Ridiculously low rates of pay

[gareth]

No-one expects to make their fortune working in the theatre - but this is taking the p*ss!

 

They want someone to wear the hats of technical manager (drawing up tech specs and liasing with venues), production electrician (focussing and relights), sound technician (sound and radio mic setup and operation), stage manager (running a tech), and DSM (calling the show). For all of that, they expect to pay £1050 to cover 17 performances and whatever rehearsal time and prep work might be required. Let's be generous and assume that a performance day might be a 9am get-in, an hour for lunch, an hour for dinner (although I doubt that these breaks would be taken in full every time), and if the show's down by about 9:30 it might be out by 11pm if it's a quick one. That's a 12-hour working day, excluding breaks. Let's knock £200 off that fee to allow for the prep time and rehearsal attendance - that leaves £50 per performance day. In other words, £4.17 per hour. WHAT?!?! Thats 88 pence per hour LESS than the forthcoming increased level of the National Minimum Wage. And I notice that there's no mention of accommodation being provided, or reimbursement of travel expenses either - which, when you consider that the shows are spread around the south-east and the midlands, would soon mount up. What an absolute joke.

 

And I notice that's it's been advertised on the official ABTT website, as well - I wonder if this means that the ABTT condone a rate of pay at such a ludicrously low level?!

[Penny]

Well that's £4.17 per hour more than I've ever earned for doing tech! Actually more like £4 more, I once found a fiver on the floor but I can't remember exactly how many hours I worked on that show.

[gareth]

Well that's £4.17 per hour more than I've ever earned for doing tech! Actually more like £4 more, I once found a fiver on the floor but I can't remember exactly how many hours I worked on that show.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

With respect, Penny, do you rely on technical theatre work to keep a roof over your head, and food in your family's mouths? No, thought not. If you ever make the move from technical work as a hobby to technical work as a means of earning a living, I'm sure you'll feel differently, and will appreciate just how much of a problem the theatre business has with rates of pay being way below what would normally be considered reasonable for the skills being demanded.

 

The recent discussions on this forum concerning the oft-advertised technical position at a certain theatre in Middlesex give some sort of flavour of the problem, but this particular example must rank as one of the worst I've ever seen.

[Guest lightnix]

I agree with gareth. This is a mickey-take too far and I have just sent the following e-mail to the moderators@abtt.org.uk link at the bottom of the ad ...

 

Dear Sirs,

 

I'm writing to express my concern at the above job advertisement, on the following grounds:-

 

While I appreciate that the rates of pay in Theatre have been traditionally lower than other sectors of the Entertainments Industry, it strikes me that the pay on offer for this job, when calculated on an hourly basis, could well be below the National Minimum Wage and therefore potentially illegal.

 

I am also concerned about the apparent hours to be worked during some sections of the tour, which, while they may not directly breach the Working Time Directive, may well (in the light of medical research) lead to a level of fatigue which could endanger not just health and safety of the technician concerned, but their co-workers and audiences as well.

 

The terms and conditions of employment laid out in the advertisement are, at best, vague and at worst non-existent.  There is no mention as to whether tax will be deducted at source, under PAYE, or whether the technician is to be engaged on a so-called "freelance" basis.  If the latter is the case, then a number of breaches of the tax regulations could potentially be committed.

 

In summary, I believe that the terms offered by the [Theatre Company] may break the Law on a number of counts and expose the successful candidate and others to unnecessary risks and hazards.  I feel that it is irresponsible of an organisation of the ABTT's standing to carry such an advertisement and am asking that you review it, with a mind to removing it until the above concerns have been addressed, the terms of employment clarified and cast iron assurances given that this company is working within the Law.

 

Yours sincerely...

 

After all, I'm sure they wouldn't knowingly advertise a potentially illegal and unsafe product, why advertise a potentially illegal and unsafe job?

[Liquid Nik]

Agree with above , lord knows how many arguments I've had over rates of pay in this industry and the usual come back of "You love it really" is starting to wear a bit thin now. When I was training there was no nationaly recognised formal qualification. I studied at LAMDA.

When we have taken on new staff in our venue we have asked for at least a relavent degree or 3 years experience all for a not particularly good wage. I feel that while theatres/venues are prepared to take on unqualified and inexperienced staff as technicians the chance of any of us earning what we are worth or what could actually be described as a decent living wage is remote.

