Actor's Equity

[Caitlin]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 8:10pm

Hi, I was just wondering, do any of you belong to Actors Equity? I just need to know what the pros and cons of joining are. Anything controversial about joining Equity? Thanks for any help!

[nycdncr]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 10:26pm

I know I may get crucified for this comment.....

I am very pro-Equity. Join as soon as you have the credits to back it up. Union jobs protect an actor salary and work-wise. The level of most Equity shows (especially tours) tends to be higher than the non-Equity tours.

I'm proud to be a 4 year member of Equity. Ok....crucify me if you must....

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 10:34pm

anyone who is making a good part of their living performing in paying shows needs to come to terms with the union thing at some point. you'll hear a lot of people complain about Equity, but you'll hear just as many who aren't quite there yet who want nothing more than to get their card. you always sacrifice a bit for the union, but the bottom line is that being in Equity is huge step in a theatre career, and without a union, actors would be getting royally screwed on every job with so many people who'd love to take their place and would do it cheaper.

[Broadway Matt]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 10:34pm

oops

Updated On: 10/11/04 at 10:34 PM

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 10:39pm

joining is really tricky...equity is one of those unions that makes sure its members don't work apart from the union. Some people can sneak it past them, but...many get caught.

So, the point is...don't join unless you're pretty sure you can get work as a union actor...too many people join and never work again. most non-equity actors who work make more than the majority of those belonging to equity.

with that said, equity does provide a living wage for it's actors, and in NYC, there is almost always something to do as an equity actor.

[nycdncr]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:16pm

i don't know what universe you are living in, but i have never been in a show where equity members were getting paid less than their non-equity counterparts. non-equity tours don't pay nearly what an equity tour pays either.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:18pm

nycdncr, you miss my point.

most equity workers get paid more PER GIG, but they have less gigs than most non-eqs...so, the non-eqs tend to make more money per year than the average equity actor.

[nycdncr]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:26pm

i suppose you could look at it that way?

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:28pm

of course, if youre a working equity actor...you make a good deal more than your non-eq counterpart. it's just MUCH more competitive in the eq world.

[nycdncr]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:29pm

because the non-equity producers have taken all of equity's jobs.

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:31pm

or...equity isnt fighting to keep those jobs. two sides to every equity contract.

[nycdncr]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:36pm

there are indeed two sides to every story. since i am a proud equity member....i choose to support them. sure....they aren't perfect, but until there's solidarity with the League of Producers, the companies who hold the rights, the SSDC, etc, etc, etc....equity can't do much on it's own. that solidarity is forming, and i'm looking forward to the future of hopefully more equity road shows and the demise of the non-equity first national tours.

[mywonderwa11]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:46pm

i don't agree with ending non-equity tours because come on! the non-eq actors need to be given the chance to perform in shows that hold the standard of an equity show. hence, why non-eq actors are cast more in touring shows than equity actors. also because it's cheaper to produce and run a non-eq show than an equity touring show. but cutting the chance for those non-eq actors to perform on the road in "broadway" shows is just pompous and you then take on the role of a "broadway bully" as a friend of mine would call it.

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:52pm

But equity actors have EARNED the right to be in National tours.

Non-equity actors just have to work hard to earn their card, and THEN they can do the "big time" shows.

That's my opinion anyway.

[nycdncr]

Posted: 10/11/04 at 11:58pm

in my humble opinion, non-equity actors should be learning their craft in summer stock and regional shows....not on a non-equity 'broadway' tour.

nothing against non-equity talent or non-equity tours. i do, however, have a problem with first national tours (oklahoma, the music man) going out non-equity.

sure...it's cheaper to produce a non-equity tour....and the quality suffers because of that. and i'm hardly a 'broadway bully'...for the record.

[bially082]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 1:13am

No national tour should ever be non-eq. If it is, then the word Broadway should not appear in the advertisments or the title of the tour. If it's not Union, it's not Broadway.

The world of live theatre does not care about giving people chances. I'm not going to give up my hard earned position on a national tour just so I can be nice and let some non-eq play it just because that would be the non-broadway bully way to do it.

I am totally oppsed to the phrase, "oh just let them do it once in a while, you don't need it as much."

I've heard that a thousand times, and I'm sick of it. My answer is simply NO.

Call me a bully if you want!

[mywonderwa11]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 2:57am

fine, you're a bully. it's quite apparent that you need to get over yourself.

[notsovirginmary]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 4:38am

"No national tour should ever be non-eq. If it is, then the word Broadway should not appear in the advertisements or the title of the tour. If it's not Union, it's not Broadway."

