Live recording and working with union

AFSDMS wrote on 11/23/2004, 6:55 AM

A beautiful new venue is opening near me. I record some performances for not-for-profit enthusiast groups for fun and to keep my hands in the business. Do multi-track, post-production mixes, all the way through preparing master CD and artwork for duplication.

The new venue is under the jurisdiction of IATSE. I've never done a recording in a venue that was union. As I understand it, right now they are still working on a comprehensive contract.

Anyway, does anyone have experience working a live performance where the performers wish to be recorded but not just through the sound reinforcement system). I'd like to be familiar and sensitive to how the working relationship would normally be set up. With an operation done mostly out of love I can't afford to hire a team when I already have several volunteers who help.

BTW, this area is apparently under IATSE 2, between Chicago and Milwaukee.

Any experiences appreciated.

Thanks

Comments

Chienworks wrote on 11/23/2004, 7:34 AM

Oh, i could go off for hours about unions! ;)

I'm not a member of IATSE, even though i've received many invitations. Lord willing, i'll never be a member of any union. In my own personal opinion, the only things unions do these days is stand in the way of getting work done and cost the consumer way more money than necessary.

That being said, i do have a very smooth working relationship with the local IATSE group. It may be mostly because of the small area i live in, but the IATSE members here also seem to realize that if a customer wants to hire me then they're not going to get the business anyway. It also helps that i have several close friends and many good working relationships with the IATSE members. I respect what they do, they respect what i do. Musicians often choose me because of my reputation or because they are familiar with me. IATSE doesn't get in my way since i don't get in theirs.

If your services are requested, contact the venue and ask their permission. In cases where the musicians say they want you to do the job and no one else they'll often be cooperative. If they're not, perhaps you can offer to attend and assist anyway, and this will help you build a friendly relationship with the union members which may help smooth the way for future gigs.

AFSDMS wrote on 11/23/2004, 9:56 AM

Thanks much for filling me in from your perspective. I've seen your posting up here for a long time and appreciate input from someone I've come to respect.

Since I posted this I actually spoke with the person whose management firm was contracted with to manage this 2,300 seat venue. I told him I was an enthusiast but one who has a multi-year track record of recording certain groups, and that I wondered what was proper protocol if the artist wanted me to record relative to union relations. I asked if he might have a contact at the IATSE union with whom I could speak to find out how I should go about this. I told him it was not only for events in his venue but in the future if I was asked to work in other venues that were IATSE.

The manager was fairly emphatic that he didn't want anyone going around house management (!) and speaking directly with the union. I re-explained that was in no way what I was doing. He said any contacts regarding the facility should be initiated through the house manager. That is a person who will be starting in the next week or so. They are just getting things going there.

BTW, he did tell me that they have an additional $2,500 fee for permission to record in the venue. This is on top of all the fees for facility, staff, union personnel, extras, etc. And there is also a stipulation of 10% of profits from any recording sales going to the venue. I explained that my recording system is a completely standalone unit so it would not be attached to or dependent upon any house sound. I wondered if that had any impact of the $2,500 recording fee. It didn't. (Guess I'm showing I'm wet behind the ears here :-) He said in this venue it was one of those situations where no one except union personnel would be able to do things like plug into an AC outlet or place anything on the stage.

Does all this seem in line with your experience? Now, we are very close to Chicago so the area has a long history of strong union control. This whole inquiry is regarding a performance by a not-for-profit organization. With the added fee for recording an organization is looking at $9,000 to $10,000 for starters to use the venue. Oh well, such is the times in which we live.

Chienworks wrote on 11/23/2004, 12:03 PM

IATSE is much more lax here. Our largest venue is a 600 seat Vaudville house converted over to a movie theatre. Oneonta's population is only 15,000. I think we're all a lot more laid back.

The one time i did get hired by a group performing in Carnegie Hall (Yes! I've done Carnegie!), i was pretty much told to sit in the corner and the union hands would set up and operate my equipment. Kinda makes me wonder why i was even hired for the gig.

drbam wrote on 11/23/2004, 12:30 PM

A union story: In the late '70s I played an event at Carnegie Hall. One union had their folks remove cases of gear and instruments from the trucks and tour buses and place it on the sidewalk outside the loading door. Another union took over and moved the gear from the sidewalk to the stage area (less than 150 feet) – yet another union had people removing gear from cases and placing it on the stage or floor. Of course they had another union that had people running and connecting cables. Unbelievable!!

drbam

AFSDMS wrote on 11/23/2004, 1:00 PM

Hmmm, am I beginning to see a pattern here?

Maybe we should have an OT thread on Union Tales, Good and Bad.