Wedding Singer tour & AEA Flyer

[WilliamT]

Posted: 8/16/07 at 10:23pm

So, I was just looking at the AEA website and saw the "If you know someone on the Wedding Singer tour" flyer and found it interesting. Anyone know what it's about? The flyer addresses the folks involved and says, "Take your professionalism to the next level"....

What's the backstory on this one?

ps - has the tour opened, yet?
Updated On: 8/16/07 at 10:23 PM

[lakezurich]

Posted: 8/16/07 at 10:54pm

The tour has not started performing yet, it starts on Sept. 15th I believe.

[somethingwicked]

Posted: 8/16/07 at 10:57pm

The tour is being producted by NETworks and is Non-Equity. Perhaps AEA is trying to recruit those involved to join the union?

[RentBoy86]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 12:29am

The tour starts before the 15th. It opens its tour here in Birmingham, AL I believe like the week of the 5th-8th.

[lakezurich]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 12:37am

Yeah, they are probably either trying to recruit, or trying to get people to only see shows that have union actors in them.

[winston89]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 5:27am

But, it would be hard for them to only get people to see tours that are equity. If you look on the AEA website they have a list of current tours. Keep in mind that there are a few more shows that are out on tour that are not on the list. But, More and more tours are starting to be non equity. From the producers point of view it makes sense to start out as equtiy for a while and then switch over. If the union is so upset about this then they should create a way for actors that are in non union tours/shows to have them easilly become part of AEA by doing them.

I personally do not get why they get so up in arms when there is a tour going on that is non equity. The producers have every right to make thier tours non equity. And, many actors that do non eq tours become equity soon thereafter. I know why AEA is around and I do support it fully. But, them saying that you shouldn't do or see a non eq tour to me is saying that we are better then they are support us because of that. It just sounds a little to self centered to me. I feel that the actors made the choice to go on a non equity tour. They know that they don't have the full benifits of being part of the union. But, it is so hard to get into the union and they need jobs. If the union made it much easier to be a member then I am sure that there would be a lot of these actors doing union gigs. But, it is hard to find a job as an actor and a lot of the time if your offered a job you sometimes have to take it.

[jarretSF]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 5:53am

So the logic is "If you're cast in a non eq tour of TWS join the union! Everyone else who wants in...sorry, we're too busy making a point."

Wow.

[Vespertine1228]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 11:08am

I think the troubling problem for AEA is that The Wedding Singer tour went directly to a non-equity tour rather than taking out an Equity Production contract first. That means no work for their members. It also means that audiences around the country will not see the full production of the show with the most experienced performers.

Plus, I feel terrible for the young actors on these tours. Most often, they get paid $350 a week. There's no way to make a living on that, even if they give you room and board on the road.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 11:30am

"It also means that audiences around the country will not see the full production of the show with the most experienced performers."

I can understand everyone's concerns with the quality of a non-Equity show (although a couple of non-Equity shows I saw turned out great), but there are many extremely talented people out there that aren't in Equity. Just because you have more experiences performing in shows doesn't automatically make you the better actor. A lot of performers may get their start this way and it might even lead up to an Equity card. These performers truly must love what they are doing to work under such difficult conditions. I don't see anything completely wrong with non-Equity...it is a choice of the performers for them to work under those conditions.

[Rymes_With_Witch]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 1:14pm

I whole-heartedly disagree that audiences are being cheated by seeing non-Equity tours. I have seen many, many non-eq tours and their casts are honestly just as good as any Equity cast. (And 99% of the time, the audiences have no idea there's any difference) For instance, I saw Oklahoma (I think it was a NETworks tour) and the cast was SUPERB, sang and danced all their roles (meaning there was one Laurie and Curly and they both danced the dream ballet) and were top notch performers. I've also seen many non-eq RENT tours and they have always been superior to the RENT casts I've seen in NY (OBC excepted; I never saw them). In the case of the RENT casts, these young, fresh performers are extremely energetic and genuinely happy and grateful to be there, and it showed in their performances. Equity actors are not necessarily more experienced OR more talented. The main difference between them is that they have union membership. They may have only booked one union job in their life, and are now Equity members. Or, as many unfortunately do, they book an Equity show just coming out of school, or get their card doing shows at Disney World or children's theater...do they have more experience than the non-eq actors doing NETworks tours? NO. Are they more talented? Not necessarily. They have just had the opportunity to join the union by being cast in an Equity show. I know many actors who chose not to join Equity because they know they will be narrowing their chances of getting hired, and want to have a strong resume before joining the union. So I think these tours are a great thing for those kinds of actors. There are plenty of regional theaters, theme parks, tours, and New York productions strictly hiring Equity actors; so AEA needs to just chill.
Updated On: 8/17/07 at 01:14 PM

[EverythingIsRENT]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 2:21pm

I kinda know Nikka Wahl, who is playing Linda on this tour.

