Re: [Callers] Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 17

Send Callers mailing list submissions to callers(a)sharedweight.net To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to callers-request(a)sharedweight.net You can reach the person managing the list at callers-owner(a)sharedweight.net When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Callers digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Caller Fees (Will Loving) 2. Re: Caller Fees (Jeff Kaufman) 3. Re: Caller Fees (Donald Perley) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:20:26 -0400 From: Will Loving <will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> To: "Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net>" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller Fees Message-ID: <CA49C77A.44A66%will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" As both a dance series organizer and a caller, I'm thrilled that we are having this discussion. Performer payment was the area that I spent the most time talking with other organizers about prior to starting our Downtown Amherst (MA) series. Several posts have mentioned paying the band only a certain number of shares, usually four, even if there are more than four musicians. Though both the caller and the band are essential to the dance, this is presumably being done to protect the callers pay. Now lets consider the other side of the coin. What if your band consists of only two musicians? The assumed "normal" arrangement would be that everyone get's a 1/3 share. Now consider that the band is bringing and setting up their own top-notch sound system. Normally the person providing and working sound gets paid anywhere from $25-200, or a full share, depending on the venue, whether they are supplying equipment and their level of expertise (the high end being someone like Bob Mills). Next, let's add in the fact that this particular band will draw substantially more dancers, usually 25-50% more, than other 2-person bands. Is it appropriate to pay the band more? In this scenario would it be appropriate to pay the band 3 shares instead of 2? From the band's perspective, they are not only bringing and doing sound, but are also bringing in a lot of value/income for the dance and should be rewarded for it. Isn't this the same as limiting a band to getting 4 shares to protect the caller's pay, even if there are more than 4 musicians? Is the band correct in wanting to protect their pay as well based on the extra value they bring? My guess from reading most people's posts is that you would in fact agree with this, but some callers I've been talking with strongly disagree. I'm interested to hear people's thought on it. As an organizer, I'm feeling a bit caught between callers' feelings that 'equal shares for all performers' is a hard and fast principle and the band wanting something for the extra value they bring. From reading everyone's posts, talking with people and looking at Jeff's spreadsheet, it seems to me that while there may be an ideal of 'equal shares for all performers' (kind of like 'liberty and justice for all') the reality of how pay is divided is quite varied. I'm deeply committed to paying all performers/artists well for the efforts and energy, including minimums and profit sharing. Our dance series is only 9 months old but we committed to doing this critical piece properly. We are working hard to fund-raise for a high-quality and fully paid for sound system so we can eliminate that as a weekly expense and have more money go to the performers. We are slowly growing a reserve fund in order to be able to guarantee minimums even when weather intervenes - such as the recent tornados that came through Western Mass on our dance night. Thanks for your thoughts. Will Loving Amherst Area Contra Dances Amherst, MA USA http://amherstcontra.org on 6/18/11 10:32 PM, Sue Robishaw at sue(a)manytracks.com wrote: get are and to -- William M. Loving Dedication Technologies, Inc. 7 Coach Lane Amherst, MA 01002-3304 USA will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com Tel: +1 413 253-7223 (GMT ?5) Fax: +1 206 202-0476 ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:42:53 -0400 From: Jeff Kaufman <jeff(a)alum.swarthmore.edu> To: Caller's discussion list <callers(a)sharedweight.net> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller Fees Message-ID: <20110718154251.GD16154(a)melfpelt.swarpa.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Will Loving wrote: Bida has dealt with requests by two person bands to be paid more in two ways: 1) paying them as a three person band, or 2) paying them the fee that would normally go to a sound person, in exchange for bringing and running their own sound The second option is equivalent to the first, but the band gets only two shares of profit instead of three. We don't have a thought out policy on this; these are just the solutions we went with for the two bands who asked. We also almost never have two person bands. Jeff ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 11:43:08 -0400 From: Donald Perley <donperley(a)gmail.com> To: "Caller's discussion list" <callers(a)sharedweight.net> Subject: Re: [Callers] Caller Fees Message-ID: <CAMKNU+-VH=y06xnmbr6u10UtpOcb5NLDNpvcd5dRkHM109gbOQ(a)mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:20 AM, Will Loving <will(a)dedicationtechnologies.com> wrote: Normally or a At our dances, if the band brings their own sound system, they get paid for that function, and as far as I've seen they always get first option on that. Some bands prefer not to if they are coming a distance (or one stop on a tour) and it would mean 2 cars or a van instead of 1 car. ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Callers mailing list Callers(a)sharedweight.net http://www.sharedweight.net/mailman/listinfo/callers End of Callers Digest, Vol 83, Issue 17 ***************************************