Equity v. Non-Equity Tours

[Gensho]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 10:28pm

Hello,
I love reading the messages on this board, however I've rarely posted (unless someone bashes Barbra Streisand, then there's trouble.)

However I'm posting now. I am not a theater actor, though I have friends that are professional theater actors.

I am in a debate with a friend over going to see a non-AEA theater performance. He feels like it's tantamount to crossing a picket line, seeing 'scabs' perform on stage. That it's the worst thing that one could ever do, essentially.

My take is two-fold. I'm aware from my performing friends that there are some pretty terrible AEA contracts out there and AEA caves many times to thrifty producers.

In addition, it's not so easy to just become a member of AEA so I would figure that non-Equity performers would need some work opportunities, right?

What are your thoughts?

[SweeneyPhanatic]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 10:37pm

I saw the Equity and non-Equity tours of "Sweeney Todd." I preferred the Equity cast, but I really enjoyed seeing different actors tackle the material and staging. I figure if it is a show you really would like to see, then see it! Even if the cast/production values are not quite what the Equity tour would be (of course with "Sweeney" there was hardly any room for downsizing), there is bound to be some part of the evening you enjoy. I would think the additional excuse to go out to the theatre would be reason enough to see as many productions as you can, Equity or not.

Does this friend of yours ever go see community or school productions, or are those even worse than buying a ticket for a non-Equity touring show?

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 10:55pm

He feels like it's tantamount to crossing a picket line, seeing 'scabs' perform on stage. That it's the worst thing that one could ever do, essentially.

That is ridiculous. You've seen movies with non-union actors, been involved with people who are non-union & enjoyed things by people who are non-union. You ask almost any tourist what AEA is & they'll have no idea.

Almost all actors start their careers in Non-Equity tours. To equate them to "scabs" is insulting. What your friend prefer people to starve over taking a Non-Equity tour? It's not as though jobs are taken away either. On the contrary, producers choose to end their tours & other producers choose to buy the rights for their own tours.
Updated On: 6/30/10 at 10:55 PM

[Eos]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 11:48pm

There's a TON of professional regional theatre here in St. Louis, much of it is quite good and 90% of the actors are non-equity. I'm more than willing to see regional theatre because I love theatre. Period.
Just my 2 cents.

[singtopher]

Posted: 6/30/10 at 11:54pm

You can't scab if you're not in the union. I mean, if your friend doesn't want to support a non-union show, thats his choice.

[AEA AGMA SM]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 12:08am

The non-Equity actors in those tours are generally not considered scabs. The ones considered scabs are the Equity actors who either renounce membership, or otherwise try to hide it through hiding behind a different name, etc, who are considered scabs.

Barry Williams, of The Brady Bunch fame, really started a fire storm when he took on the role of the Captain in the non-Equity tour of The Sound of Music back in 2000-01. He claimed that he had resigned from the union prior to taking the role, and Equity claimed that he was still a member when he began negotiating the contract, thus violating the by-laws of the union that he had agreed to uphold when he joined back in the 1970's. His membership was revoked and he was fined, though he later earned forgiveness after helping to get a production of (I think) A Christmas Carol under an Equity contract.

[TheatreFan4]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 12:13am

Ted Neeley also resigned from Equity when the JCS tour became Non-Equity.

[PeterJamesZielinski]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 1:06am

Theatrefan - you need to realize you're making too broad a statement there.

"Most" actors do not start with non-Equity tours. But yes, some do get to do them.

"All" actors start out non-Equity.

When have acquired enough weeks through the Equity Membership Candidate program...they can join the Union. They can also be offered an Equity contract directly and immediately join the Union.

They do not, however, start by joining non-Equity tours.

[PReeves2]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 9:55am

I have no problem with regional theater. I do however have a problem when a production comes through town that is essentially billed as "The" Broadway production only to find out it's a non-equity watered down production and I'm still being charged a Broadway show ticket fee.

[newintown]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 10:29am

All tours are "watered down" from their Broadway productions these days, Reeves. You're never going to see the exact same set, costumes, lights, effects. Sit-downs in Vegas, yes. Tours, no.

Also, due to economics, lots of shows are starting their tours as non-equity these days. And the tour is just as good as the Equity version would be.

The only difference between Equity performers and Non-Equity performers is a little piece of paper. A union card is no guarantee of talent, experience, or skill. There are great and crappy performers in and out of the union.

And it's not at all unusual for union actors to leave the union in order to find work.

[tourboi]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 10:36am

PReeves... marketing AND ticket prices are for the most part controlled by the local theatres/presenters, not the producers. So the best thing you can do is write your presenter and tell them that the non eq's they bring in should be cheaper.

Newintown, That's true... sometimes. Sometimes tours go out with bigger, bolder set and lighting designs (Altar Boyz, and Xanadu both went out with bigger designs than they had in NY). Many shows do go out (initially) very close to their Broadway counterparts but as bookings get shorter, and shorter, and time goes on, they do scale down.

[Schmerg_The_Impaler]

Posted: 7/1/10 at 11:12am

Yeah, by 'Broadway,' they mean that direction, choreography, and style are largely the same. I saw the Cats non-eq tour, which was billed as the Broadway tour even though the show's been closed on Broadway for a long time. I thought the performances were still very good-- I was expecting much worse, since I knew it was non-eq, but I'm still glad I saw it. On the other hand, the set was inflatable and the music was canned...