Musicals at an Opera House vs. AEA

[VSM]

My point, and opinion, is if you are a member of one of the major performing Unions, an AFL-CIO affiliate, you may not participate in another Union's jurisdiction without benefit of that Union's contract.
It makes no difference if that particular theater is using a contract, it is YOUR Union status that makes you inelegible.

Also, what about union SMs who act in non-union film?  Or, union actors who dance in amateur Nutcrackers?  It seems like the AFL-CIO rule is more of a guideline...


If by union SM and actors above you mean Equity, then there is no conflict in the above situations.  Film is covered by SAG; dance by AGMA.  If you are not a member of SAG you may paricipate in non-SAG films; if you are not a member of AGMA you may dance in non-AGMA productions.

Conversely, just because you are a member of Equity does not make you a member in SAG or AGMA.

[Scott]

My point, and opinion, is if you are a member of one of the major performing Unions, an AFL-CIO affiliate, you may not participate in another Union's jurisdiction without benefit of that Union's contract.
It makes no difference if that particular theater is using a contract, it is YOUR Union status that makes you inelegible.

By that logic, a member of UFT, which is also an AFL-CIO affiliate, would be prohibited in performing in non-union productions.  Or AEA member would be prohibited from teaching high school without an UFT contract.

I have never, ever heard of AEA actors being prohibited from appearing in Non-SAG films or under non-SAG contracts (unless they have also joined SAG).  SAG members are clearly not prevented from working in non-AEA films (unless they have joined SAG).

[RuthNY]

From the Booklet  "About Equity" 
pp. 15-16 (link to .pdf is below)

"Equity rules prohibit members from working, with or
without pay, for any employer who is not a signatory
to an Equity agreement or code, unless Equity has
given prior written permission (for example, granted
for performances sponsored by a religious institu-
tion or to fulfill academic requirements).

Working without benefit of contract is so serious
a breach of your professional responsibility that
such behavior will subject you to disciplinary
action. Such non-union work seriously diminishes
Equity’s ability to stimulate professional work
opportunities, undercuts all other agreements,
creates unfair competition, and is ultimately
detrimental to the welfare of all the members.

Therefore, the same principle applies in accepting
non-union work under sister union jurisdictions.

Should you have any questions regarding this very
important rule, immediately contact Equity staff in
the nearest office. "


http://www.actorsequity.org/docs/about/aboutequity_booklet_06.pdf

[Amy877]

Yes, the principle does apply that accepting non-union work in sister-union jurisdictions is generally not good.  And, I agree that union work is best.  However, originally, we were talking about whether Equity would allow a member-SM to do a musical in a non-union opera house... for instance, someplace like Ash Lawn Opera Festival, a non-union opera house which is doing both CARMEN and MY FAIR LADY this summer.   

Equity would not have jurisdiction in such a case; it would fall under AGMA.  Using Article X - Discipline of Equity's constitution, which defines offenses worthy of disciplinary action, one could argue that Equity could not stop a member working non-union in another juridiction IF the sister-union that HAS jurisdiction gives permission.  See below (underlining is mine).

Section 1 (f) It shall be conduct unbecoming a member to work in the jurisdiction of any other branch of the Associated Actors and Artistes of America for an employer whose employees are represented by the other branch, unless the member seeking employment with the employer first inquires of the other branch to ascertain whether the employer is a signatory to a collective bargaining agreement with the other branch. It shall be conduct unbecoming a member if the member accepts employment with an employer in the jurisdiction of another branch after having been advised that:

(1) The employer has refused to bargain in good faith for a collective bargaining agreement with the other branch and the other branch has declared the employer unfair or has otherwise directed its members not to work for the employer; or

(2) If the employees of the employer are engaged in a primary strike ratified or approved by the other branch."

Nowhere does it say the employer has to HAVE a contract with the sister-union.  I would point out that since Ash Lawn hires AGMA members, their "employees are represented by the other branch" even though the employees aren't on a union contract. 

[VSM]

However, one could argue that the proper jurisdiction lies with AEA and not AGMA.
Then what?

This thread seems to taking a turn towards personal style and whether or not a certain individual will honor his Union obligations or not.

There appears to be a divide that may or may not ever be agreed upon.
Perhaps we can all agree to disagree?

[RuthNY]

Not to re-start or prolong the discussion, but I happened to find these tidbits on AEA's website this morning:

"Today's professional performers must be able to work in every medium: theatre, television, radio, film, the internet and other new media platforms. To protect the wages and working conditions that everyone deserves, members of one union may not undermine another union's efforts to organize professional work opportunities. Simply stated, you may not accept employment in a "sister" union's jurisdiction without the signing the appropriate contract, unless you verify that the second union does not object and confirms that it is not trying to organize or achieve a contract with that particular employer.

Actors' Equity, AFTRA, AGMA, AGVA, SAG and the Italian Actors' Union are all members of the Associated Actors and Artistes of America (4As). This means that we recognize, respect and support each others efforts to organize and negotiate fair and equitable contracts. As a member of one or more of the 4As unions, you are bound by your union's constitution to uphold these provisions

Actors' Equity is currently seeking a contract with the following employers, producers or organizations. Members of AEA and the 4As may NOT ACCEPT EMPLOYMENT until a contract is achieved. If you are contacted about employment, please contact Flora Stamatiades, National Director, Organzing and Special Projects immediately. All calls are confidential."

