Comments on: agma “likely” to strike nyco http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/ where opera is king and you, the readers, are queens Sat, 11 Sep 2010 00:54:03 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 Pasta Diva commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-11/#comment-65196 Pasta Diva Mon, 11 May 2009 22:27:14 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-65196 To All, from an AGMA/NYCO shop member: Alan Gordon's letter: Dear Members: Many of you seem very confused about what's going on with regard to NYCO and with regard to the purpose of the bargaining unit meeting on May 18th. First, the meeting on the 18th has two specific purposes and two purposes only: 1) To bring members who work at NYCO up to date on what's gone on thus far and what various options are available to us; and 2) To let members have an opportunity to ask questions and to voice their concerns. That's it. We do not plan on taking any votes about anything. Your delegates and the members of the negotiating committee need to hear from as many of you as have opinions and, thereafter, the negotiating committee and AGMA staff will meet to discuss the best negotiating strategy and our lawyers will plan the best legal strategy to accomplish their goals. As Ive said before, NYCO employees who would like to serve on the negotiating committee should e-mail NYCO Committee @ aol.com. Members employed by NYCO will have an opportunity to vote in favor or, or against, accepting any agreement that results from eventual negotiations with NYCO and, if no agreement results, members employed by NYCO would have an opportunity to vote for, or against, any possible job actions. As to bringing you up to date and exploring options, it's a very complicated matter, and it's not easy to lay out all of the options and examine them next to each other because many options depend upon things not in our control. I wont try to explain them all here, since that's what the meeting on the 18th is for, but I'll try to simplistically state what I think are the ultimate results of the three most likely options: 1) We refuse to negotiate, litigate, prevail in whatever litigation happens and NYCO is forced to comply with the terms of the current contract; 2) We negotiate with NYCO early but after the orchestra and we reach some agreement. If we should reach an agreement, it likely will not look anything like the current contract, it will be for less work and limited guarantees. Such a contract could be for one, two or three years and it can be an entirely new contract or just a temporary interruption in the current one. It's likely we could maintain heath coverage, but it's more difficult to maintain paid family coverage. Members would then have a chance to vote for or against accepting the contract. If a majority of each part of the bargaining unit votes yes, the contract is ratified and, assuming its then ratified by the Board of Governors, it's a contract; 3) We negotiate but don't reach an agreement. In that event there are only two further options: NYCO imposes its own contract and members agree to work under it or members decide that they wont work under it and go on strike. Unless we refuse to negotiate and then succeed in litigation, there's virtually no chance that we can maintain our current contract. The way Steel plans to operate next year, there's simply not enough work to pay for the provisions in the current contract. No matter how well we negotiate or how tough and united we are, if we are able to reach an agreement it's very likely that working at NYCO, at least for the next few years, would be a very part time job at best. Thus, it seems likely that at some point in the next four or five months, the NYCO bargaining unit might be faced with the ultimate decision that often faces union members in the for-profit world: Is it better to accept any work at any terms and conditions or is it better not to even if that means the closure of the employer. Anyway, this is a horribly difficult situation and AGMA's job, and the negotiating committee's job, is to try to find a way in which to accomplish whatever goals seem to reflect the desires of the majority. Please keep in mind that you're all on the same side, even though there will be sharp differences of opinion about the various options depending upon each individual's needs and goals. See you on the 18th. Alan Gordon To All, from an AGMA/NYCO shop member:

Alan Gordon’s letter:

