Important Message from the MEAA

This message removed 4/4/2007 13:30pm at the request of member Melz for reason: defamatory content.

Ok - I'm confused. Whats so bad about being a contractor? To my knowledge Australia is a free country and if anyone wants to do a show they can. Just because the people doing this show are contracting people and not using Equity contracts doesn't mean that Equity should send this email out. This seems extremely defamatory and inflamatory. The person who runs this site should remove it. In my experience, Equity don't know their arse from their elbow, so this doesn't surprise me. And whats this thing about contracts and amateur status? Does anyone else find this contradictory? Amateurs don't get paid, so why would they have Equity-approved contracts? Why would they get super? Bizarre. Eventainment are doing the right thing by contracting people, aren't they? It seems that they are trying to build some sort of Arts scene in Perth. Amusing that Equity cry foul because they're not involved. Pathetic really. No wonder the Arts scene in Perth is the arse of the country. In any case - this looks like its a kick-arse show. When I tried to get tickets, all the VIP areas are sold out. Bummer. Best wishes to cast and crew!!

I don't know as the author has remained anonymous but this reads as if it were written by a member of the Eventainment team doing a bit of naked promotion. OK there is nothing wrong with promotion of your show but at least show your colours. The issue of contractor contracts versus employment contracts is an important one relating to the fact that the Liberal Government in association with various business organisations is totally dismantling all the protections and support that were earned by a great many brave and dedicated men and women over a number of years and returning us to laissez faire Victorian employment provisions. If you are going to be paid sign a real employment contract don't sign as a contractor. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

Spot the Labor supporter. I agree that that email is defamatory. Who cares as long as the show is good. Bring it on!

So you're response (still anonymous) is to put a label on me and decide that that solves the argument. Now I fit in your world view and you don't have to think. I admit to being left wing but I am not now nor ever have been a member of the labour party. I am concerned that the protections that protect you as well Mr Minger or Singer or whatever are being eroded. One day you will wake up and find yourself with nothing and no way to complain because you and others like you have stood by and watched while all the hard won protections were taken away from you. That's not a world I want to live in. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

I find myself in the middle of this argument, as equity (I am a member) has sometimes shot off in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, in this case, a promoter is attempting to get out of costs they could otherwise be expected to incur. I also don't think for a second this is being marketed remotely as an amateur production (check the fliers) I'm sure all the Idols and Nikki are being paid... please correct me anyone involved if crew and musoes aren't being paid (EXTREMELY unusual in MT). I am also sure that the Yellowglass boys are getting paid (as they bl'''y well should- kudos to them for their work) possibly some in the cast are not. I for one would love to know. However, that said, a very large amount of freelance work in the music sector at least in perth is as a contractor- NOT an employee. To counter this, we have created as an industry acceptable pay rates that are high enough to 'include' your super and other things. Now, the union suggesting that we in the industry take a stand against a company eroding hard-fought rights is neither defamatory, nor illegal. Not yet anyways I for one think that it is probably a good thing that people in our industry get super (god knows we earn little enough before retirement!), that they're protected by workers comp, that they have what few rights we in the industry have. The whole issue is raised in the very first reply- "What's so bad about being a contractor?" the fact that the average person has not a clue as to why that is not as good as being an employee is proof that people like equity need to bang the drum some more. singer/minger/finger- whatever you want to call yourself- "Who cares, as long as the show is good"??!! WTF?! That comment shows neither thought, intelligence, or even a basic understanding of the fact that those people out there making this product work deserve to be paid and respected in their working rights as much as any 15 year old at maccas. Shame on you, you anonymous twit! A non-labor supporter, but certainly no conservatives man! Neville ps- in the interest of free speech- here is the original non-defamatory letter from MEAA so all can see what we're actually talking about Dear Members There is a production of “Hair” by Eventainment Pty Ltd being planned at the Regal Theatre in May 2007. For this, their first production, it is our understanding that Eventainment Pty Ltd is asking for performers, crew and musicians to sign Independent Contractor Agreements. This means people working on the production would not be considered employees – but contractors. This is a radically different legal arrangement and is in opposition to what we have all worked for in the industry. Our standard industry contract for live performance, negotiated by the union and Live Performance Australia, employs people as employees and offers the basic terms and conditions which we all expect and require. It means basic things like your superannuation is paid, and there is workers compensation insurance. Agreeing to work in musical theatre as an independent contractor with terms which undermine the basic conditions of employment provided in our Performers Collective Agreement and the relevant awards is not in the interests of the industry. We urge all members not to support a production which does this, whether claiming amateur status or not, and we urge all members to only sign the standard industry contracts. If you require more information please contact the WA Branch. Naomi McCrae WA Industrial Organiser Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance 123 Claisebrook Street, Perth, 6000 WA Tel: (08) 9227 7923 Fax: (08) 9227 9026 Email: naomi.mccrae@alliance.org.au www.alliance.org.au It's the simple things stupid...

