

Joe, thanks for your support. Evem though our paths didn't cross, you and I know we have a hundred mutual friends. As a now-deceased but still beloved friend used to say: "When you get a pimple on your butt in NY, everyone in LA knows about it the next day.
As a 39 yr; veteran of my band, I thank you from the bottom of my heart.

Dawn Hannay

9/27/2012 00:03:49

Bravo, Joe! As usual, you hit the nail on the head. These are terrible times, and this should never have been permitted to happen!

George Curran

9/26/2012 17:05:18

The musicians are not happy. We have been treated like dirt. With no options, we have to work with the thugs who are managing us. Thanks to everyone in the community who have so passionately supported us throughout this!

George Curran

9/26/2012 17:37:31

Math equation:
3 (built in structural deficit for VWA) x 7 (years VWA has been open) = 21 (very close to the 20+ million dollar ASO deficit)

musician

9/27/2012 02:06:43

Thanks Allison! Gamble, lose, and get rewarded. It PAY$ to mismanage an orchestra. See you in hell.

Justin

9/26/2012 17:43:52

I am sorrowful for the ASO musicians. I cannot believe that the scumbags that run this wonderful orchestra are getting away with this. Many people think that musicians of this level get paid too highly. This is false. The amount of time that it takes to be a musician at this level is much more than they get paid for. It takes the same amount of schooling as becoming a doctor or lawyer, with the same amount of "studying." The orchestra may have a 9 month season, but the members of the orchestra do not actually get 3 months off. If they stopped playing their instruments over this time, they would most certainly lose their jobs. Also, there is much more work done outside of rehearsals and concerts. Practicing is a must. The amount of hours put in to obtain and maintain a job at this level is extremely large. Yet, the management has a 40 hour a week job and gets paid almost 1/3 of a million/year. I could not believe the number of people in management, either. There is no need for that many people. There is where the deficit is coming from. I am sad that the agreement came on these terms. I wish the best for the ASO musicians.

larry lemaster link

9/26/2012 18:47:14

Have no fear, mein freunde, this will not pass. I treasure your wonderful musicianship. and leadership. We only have to organize to prevent getting screwed without getting kissed in the future. Have no fear, the future is in front of us, solutions are at hand!

Joshua Porter

9/26/2012 18:07:24

I can't find the words to express how much this upsets me. As an engineering student at Georgia Tech, fine arts aren't really a big concern for most people around here. Yet, as a musician myself (horn), my passion for music makes my heart ache as I follow all that's happening with the ASO.
If I weren't a broke college kid, I would gladly support the musicians who inspired me to find a love and passion for music. It's unfortunate that the business and money aspects have such an impact on how the joy and emotions of music can be shared these days, and even more so that the greed of certain individuals can have such a hampering effect on that as well.
I will continue to attend concerts and support all of you musicians in what small ways I can. Just know that you're truly appreciated, and the fact that you're willing to take these kind of pay cuts rather than let the music die is a testament to your dedication an passion. It doesn't go unnoticed. Thank you for making an impact in my life as well as those of countless others. Don't lose your faith in music, the real reason we're all here.