While it is true that I do love the job, is this any excuse to be taken advantage of, I think not, conversely I feel that employing somebody who actually enjoys what they are doing would be an advantage to the employer, for the reason that you are going to end up with an employee who will bend over backwards to get the best possible end result.

Well that's £4.17 per hour more than I've ever earned for doing tech! Actually more like £4 more, I once found a fiver on the floor but I can't remember exactly how many hours I worked on that show.

Please dont sell youself short you are not only not doing yourself a favour but you are reinforcing the excuse to underpay. I've a wife and two small children and soon I wont be able to support them and a job in the theatre, which is sad.

 

I've got a box here with soap writen on the side which I'm now going to climb down from!!

 

But it all boils down to "Don't clap, throw money"

[Guest lightnix]

Well that's £4.17 per hour more than I've ever earned for doing tech! Actually more like £4 more, I once found a fiver on the floor but I can't remember exactly how many hours I worked on that show.

Please dont sell youself short you are not only not doing yourself a favour but you are reinforcing the excuse to underpay...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

...Not to mention devaluing the entire profession :P

 

Oh dear, there I go again... :P

 

I know I've said this all before, but I'm going to say it again and keep on saying it until it at least begins to sink in.

 

The job of being a theatre / entertainments industry technician now arguably requires a higher level of general skill and professionalism than it ever has.

 

The sophistication of the technology involved has never been more advanced than it is now and is likely to increase for the foreseeable future. Even the simplest shows are "bigger" now. Time was when I could light a whole show quite extravagantly using thirty channels, now there are single lights which use more than that. I remember when the 72 way dimmer rack in the Great Room at the Grosvenor House Hotel was more than enough to do the job, now the 144 ways it possesses is barely enough sometimes. The dimmer systems in the QE2 Conference Centre which served us so well in the 80s and 90s are due to be doubled in size, because we find ourselves having to pair up more and more lights on even the "simplest" of rigs, to avoid running out of channels.

 

The costs associated with doing the job, in terms of the training required, the tools needed to do the job and the insurance (in the case of self-employed freelancers) has dramatically increased in the last decade.

 

The amount and complexity of regulation and legislation affecting the business has also greatly increased. It often seems that not only do we have to be technically competent to do our work, but legal experts as well.

 

Everything's got bigger.

 

Everything except the money that is, in real terms anyway.

 

Don't get me wrong, I quite understand the desire to gain experience at personal expense, to "be reasonable", "make an impression" and "help the production" in order to show "worthiness". I've been there myself, many times, but where does it end? At what point do you decide that it's time to earn a wage in proportion to your level of experience and ability, only to find that you are now suddenly "overqualified" for the gig in the eyes of your employers and that there's a whole new generation coming up behind you, who are prepared to work for the same rates you were charging ten whole years ago, because they want to "be reasonable", "make an impression" and "help the production" in order to show "worthiness" and because they think your decade-old rate is "really big money" compared to what they've been making from follow spotting, humping flight cases and loading trucks?

 

The answer to that is in our hands and nobody else's, but as long as we regard our work as a trade, rather than a profession; as long as we're prepared to scramble over each other in order to get the gig, regardless of the personal cost; as long as we regard ourselves as being "unprofessional" for daring to set out our own terms and conditions and as long as we regard ourselves as "only the crew", things won't get any better.

[JonHirsh]

When I am being asked to work a job I do a very simple thing I say my rate and if they dont like it I refer them to many a tech who will take what they will offer. I will never take a dollar under the rate I have decided that I am worth. I make no exceptions for non for profits because I still need to eat I need to live and there are hundreds of new unemployed techs out there that will do it for that reduced rate.

 

 

Thats my theroy

JH

[Solstace]

Trying to be constructive here:

 

Has anyone done the show to know what it would likely involve from a technical perspective? If these are small venues and there's relatively little tech kit involved - perhaps this could be a good (paid) learning experience for a student or relative newcomer to the field - though if this is the case then it would be nice if they'd said so from the start.

 

I've taken the liberty of sending the named contact an e-mail asking for answers to some my points above. If I get a reply, I'll keep you posted.

