Comments for a poor player

Comment on Is AEA Worth It? by Tom Helmer

Tom Helmer — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 23:02:57 +0000

“This union even restricts access to health care to its members by requiring a minimum number of weeks worked before you can get health insurance through the union”

Remember that the health fund is overseen jointly by AEA AND the producers. It has never been an easy task to provide health coverage to as many members as possible while keeping the plan solvent. So, saying the union ‘restricts’ is not entirely accurate.

“AEA is essentially a union of part-time independent contractors.” Again, ‘independant contractor’ is not entirely accurate. If you are working under an AEA contract, you are being paid as an “employee”…although I understand the basic sentiment of that sentence.

It is possible to eke out an existence as an AEA member outside of NYC or never having worked a Broadway Production or Touring Contract. It happens in many major markets like Philadelphia, Washington/Baltimore and Boston.

Comment on Is AEA Worth It? by Mash Niblik

Mash Niblik — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 22:42:55 +0000

You neglect to mention that some of the aggregate money agreed to in AEA contracts goes to pension. With only 2 weeks per year for 10 years, Equity members are eligible for a pension – non-union actors are not. (Going to be doing A CHORUS LINE when you’re 75?) One of the big things that you might not even be aware of are safety and sanitary conditions that are just as much a part of the contract as money. Also, many non-union actors are paid as independent contractors – thus not eligible for unemployment insurance and other benefits due employees paid through W-4 wages. Plus, if an employer feels like not paying a non-union actor, that actor can certainly sue the employer out of her own pocket, but Equity will enforce the contract for free and the actor can be paid the 2 weeks bond collected as insurance from the employer for such an event. There’s more to it than the pay check. Speaking of pay checks – Equity sets minimums. Everything is negotiable (not just money, by the way) Equity can actors can always negotiate more; non-union actors can always get less.

Comment on Is AEA Worth It? by Francis Jue

Francis Jue — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 22:10:38 +0000

There are many things I agree with in your article about the value of Equity membership:
– Theatre doesn’t pay actors as well as some other media.
– There is plenty of non-union work out there, some of it as good as what you might see from union actors.
– Equity doesn’t guarantee success.

But I would add the following considerations to your evaluation, particularly when talking with your students:
– Equity contracts provide more than just minimum wages. Almost all of them provide for contributions to an actor’s pension as well. Many of them also require contributions to the Health Fund — you are correct in stating that actors must earn enough contributions to become eligible, helping to maintain the pooled resources of the Fund, and providing coverage for actors for periods of time that extend beyond employment. Most non-union acting gigs don’t offer health insurance, and when they do, coverage ends at the end of the job.
– Equity contracts also offer work rules that protect actors and offer producers practical guidance to avoid endangering or abusing actors. These rules also provide means by which disputes are resolved, thus avoiding blacklisting or tainting an actor’s reputation and ability to get hired in the future.
–Equity offers contracts to theaters that have demonstrated their ability to pay and maintain minimum standards at work. In cases where an employer has reneged, Equity works hard to recover money due to actors.

Bottom line, Equity is more than a vanity designation to me. It has fought for professional standards and compensation for actors and stage managers for 100 years. Equity has stood up for equality during the blacklist, fought segregation of theaters, promoted non-traditional casting, and supported marriage equality. There are no guarantees in life, and becoming an actor is a risky proposition, whether union or non-union. There are myriad ways to have a fulfilling career as an actor. As a full-time actor for 22 yeas, and an Equity member for 27 years, I believe that Equity has made my career possible.

Comment on The Great Whiter-Than-Ever Way by poorplayer

poorplayer — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 16:20:59 +0000

To all,

Thanks for all your comments. At this point I have decided to close comments on this post simply because I have no time at this point to go through all these comments, and I do not want to add to the pile. There is plenty to go through, and I doubt I can do any justice to what is already here. I have never, in the 6+ years of writing this blog, have had anything like this kind of traffic. The best that can be said at the moment with the time I have is that I seem to have unwittingly hit a raw nerve in the American theatre scene. Clearly it is a topic worth further discussion, but I suggest that there are better forums than my comment section. Again, thanks for participating. -twl

Comment on The Great Whiter-Than-Ever Way by Keith Josef Adkins

Keith Josef Adkins — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 11:56:45 +0000

Disrespectful? Are you serious? This, coming from someone who says it’s okay for theater to reflect white history and values and who says there are no produceable plays by playwrights of color. In truth, I find the tone of your statements to be steeped in ignorance about an entire community of hard-working, educated, talented theater practitioners. Assumptions? Mr “Huh”, you entire response is plagued with assumptions and misguidance.

I’m not sure where you trained, but that saying is shaped by value judgments that are informed by a group of people who refuse to see value, relevancy, (or visibility) in anything other than their own history and experience.