David

9/27/2012 01:25:21

As pointed out in several other responses, it is NOT the musicians’ job to raise money or “find the sponsors,” but the top management’s. And the argument that salary levels will not affect the long-term musical quality of the orchestra is so inanely naïve that it has already been sufficiently rebutted above. “Producing beautiful music” is, indeed, the musicians’ job, and by far the single most important component of "maintaining a world class symphony," but the implication that this is an idealistic and oversimplified position that the musicians have taken is a nonexistent straw man.
Clearly another part of the musicians’ collective job that so many of them that I know have taken incredibly seriously is to make contributions to the metro Atlanta musical community, and therefore in an indirect but VERY REAL way to the ASO organization, when OFF the stage, especially by working with young musicians. You didn’t see this trumpeted or flaunted as a negotiating posture, though – they just DO it – AND continued to do so during the lockout. Unbelievably dedicated, caring, and personable (and, obviously, talented!) individuals like Ronda Repess, Juan Ramirez, Jere Flint, many others that I mentioned in an earlier comment on another site, and many others I know only by name rather than through personal experience, have been building valuable goodwill one student at a time, and by extension one entire family at a time, for decades. This benefits the entire ASO organization in a way that might, in principle, somehow be as measurable as fundraising/sponsorship, but doesn’t need to be measured to be appreciated. It is qualitatively and conceptually clear to me that a very significant segment of the ASO’s audience (and possibly also donor list) has been built in this way by adding entire families as regular ticket buyers whose first contact with the ASO was through the Atlanta Symphony Youth Orchestra and/or the Talent Development Program (AND officially unaffiliated programs founded and run by ASO musicians, like Franklin Pond Chamber Music, Buckhead Youth Orchestra, and others).
I am deeply saddened that the poisonous atmosphere of the late negotiations may sour this tradition that I believe has gone underappreciated by the ASO management, even as, yes, they do support some of it directly, and often competently.

Denise St.P

9/27/2012 01:50:17

This is all very sad for the musicians and the future of this symphony orchestra. It seems this orchestra has been mis-managed and is making the musicians pay for management's mistakes. Surely the repercussions of this unfair negotiation will be felt for years by not only the musicians, but by the artistic community in Atlanta.

mkathryne

9/27/2012 03:31:19

As a patron, subscriber and supporter of the ASO for many years I have been shocked by the treatment of our musicians. The WAC and ASO boards may think that they weathered the PR storm of their actions but they have only created an environment of great distrust and disrespect for themselves. What a travesty! I am certain many people would love to give directly to the musicians and not continue to give their support through the management where unless there are major changes donations will continue to be mismanaged. The cruel and deceptive actions by the boards and management have created a toxic environment.

Barrett

9/27/2012 04:55:29

I find it horrible that it's come to this point for the ASO. The ASO is made up of some of the finest musicians in the world. They are experts at their craft. There is no one in any orchestra's management that can come even close to doing what the performers on the stage do. At the same time, almost any member of the orchestra could do the job of an individual management or staff member could, and maybe even better. Each individual should be paid for what they can do and how well they can do it. The management of this orchestra should be terminated. It amazes me that there seems to be no system of accountability for them. I guarantee that there would be heads rolling if the viola section started to fail so miserably at their job as the management has.

george wells

9/27/2012 05:01:12

You should have all quit, formed a collective non-profit, hired a manager of your choice with a small staff, and you would probably have earned the lower salary anyway, only you would be in charge of your future. But musicians don't have balls, they just know how to play their instruments and go home..

Katie

9/27/2012 05:47:08

@ George Wells
As if it were so easy and money grew on trees! Shame on you for suggesting that the solution were so simple. Where would the symphony perform? Do you have $300 million dollars to build a new hall? Do you have start-up funds for salaries, health insurance costs, pension, highly-qualified staff and managers? Please sir, do not insult the musicians by inferring that they enjoy being bullied by the upper management of the ASO and the WAC. I'm certain they would be happy to leave and manage themselves, but as I stated before, endowments do not grow on trees.

Matt

9/27/2012 07:59:12

Woodruff had almost $700,000,000 in 2010, with $241,000,000 in liabilities--i.e. a net positive value of over $450,000,000. Many of the donors who contributed to the endowment did so with the idea that they were supporting a symphony. If the musicians left to form their own organization, what about the intent of those donors? I doubt the endowment money would go with the musicians. Getting the community to have a positive view of the orchestra is crucial. Educating the younger generation about this wonderful music and the opportunity the symphony gives this community is critical to the long term viability of the organization. How much more "concrete" do you need?

Spark

9/27/2012 05:04:16

It's a sad day for musicians. I'm disgusted by management's actions. Please don't leave for better gigs! Atlanta needs you.