Dear Members:
Many of you seem very confused about what’s going on with regard to NYCO
and with regard to the purpose of the bargaining unit meeting on May 18th.
First, the meeting on the 18th has two specific purposes and two purposes
only: 1) To bring members who work at NYCO up to date on what’s gone on
thus far and what various options are available to us; and 2) To let
members have an opportunity to ask questions and to voice their concerns.
That’s it. We do not plan on taking any votes about anything. Your
delegates and the members of the negotiating committee need to hear from
as many of you as have opinions and, thereafter, the negotiating committee
and AGMA staff will meet to discuss the best negotiating strategy and our
lawyers will plan the best legal strategy to accomplish their goals. As
Ive said before, NYCO employees who would like to serve on the negotiating
committee should e-mail NYCO Committee @ aol.com.
Members employed by NYCO will have an opportunity to vote in favor or, or
against, accepting any agreement that results from eventual negotiations
with NYCO and, if no agreement results, members employed by NYCO would
have an opportunity to vote for, or against, any possible job actions.
As to bringing you up to date and exploring options, it’s a very
complicated matter, and it’s not easy to lay out all of the options and
examine them next to each other because many options depend upon things
not in our control. I wont try to explain them all here, since that’s what
the meeting on the 18th is for, but I’ll try to simplistically state what
I think are the ultimate results of the three most likely options: 1) We
refuse to negotiate, litigate, prevail in whatever litigation happens and
NYCO is forced to comply with the terms of the current contract; 2) We
negotiate with NYCO early but after the orchestra and we reach some
agreement. If we should reach an agreement, it likely will not look
anything like the current contract, it will be for less work and limited
guarantees. Such a contract could be for one, two or three years and it
can be an entirely new contract or just a temporary interruption in the
current one. It’s likely we could maintain heath coverage, but it’s more
difficult to maintain paid family coverage. Members would then have a
chance to vote for or against accepting the contract. If a majority of
each part of the bargaining unit votes yes, the contract is ratified and,
assuming its then ratified by the Board of Governors, it’s a contract; 3)
We negotiate but don’t reach an agreement. In that event there are only
two further options: NYCO imposes its own contract and members agree to
work under it or members decide that they wont work under it and go on
strike.
Unless we refuse to negotiate and then succeed in litigation, there’s
virtually no chance that we can maintain our current contract. The way
Steel plans to operate next year, there’s simply not enough work to pay
for the provisions in the current contract. No matter how well we
negotiate or how tough and united we are, if we are able to reach an
agreement it’s very likely that working at NYCO, at least for the next few
years, would be a very part time job at best.
Thus, it seems likely that at some point in the next four or five months,
the NYCO bargaining unit might be faced with the ultimate decision that
often faces union members in the for-profit world: Is it better to accept
any work at any terms and conditions or is it better not to even if that
means the closure of the employer.
Anyway, this is a horribly difficult situation and AGMA’s job, and the
negotiating committee’s job, is to try to find a way in which to
accomplish whatever goals seem to reflect the desires of the majority.
Please keep in mind that you’re all on the same side, even though there
will be sharp differences of opinion about the various options depending
upon each individual’s needs and goals.
See you on the 18th.
Alan Gordon