Yes, I was going to post very similar comments before, but got cut off halfway through typing... Thoroughly agree. The Prompt Copy Store www.store.thepromptcopy.com Sticky Apple Legs www.freewebs.com/stickyapplelegs Puppets in Melbourne www.freewebs.com/puppetsinmelbourne Treading the Boards www.treadingtheboards.thepromptcopy.com

Good on you, Neville, for reproducing the letter. Defamatory? What nonsense! This is an industrial relations issue and is pertinent for professional workers in this industry, and I don't understand why it was withdrawn in the first place. Actors, stagehands and other crew have a hard enough time making a decent living out of their art as it is, without being undermined by the Howard Government's fiction of negotiated AWAs and "independent contractors". It is not about besmirching the reputation of the company: it is about upholding the rights of actors and crew to decent remuneration for their work. And it is about protecting the rates and conditions, which people in the industry have worked very hard to obtain. The contracting system (& AWAs) is a pernicious weakening of the bargaining power and the real earning power of all workers because contracting under the new laws leaves employees without a number of protections, including superannuation contributions. Professional companies have got to act professionally: that includes respecting actors' and others' rights to decent pay and conditions, and behaving like they do have that respect. If conditions are being undermined by an AWA or a contracting system, that is disrespectful towards the actors, etc, and unprofessional. This is not a matter of being pro- or anti-Labor. it is about the ethics of employment. Those ethics are laid out in the International Labour Organisation's labour standards. The ILO is an international tripartite (employers/governments/unions) body. The principles apply to employers in the corner shop, the factory, the office, and on the stage. Jim

People in this thread appear to be confused about what is meant by contracts. Before I get onto that issue. Eventainment are musical theatre and acoustic performance promoters. There are a number of overseas companies operating under the same name, in the same business (in Indonesia, for example). So, we are hardly dealing here with some amateur, community-based theatre group. The anonymous champion of the promotion company, Eventainment, asks "Whats so bad about being a contractor?" He/she goes on: "And whats this thing about contracts and amateur status? Does anyone else find this contradictory? Amateurs don't get paid, so why would they have Equity-approved contracts? Why would they get super? Bizarre." Yes, contracts are common in the industry. It is in the nature of theatre and screen that work is intermittent and short-term. Professional actors do enter into contracts. But, there are two ways to do this. First: to enter into a short-term employment contract. Now this can be done one of two ways. On the one hand it can be above board and ethical, conforming with the benchmarks set out in awards and bona fide agreements. The actor or crew member is paid the going rate for their skills and artistic work, enjoying the basic conditions of employment including superannuation. On the other hand, the company can play on the unfortunate ignorance of too many actors about their rights and undercut the industry standards. The AWA system makes this much easier for shonky companies to dud their employees. Second, the company can try and subvert the industry standards by attempting to get the actor or crew member to enter into an independent contractor arrangement. The Federal Government now allows this, undermining the common law of employment and the obligations an employer has towards actors and crew. Under these arrangements, the actor loses the conditions that employment brings. You are treated as if you are your own company, and you are responsible for supplying your own superannuation, for example. You can bet your bottom dollar that payment on such a contract is not superior to the industry rates and conditons. If anything is "bizarre" about what is suggested is happening at Eventainment, it is this. If they truly "are trying to build some sort of Arts scene in Perth" then, by undercutting the industry benchmarks, they will create a reputation for themselves among theatre professionals, where - in the long run - no self-respecting professional actor will touch them. Jim

I think the "contractor" agreement, while something I would discourage anyone take on, is the way of the world in 2007. It's happening in every industry not just the Arts. And in all honesty the MEAA really has no teeth any more. I am refering to the "attempt" the MEAA made to extract money from the now defunct WA Barron Television for actor payments for The Adventures of Chuck Finn. We were all on industry contracts and still got screwed. What did the MEAA do? SWEET BUGGER ALL!! Barron was wound up and we are still waiting for our money. I ask you all - what's the point of them? Why bother when all they do is take dues and can offer no real saftey net.