Kevin Johnson

9/27/2012 05:28:01

The Administrative costs for this orchestra are LAUGHABLE. This would make Robert Shaw spin in his grave. Plus a full 105 piece orchestra is now what percent non full time?? Sad.

9/27/2012 05:57:56

i don't mean to come off as a rube –– i'm a professional classical double bassist myself, as well as an arts administrator –– but the topic that always seems to be missing from this conversation (particularly, the one taking place in the comments section) is that cultural tastes have changed dramatically since ... well, they've been changing forever, but i would say for the sake of any conversation related to to classical music that cultural tastes have dramatically shifted since the 80s.

arts administrators blame rising union costs, and dried-up philanthropic sources; musicians blame inflated salaries and unsuccessful fundraisers.

the issue is neither. the issue is that the american educational system, and the american media, no longer puts a premium on intellectual and artistic excellence. i say this with dismay, of course, but the issue is that many of the 30-40-50 year olds who, in one era, were philanthropic and ticket-buying constituents of the so-called "fine" arts, are now ticket-buying constituents of ... i don't know, bruce springsteen concerts. (which is meant with no disrespect to the boss.)

the issue wherein there are only 17 full time american orchestras remaining, is not one of non profit leadership greed, or musician's union greed. it's that "popular" culture (batman movies, lady ga ga, real housewives) is enjoying a period of immense popularity, and those who attend classical concerts are a diminishing pool of former music students, current musicians, tourists, and financial cultural custodians. (i say diminishing pool, because music isn't taught in most public schools, thus drying up one other source of audience.)

what we really should be collectively focussed on as an industry, instead of he-said/she-said bickering, is starting a dialogue on how to bring this incredible art form to life again for the current generation. and, for the record, i'm not talking about dumbing it down by programming john williams music... i'm talking about musicians fighting to get it back into the school curriculum with the same vigor they use in contract negotiations, and arts administrators focusing if not a majority then at least a substantial part of its operations to developing long term strategies that serve our field (as opposed to the equally critical and extremely difficult, "how do we get bodies in seats at next saturday's concert").

until such a time as this has been addressed thoughtfully, and by the right people, we may be having a very different, and much scarier, conversation 25 years from now.

Dean

9/27/2012 09:05:17

Thank you jh!

As I was reading all the way through the bickering I was really boiling up my response - which is very similar to yours. I'm very impressed with how you've articulated what the real problem has been for quite some time now. Here's what I'd like to add, for whatever it's worth...

I am an academically trained composer, performer, and a mentor to professional musicians of all experience levels. I travel and hire musicians all around the nation. They need to read well, memorize, and improvise music in various challenging performance settings. I am constantly learning and therefore sharing in life-learning experiences which cannot occur in a scholastic setting. That being said, the obstacles that today's orchestra world faces are complex but simple.

Because orchestral music program managers have chosen to NOT adapt to what a modern cultural interests reflect, consumer arts and entertainment dollars (charitable and other) have easily flowed elsewhere. A concerted effort has been made by most organizations to not leave out the tried and true traditional pieces for fear that patrons would whine and/or be shocked and overwhelmed by anything too unfamiliar and challenging. One important role music plays for us is that it challenges and inspires us all - not just within the comfort zone but beyond it. If the choice by most managers has been to throw the occasional "4th of July fireworks pops concert bone" to the summer festival picnic-ers and continue to fill the bulk of the season with music that was composed by and for predominantly European people and cultures that were thriving over 6 decades ago then what you see happening in music schools and concert halls is going to continue to happen. It used to be, among many friends and neighbors in the same room, one would take the vinyl LP out of the container and place it on the record player and carefully set the needle on it. Nowadays many modern families choose to watch televisions in separate rooms, vote online for their favorite idol, text OMG and LOL while at the birthday dinner table, share YouTube videos, 'Google' how to get from here to there, and post on FaceBook what Pandora has chosen for you to listen to. How does a concert hall promoter persuade mothers and fathers to buy tickets, gas-up the car, pay for parking, find and hire a reliable and trustworthy baby sitter (or actually bring the kids) to an amazing concert hall for a live performance of a piece of music that has been (and somehow continues to be) reinterpreted over and over again by acoustic instrumentalists for a dwindling amount of mostly elderly professional aficionados?