]]> AGMA,, AFL-CIO commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-11/#comment-63755 AGMA,, AFL-CIO Fri, 01 May 2009 20:44:47 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63755 Not that it’s relevant to the on-going discussions about NYCO, but I feel compelled to respond to the postings by ‘Sanford’ since he or she is misinformed about the way in which SAG and the WGA are actually run, versus the way in which AGMA is run. That response, which follows, is based on actual knowledge, not websites, acquired over twenty six years of representing talent employees in the movie and television business, and dealing with SAG and the WGA on a regular basis. All three unions have professional staffs, elected officers and governing bodies. The way it’s supposed to work is that the governing bodies come from, and reflect the interests of, the core membership, and establish policy; the professional staff implements those policies; and the elected national officers are working rank and file members who share common interests with the rest of the working rank-and-file membership. It actually works that way in AGMA: Our Board of Governors meets monthly, sets day-to-day policy and our national officers are rank and file singers, dancers and production staff, who regularly work in AGMA jurisdictions. The professional staff provides advice and counsel to those officers and leads contract negotiations, based on their extensive backgrounds in union matters, but does not set policy. The way it really works at SAG, for example, is that the staffs run the union, much of the Board is comprised of out of work actors, and the elected national officers have nothing whatsoever in common with the rank and file working actor. Connie Stevens, Anne-Marie Johnson and David Hartley-Margolin haven’t worked in decades, Sam Freed’s primarily a stage actor, and Alan Rosenberg is so distant from the concerns of SAG’s members that he was just instructed that he is not permitted to speak for the union. The Board’s of SAG and WGA meet four times a year, usually for just one day. The vacuum caused by their lack of involvement in union affairs and their lack of a community of interest with working actors enables the professional staff the run the union the way it sees fit to run the union. At the WGA, if the officers had anything in common with the core membership, they never would have championed a strike, because the strike crushed the lower paid writers but had no effect at all on the handfulls of rich writers who lead that union. Entertainment union negotiations consist essentially of getting more money for members already making a lot of money. In AGMA, negotiations focus on the needs and interests of its core membership, and on defense of their contractual right. Yes, most entertainment unions have similar mission statements. At AGMA we actually try to live out the true meaning of our mission. Not that it’s relevant to the on-going discussions about NYCO, but I feel compelled to respond to the postings by ‘Sanford’ since he or she is misinformed about the way in which SAG and the WGA are actually run, versus the way in which AGMA is run. That response, which follows, is based on actual knowledge, not websites, acquired over twenty six years of representing talent employees in the movie and television business, and dealing with SAG and the WGA on a regular basis.
All three unions have professional staffs, elected officers and governing bodies. The way it’s supposed to work is that the governing bodies come from, and reflect the interests of, the core membership, and establish policy; the professional staff implements those policies; and the elected national officers are working rank and file members who share common interests with the rest of the working rank-and-file membership. It actually works that way in AGMA: Our Board of Governors meets monthly, sets day-to-day policy and our national officers are rank and file singers, dancers and production staff, who regularly work in AGMA jurisdictions. The professional staff provides advice and counsel to those officers and leads contract negotiations, based on their extensive backgrounds in union matters, but does not set policy.
The way it really works at SAG, for example, is that the staffs run the union, much of the Board is comprised of out of work actors, and the elected national officers have nothing whatsoever in common with the rank and file working actor. Connie Stevens, Anne-Marie Johnson and David Hartley-Margolin haven’t worked in decades, Sam Freed’s primarily a stage actor, and Alan Rosenberg is so distant from the concerns of SAG’s members that he was just instructed that he is not permitted to speak for the union. The Board’s of SAG and WGA meet four times a year, usually for just one day. The vacuum caused by their lack of involvement in union affairs and their lack of a community of interest with working actors enables the professional staff the run the union the way it sees fit to run the union. At the WGA, if the officers had anything in common with the core membership, they never would have championed a strike, because the strike crushed the lower paid writers but had no effect at all on the handfulls of rich writers who lead that union. Entertainment union negotiations consist essentially of getting more money for members already making a lot of money. In AGMA, negotiations focus on the needs and interests of its core membership, and on defense of their contractual right.
Yes, most entertainment unions have similar mission statements. At AGMA we actually try to live out the true meaning of our mission.

]]> Alto commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-11/#comment-63645 Alto Fri, 01 May 2009 02:56:05 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63645 My mistake for confusing two companies that I in fact don't know at all (relying on a nieces e-mail like a clueless gay uncle). My mistake for confusing two companies that I in fact don’t know at all (relying on a nieces e-mail like a clueless gay uncle).

]]> fhc commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-11/#comment-63643 fhc Fri, 01 May 2009 02:31:17 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63643 I'm afraid that Alto is wrong -- it's actually Orlando Opera that's declaring bankruptcy, not Florida Grand -- Orlando isn't an AGMA house; its financial problems stemmed from mismanagement. I’m afraid that Alto is wrong — it’s actually Orlando Opera that’s declaring bankruptcy, not Florida Grand — Orlando isn’t an AGMA house; its financial problems stemmed from mismanagement.

