|
I agree with the need for a panelist taking the "trouble with unions" point
of view.
However, ticket price increases don't seem to be as affected by payroll as
folks think. According to TCG's 1999 survey of 98 member theaters,
production payrolls (as distinct from "artistic" in-house staff payroll)
represent only ~17% of total expenses for those theaters. (That means that
production payrolls cost approximately the same as marketing and fundraising.)
If you take the total payroll and remove administrators, the total payroll that
could conceivably be affected by unions only represents ~44% of total expenses.
The TCG report says a major increase in expenses from 97-99 was increase in
designer and management expenses.
However, there are other union / small theater issues:
The argument that you hear in cities other than NYC and LA is that union
rules prohibit actors from working at non-union theaters, and no middle ground
has been established -- as it has in LA and NYC. That lack of compromise seems
to me to be a major issue affecting RAT-type theaters.
Another issue would be: what are unions doing to increase performance
opportunities for members? If 85% of all current equity members are unemployed
at any one time, that seems to me to be a crisis. In a way, this means that the
union is colluding with management to keep the pool of actors vastly greater
than demand, thus driving *down* costs. The union then becomes more of an
accreditation body (like an engineering society) than a union.
Cheers,
Cat
> Gaby, no fooling, you should have at least one panelist to take the
> anti-union position. The prohibitive ticket prices of commercial New > York theatre are a major argument against, as is the relative > unemployment level of theatre professionals in all disciplines. TravSD > > |