If the choice by more managers (and patrons) were to commission, support and program more culturally relevant pieces we might see a change. If management decisions were made to integrate the instruments of the orchestra with more culturally relevant music making (i.e all genres and electric instruments - including DJ turntables) then we might see more students choosing to learn and master orchestral instruments and more scholastic institutions not having to cut music education programs or fewer families and teachers weeping at funerals for the escalating 'lost-students-gone-postal' epidemic.

Let's ask anyone not associated with the music world to name a living instrumental musician and/or composer who's published work is not associated with pop music and/or motion pictures or TV and see what answers we get...

Sarah

9/27/2012 12:19:48

Thanks for your thoughtful writing, JH.

Orchestras have been in decline since the invention of the phonograph. It is a bit silly for either side to fundamentally blame the other for a couple of years' bad finances when the whole century has been a slump...

With that in context, musicians are a bit naive then to completely attribute the result of their reduced bargaining power to ineffective management.

The master carpenter who made horse and buggy carriages was probably mad at his boss too, when he was out of a job.

stringchick

9/27/2012 12:38:06

BRAVO, JH. As an orchestral performer for 20 years before beginning a teaching career, you couldn't be more correct. When Fulton County lost it's nationally recognized elementary instrumental music programs 3 years ago, that was the steepest slippery slope that has come down in quite a while. Parents, educators, and area musicians should have been fighting like crazy to keep it - because musicians must grow their audience!! Unfortunately, the program did die - without nearly enough folks raising a stink. Without education, students, who grow up to be people, just don't know what an orchestra is. I can tell you that when my students - most of whom have NO background as to what a symphony is - actually hear or see a symphony - they are transfixed by how wonderful it is. A DIALOGUE IS NEEDED to this end, and musicians - and parents need to fight to get music back in the curriculum.

Stringchick

9/27/2012 13:02:51

One of the most vocal and tireless supporters of the Fulton County music programs was Joel Dallow - a cellist in the ASO. He wanted music for his own kids, and others in the community. We cannot let what happened in Fulton County - we have no instrumental programs in the elementary grades - happen to the ASO. By supporting music in our curriculum we will strengthen, educate, and produce the audiences orchestras deserve.

Stringchick

9/27/2012 13:09:45

The management of the ASO was conspicuously silent at the time of Fulton County's music demise. WAC is in Fulton County - would one not expect them to take some sort of stand or issue a statement at the very least?

Matt

9/27/2012 14:43:14

" i'm talking about musicians fighting to get it back into the school curriculum with the same vigor they use in contract negotiations"

I agree with you. I spoke with a middle school teacher recently and asked about what music they are rehearsing. None. Basics--how to play. Since there is no music in the elementary system, they have to teach kids the absolute basics in middle school. Without enough instruments (kids sharing instruments).

This is where we pass on an amazing part of our culture, and we are failing as a society.

Most, if not all, orchestras do considerable community outreach. ASO: http://www.atlantasymphony.org/EducationAndCommunity/Index.aspx

As you note, with only 17 full time orchestras, how much of the country gets the benefit of this outreach?

ASO has fewer than 90 full time members now--how much can they do in Atlanta, much less over the "territory" they have?

Thomas E. Kail

9/27/2012 07:02:38

It is sad that a regional urban center like Atlanta cannot support a first rate symphony orchestra. The orchestra has musicians who are world class, the best or among the best in the world. They have dedicated their lives to perfecting their talent and they make the world better for their contributions.

I am also saddened by the inept leadership that management has shown. That they do not, however, share the risks for their ineptness is the norm today in our business culture. We are less because of that.

I believe that Atlanta's image is enhanced because it has an orchestra that ranks among the best in the U.S. Culture matters! It is a quality of life issue.