]]> squirrel commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-11/#comment-63641 squirrel Fri, 01 May 2009 02:02:50 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63641 La Cieca: Ouch. I'm officially offended by your comment. I never said or implied what you suggest. I happen to agree with you that choruses spend a hell of a lot more time in rehearsal for any given production than an orchestra (who practically sightread the show in the Sitzprobe, and have no staging matters to worry about). And I know a bit about how opera houses work, having served as a chorus master myself. I still think that the chorus should be paid for its time, but do not think that the rights of the chorus should be prioritized over the solvency of the house. There must be a series of priorities. The first is the house. If the house can't afford to do Aida, it should do Jakob Lenz. There can either be a NYCO with or without a full time chorus, but unfortunately the converse does not hold true. Now I'm bowing out of this discussion, because sentiments are running quite hot and I've obviously stepped into a topic where you have either a strong vested personal interest, or a deep politically motivated conviction that I do not share. Cheers. La Cieca:
Ouch. I’m officially offended by your comment. I never said or implied what you suggest. I happen to agree with you that choruses spend a hell of a lot more time in rehearsal for any given production than an orchestra (who practically sightread the show in the Sitzprobe, and have no staging matters to worry about). And I know a bit about how opera houses work, having served as a chorus master myself.

I still think that the chorus should be paid for its time, but do not think that the rights of the chorus should be prioritized over the solvency of the house.

There must be a series of priorities. The first is the house. If the house can’t afford to do Aida, it should do Jakob Lenz.

There can either be a NYCO with or without a full time chorus, but unfortunately the converse does not hold true.

Now I’m bowing out of this discussion, because sentiments are running quite hot and I’ve obviously stepped into a topic where you have either a strong vested personal interest, or a deep politically motivated conviction that I do not share.

Cheers.

]]> Nerva Nelli commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63612 Nerva Nelli Thu, 30 Apr 2009 23:02:03 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63612 Hey, d'agilita, maybe "Lauren, Queen of La Scala" could pack the State Theater if NYCO offered her in thrice-daily showings of those two Pasatieri masterworks she just recorded. Of course, the crowds would be clamoring for Deborah Drattell's immortal LILITH as well. Hey, d’agilita, maybe “Lauren, Queen of La Scala” could pack the State Theater if NYCO offered her in thrice-daily showings of those two Pasatieri masterworks she just recorded.

Of course, the crowds would be clamoring for Deborah Drattell’s immortal LILITH as well.

]]> smalum commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63611 smalum Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:32:06 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63611 or the stage hands..... or the 27 people in the development/marketing department or the stage hands….. or the 27 people in the development/marketing department

]]> Sanford commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63610 Sanford Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:23:33 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63610 Well, if all else fails, I saw NYCO should use the same computerized orchestra we used at Operaworks. One man sitting at a computer console, using his mouse to control tempo and volume. And NYCO should only perform single character operas, such as La Voix Humane. Or for operas that require a chorus, how about doing it a la Sing It Yourself Messiahs? Give the audience scores, and have them sing the chorus parts. A good time will be had by all. Well, if all else fails, I saw NYCO should use the same computerized orchestra we used at Operaworks. One man sitting at a computer console, using his mouse to control tempo and volume. And NYCO should only perform single character operas, such as La Voix Humane.

Or for operas that require a chorus, how about doing it a la Sing It Yourself Messiahs? Give the audience scores, and have them sing the chorus parts. A good time will be had by all.

]]> Ian commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63607 Ian Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:49:40 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63607 @84- you think the chorus is being difficult, just WAIT until the orchestra get wind of a plan to reduce their numbers... @84- you think the chorus is being difficult, just WAIT until the orchestra get wind of a plan to reduce their numbers…

]]> d'agilita commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63604 d'agilita Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:19:42 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63604 For starters: Monteverdi L'Orfeo Argento The Vouage of Edgar Allen Poe Cavalli L'Ormindo Hoiby A Month in the Country For starters:
Monteverdi L’Orfeo
Argento The Vouage of Edgar Allen Poe
Cavalli L’Ormindo
Hoiby A Month in the Country