AND:

"Alert: "Non-Jurisdictional" Fiction, not Fact !

AEA and 4As members should beware of ANY audition notice claiming that a production or project is "non-jurisdictional" or "not in any union's jurisdiction."

It is highly unlikely that such a claim is correct. This terminology is almost exclusively used to avoid a union contract, when one should be in place.

Please contact Flora Stamatiades, National Director, Organzing and Special Projects by phone at 212-869-8530, ext. 419, or by email at flora@actorsequity.org before auditioning for any live project that claims to be "non-jurisdictional" or "not in any union's jurisdiction." All calls are confidential."


http://actorsequity.org/NewsMedia/news2007/Feb14.4As.asp

[Thomas A. Kelly]

Dear Ruth

WELL DONE! Eliminate the guess work.

Tom

[SM101]

Wow.
This is the verdict, and there are two situations with the same issue. Company #1 is an educational institution that hires professional stage managers. They produce 5-6 operas a year (it's an opera program) and once a year they do a musical. Because the performers are students, they can't unionize the artists. There are a few IATSE crew members, and the directors/maestros they bring in are in unions (though I'm not sure how that side works with the university). Company #2 is a small "opera" company that performs one opera and one musical a season.

I spoke with Equity and AGMA (I'm a member of both). To confirm what many of you have said, AGMA doesn't care what we do. Granted, they don't seem to offer much support to stage managers in general anyway (if any, other than having contracts for us) and in the past, when I've had problems with companies, they have done nothing to support me and the company got away with many contract breeches in the end. So, AGMA didn't care either way. Equity had this opinion: they prefer their members not work non-union contracts, but understand that we do, occasionally, if we work under AGMA jurisdiction.. so they approve because legally they can't. They just want us to be treated fairly, and many non-union opera gigs pay better than MANY union Equity gigs, offer housing/benefits, etc..

Back to the point. With Company #1, Equity said the only way for me to work the musical legally was to do a Guest Artist agreement. The house seats 1,000+ people, so that was my only option. Come to find out the university had worked with Equity quite often, though not in the opera department as much. Luckily, the university is housing me and I was able to save them a great deal on that end, so adding over $2,000 to my musical contract (in benefits, taxes, etc.) wasn't a problem. The fee was close enough to Equity's requirements already so that side of the contract wasn't an issue.

Company #2 was the same situation with Equity, though I also had the option to do a Special Agreement with Equity because their house is significantly smaller than Company #1. #2, on the other hand, wasn't open to spending an extra penny to give me health weeks, plainly. I wouldn't work for them EVER now knowing their disrespect for unions.

Now, I'm not sure if the University would hire me to do a musical again, and I guess we'll see about that.

I just finished a production with another non-AGMA opera house that paid AGMA rates, they just don't have an agreement with AGMA, though I can see no reason why they wouldn't. They aren't against it though.

I would much rather work for companies that offer union-like benefits and pay well than an Equity contract that pays $200 a week. Would someone explain to me how a job that pays like that is respectful? And why a company that isn't anti-union, but pays significantly better (for theater) isn't in our "best interests" as Equity members? I feel the love from the Equity office everytime I call, and they would die for me in a conflicted situation, but they really need to bridge the pay gap within the contracts they offer.. and either NOT require Equity to house SMs, or say "the institution is required to house all members of Stage Management but won't do it in most instances so don't even try." Even NON-union AGMA houses house most of the time. For the love.

I think the original question left out an important piece in the discussion. What kind of contract, if any, does the "opera" house have? Are they an Opera House only in name, or like us, do they produce all opera and then once in awhile a musical. If it is a non union opera house and not considered as a possible theater for Equity to organize, then there seems no impediment to anyone in any union working there.

[SM101]

But Equity does care about Ash Lawn Opera Festival, and will not let it's members work on musicals with that company unless they have an Equity agreement established. They are company #2! Regardless of where it is, unless the company is under an AGMA agreement for the musical (in which case Equity still requires them to pay at least the Equity minimum for the production, even if it isn't under Equity's jurisdiction) if it's a musical performed in English, you CAN'T do it unless Equity agrees to it by establishing an agreement with the company. If you're Equity and are working for Ash Lawn, Equity will have a problem with it.

Yes, the principle does apply that accepting non-union work in sister-union jurisdictions is generally not good.  And, I agree that union work is best.  However, originally, we were talking about whether Equity would allow a member-SM to do a musical in a non-union opera house... for instance, someplace like Ash Lawn Opera Festival, a non-union opera house which is doing both CARMEN and MY FAIR LADY this summer.   

Equity would not have jurisdiction in such a case; it would fall under AGMA.  Using Article X - Discipline of Equity's constitution, which defines offenses worthy of disciplinary action, one could argue that Equity could not stop a member working non-union in another juridiction IF the sister-union that HAS jurisdiction gives permission.