A few years ago I organized a national conference that was held in Atlanta and a guest asked me the following question: "What is the one thing and only one thing that if you were visiting Atlanta that you would not want to miss seeing?" How would you answer that question? What would you point to and how many things would rank as world class? How many would fall in the area of culture and provide citizens regularly with a rich cultural experience that they could not find in another city?

Are those not questions worth pondering today?

Virginia

9/27/2012 15:11:44

@ Sarah, Sure, the musicians can go out looking for sponsorships and YOU can fill in for the Rite of Spring, Tschaikovsky 4 Piccolo part or ANY part. Give it a go.

almore

9/27/2012 15:50:08

I didn't realize that symphony orchestras were corporations with diverse products for sale; I always thought the music made by the musicians was their only product. If management is worth so much money, maybe the musicians should walk and let management offer their valuable talents directly to the audience.

Peter

9/27/2012 16:58:01

This is a lesson in financial literacy. If you are going to strike, you must have a reserve fund in place to create leverage. Hopefully in two years the musicians can hold out longer and create more pressure on management.

Shane

9/28/2012 00:52:11

@Sarah,

Nice try, secret ASO manager. You convinced absolutely no one.

Michael

9/28/2012 08:12:52

I would like to add some thoughts to everything what was already said. First of all, it is very sad that the management of the orchestra became a highest authority and actual musicians do not have power to control management. Orchestra can't say 'we don't like you, you did not good enough, you are fired', or can they?

Second of all, I think it is almost impossible for non-musician to understand how hard the work of professional musician really is. For many people musicians are just having fun by doing what they like. Those musicians, who spent most of their life to reach the perfection in making music, they work with the level of intensity and commitment that not many people are capable of on their workplaces.

Finally, we can speak that there are hundreds of musicians who would work for less money with almost the same quality and few guys from the audience will recognize the difference, but that is not what orchestra is. Such orchestra as ASO has the history and traditions, the ensemble of world-class musicians who used to play together for many seasons. That what makes the great orchestra. And that is what in danger if the situation will continue to get worse.

Sarah

9/29/2012 16:42:47

Well, at least someone acknowledges that the orchestra could exist with equal quality at lower pay.

To your point about continuity and tradition, that is a worthy goal, but not something that is only achieved by keeping the same people at high pay for years and years. Think of the ASO 10 years ago (if you were here) -- and how different it looked. If almost the whole orchestra turned over right now, a few years from now I think you would be surprised that you still have tradition and quality.

Michael

9/30/2012 05:40:46

I think my concerns is not about existence for the lower cost. Let be honest - can management exist for less money with the same quality - of course! Can NHL-team owners, CEO, top-managers, and many others still exist with less salaries? Yap, they can. The whole topic is not about that, I think.

What is 'high pay'? Relativity of these words makes it nonsense. 'High pay' in this particular economical situation, or in general? Does management get 'high pay' or 'low pay'? If it is 'high' they can make it lower and everybody will share losses according to economical situation. It is just frustrating that orchestras became such complex organizations that 'orchestra' and 'musicians' are separated from each other although it should be the whole by the definition.

Dean

9/30/2012 07:02:54

When given the choice between bringing the family to the Aquarium or the concert hall, which one has our community been choosing and why?

I've seen us so-called adults blaring pop music from car speakers while lining up at the McDonald's drive-thru windows and texting as we eat and drive away. I do not see us sitting politely in fine restaurants enjoying an adult conversation without the inclusion of cell phones as often. You get the picture; things ain't what they used to be. I used to see and hear children playing outside unattended in the neighborhood streets. I insight that what more often occurs is a fixation on video screens and audio speakers of all sizes. An intensifying frenzy of internet activity that is integrating with cable/satellite TV technologies. As this inevitable intracommunity continues to be more engaging we must interface with it as wisely as possible. Changes on all behavioral fronts are occurring based on the activity and feedback such digital culture enables, encourages, and inspires. How can acoustic orchestral music (or anything so traditionally analog) compete with such a paradigm shift?