NO national tour should be called a "Broadway" tour because it gives clueless theatre goers the impression that it's the same company from New York.

I'm currently living in the middle of no-where, so I have to admit that I'm grateful for the non-equity tours because they come here. I just can't see bringing theatre to people who would otherwise never be able to see anything resembling a "big show" as a bad thing.

"But equity actors have EARNED the right to be in National tours.

Non-equity actors just have to work hard to earn their card, and THEN they can do the "big time" shows."

But so many actors on Broadway and in big national tours earned their cards by being cast in these shows. Some have far less experience then those in the non-union tours.

One of my best friends moved to NY last year and was almost immediately cast in the chorus of a show. She had two community theatre credits to her name.

I also know people who are out on non-equity tours right now who are actually equity-eligible, but they want to work steadily so they won’t join unless cast on Broadway.

I’d say that they have more then earned the right to be on a national tour.

[eatlasagna]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 5:04am

i'm not really into this whole equity vs. non-equity thing... in fact my friends (who know sh** about theater) and i could care less... just as long as the actors are GOOD at their job... because let's face it... we've all heard non-equity actors who have much more talent than some equity actors...

[nycdncr]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 9:18am

if a non-equity actor is that good, why don't they come to the equity chorus call and audition for the equity show? most equity chorus calls will see non-equity people, and if they're good enough they might get a callback and even possibly the job.

i agree that all tours should be equity in an ideal world, but the networks and troikas of the world have shown that an ideal world is a non-existent world. they have taken over the market of the equity bus and truck tours that used to be soooo prevalent.

equity tours used to play my hometown all the time....granted they were scaled down bus and truck tours, but it was still equity talent. now, they only get non-equity tours in. i've seen a few, and the product really does suffer. say what you will about non-equity talent, but you'll never convince me that an all non-equity show is superior to an equity one. i've seen both, and there's just no comparison.

stepping off my soap box now.

[LotsWife]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 9:47am

IMHO, Non-Equity tours aren't considered Broadway tours. They are merely regional centers (like Troika is out of Gaithersburg, Maryland). I see it as a regional theatre taking a show on the road. Though the sometimes use equity performers, regional theatres do the exact same thing.

I don't think necessarily it is imperative that ONLY members of equity should be allowed to tour. That isn't an exclusive privilege for members of the union. Everyone is trying to earn money somehow.

I support equity. I think they employ some of the most incredible talents. I also think everyone should have the opportunity to perform. I mean, it's not only a privilege, it's a freedom ... does that sound a little cliché? I think we should look at the performance aspect of it. Of course, they MAY be taking a few jobs away, but that shouldn't affect how everyone else should work.

Just my opinion ...

[Mr. Tuttle]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 10:58am

Oh course you should join Equity. Then you'll have the chance to persue a career other than performing cause as we know, less
than 10 % of their memmbership actually can make a living at it.

And always remember that if it's a non Equity tour, it's crap. Only Equity performers are capable of doing anything like a national tour. If you're Equity, then you are talented. If you are not Equity, then you are not even capable of walking the stage without hitting the furniture. And yes...go to summer stock cause that's the only place non Equitys should work. They should not even dream of touching a professional stage until they join cause they are crap.

Thank god I just saw the Mille tour with an all Equity cast. Sure most of the performances were lacking and boring but..they were Equity so it had to be great!!

Updated On: 10/12/04 at 10:58 AM

[ckeaton]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 11:03am

Proud Member of Actor's Equity since 19XX
I've noticed that in programs lately. Was this in a memo from the union? It does help with declaring a show as an equity show.

[redhotinnyc2]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 11:08am

Mr. Tuttle - before I block you for another of your moronic rants - I must say that your post here only re-solidifies the thought that you are simply a bitter, non-union performer who cannot find work anywhere - at least thats how your posts ALWAYS make you look.
You might want to re-think your approach to how you state things in the future - you're alienating a lot of folks with your insipid comments. I, for one, after this post, will be thankful for the "blocking" mechanism on this board, which, from this moment on, will make it possible for me to look at threads like this without having to read your belittling comments.

[Mr. Tuttle]

Posted: 10/12/04 at 1:30pm

My dear red hot:

As much as I appreciate your attempt at psychoanalysis, your message only proves to me what a moron you are.

Why not address the points I and others have raised. Those of us here have chosen to discuss the issue at hand. And what do you choose to do? You choose to launch a personal, unprovoked attack on me for no valid reason. If you don't like members discussing the issue at hand, perhaps you should not waste our time by reading this thread.

If anyone here is appearing bitter, perhaps a look in the mirror will answer your question.