Professional vs Amateur

Ruth wrote:

> Are most actors/performers happy to work for Equity rates? Or are
> equity rates equivalent to the award rates of entertainment? Do
> people care even if they are award rates?
>
> Opinions?
>
> Ta. Ruth



AHarwood wrote:
>
> As a professional actor receiving equity rates, I have to say
> as a fulltime job it would be essential.
>
> When it comes to theatre (In Perth especially) no company
> offers you equity rates (unless you somehow manage to get
> involved with Deckchair or Black Swan as far as I am aware)
> and most of the supposed professional companies are merely
> co-ops and profit share.
>
> In these cases I personally prefer to tell the company to
> keep my share of the money to help them put on their next
> production (hopefully this is the case and they don't simply
> divie it up amongst everyone else) unless (here I get greedy)
> it is of a reasonable sum of money(of which I would probably
> still divide and give some back to the company but this case
> is very unlikely in the first place) or if I have incurred
> costs that I think should be covered.
>
> To expect equity rates in Theatre in Perth is simply naive
> and we all tend to be grateful for whatever little bit is
> offered.
>
> So in perspective the difference between amateur and
> professional theatre here is simply the professionals might
> make a token amount of money for their effort where as the
> amateurs (I really prefer community to be the term because
> some pros are no better in talent and some community actors
> are a damn sight better than the pros) do it because they
> enjoy theatre for whatever reason they do it'.
>
> Besides which companies have the guts to put on massive
> musicals with a cast of forty or more where you simply have
> an absolute ball meeting and socialising with everyone? The
> Community companies.
> Some of the best and pobably most educational theatre
> experiences I have had have been with Community theatre and I
> have performed at larger venues to larger crowds with better
> direction, better technical aspects and as I have said
> before, better actors, by being involved with these companies
> and I have had a much better time of it. (Then get back to
> community theatre I here some of you cry - I don't think I'd
> ever leave community theatre if I wasn't moving to England -
> it's way too gratifying to simply ignore both as an actor and
> as a human being)




I understand what you're trying to say, Anthony, but you make a few statements that need clarifying.

I think you might be assuming 'professional company' means 'company that gives you some money for performing'. But just as you make a distinction between amateur/professional performers which isn't defined simply by whether they get paid or not, similarly I would say just because you get offered some money doesn't make it a professional company.

All of the funded companies in Perth pay Equity rates - Perth Theatre Company, Black Swan, Deckchair, Barking Gecko, Yirra Yaakin, Spare Parts. It is a condition of their funding that they pay their artists proper rates, not co-op or profit share arrangements.

There are other companies too, that appear from time to time, that may apply for special grants or operate on a professonal budget, and pay Equity minimum rates.
Many other groups (at the Blue Room, say) may apply for some funding to put on a show, but not have a complete budget to pay wages - these are the 'co-op' or profit-share situations you mention. And other shows have no budget at all.

This is why amateur groups have the 'guts' to put on huge cast shows...the professional ones literally can't afford it - not because they are stingey and want to keep the money for themselves, but because the Live Performance Agreement stipulates that they MUST pay everyone proper rates. If the government would provide more funding and/or the public would support professional shows with higher ticket prices more often, then companies would be more likely to turn a profit and employ larger casts. Oh, and that's another good point - all of the funded professional companies I mentioned above are NON-Profit Organisations, which means they pay wages as part of covering their costs, but no one stands to make any huge profits out of the deal. Budget surpluses are re-invested in future productions, and effect how much funding is allocated to them next round.

So, call me naive but I DO expect (and get) Equity rates from the theatre I do in Perth. That's how I make my living, and why I consider myself a professional actor. On the occasions when I do participate in non-paying performances (our recent romp in Big Fun Sometimes, for instance), it's me indulging in my hobby, in the same way most of you with jobs also like to indulge in theatre in your spare time. And like you said, it's great fun to participate in large cast musicals, which are rare in the Perth professional scene.



To answer Ruth's questions, then;

Equity rates are really the MINIMUM standard that performers should be receiving for the work they do. It's entirely possible to receive ABOVE the Equity minimum.

Yes, it is the same as saying 'award rates for entertainment'.

Are most performers happy to work for Equity rates? Yes, because getting paid for work in the arts is a good and rare thing. But No, the minimum rates are still disgustingly small when you compare them to virtually any other industry which requires a similar degree of skilled labour, often with a degree.
The problem is partly one of economics - an oversupply of performers and a limited demand for their skills. And partly one of valuing our Arts and Culture...because it is so often seen as a 'hobby' and not a skilled job, you're expected to be satisfied with 'the sheer enjoyment of performing' rather than with reasonable monetary recompense.


Most performers should be DEMANDING Equity rates, because this has been established as the MINIMUM for which you should stoop to sell your skills at. It is entirely possible to negotiate above-award rates if you have the skills to offer, but that becomes increasingly difficult to justify when performers out there have been known to offer their services for free.
If performers were more conscious of demanding at least Equity minimum and refusing to give freebies, the average performance wage would rise and we would all be in a stronger position to continue to negotiate.

The performance job I am currently doing is paying above-award rates,
and we turned down other gigs that simply weren't offering enough money.
Personally, I think that's the real definition of 'professional'.


Cheers,
Craig

[%sig%]