Drew’s post regarding ownership of a Symphony got me thinking. Those involved with a Symphony in any way be it managers, musicians, board members or audience members are in essence caretakers charged with delivering the orchestra to the next generation and beyond. Also, whilst there is not equal pay, there should however be equal say…..
In a marriage one spouse may earn more than the other, but when discussing future life issues don’t they need to be equals in that discussion for the relationship to move forward successfully? Bottom line, in an organization such as an orchestra, there may be different levels of responsibility but everyone is 100% accountable for that responsibility so that there is a unified mission and purpose. No level of responsibility should ever be devalued when a negotiation takes place, because ultimately everyone needs to be able to perform at their best, from the usher taking the tickets, right up to the music director. For example: It could be the greatest musical performance ever, but if there is a mix up with the seats and people have to move, then it might just be the worst performance ever for those patrons inconvenienced!
A surgeon may be a master at using a scalpel (or at least I hope so!), but it is a Surgical Technologist that preps the patient and hands them that scalpel. For the patient’s sake the ST (who earns pennies on the dollar compared to the surgeon) needs be valued by the surgeon and the administrators, so that they are always motivated to perform at their best. That could mean anything from making sure it’s realized how much they are appreciated, how necessary they are, paying them a little more from time to time, but most importantly, listening to them if they have suggestions about how they can perform better, even allowing them to criticize their leaders! Being valued is more about how you are being treated as a human being than how much you are being paid as an employee.
I am beginning to think that all a contract is between the musicians and a management is an extended truce between vicious battles! That’s a cycle that needs to stop, and I think by making everyone an equal partner at the bargaining table will help that. Everyone wants the situation in Jacksonville to be over. Let’s hope it is soon, but the situation that is the most problematic there is the breakdown in communication, the lack of trust and the potential loss of their importance to their community. To that the most devastating things I have read are the letters in the Times-Union. From this one titled “Board must tend to business”, Harry C Rogers PHD writes:
The symphony musicians make great music; management’s job is to make sure that they have the resources to “sell” that music.
From this letter titled “Citizens must buy tickets” Al and Tibby Sinclair write:
“As with any other business, there must be enough customers willing to buy services or merchandise to fund this enterprise or it will be unable to continue”.
The talk of the financial situation so loudly by both sides is reflected in these letters from audience members, so they have to be respected. For them (and for many more I suspect) it is about the “business” which is an obvious, tangible, but unfortunate thing to put the brightest spotlight on. Name a great city that has grown without an orchestra to enrich and educate, helping to set an example of the quality of life that is on offer to the outside world. This alone can help major businesses decide to relocate to a community, which will help grow the economy for example and is also tangible. Can Jacksonville afford not to have that option? Or, should it be cast off like a Pizza parlor that didn’t quite make it as is suggested. Remember there are lots of Pizza parlors but only one orchestra!
Putting the tangible negotiating issues aside (not to devalue them however), it is the intangible issue, how to find a way to make sure this never happens again that needs to be addressed when it’s all over. Drew was quoted in this Times-Union article by Timothy J. Gibbons about this, and has said as much in his posts. It’s the quote below from Alan Hopper in the last sentence that is puzzling to me:
The other lingering effect may be seen among the musicians, said McManus, the management consultant.
“It takes a long time to build that unique artistic sound,” he said. “It takes one single event like this to shatter that, if it goes too far.”
Symphony management is aware of such concerns, Hopper said, and will work on mending fences once the musicians are back in their seats.
“We will be very careful,” he said, “about managing all those relationships“. (my emphasis)
Managing relationships? That is passive, having relationships is active, and what is needed for every orchestra. It’s just like the difference between “saying” and “doing”. Plus, you can only “have” a marriage, trying to “manage” one (meaning it is not an equal partnership) might lead to a divorce! I can only hope that when Alan Hopper made this statement, that thoughts of “having” a relationship when the crisis is over were also on his mind.
Well put!