]]> d'agilita commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63603 d'agilita Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:17:22 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63603 D'agilita advises NYCO to employ no chorus at all and minimum orchestra. Baroque and contemporary operas using between 14 and 20 instruments, simple sets with few stage hands, a smaller space and eliminate most of the administration and NYCO will survive. Within the nexr few days I will be posting a list of operas, both one acts and full length which would be suitable. D’agilita advises NYCO to employ no chorus at all and minimum orchestra. Baroque and contemporary operas using between 14 and 20 instruments, simple sets with few stage hands, a smaller space and eliminate most of the administration and NYCO will survive. Within the nexr few days I will be posting a list of operas, both one acts and full length which would be suitable.

]]> balabanov11 commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63590 balabanov11 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:31:42 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63590 ftr, Gordon did not go to the media first. In one of the many articles buried recently in a Saturday Times Edition, Steele referred to concessions that would have to be made by the Unions - obviously a stupid thing to say, and showing his inexperience in dealing with Union negotiations. Gordon then immediately made his first public utterance concerning the ability of AGMA to strike NYCO. But the first shot across the public bow was by Steele. ftr, Gordon did not go to the media first. In one of the many articles buried recently in a Saturday Times Edition, Steele referred to concessions that would have to be made by the Unions – obviously a stupid thing to say, and showing his inexperience in dealing with Union negotiations. Gordon then immediately made his first public utterance concerning the ability of AGMA to strike NYCO. But the first shot across the public bow was by Steele.

]]> Sanford commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63577 Sanford Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:49:49 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63577 mr. Gordon, your refutation of my comparison to SAG and WGA is egregious, as a google search just showed. You are all run by your members, whether elected to office or not, and all of your members must vote to ratify contracts. Furthermore, you all have nearly identical mission statements, as perusal of all three websites just showed. mr. Gordon, your refutation of my comparison to SAG and WGA is egregious, as a google search just showed. You are all run by your members, whether elected to office or not, and all of your members must vote to ratify contracts. Furthermore, you all have nearly identical mission statements, as perusal of all three websites just showed.

]]> Sanford commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63575 Sanford Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:44:49 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63575 Mr. Gordon, Both SAG and The Writers' Guild are, as you say, run by elected officers. Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't those elected officers working professionals in their fields? Here's the current Board of Directors of SAG: NATIONAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS NATIONAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2008 - 2009 Alan Rosenberg, President Connie Stevens, Secretary-Treasurer Anne-Marie Johnson, 1st Vice President Sam Freed, 2nd Vice President David Hartley-Margolin, 3rd Vice President (listed alphabetically) Angeltompkins Adam Arkin Scott Bakula Molly Ballard Bonnie Bartlett Justine Bateman Mark Blum Joe Bologna Amy Brenneman John Carter Brown Suzanne Burkhead Keith Carradine Seymour Cassel Tom Chantler Paul Christie George Coe Dave Corey Roy Costley Rebecca Damon Anne DeSalvo Maureen Donnelly Cece DuBois Nancy Duerr Abby Dylan Morgan Fairchild Frances Fisher Joely Fisher Nancy Giles Traci Godfrey Elliott Gould Valerie Harper David Hartley-Margolin Sumi Haru Virginia Hawkins Robert Hays Todd Hissong Mike Hodge Ken Howard James Huston Jim Hutchison William Katt Lainie Kazan Ed Kelly Diane Ladd Art Lynch Kent McCord William Mapother Richard Masur Mary McDonald-Lewis Helen McNutt Bill Mootos Esai Morales Sue-Anne Morrow Debra Nelson Pamela Reed Sam Robards Stephen F. Schmidt Matt Servitto Nancy Sinatra Renee Taylor Kate Walsh Sharon Washington Angela Watson JoBeth Williams Jenny Worman Liz Zazzi here's the current board of the Writers' Guild West: Officers & Board of Directors 2008 - 2009 Patric M. Verrone President E-mail David N. Weiss Vice President E-mail Elias Davis Secretary- Treasurer E-mail Board of Directors To send an e-mail, click a name below. John F. Bowman Katherine Fugate David A. Goodman Howard Michael Gould Mark Gunn Karen Harris Nick Kazan Kathy Kiernan Robert King Peter Lefcourt Aaron Mendelsohn Joan Meyerson Phil Alden Robinson Howard A. Rodman Tom Schulman Dan Wilcox So your argument that AGMA is nothing like those guilds is egregious; you are exactly like those guilds. You're all presumably run by your members, whether elected to offices or not, and have your members best interests at heart. In point of fact, you all have nearly identical mission statements, to wit: AGMA is a democratic union, governed by its members. All union officers are performing artists chosen through elections in which every member in good standing is eligible to vote. The Board of Governors, the governing body of AGMA, is responsible for final approval of all contracts, management of union funds, and for protecting all members from unfair or unsafe practices and conditions. Any active member in good standing is eligible to run for a seat on the Board. Elections for the Board are held in three-year cycles and elections of all officers are held biennially. Mr. Gordon, Both SAG and The Writers’ Guild are, as you say, run by elected officers. Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t those elected officers working professionals in their fields?

