Non-Eq vs. Equity tours?

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 9/10/21 at 4:32pm

I do not plan on supporting the tour of Tootsie, but Im very excited that one of my favorite shows is going back on tour. It has been noted online that it is non-Equity. Is this a sin? Are we not allowed to be excited about a show people want to see, but potentially cant get to for whatever reason coming closer to them and actually making them ABLE to see it? Im confused. I think the actors get paid less, right? Which I know isnt what they deserve, but other than thatlike are we not allowed to be excited??

[Alex Kulak2]

Posted: 9/10/21 at 4:37pm

There's nothing wrong with wanting to see a show. The problem with non-equity tours is that the actors are underpaid, the sets are cheaper, the production as a whole is a cheap imitation of the Broadway version... yet they still charge Equity tour ticket prices. It's just an excuse for producers to pocket more money while exploiting actors, stage workers, and artists.

[RippedMan]

Posted: 9/10/21 at 5:02pm

I come from an area that almost exclusively gets Non-Eq tours, so yeah, you can be excited. It's great to see theater. And sure, the quality overall is lesser and therefore the performances might be lesser, but sometimes it is all you've got. 

[David10086]

Posted: 9/11/21 at 12:33am

Alex Kulak2 said: "There's nothing wrong with wanting to see a show. The problem with non-equity tours is that the actors are underpaid, the sets are cheaper, the production as a whole is a cheap imitation of the Broadway version... yet they still charge Equity tour ticket prices. It's just an excuse for producers to pocket more money while exploiting actors, stage workers, and artists."

Thank you for explaining this!  Also, many of my theater friends say they won’t see a show in our city because it’s a “ bus and truck” tour. Is that the same as saying it’s non-equity? 

[DooWahDiddy]

Posted: 9/11/21 at 9:06am

David10086 said: "Alex Kulak2 said: "Also, many of my theater friends say they won’t see a show in our city because it’s a “ bus and truck” tour. Is that the same as saying it’s non-equity?"

Yes, a bus and truck tour is a euphemism for a Non-Eq tour. The implication being that the cast and crew travel on a bus, while the set is transferred from city to city on a truck. On high-profile Equity tours, the cast will frequently fly between cities after "sitting down" for weeks at a time, while on a "B & T" tour, they can find themselves in a different venue almost every night.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 9/11/21 at 9:13am

I've seen seen great non-eq tours, and some not so great ones (same could be said for equity tours I have seen, too!). What I find most off-putting about non-equity tours besides underpaying the actors, of course, is that some of the tours have sets that look like they belong in a community theatre. The designs can sometimes be so scaled back that they are unrecognizable from the original design, yet they are still charging Broadway/equity prices.

[ArtMan]

Posted: 9/11/21 at 9:13am

The average person attending a show won't know the difference whether the show/tour is equity or nonequity. I have found even Management who has booked the show doesn't know the difference.  To be honest, I have seen alot of nonequity tours that were very good.  There may be some slight differences in sets and the casts seem to be very young.  However, they are still very talented. The recent nonequity tour of Rent was very good. I may be wrong but a "bus & truck stop is usually described for one nighters.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 9/11/21 at 9:38am

I’ve found that in the past Non-Equity tended to be smaller and cheaper tours that tended to do one nighters in smaller markets. They often gravitated towards smaller markets that were housed in University performing arts centers, etc. Sometimes they were an add on show in larger markets that had a Broadway series of Equity tours.

Over the years I have not appreciated that the Non-Equity tours have crept into the Broadway series of larger market touring houses. When the non-Equity shows have played larger markets with big barn theatres often the sets don’t fill the stage and you can see how all the sides of the stage have brought in to scale it down. It’s shady. As others have said, we are also paying top dollar for a non premium product.

Often the talent is top notch, but many times it is sub par and how could it not be. The performers aren’t given the same protections, amenities and rights as equity performers.

Of particular concern was the treatment of the Equity Tootsie cast. They were all tossed. I hope that does not become the norm. That was egregious. I was sooo beyond excited to see Veanne Cox on tour. I think subscribers do need to voice their concerns to promoters and bookers. I know I did. We have to help protect actors. The tour is going out as planned. No reason they could not have stayed Equity.

[David10086]

Posted: 9/13/21 at 2:17am

DooWahDiddy said: "David10086 said: "Alex Kulak2 said: "Also, many of my theater friends say they won’t see a show in our city because it’s a “ bus and truck” tour. Is that the same as saying it’s non-equity?"

Yes, a bus and truck tour is a euphemism for a Non-Eq tour. The implication being that the cast and crew travel on a bus, while the set is transferred from city to city on a truck. On high-profile Equity tours, the cast will frequently fly between cities after "sitting down" for weeks at a time, while on a "B & T" tour, they can find themselves in a different venue almost every night."

Again, thank you so much for sharing this information with us. I never really understood what they meant. I believe the B+T shows we get are the older shows that come in for a weekend rather the whole week. And yes, they still charge top dollar. 

