The American Guild of Musical Artists (AGMA) was formed in 1936 to improve these conditions and others. Are matters better now? An unequivocal “yes.” Singers who think otherwise are often unknowingly reaping benefits from groundwork laid years ago by some of the altruistic early members of the union. Phyllis Fay Farmer, a New York concert singer, points out that unions have set a higher standard for even non-union jobs. “AGMA working conditions have become standard for both AGMA and non-AGMA jobs, conditions that employers and singers, both AGMA and non-AGMA, take for granted.”
Opinions differ widely, however, as to how many conditions have improved. AGMAzine, the official publication of AGMA, paints a fairly glowing picture of the state of the union in each issue. According to our informal online poll conducted in September, choristers at New York City Opera along with some of the other AGMA choruses seem generally happy with the union.
Not everyone is pleased, however. Soloist members in our small poll, while reporting a few positive events, either seemed confused about the union or displayed open hostility. And this feeling isn’t limited to soloists responding to the poll. In 1996, there was great discord in the union when the Metropolitan Opera Chorus tried to secede from AGMA and form their own union. While the details were never given to the membership, it is known that AGMA had to resort to legal means to keep the chorus in the union. Another chorister wrote, but would not allow his quote to be used even anonymously, that his chorus is considering legal action against AGMA.
• Unions raise wages–especially for minorities and women.
• Union pay is higher in nearly all occupational groups.
• Workers have better benefits.
• Incomes are lower in Right-to-Work states.
• Unions are good for productivity.
• Union workers have greater job stability.
• Unions are important for young and older workers.
• Unions help part-time workers.
–AFL-CIO
So what is this about? Are “unions…a waste!” as one soloist wrote? Consider the strong case for unions made by AFL-CIO as listed in the inset. (Each one of these facts is backed up by extensive statistical research–see www.aflcio.org/uniondifference for more information.)
Singers, too, want better wages, benefits, equality, and job stability. It is a statistical fact that when unions get involved in other industries, employees reap these very benefits. But do unions really work in the unique world of the performer? And specifically, are classical singers seeing these benefits from their own union?
The union seems to be working quite well for some unionized choristers, particularly New York City Opera. Choristers who are content also appear to be very involved, aware of their specific contracts and quite protective of their union. They also seem to have instant access to the union’s assistance, which is not always the case with soloists, according to their reports.
A chorister in the Northeast wrote a sobering tale of an opera company in the Northeast trying to “break the union” through “lying” and “withholding information,” among other tactics. He wrote, “As long as we have opera companies who choose to try to get everything for nothing, we have the need for the union. This particular company scares me because they are so willing to break the rules.What would happen if there wasn’t a union? They would hire anybody and pay whatever.” AGMA is working well for this chorus.
Few complaints were received from choristers about staff relationships with AGMA regarding insurance, wages, equality or job stability. In fact, another chorister wrote about an attempt to have her fired by a fellow chorister who was dating the chorus master. AGMA personnel came to her rescue, even appearing at her audition to make sure she was fairly treated.
Several soloists who wrote to CS, painted a very different picture. The most common complaint is that they do not see benefits for their dues; some feel that their dues are simply financing the union’s work for choristers. Secondly, they are angry about the cost, details and lack of staff knowledge about health insurance. There were complaints about staff responsiveness to problems and their inability to get mistakes in accounting remedied. One soloist offered a positive response: “Several times AGMA has gotten me money from broken contracts. They have set requirements for basic working conditions. They are a huge help to the chorus and dancers with whom we work. AGMA’s not perfect, but they’re there.”