I have some realistic programs in mind that I won't share in this blog but I will suggest the following to refocus the attention and stimulate creative discussions on the real audiences and real current cultural behaviors in Atlanta (and the many other major cities with dying orchestras).

"Feed mayonnaise to the tuna..."

Present an orchestral program on PBS with Bruce Springsteen at the Atlanta Aquarium conducted by John Williams.
Furthermore, create educational music arrangements for acoustic music school programs that integrate with electric music programs. The sooner this happens, the sooner the car companies will learn about and become interested in the wisdom of the blacksmiths and hopefully, blacksmiths will get hired by the car companies in some modern capacity.

I'm not suggesting that we start making horse shoes out of aluminum. High quality, traditional acoustic music will never actually die. Especially in the private scholastic environment. It must realize though that it is, and has been, a hungry Panda that will die off without patronized endowments.

Hopefully this will encourage discussion on further reaching comprehensive orchestral program strategies instead of who's at fault for not adapting to the relevant interests of the modern digital culture that more and more of us our finding our dusty oboes and cassette tapes in.

Anybody wanna buy a horse and carriage?

Stephen Swift

10/1/2012 17:40:36

Surely the most obvious point here with respect to supply and demand is that there are far fewer highly talented musicians than people who could do a competent management job.
Management are highly paid simply because their greed, delusions of self worth and lack of morality mean they choose to abuse their position in charge of the purse strings (this almost always tends to be the case - those closest to the money can't bear to see those generating the money earning more than they do, even when they ehemselves add little or no value).
In the case of the ASO it seems that the management have been doing no better than any random Joe off the street could have achieved, whereas any random Joe off the street most certainly couldn't play in the band!!

Linda

10/2/2012 08:09:44

I wonder what might happen if management were chosen the same way musicians are - by blind audition. Musicians are asked to play various excerpts behind a screen, and a panel listens for tone, style, accuracy, etc that they think best fits with the orchestra. It has very little to do with resume or experience or who you know. In the same way, management candidates might be asked to write anonymous essays on the "need" for classical music (thereby producing a few management types who actually believe in it), their favorite composer and why (thereby producing folks who actually know something about music), and their vision for the orchestra and development (thereby providing the opportunity to find those with workable goals and ideas.) By doing it anonymously, we could perhaps avoid the high-salary jobs being passed along to friends or recycling "experienced" failures from other orchestras.

Brandy

10/2/2012 10:00:20

I have been following this and it's really hard to pick sides however to be frank, the orchestra isn't that big of a deal in Atl and I am a native. This lockout wasn't on television or really in the paper. We aren't talking NY or Chicago. These musicians were paid VERY well and still are. They went on a lockout for the summer and then caved before the first concert. All bark and no bite. They should have not given in and then let management explain to the ticket holders why their musicians aren't playing. If the musicians wouldn't have folded so soon, they may have been able to bargain. Instead, they look weak. These musicians will be fine with their paycuts. If you don't like it, leave. I am sure someone just as qualified is eager for your spot. The musicians still make very good money. You aren't on a pedestal and not a celebrity so just get over it and do your job.

Matt

10/2/2012 10:04:33

Brandy,

do you manage people? If so, my guess is you aren't very good at it. Such contempt for workers is going to come through.

Live what you say--take a 20% pay cut. If you don't like it, leave. Come back and let me know how that works out.

Brandy

10/2/2012 10:09:28

A lot of people have had paycuts in this economy. When people aren't making money, do you think they are going to spend it on the arts? I am sure they would prefer putting food on their table.

I have taken a paycut and it wasn't easy but these musicians are still paid VERY well. Times are tough. All I am saying is if it were that big of a deal to them, don't fold before the first concert. Management had the upper hand the entire time and still do. Now they have to go back to work for them and I am sure that won't be too pleasant.

Matt Carey

10/2/2012 10:33:54

Sounds like blaming the victims here. They take the pay cut, *and* they are at fault because they should have fought harder.

They are paid well? At under the average salary for Atlanta? Did you ever make that comparison? I did.