[DiscoCrows]

Posted: 9/13/21 at 3:11am

Can someone knowledgeable about the terminology speak a bit to what a “first class” tour might be then? I have learned/gotten to know that generally speaking to be any tour that goes out on an Production contract. Is it still a “first class” tour if it goes out SETA, thus, can we consider non-first class tours to be “bus and truck” as well, especially if it’s low-tier SETA and actually tends to bus performers/do engagements akin to a non-equity tour?

Also, why are sets for non-equity shows so scaled down? Don’t basically all non-equity tours still employee IATSE crews (and thus the United Scenic Artists designers who would’ve been responsible for the nicer looking Equity sets anyways)? Do the unions just require them to re-make them for the extra labor hours or something akin to that?

[Alexander Lamar]

Posted: 9/13/21 at 9:37am

I would imagine a lot of it has to do with the need to be able to break down, load out, and load in so quickly. As stated, some non-equity tours do consecutive nights in different cities. They’ve got to be able to move quickly.

Compare that to some larger tours which may have jump sets - additional copies of the main set which can be loaded in to a theater in one city while the cast is performing on another city in yet another city.

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 9/13/21 at 10:57am

I also think the quality or “first class” aspect of a show has to do with how the performers are treated. I’ve spoken to many actors on Non-Equity tours who have discussed how grueling it is. There is a big difference between settling down into a city for a week or two versus a night or two. Also, actors have told that they have often helped with load in and load out. They often are lacking sleep and rest between cities.

If actors are run down and unprotected you aren’t getting them at their best or the best performance.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 9/13/21 at 2:24pm

All good points on here.

As far as the cast goes, the biggest issue with non-Equity tours is typically age. Although this recently changed with the Open Access policy, it used to take most performers at least a couple of years to earn their Equity card. Therefore, non-Equity actors tend to be fresh out of college or still in their twenties. This is not an issue when casting a show like RENT, but for a show like Tootsie, if the guy playing Michael Dorsey/Dorothy Michaels is 22 or 23 (which appears to be the case with this tour) when the character is supposed to be in his thirties or even forties...that can be problematic. Non-Equity tours often look and feel like college productions for this reason.

Like with any craft, people tend to get better at acting/singing/dancing the more they do it. If someone is in their twenties, they may be extremely talented, but they have less experience than their older peers. The best example I can think of was seeing Alan Cumming play the Emcee in Cabaret on Broadway in the late 90's, and then a couple years later seeing someone clearly in their early/mid twenties do it in the non-Equity tour. The young man on the tour wasn't "bad" per se, he just didn't have the level of experience someone like Alan Cumming has who can bring that extra "something" to a role as complex as the Emcee. And frankly, you shouldn't be charging people the same price to see a kid fresh out of college play the Emcee as you would Alan Cumming or any other older actor with his kind of resume. But the assumption by the producers is that audiences in small-town America won't know the difference and won't care because they don't know what they're missing. And usually, they're probably right, which is why non-Equity tours tend avoid major cities where audiences are more likely to have seen "real" Broadway tours before.

[hearthemsing22]

Posted: 9/13/21 at 3:49pm

All of this is so interesting!! Thank you for all of your comments!

[Bettyboy72]

Posted: 9/13/21 at 4:10pm

The Distinctive Baritone said: "All good points on here.

As far as the cast goes, the biggest issue with non-Equity tours is typically age. Although this recently changed with the Open Access policy, it used to take most performers at least a couple of years to earn their Equity card. Therefore, non-Equity actors tend to be fresh out of college or still in their twenties. This is not an issue when casting a show like RENT, but for a show like Tootsie, if the guy playing Michael Dorsey/Dorothy Michaels is 22 or 23(which appears to be the case with this tour) when the character is supposed to be in his thirties or even forties...that can be problematic. Non-Equity tours often look and feel like college productions for this reason.

Like with any craft, people tend to get better at acting/singing/dancing the more they do it. If someone is in their twenties, they may be extremely talented, but they have less experience than their older peers. The best example I can think of was seeing Alan Cumming play the Emcee in Cabareton Broadway in the late 90's, and then a couple years later seeing someone clearly in their early/mid twenties do it in the non-Equity tour. The young man on the tour wasn't "bad" per se, he just didn't have the level of experience someone like Alan Cumming has who can bring that extra "something" to a role as complex as the Emcee.And frankly, you shouldn't be charging people the same price to see a kid fresh out of college play the Emcee as you would Alan Cumming or any other older actor with his kind of resume. But the assumption by the producers is that audiences in small-town America won't know the difference and won't care because they don't know what they're missing. And usually, they're probably right, which is why non-Equity tours tend avoid major cities where audiences are more likely to have seen "real" Broadway tours before."

Yes, the Tootsie casting is very concerning as is the amount I was charged for the ticket even with a subscription discount.