|
Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! >
very slightly OT: justice for jazz artists
very slightly OT: justice for jazz artists
Page:
1
kudzurunner
5725 posts
Oct 29, 2015
4:40 PM
|
While I was in Harlem last Thursday night, attending the Great Night in Harlem show at the Apollo and blowing a little harp at the afterparty, I met a guy who happens to be the jazz rep at Local 802, the NYC musicians' union, and one of the people behind a website/cause called "Justice for Jazz Artists." I wasn't familiar with the group, but now that I've paged through the website, I really like what I'm seeing.
The basic idea is that a law was passed in NY State back in 2008 or so, giving jazz club owners a tax break so that they could deposit the money they saved--i.e, the tax break--into a pension fund for jazz musicians. In other words, they could behave more or less like any other business with regular employees, rather than giving everybody cash at the end of the night, a 1099 at the end of the year, and a "So long, buddy" as the door slammed.
But none of the clubs--we're talking The Blue Note, Iridium, all the big jazz clubs in NYC--has made any deposits in the fun. They've just been pocketing the tax break.
So Justice for Jazz Musicians was born. I've added my name and email to the petition; I urge you to do the same, since it costs you absolutely nothing. You might also think about doing one or more of the things they suggest on the "Get involved!" page.
I'm not a big do-gooder. But this seems like a good cause, one we can all agree on--even if, like me, you know that the club owners probably have their own sob stories about how tough it is to keep a jazz club going in NY. Still: a law was passed and the clubowners are pocketing the money that was supposed to go into the pension.
Justice for Jazz Artists
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Oct 29, 2015 4:46 PM
|
Goldbrick
1173 posts
Oct 29, 2015
5:54 PM
|
Musicians are contractors.
Not sure why clubs( which are disappearing at an alarming rate ) are getting dinged.
The tax break is only on admission and its just a sales tax waiver on clubs with less than 250 seats.
They are targeting 6 high end clubs that probably pay pretty well.
Those clubs would probably be better off just paying the tax before some union jerks get in there and steal the money.
If you want a pension- get a day job like so many of us have done.
Just my 2 cents but there is no way that pensions should fall on club owners when the musician model is really contract work
|
A440
471 posts
Oct 30, 2015
2:34 AM
|
Musicians (and nearly all artists) in America were among the first to be "Uberized" - employees replaced by freelance contractors. I guess for NYC jazz players, it happened in the 1930s. Today workers in many sectors face a new reality without social benefits (healthcare, paid vacation, pension, etc.), no job security, and the need to own and maintain the tools to do their job.
The pension plan seems like a good idea, but maybe the problem is with the NY tax system - the jazz clubs should not be able to declare the tax break, unless they can prove they pay into the pension fund. So this petition should focus on the tax implementation rather than the behavior of the clubs, requiring proof of contribution in order to claim the tax break. If the clubs get the tax break automatically, they have no incentive to contibute to the pension.
Last Edited by A440 on Oct 30, 2015 11:51 PM
|
Frank101
130 posts
Oct 30, 2015
9:04 AM
|
Sounds like whoever drafted the law did a lousy job. If the tax break money was supposed to go to the musicians, that needed to be explicitly spelled out. If that was not explicitly spelled out, then of course the club owners will just pocket the money.
|
kudzurunner
5733 posts
Oct 31, 2015
2:16 PM
|
Here's a followup by my contact at 802:
_____________________________________________________
Local 802, which is the New York local of the AFM, has been trying to find a way to advocate for jazz musicians for years—this after years of benign neglect in this field.
· The jazz musicians who were originally at the core of this effort were mostly well established figures without huge national profiles, with the possible exceptions of Dr. Billy Taylor and Hank Jones, and their vision was to use the existing union retirement model—the AFM’s defined benefit pension plan—as a means to providing retirement security for thousands of musicians who play the major clubs every year. According to Todd, the Blue Note alone provides for about 3,000 individual musician “services” annually.
· In the late 1990s, because the AFM’s pension fund was in fact “overfunded,” federal law mandated that it pay out at a very high rate, commensurate with its rate of overfunding—at a whopping 40%. This was added incentive to bring this benefit to the jazz community.
· Because there was a lack of density in the field, meaning there were not very many jazz musicians in the union, the union local decided to try a “top down” approach, which meant getting a law passed to get money flowing into the fund. There is a precedent for this approach in the Turkus Award of the 1960s, which helped settle a labor dispute on Broadway by redirecting sales tax off the door to pay for the pensions of nine entertainment unions.
· In 2006, the union met with some of the major clubs who said they would support a similar law being passed.
· Musicians lobbied in Albany in 2006 to get the law passed.
· It passed and in 2007 it was implemented but the law in fact did not go far enough. It was signed by then Governor, Republican George Pataki, but he refused to mandate that the forgiven sales tax monies be redirected into the pension fund. The tax was forgiven. Although some clubs benefited by not altering their pricing, for most it was just a pass through, meaning they no longer collected the sales tax and no longer paid it to the state of NY.
· The union jazz musicians then tried to convince the clubs to sit down once again and work out a deal whereby they would start collecting the tax as a musicians’ benefit or a common good tax, and send it on to the pension fund. No club volunteered to do this.
· Since that time, the union’s Justice for Jazz Artists campaign has gathered over 7,000 anonymous signatures of musicians and fans, and garnered over 65,000 likes on Facebook. There have also been ;public endorsements from politicians, religious leaders and such luminaries as Joe Lovano, Ron Carter, Randy Weston, Jason Moran, Christian McBride, Jimmy Owens, Marc Ribot, Regina Carter, Jimmy Cobb, Harry Belafonte, John Pizzarelli, Bucky Pizzarelli, Dave Liebman, Bill Frisell, Kenny Barron, Fred Hersch, Tierney Sutton, and about 100 others.