And, because they gave in, it isn't a "big deal" to them?

Are ticket sales down? You imply that, but is it the case? Question for you: how much of their operating budget is from ticket sales and how much from the management of the endowment? My guess is the answer will surprise you. Who is responsible for managing the endowment? My guess is you know the answer to that one--it isn't the musicians.

It won't be a pleasant working environment for the musicians, true. But management (and, thankfully, the public) gets the advantage that the musicians are professionals who are trained to give their best even when life is unpleasant.

Taylor

10/5/2012 20:37:36

Why should musicians make the average salary? What does average have to do with what someone gets paid?

You get what you can command in the demand for your services, what you can negotiate, or have the bargaining power to get.

Matt

10/8/2012 06:30:06

Let me recap--I was told about how the musicians get such high salaries and I pointed out that the base salary is actually below the average for Atlanta. In response I am asked why should they even get average?

Can we just skip to the end of this "logic". Why don't we ask them to work for free? Or, even, they should pay. I bet Atlanta could (and probably does) field an OK community orchestra. Heck, I'd pay for the opportunity to play in your concert hall. The question is, would there be enough audience to pay? Would donors contribute?

Another question which may not be of importance to you: are we willing to give up on excellence?

The ASO attracts excellent musicians. Do you think their ability to attract the quality they do will be hindered in this scenario: "That was a great audition. We'd like you to leave your home state or country and come to Atlanta. We can offer you a below average salary and the chance to play with an orchestra which used to win Grammy awards."

At the present salary, and comparing to information on 2010 tax forms, the highest level executive makes about 10x the base salary for musicians. What if we took the same logic that has been submitted above: have an open audition and see if you can get a line around the block. You don't even have to prove you can play a musical instrument. And, if the orchestra's finances run into trouble, you can make up the difference in other people's salaries.

I realize I am biased. As a kid my record collection was largely orchestral music. I had recordings of the Atlanta Symphony under Louis Lane. I am proud that America has fielded excellent orchestras. I have a small idea of what sacrifices it takes to make the level of musicianship of such a fine orchestra. I also know that such excellence come from focusing full time.

I also come from this approach: when someone makes more money than I do, in my own field or elsewhere, I think "I should make more" not "He/she should make less".

Curious

10/3/2012 03:24:49

I am a donor and volunteer to the ASO and a question comes to mind as I read these comments. How many commenters on here are donors to the ASO. It is fine to complain about management and say that they don't know what they are doing, but are you willing to step up and help. It is just like voting in an election. If you don't personnally participate, then you don't have the right to complain.

Matt

10/4/2012 13:01:56

I have not donated to the ASO. I have donated to the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra Musicians, though. As well as entertainment groups (including another symphony) elsewhere.

I am curious, are you saying that those who have not supported the symphony can't criticize the management? That is a way to get a very biased viewpoint, which I am sure you will see if you think it over. Using your voting analogy, one could say, "Have you supported the democratic party? If not, how can you criticize Mr. Obama?"

I believe your complaint that people are saying that management "doesn't know what it is doing" is a bit of a straw man. One can say they are making bad decisions without saying they don't know what they are doing. They may know that their decisions could be leading to a lesser quality orchestra over the long term, but be willing to accept that.

David

10/6/2012 01:46:10

To help all of us in our long-term, Big Picture thinking, may I suggest this book, which I just ordered after having attended a symposium led by the author last weekend. At least in the session, he is largely concerned with public policy, but I kept thinking repeatedly that the general questions he raises are clearly related to the issues that have been discussed here:
http://www.amazon.com/What-Money-Cant-Buy-Markets/dp/0374203032

Kate

10/8/2012 05:33:51

As my daughter's piano teacher wisely said, "you will never be able to pay me what I am worth." Thank you Atlanta musicians for sharing your gifts with us.

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Atlanta Symphony Musicians Accept New Agreement Including $5.2 Million In Concessions

Leave a Reply.

Categories

Author

Archives