[lakezurich]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 2:35pm

I think the problems people have is not with the talent of the actors, but with changes made to the show, set, etc.

[Neverandy]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 3:50pm

Here is the route for TWS as per a couple of weeks ago




August 28-September 2, 2007 Gainesville, FL Phillips Center

September 4-9, 2007 Birmingham, AL BJCC

September 10-23, 2007 Baltimore, MD Hippodrome

September 25-30, 2007 Minneapolis, MN Orpheum

October 2-14, 2007 Fort Lauderdale, FL Broward Center

October 16-21, 2007 Atlanta, GA The Fox

October 23-28, 2007 Orlando, FL Bob Carr PAC

October 30-November 4, 2007 Saint Petersburg, FL Mahaffey Theater

November 6-11, 2007 Jacksonville, FL Times-Union

November 13-18, 2007 Louisville, KY Kentucky Center

November 20-25, 2007 PENDING

November 27-December 2, 2007 Spokane, WA INB PAC

HOLIDAY LAYOFF

January 8-13, 2008 Columbus, OH Palace Theatre

January 15-20, 2008 Appleton, WI Fox Cities PAC

January 22-27, 2008 Indianapolis, IN Clowes Hall

January 29-February 3, 2008 Norfolk, VA Chrysler Hall

February 5-10, 2008 Newark, NJ NJPAC

February 12-17, 2008 Memphis, TN Orpheum

February 19-24, 2008 Providence, RI PPAC

February 26-March 2, 2008 Kansas City, MO Music Hall

March 4-9, 2008 Charlotte, NC Belk

March 11-23, 2008 Saint Louis, MO The Fox

March 25-30, 2008 Raleigh, NC Progress Energy Center

April 1-6, 2008 Fort Myers, FL Barbara Mann PAH

April 8-13, 2008 Pittsburgh, PA Benedum

April 15-27, 2008 Dallas, TX Music Hall

April 29-May 4, 2008 San Antonio, TX Majestic

May 6-18, 2008 Houston, TX Hobby Center

May 20-25, 2008 Tempe, AZ Gammage

May 27-May 28, 2008 San Luis Obispo, CA Cal Poly Arts

May 31-June 1 Escondido, CA California Center

June 3-8, 2008 PENDING

June 10-12, 2008 PENDING

June 13-15, 2008 Vienna, VA Wolftrap

June 17-22, 2008 Hartford, CT Bushnell

June 24-29, 2008 Boston, MA Colonial




With some exceptions these are pretty big cities. This route is comparable with what AEA Production contract Tours would have. AT Venues like Atlanta, Orlando, Boston, and Houston (among many others), the Ticket price for the Non-eq Tours(especially TWS which is the First National Tour) is the same as the AEA production contract tours. The actors in the non-eq tour make much less money, (in the neighborhood of 500 a week vs 1500). Where does all that money go?
Non-eq has its place, but Equity has a valid point in terms of this tour. We aren't talking about a Tour Like the non-eq Urban Cowboy that is playing the college circuit. These are major cities that this tour is playing, and for the most part this show will probably bookended by equity tours like MAMMA MIA, PHANTOM, and JERSEY BOYS, with the same ticket price charged.

Updated On: 8/17/07 at 03:50 PM

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 8/17/07 at 6:23pm

http://talkinbroadway.com/allthatchat/d.php?id=1449660

[tourboi]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 7:36am

I think you need to realize that you can blame the presenters, not the producers, for the ticket prices. The producers get a weekly "guarentee' from the presenters, and if the show makes money (which TWS might not in those markets, even if they are big ones) they only make a percentage of those profits.

Also, part of the reason of being non eq is so if the tour adds more dates they have the option of doing split weeks and one nighters down the road to fill gaps.

Presenters are the ones in charge of promoting, BOOKING the show for their own market, and marketting, and pricing a show. If you have issues with those things, blame them.

[musicalsFan]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 9:21am

Why wouldn't they get a guarantee?

These Broadway shows are sold in subscription series.

If they include a popular show like Jersey Boys or whatever, doesn't the TWS get the coattail effects of that?

The fact that the prices for these non-equity tours are priced almost exactly if not exactly the same as equity tours, makes me not want to see buy a ticket.