So you repeat your mantra that ADs and producers are hungry for great material. “Great” is relative. I would say ADs and producers are hungry for material that will support their (often limited) point of view of the world and also fill the seats.

I actually think we’re better served by addressing divisive and destructive notions that support a system where theater should unapologetically support a white value system and it’s fragile friend, white history.

It’s never too late to remove the blinders and dive, head-first, into reality. You may want to avoid anonymity as well.

Keith Josef Adkins
Playwright
Screenwriter
Former cultural blogger for TheRoot.com
Artistic Director of The New Black Fest

Comment on The Great Whiter-Than-Ever Way by Zakiyyah Alexander

Zakiyyah Alexander — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 08:32:54 +0000

I won’t allow myself to get into this debate, because to my mind there is nothing to debate. All I would ask is, is theater only for white people over 40? Because that’s who purchases tickets. Theater artists rarely ‘buy’ tix, we are comped because theater is simply not affordable. Is theater for middle class/educated? Because that’s who pays full or even half price for the tickets on broadway? Actually, wait, is Hollywood for white people, too? Cause those are the faces I see represented. I agree with you – audiences are often white, but so are the people on the stage. So are most of the producers. And it’s a complicated issue, one that deals more with class than race, but I digress. The one thing I will specifically disagree with is that all the best plays are not produced, and you are naive to think so. The process of producing commercial theater is connected to who the producers financially think has a chance. Programming is not always about putting the best play up, but rather producing a play that can sell to middle aged white people and all the diversity programs in the world can’t change that, which is why the most provocative of plays are actually not on broadway, they are self produced or put on by independent companies where money is less of an issue, and yup, statistics aren’t always published. Those houses are often more diverse in both age and race because the characters are diverse in scope, and structure. Broadway is the tiniest part of most working artists lives in NYC, and I say this as a writer who has been fortunate to be steadily working for over 10 years, and when i am produced, the audiences reflect my plays – which means my plays reflect the audience i am writing for, and as a nativer nyer that means my characters are of many races/class/etc. The obvious truth is art is simply for everyone whether or not the audience in a broadway house represents this. Your assumptions may be based on statistics, but again don’t necessarily align with the experiences of those living and creating theater every day in NYC. From your post I am (assuming) that you have not seen and experienced the vibrant theater scene in the way that I have, in a way which is most certainly not just for white people. I’m also assuming you meant to push buttons and propose a question that you can’t possibly believe is true. Yes, the audience might be (mostly) white on broadway, but does this mean theater is for them? No, just means America is not always represented in commercial art, and hopefully we are working on that. I for one am wondering what you plan to do as an educator? I hope it means making sure to produce new plays at your school by emerging and mid-career writers of color. If you need some names, please let me know.

Comment on The Great Whiter-Than-Ever Way by Thomas Garvey

Thomas Garvey — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 05:25:01 +0000

But Kathryn, I’m just wondering – if you DO outreach to those folks, and they STILL don’t return to the theatre . . . is there a point at which you say, okay, they’re just not that into the theatre? Or do you feel they MUST change because you say so? Or because this is your way of telling yourself you’re fighting oppression?

Comment on The Great Whiter-Than-Ever Way by Thomas Garvey

Thomas Garvey — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 05:21:27 +0000

I hear you. But you know, these people are basically arguing for their jobs. If a debate about Loughlin’s ideas really gets going, they might all be out of work. I mean, what if the communities THEMSELVES would rather have more rap and salsa? Horrors! That’s bound to make these folks “idealists” and “zealots,” you know.

It is depressing reading them, though. I mean, if you replace “racist” with “communist,” you’re right back in a Senate hearing in 1954, aren’t you.

Comment on The Great Whiter-Than-Ever Way by Kathryn Dooley

Kathryn Dooley — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 04:22:01 +0000

I’m a stage manager in Washington DC. I will agree with you that even here audiences are primarily white and older. But I really believe that it’s an art that is passed down across generations. And if you haven’t received it from your parents, why would you pass it on to your children? In the past, white people were most likely (due to appeal, time, money, etc.) to bring their families to the theatre. So the children from those families have grown up to share it with their own children. But people who weren’t exposed to theatre as a child probably aren’t going to bring their own children, and so on and so forth.

I don’t believe it’s a thing that can change overnight. But I also don’t think it will ever change unless we actively work to change it. If we accept that this is just the way it is, this will always be the way it is.

Comment on The Great Whiter-Than-Ever Way by Thomas Garvey

Thomas Garvey — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 01:25:22 +0000

That’s the irony, Esther – and I agree with you, btw. Audiences I’ve seen on Broadway have often been more diverse than those I’ve seen elsewhere. These people bashing Tom’s statistics don’t seem to realize that statistics elsewhere in America are probably worse.