A union is a strong as its members. If the members get together with the union (rather than putting in a complaint and waiting for something to happen) you get more out of your Equity dues. In any case a search on Barron Entertainment Limited reveals that it appears that none of the creditors have been paid. Legal action has been taken against the Directors. You can't blame MEAA for that. Blame the inadequate legislation protecting workers in the case of companies under liquidation. Jim

Some more legislative betrayal of workers in the industry. Under so-called Work "Choices", the US MTV reality television production, Real World, has offered crew Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) with rates of pay in some cases less than the minimum rates from the MPPA. It seems that some crew members are being paid less than $15 per hour by MTV. The Motion Picture Production Agreement (MPPA) is what ought to apply. This is the real world of exploitation in the film industry. This will only happen if workers in the industry let it and the attitudes of Minger/Springer prevail. At least sign the MEAA petition here: http://www.alliance.org.au/realworld.html Jim PS. I am not, nor have ever been, a member of Equity: I'm "retired" but active.

Jim

There was a story on this on page 3 of today's West Australian.

It could be pro/am... The Prompt Copy Store www.store.thepromptcopy.com Sticky Apple Legs www.freewebs.com/stickyapplelegs Puppets in Melbourne www.freewebs.com/puppetsinmelbourne Treading the Boards www.treadingtheboards.thepromptcopy.com

From their website (http://www.geocities.com/yellowglasstheatre/) you can find out a little (very little) about them. Nowhere could I see the words 'amateur' or 'community'. I was scanning though. More info here: http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,21457611-5005364,00.html What do you mean registered/licensed? The Prompt Copy Store www.store.thepromptcopy.com Sticky Apple Legs www.freewebs.com/stickyapplelegs Puppets in Melbourne www.freewebs.com/puppetsinmelbourne Treading the Boards www.treadingtheboards.thepromptcopy.com

The show would be licensed by the copyright holder either as a professional show or if organised as a co-op say or as a pro-am the copyright holder could choose to license it as an amateur show. This si always supposing the company has provided all accurate and relevant information to the copyright holder. Mind you the licensee would probably get more income from an amateur license if the show is a short run depending on the percentages charged. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

Two points. 1/ The poster contains no "By arrangement with" reference which is generally a contravention of licensing requirements often overlooked. 2/ They do refer to themselves as professional in the "About yellowglass" section of the site. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

Indeed it should. If in fact it is an amateur production in which some people are getting paid or a pro production in which some people are not getting paid then any contract should reflect that. I was not aware of the requirement to place "This is a Community Theatre Production" on material. It certainly doesn't seem to apply in Adelaide. Finally if signing a contract that makes you a contractor you should add together 1/ The Hourly rate you require 2/ 9% for superannuation 3/ 7% for annual leave 4/ 7% for sick leave. 5/ Pro rata amounts to cover your workmans comp and public liability insurance because if you are a contractor you must carry both yourself. 6/ 3% for long service leave so an hourly rate of say 22.50 becomes ... well you work it out. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

I believe that if you get amateur rights you MUST put a variant of this on your publicity. Scuttlebut has told me that someone in Perth has been rapped over the knuckles about this only in the last couple of months. You can make a good case to omit it if it is fairly obvious: e.g. if a comapny was called "Seville Grove Amateur Theatre Group" I think they could justify NOT also having "This is an amateur production" on their posters. On a variant note: I pointed out what I thought was an error on Mandurah B&B poster only to be told that, no, that is what they were required to print... blah blah blah's production of Disney's "Disney's Beauty and the Beast" Made no sense to me then, makes no sense to me now :-)

You used to have to name Death Trap as "Ira Levin's Death Trap" by Ira Levin. I don't know if that is still true. I have still never heard of having to declare your amateur status. Is this a state law or a requirement of the license holders? It certainly does not seem to apply in SA. Is that all there is? Well if that's all there is my friend, then let's keep dancing. www.tonymoore.id.au

Paul wrote (and a few other suggested):
> I believe that if you get amateur rights you MUST put a variant of this on your publicity.

IANAL but I think you'll find this is purely contractual. There's nothing in law that says if you're doing an amateur or community theatre production, you must label your publicity accordingly.

However, I believe some agents make this a contractual requirement. I.e. We'll grant you amateur performance rights on the condition that you include this notice on your publicity material. If you don't, you're in breach of the contract.

Incidentally, I made a close examination of a poster for the recent production of Cats and could find no references anywhere to its amateur status, in spite of the insistence of some correspondents. 

Regards
Grant

--
Director, actor and administrator of this website