· Still the clubs haven’t budged.
· To date there continue to be scores of jazz musicians who retire every year with no savings and little in the way of social security. Those who counter that they should have saved for their retirement through other means (what means?) or taken day jobs miss the point: to excel in the jazz field means a full time commitment to one of the most demanding and complex of art forms. The cost of a nightly pension contribution at a club like the Blue Note would run about $25 per performer—that’s the cost of about two drinks. The Blue Note brings in about $8 million in gross receipts a year. Annual pension for all who work there would total less than $100,000. The AFM’s pension fund is now returning at an annual rate of 12%. It’s a healthy fund, funded at about 87%, which is a high number these days for most defined benefit plans.
· It’s not about money, in the end, for most of these employers—it’s about ceding power to the union. The musicians union is not without its issues, but it’s hard to argue with a group that is advocating for people who make live music.
· Articles on this subject that might shed some further light are:
http://www.afm.org/im/jason-moran
http://www.thenation.com/article/aging-jazz-artists-sound-note-protest/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=socialflow
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/18/nyregion/city-council-hears-push-for-benefits-by-jazz-veterans.html?_r=1
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Oct 31, 2015 2:18 PM
|
6SN7
592 posts
Nov 01, 2015
5:43 AM
|
I have never heard of a business that receive a tax break and then turn around and deposit it into a pension fund or anything else other than putting it into its own business bank acct. If I owned a business, I wouldn't support something like this. Companies give pension benefits to full time employee, not contract employees and by definiton , that is what a musician is.
I read the expanation on the website and it sounds very squishy to me.
Last Edited by 6SN7 on Nov 01, 2015 5:46 AM
|
kudzurunner
5734 posts
Nov 01, 2015
2:40 PM
|
Has anybody actually read the article in the Nation posted above? The objections being raised here begin to fall apart when you look at similar plans already in place for other contract employees--session musicians, radio jingle singers, concert hall musicians. There's nothing particularly extreme about what is being proposed.
Aging Jazz Artists Sound Note of Protest
Here's the passage that irks me:
"The retirement plan has been in an impasse since 2005, when labor activists negotiated a deal with owners of clubs like Birdland and Iridiuim to lobby for a state sales tax break, on the condition (what the union calls a “handshake agreement”) that, in tandem with saving on taxes, the clubs would pay into the pension fund. The club owners’ trade association, Manhattan Association of Cabarets & Clubs, at the time endorsed the proposal to then-Governor George Pataki, in a letter stating, “A number of major clubs have agreed to direct the savings from the admission tax exemption to performers’ health and pension benefit funds.” But by the time the proposal worked its way through Albany’s sausage-maker, the most important aspect was missing—a direct mechanism for actually collecting the contributions and investing clubs’ revenues in pensions. The clubs never established a collective agreement on making direct payments into a pension plan. And now, the union argues, the clubs are benefitting from the tax savings without following through on their earlier commitment to artists."
Of course the clubs don't own up to what they've done. Whaddya expect? They're New Yorkers, tough guys.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Nov 01, 2015 2:51 PM
|
walterharp
1693 posts
Nov 01, 2015
5:17 PM
|
the problem is the same that many unions have right now... if the musicians refuse to play, there are too many others that are willing to step in for the same or less pay. the club owners are looking at the whole thing on a short time frame, they assume they can always get musicians for cheap because they always have... worst case, get a dj.
|
6SN7
593 posts
Nov 01, 2015
5:50 PM
|
actually i did read The Nation article and it still was quishy to me. There are certain facts missing, such as no response from the clubs in question and other information. But honestly, I am not an authority in labor/employee law.
|
Frank101
131 posts
Nov 01, 2015
6:42 PM
|
If the law as it stands allows clubs to keep the money, the clubs are gonna keep the money.
Work on changing the law, don't waste time trying to change the club owners' behavior.
|
JustFuya
813 posts
Nov 02, 2015
2:31 PM
|
I wouldn't work on changing this law. I would expend my energy on abolishing it. The premise is lovely but as written it is apparently toothless. While it allows the clubs to reneg on their 'handshake promise' without retribution, it deprives NY of the source of tax income that was formerly generated to benefit more than a few. Now, as I understand it, this money is entrusted to a small number of ethically challenged elite. I think the union is wasting its effort on repairing a junker that should be replaced.
I have had my fair share of experience with unions. I was impressed and often amazed at what they accomplished but I never needed them to complain, explain, bargain or beg on my behalf. In fact, I felt they impeded my ability to negotiate wages, promotions, vacations et al. In other words, I never voluntarily joined a group in order to exempt myself from the requirements, obligations or other BS that most others have to deal with. These limitations also include denial of earned perks.
A contractor is just that. They negotiate on their own behalf. I think 'Justice for Jazz Musicians' has a less than selfish benefit. They might be more effective if they were to broaden their base of support and rename the group "Justice For The Taxpayer". If they could eliminate the root problem (a very sloppy or unenforced law) they could then regroup and accomplish something more effective.
As far as righting the wrong that continues, small claims (10k limit in CA) works very well for groups who coordinate and stagger their singular appearance in court.
Last Edited by JustFuya on Nov 02, 2015 2:37 PM
|
Post a Message
|