Here’s the current Board of Directors of SAG:

NATIONAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS
NATIONAL BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2008 – 2009
Alan Rosenberg, President
Connie Stevens, Secretary-Treasurer
Anne-Marie Johnson, 1st Vice President
Sam Freed, 2nd Vice President
David Hartley-Margolin, 3rd Vice President

(listed alphabetically)
Angeltompkins
Adam Arkin
Scott Bakula
Molly Ballard
Bonnie Bartlett
Justine Bateman
Mark Blum
Joe Bologna
Amy Brenneman
John Carter Brown
Suzanne Burkhead
Keith Carradine
Seymour Cassel
Tom Chantler
Paul Christie
George Coe
Dave Corey
Roy Costley
Rebecca Damon
Anne DeSalvo
Maureen Donnelly
Cece DuBois
Nancy Duerr
Abby Dylan
Morgan Fairchild
Frances Fisher
Joely Fisher
Nancy Giles
Traci Godfrey
Elliott Gould
Valerie Harper
David Hartley-Margolin
Sumi Haru
Virginia Hawkins
Robert Hays
Todd Hissong
Mike Hodge
Ken Howard
James Huston
Jim Hutchison
William Katt
Lainie Kazan
Ed Kelly
Diane Ladd
Art Lynch
Kent McCord
William Mapother
Richard Masur
Mary McDonald-Lewis
Helen McNutt
Bill Mootos
Esai Morales
Sue-Anne Morrow
Debra Nelson
Pamela Reed
Sam Robards
Stephen F. Schmidt
Matt Servitto
Nancy Sinatra
Renee Taylor
Kate Walsh
Sharon Washington
Angela Watson
JoBeth Williams
Jenny Worman
Liz Zazzi

here’s the current board of the Writers’ Guild West:

Officers & Board of Directors
2008 – 2009

Patric M.
Verrone
President
E-mail

David N.
Weiss
Vice
President
E-mail

Elias
Davis
Secretary-
Treasurer
E-mail

Board of Directors

To send an e-mail, click a name below.

John F. Bowman
Katherine Fugate
David A. Goodman
Howard Michael Gould
Mark Gunn
Karen Harris
Nick Kazan
Kathy Kiernan
Robert King
Peter Lefcourt
Aaron Mendelsohn
Joan Meyerson
Phil Alden Robinson
Howard A. Rodman
Tom Schulman
Dan Wilcox

So your argument that AGMA is nothing like those guilds is egregious; you are exactly like those guilds. You’re all presumably run by your members, whether elected to offices or not, and have your members best interests at heart.

In point of fact, you all have nearly identical mission statements, to wit:

AGMA is a democratic union, governed by its members.
All union officers are performing artists chosen through elections in which every member in good standing is eligible to vote. The Board of Governors, the governing body of AGMA, is responsible for final approval of all contracts, management of union funds, and for protecting all members from unfair or unsafe practices and conditions. Any active member in good standing is eligible to run for a seat on the Board. Elections for the Board are held in three-year cycles and elections of all officers are held biennially.