And why is it that only the actors are non-union? Why don't they just get non-union stagehands?

Movin' Out is non-equity. Yet the IATSE is still handling the backstage.

If the producers were really serious about cutting cost why not go non-union all the way? Or is it because they know they can push the Actors Equity around but not IATSE?
Updated On: 8/18/07 at 09:21 AM

[musicalsFan]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 9:34am

By the way in Baltimore,

The equity Disney's High School Musical is priced the same as the non-equity The Wedding Singer at $70(!) top price ticket.

$70 for a non-equity tour.

So, why isn't TWS at like $50 or even $60 ?

Why am I the consumer not seeing a price break????

[mrkringas]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 10:22am

I think the word some of you people are looking for is solidarity.

I'm in a Trade Union in the UK. Not a theatre one mind you! But the roots can run deep and the situation with AEA and non-Equity tours is quite understandable from my point of view. It is not an attack on the people working in them but no doubt a desire to recruit and to inform.

Although they are probably fighting an uphill battle in the US!

[Neverandy]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 10:37am

All shows get guarantees. That is the nature of the business. The simple fact is that the producers are avoiding using Union Talent because it costs more than non-union.
If the show was on a full production touring contract with equity the minimum salary would be $1509 a week, with about a $700 weekly per diem. Add about $150 a week for the equity Health insurance and you come to about $2300 per performer per week minimum.
For Non-eq, salaries are much lower. (in the neighborhood of 300-1000 depending on role with a small per diem.
Guarantees are pretty standardized in cities like Atlanta, Boston, Houston, etc. If shows like High school Musical and Phantom can make money on the equity price structure, while charging the same ticket price in those cities-How is it impossible for Wedding Singer?
Equity has made huge concessions in terms of salary and per-diem in regards to touring,to encourage Producers to use Union talent when they are touring into these markets. Shows like 42nd st (in '02), and Evita (in '04) Annie (produced by NETworks in '05) all went out on Equity contracts. TWS is a First National Tour and is playing a First National Tour schedule. What reason besides greed can they give as to why they aren't using Union Actors and giving them Health Insurance?

[sondhead]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 10:55am

"Plus, I feel terrible for the young actors on these tours. Most often, they get paid $350 a week."

Well they obviously are getting by OK with this or they wouldn't have taken the job.

This ranks up there with the people that think Wal*Mart is awful because of the way it treats its employees--CLUE PHONE, no one is FORCED to work for Wal*Mart. It is not slavery. Neither are non-eq tours.

And AEA Clue Phone: Anyone in a non-eq tour knows exactly what AEA is, not you're not enlightening them with propaganda flyers.

[Neverandy]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 2:23pm

Well, I can tell you from experience that it can be pretty sobering to look at the playbill of your non-eq tour and see an advertisement for an upcoming Union Tour and see that they are charging the same ticket price for it.
Also, you must realize that Equity does actually care about these performers. They aren't asking the producers to fire these actors and hire Union ones-They are trying to organize the cast and welcome them as new members.

[mrkringas]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 4:19pm

I cannot seriously believe you just compared a non-Equity tour to working in Walmart!!!!

Walmart have one of the most well documented and heinous records of employee relations. They are a disgrace. The comment about people not being forced to work there smacks of middle class ignorance.

Your comments sicken me.

[tourboi]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 6:53pm

All I can say is I've toured (extensively) on equity, and non equity tours, and both were great experiencs. These "cast is put in 3rd class hotels" stories and what not are a myth so far. Maybe Big Leage tours are awful (I refuse to do those) but my experiences with NETworks have all been positive, and the casts I've worked with would agree. We were all quite happy.

And btw, did you ever consider the cost of MOVING the show? Non-Eq tours move around (usually) consistantly more than Equity tours, sometimes 4-5 times a week. Any money saved by paying the cast/crew less is usually used up in the moving costs. Equity tours only have to move once a week, minimum.

[Switz78]

Posted: 8/18/07 at 11:33pm

The flyer has to do with the fact that NETworks chose to send TWS out non-eq and not do the experimental touring contract. They are not trying to recruit members, but get the members to band together and ask for union representation, like they did (are doing) at The American Girl Store with those shows.
Also NETworks pays a salary and per diem but the actors pay for their housing each week.

[CurtainPullDowner]

Posted: 8/19/07 at 12:43am

A lot of the advertising says "Direct from Broadway" which of course a non-union tour is not.
No offenese to non-Union actors, but the other Unions like Iatse are much stonger and will not concede as Equity does on certain matters.