 

Some further thoughts/questions to ask in relation to this vacancy...

 

In terms of getting a seasoned pro in, to deal with a long list of tech requirements, (which I assume is the intention by advertising on ABTT):

 

1) Am I right in thinking that £1050 might be considered a more realistic fee for *each* role within that Tour Company, eg. Tech Manager, Sound Technician, LD/LX, SM, DSM etc etc? Even if that were the case, for the number of venues and performances I'd say that's still a bit low. Add another 0 on the end and they might have a few more takers!!

 

2) What exactly the "company/stage manager" be doing to support all of this.

 

Perhaps I've been spoiled by my own touring and freelance experience thus far, but unless they are in fact looking for a student or newbie (guided by the Company/Stage Manager) then I can see that job/reward ratio has potential to suck big-style...

 

Apologies for a slight laziness/haziness to this post! If you really want, please see my most recent "TIWBM" for an explanation!

[gareth]

Am I right in thinking that £1050 might be considered a more realistic fee for *each* role within that Tour Company, eg. Tech Manager, Sound Technician, LD/LX, SM, DSM etc etc?

No. £1050 for 17 full days of work plus pre-tour preparation time is nowhere near realistic for anyone, not even someone who's taking their first job in the business. The only circumstance in which I could imagine this being even remotely acceptable would be if this was intended as some sort of 'placement' or training position, where they're expecting someone to do the work on an expenses-only basis just to gain the experience - but the long list of responsibilites and required skills in the job ad makes it pretty clear that this is not the case.

[nickb12345]

Has anyone done the show to know what it would likely involve from a technical perspective?  If these are small venues and there's relatively little tech kit involved

 

<snip>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

One of the venues if a 350 seat near me, working there at moment as it happens.

 

 

Nick

[gareth]

One of the venues if a 350 seat near me, working there at moment as it happens.

And ........?

[ChrisD]

The problem with low wages are people are willing to accept them. As I'm not a union member, are there any guidelines released by BECTU suggesting minimum rates? If us Lighting Designers/Sound Engineers/Stage Managers etc agreed some acceptable rates, then possibly we would see more acceptable wages in the recruitment advertising of the theatre industry.

[gareth]

The problem with low wages are people are willing to accept them.  As I'm not a union member, are there any guidelines released by BECTU suggesting minimum rates?  If us Lighting Designers/Sound Engineers/Stage Managers etc agreed some acceptable rates, then possibly we would see more acceptable wages in the recruitment advertising of the theatre industry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The current BECTU/TMA agreement can be downloaded from here. It sets out what most people consider to be reasonable minimum rates of pay, subsistence, touring allowances, etc. for technical staff.

[paulears]

Bectu have a huge list of rates on their site. So do equity. (for sm.dsm/asm)

[Just Some Bloke]

I work at one of the venues on the tour (Production Manager here).

 

Firstly, the show is an afternoon performance for families (2.30) so won't finish late.

 

Secondly, the fee we are paying the company for performing isn't high. In fact, it's low. We'd love to pay them more as their last show they did here was excellent, but as it isn't a tribute band or a named commedian, then audience numbers won't be high and we'll probably just about break even as it is.

 

Thirdly, many similar sized companies tour with only an SM who does re-lights and sometimes plays back sound efects too. It's only because these guys are using radio-mics that they've gone with two people, I'd imagine, otherwise they might have gone with one person who'd have been payed more, but not double.

 

Fourthly, I wouldn't imagine there'd be loads of LX or sound cues, as there simply won't be time to plot them before 2.00. It should, therefore, be a good job for someone starting in the business.

 

On the other hand, I agree with everything said above about rates of pay being low. I certainly wouldn't consider either doing the job myself or even recomending it to anyone I know because of the money.

 

But how many times do people post questions on this very site along the lines of "how do I get into the business?". "I know what I'm doing" they say, "but I've never had the chance to prove it in a professional environment". Maybe this would be just the sort of thing for them. Straightforward job, a bit of money and something to put on the c.v.

 

What I suspect will happen is that the company involved will have quite a few applications and will be able to chose the one with the best industry experience, simply because there are people around looking for the work.

 

All in all, it's not an ideal world, and sometimes it's better to offer a less than ideal job than no job at all.

 

Just my 2p