]]> The Logical Tenor commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-10/#comment-63569 The Logical Tenor Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:31:43 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63569 La Cieca, you mentioned soaps... but I must call you on forgetting to mention <i>telenovelas</i>. I have it on good authority that <i>Tieta do Agreste</i> and <i>Roque Santeiro</i> are favorites among choristers. La Cieca, you mentioned soaps… but I must call you on forgetting to mention telenovelas. I have it on good authority that Tieta do Agreste and Roque Santeiro are favorites among choristers.

]]> Second Nazarene commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-9/#comment-63567 Second Nazarene Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:30:13 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63567 Getting rid of the chorus won't save the company. The chorus is 1/35th of the budget. Any concessions that the chorus makes in its contract would amount to pennies. There seems to be a long term plan here that Steele would like to implement that means more than just saving money. Given his lack of interest in what most people see as ideals in operatic performance, it's possible he forsees the type of season that stays away from the grand opera choruses that require more mature singers. (No more Carmens, La Bohemes, Turandots, and other works that are taxing on younger singers.) Yes, the demise of the company would be a very sad thing, but I don't feel they are willing to push any group at NYCO to the point of a strike. No one wants that. People just want to keep their jobs. Everything that Steele is proposing to take away from the chorus, associate chorus, and weekly employees is, well, EVERYTHING. Getting rid of the chorus won’t save the company. The chorus is 1/35th of the budget. Any concessions that the chorus makes in its contract would amount to pennies. There seems to be a long term plan here that Steele would like to implement that means more than just saving money. Given his lack of interest in what most people see as ideals in operatic performance, it’s possible he forsees the type of season that stays away from the grand opera choruses that require more mature singers. (No more Carmens, La Bohemes, Turandots, and other works that are taxing on younger singers.)

Yes, the demise of the company would be a very sad thing, but I don’t feel they are willing to push any group at NYCO to the point of a strike. No one wants that. People just want to keep their jobs. Everything that Steele is proposing to take away from the chorus, associate chorus, and weekly employees is, well, EVERYTHING.

]]> ImAudience commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-9/#comment-63566 ImAudience Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:23:26 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63566 All of this may almost be moot at this point. Tkt brochures are not out. At this point, we have to ask whether or not people will subscribe to next season if they've been reading in the press that the season is in jeopardy. Why send money when it's possible that one or more presentations will be cancelled and tkt costs may not be returned? My guess is that even the most loyal subscribers, like me!, will wait to see what happens in the fall. Truly, AGMA, in taking their "negotiations" directly to the public first, is putting the nail into what remained of NYCO's cash flow potential. All of this may almost be moot at this point. Tkt brochures are not out. At this point, we have to ask whether or not people will subscribe to next season if they’ve been reading in the press that the season is in jeopardy. Why send money when it’s possible that one or more presentations will be cancelled and tkt costs may not be returned? My guess is that even the most loyal subscribers, like me!, will wait to see what happens in the fall. Truly, AGMA, in taking their “negotiations” directly to the public first, is putting the nail into what remained of NYCO’s cash flow potential.

]]> PurplePimpernel commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-9/#comment-63564 PurplePimpernel Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:20:06 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63564 @ #84 Arianna a Nasso [slow clap] Bravo! @ #84 Arianna a Nasso

[slow clap]

Bravo!

]]> balabanov11 commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-9/#comment-63563 balabanov11 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:16:04 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63563 referring to #84 referring to #84

]]> balabanov11 commented http://parterre.com/2009/04/29/agma-likely-to-strike-nyco/comment-page-9/#comment-63562 balabanov11 Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:15:28 +0000 http://parterre.com/?p=3577#comment-63562 I think Local 802 would find that a , shall we say, INTERESTING proposal..... I think Local 802 would find that a , shall we say, INTERESTING proposal…..

]]>