Lawsuit Filed to Stop Actors Equity from Forcing Small Theatres to Pay Minimum Wage

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Deadline

by David Robb

A group of actors and local theatre owners have filed suit against Actors Equity seeking to overturn the union’s decision to force small legit theatres in Los Angeles to pay their actors minimum wage. The plaintiffs, including actors Ed Harris, Amy Madigan and former SAG president Ed Asner, claim the union’s minimum wage mandate will destroy local theatre.

In April, Actors’ Equity decided to scrap its 99-seat waiver policy and force small theaters in Los Angeles to pay their actors at least minimum wage – which is currently $9 an hour and going up to $10 next year. The suit claims that Equity’s mandate violates a settlement agreement that resolved a similar lawsuit back in 1989. Plaintiffs in that suit include many of those involved in the latest suit, including actress Salome Jens and theatre owners Joseph Sterns, Maria Gobetti and Tom Ormeny.

The ’89 settlement established a Review Committee that would be allowed to review and make recommendations on any substantial changes to the 99-seat waiver. Half of the Review Committee are members of the original lawsuit, but the latest suits says they were not consulted when the union decided to force theatre owners to pay minimum wage.

“This lawsuit became necessary because Equity refused to comply with the preliminary procedural protections built into our 1989 Settlement Agreement,” said Gary Grossman, a member of Equity and one of the plaintiffs in the 1989 litigation. “These procedural protections were designed to ensure that, before substantial changes were made to the 99-Seat Theater Plan, meaningful discussions would take place within the small theater community.”

FULL story at link.

Read more: http://deadline.com/2015/10/actors-equity-la-99-seat-waiver-los-angeles-1201587087/

[LiberalArkie]

1. In situations like this I can see both points of view. However to me, the ideal would

be a the small wage supplemented by a profit sharing with the theater owners and craft. Thus if the play is fantastic everyone benefits, if it is a bust then at least the beginning actors got a start somewhere.

[HomerRamone]

2. Do they get tips?

How else is it legal to not pay minimum wage?

[Omaha Steve]

4. In the early 80's I was in "Jesus Christ Superstar" as a local Omaha production

I was a guard.

I must have had over 250 hours for rehearsals etc. over 3 months time nights and weekends. I got about $100. Figure in gas for the drive to and from downtown and you see I lost $ on performing. The musicians came in for the last couple rehearsals and got scale. Two of the leads came in from the coast and got equity.

I wasn't considered employed by the company, so no minimum wage.

3 sold out shows. The Orpheum Theater below holds 2,600 people.

The company did "Grease" next at the Omaha Music Hall. It went belly up on the next run of "Superstar" a year later. I wasn't in "Grease" or the the second run of "Super Star".

OS

[Recursion]

8. If it's an Equity production the union rules override minimum wage laws

There are actually enough exceptions in Federal and State minimum wages to drive several trucks through (see what I did there?). The idea with this one was that existing union negotiations (like Equity's with the theater owners) should be allowed to continue even if they don't meet the requirements for general employment.

I can see both sides here; it's not like small local theaters (even commercial ones) are swimming in money. That said maybe that's a sign they should be community theaters. Community theaters can offer a "stipend" to some cast & crew which can be far below minimum wage, but it's allowed because it's primarily a volunteer artistic activity.

[MrModerate]

3. It's considered volunteer work . . .

And often has no benefits whatsoever, except the most important one: the opportunity for artists to pursue their craft.

[blackspade]

5. Paying minimum wage is too burdensome?

How pathetic is that?
Especially from plaintiffs that have millions.

[1monster]

6. I've worked in local professional theatres. The pay was pretty minimal, but the

actors and crew were given a percentage of the profits from the production. I don't remember the formula, but none of us were dependent on those payments for our living expenses. We did it mostly for the love of theatre. The small amount of money we got at the end of the run was just a bonus.

[Yupster]

7. Ed Asner against the minimum wage

[Dr. Strange]

9. I know, right?

Tell me that's not a sign of the apocalypse!

[Xithras]

10. The result will probably be the de-unionization of the smallest theaters.

One thing that often isn't mentioned in these articles is the fact that most of these performances are taking places in tiny theaters with less than 50 seats, where the average show budget is under $50,000 for the entire run of the show. The people acting in these shows are generally newcomers and nobodies who are simply trying to get some acting experience under their belt, and who are more than happy to act these parts in exchange for a percentage of their ticket sales. Very few of them view it as a "job", and virtually none of them depend on it as a source of income.

The real problem with the unions decision is that it will kill off most of these shows. A show with a $30,000 budget and 50 seats simply cannot afford to pay minimum wage. That eliminates jobs and opportunities for actors without experience to practice and hone their craft. The result of this is fairly predictable: People new to the acting trades will simply avoid joining the union, so they can still participate in these shows. If the choice is between joining the union and never acting, or avoiding the union and acting for no pay, most actors will avoid the union. That's actually the reason why Asner and other Hollywood union supporters are OPPOSING the move. They fear that it will ultimately undermine the Hollywood unions by creating a generation of actors that got their start without union support.

Of course, that may actually be the point. The union currently has a lot of acting members who make little to no income and who pay few to no dues. These actors are a bit of a burden on the union. If the minimum wage goes into effect and the actors start making more money, the union wins by getting more dues. If the actors flee the union to keep working in these small budget performances, the union still wins by ridding itself of its non dues-paying membership.

Interwoven into all of this is a fight over the cultural differences between the New York and Los Angeles theater scenes. In New York, nearly all theater is backed by investors who understand that paying actors a reasonable wage is part of doing business (and theater IS business to them). There tend to be fewer shows overall, but they are higher quality with bigger budgets and a view towards profitability (or at least breaking even). In Los Angeles, anyone with a script, a Craigslist ad, and access to a large room can put on a show for practically no budget at all. These "pocket stages" give Los Angeles a vibrant small theater scene that is unmatched in the nation. The point of these small theaters aren't to generate profit, but to experiment with new ideas, to allow actors, storytellers and producers to build experience, and to promote acting as an art form. The union leadership in New York has been fairly open about the fact that they want to replace this unique Los Angeles theater scene with something more akin to what we see in New York, with far fewer pocket stages and far more large and mid-sized productions that use smaller numbers of professional, well paid actors. Many people in the L.A. acting scene see it as an attempt by the New York union leadership to destroy the Los Angeles theater culture and colonize it with New York's theater culture. It would replace the literally HUNDREDS of semi-independent and nonprofit productions in Los Angeles every year with a far smaller number of mid-sized productions controlled by the wealthy. It would also create more jobs for hundreds of "professional" actors by fostering the development of those mid-sized productions, at the expense of the thousands of flat rate or ticket equity actors who work in these tiny productions today.

It's not a simple issue.