National Association of Orchestra Leaders

34 Metropolitan Oval, New York, N.Y. 10462 • (212) 863-8997

April 20th, 1965

Congressman Frank Thompson, Jr.

House of Representatives

Washington, D. C.

Dear Congressman Thompson:

COPY

Kindly refer to the enclosed reprint of your statement carried in the official Journal of the American Federation of Musicians, dated April 1965.

Can you justify that statement in view of the enclosed Special Bulletin and the provisions of the AFM By-laws which coerce orchestraleader-employers into membership? Thus far, the only relief available to orchestra-leader-employers from this Union's oppression is under State Right to Work laws, a remedy denied them in States that do not enjoy Right to Work laws.

You will recall that on May 13, 1964, you, by introducing HR-11238. deliberately tried to deprive orchestra-leader-employers of the gains accruing to us from three years of litigation against the AFM. I enclose a copy of your. HR-11238 Now you are again sponsoring a measure (HR-77) that would take away the small amount of freedom remaining to orchestra-leader-employers.

Your appearance at many AFM Conventions and the many Articles by you and for you that have been published in the AFM official Journal and the journals of many Locals of the AFM. Your sponsorship of HR-22 and the ill-fated HR-11238, clearly shows you as an indiscriminate supporter of AFM's policies, some of which have been ruled unlawful by the Federal Courts. We take a determined stand against your AR-22 Just as we did against your RR-11238, since both of these measures were purposely designed to strengthen AFM dictatorship over orchestra-leaderemployers and the music profession in general. This dictatorship has lessened job opportunities and thwarted the progress of the musical profession.

TESTIMONY PRESENTED TO THE HOUSE LABOR COMMITTEE

BY LEROY VAN DYKE

REGARDING AND IN OPPOSITION TO HR.226

JULY 21, 1993

I am Leroy Van Dyke. By way of self-introduction, it will be relevant to note that I am a full-time musician/recording artist/ entertainer, and have been such for more than 35 years. I write this statement in opposition to HR.226.

I was a regular member of the cast of the ABC television network "Ozark Jubilee" with Red Foley, a regular on the Grand Ole Opry and a director of the Country Music Association.

I am presently a member of the Country Music Association, the Academy of Country Music, the Nashville Association of Talent Directors, the International Entertainment Buyers Association and the National Association of Orchestra Leaders. I am also a member of 12 state and/or regional fair associations.

I currently travel some 100,000 miles per year as a musician/ entertainer, and have provided a livelihood for four or more working musicians, union and non-union, for over 30 years.

I was a member of the American Federation of Musicians (AFM) for 35 years.

You will not think me to be immodest when I tell you that I have more than just a simple working knowledge of the live-music entertainment business.

Our business is unique, complex, and difficult to understand for anyone but those who are experienced and in the mainstream of the live-music business. Because of the complexity of our business, principles applied to the construction industries simply are not appropriate to apply to the live-music business.

There are some extremely important concepts that must be brought to your attention.

First, contrary to claims of the proponents of HR. 226, known as the "Performing Arts Legislation" or so-called "Right to Talk" legislation, HR.226 has nothing at all to do with representation. All musicians at present have the right to collective bargaining and representation by the American Federation of Musicians if they so desire.

Second, the AFM represents only about ten percent of working musicians, and of the many with whom I have discussed this proposal, I have found none who support it. Martin Emerson, former AFM president, said it better than I could and I quote his fund-raising efforts in support of earlier bills, ...we had hoped for one dollar per member for a total of $200,000. To put it quite bluntly, the tiger failed to jump through the hoop, and we have on hand a

paltry sum with which to entice our 'subjects' to perform in our behalf... But I am saddened to report that we ended up with a grand total of $1,156.44...I am including their names on page three of my report...all 139 of them!... Is it that they don't care about their Union?" That from former AFM president Emerson tells the story in a most succinct manner.

Further, the 90 percent of working musicians who do not choose to align themselves with the AFM are not even aware of the existence of HR.226 and so have no opportunity to voice their objections.

Third, one of the primary objectives of HR. 226, in truth, is to help preserve the tax-exempt status of the American Federation of Musicians, an organization which for decades has routinely disregarded federal court and National Labor Relations Board guidelines by admitting management and employers to membership and to positions of authority within the AFM. AFM locals also continue to exact dues from traveling musicians, for which they receive no benefits, constituting a violation of current guidelines and rulings.

Fourth, the AFM, through this legislation, would also like to apply section 8(f) of National Labor Relations Board guidelines as applied to the construction industry, to the musical entertainment business. This, for example, would compel all members of any musical group to abide by union policies, even if only one person in that unit is affiliated with the AFM. This could apply, even if all the other members of the group are non-union and have no interest in joining.

Fifth, a further objective of the AFM in pushing HR.226 is to re-institute the "dark ages" of the live-music business as it existed in the dictatorial days of the notorious and infamous Petrillo. He said, "...I think we should go out and fight a little like we did in the old days." He decried the federal laws that make it difficult for a union to punish members for breaking the rules! Petrillo further stated: "I remember when a member didn't sleep for a week when he got a notice to appear before a disciplinary board... It's damn tough to operate a union without power to discipline members..."

Please keep in mind that I write here on behalf of working musicians, musical entertainers and buyers of live-music entertainment in opposition to HR.226.

Mr. Johnny Holmes, manager of the Arkansas State Fair, made the statement that if all fairs and other buyers of live musical entertainment had to live under the ramifications inherent with the passage of HR. 226, they would more than likely opt for alternative forms of entertainment. He went on to say that "..we can run a fair without live music."

Buyers cimply cannot live with the risks, paperwork, obligations and liabilities HR.226 would institute, and musicians by the tens of thousands would find themselves out of work...overnight!

HR. 226, if enacted, would classify any purchaser of live music as the "employer" of the musicians supplying it. As such, musicians would no longer be considered independent contractors. Purchasers of live music would be "employers," and, as such, would be liable for musicians hired in terms of Workmen's Compensation, Unemployment Insurance, Social Security, local, state and Federal withholdings and union pension and health payments.

HR. 226, if enacted, would validate agreements entered into by AFM locals and purchasers of live music, requiring that all live music be furnished by AFM members. If any band or individual were not an AFM member, all union employees of the purchasing entity (bartenders, waiters, delivery personnel, custodial workers, food handlers, etc.) could strike, picket, walk out or slow down, thus legalizing the now illegal and prohibited secondary boycott.

If you are truly conscientious about representing the majority of your musical constituency and about representing all buyers of live musical talent, I, as a working musical entertainer speaking on behalf of my colleagues, respectfully request that you allow HR. 226, this nefarious, ill-advised, unneeded and unwanted proposal, to die a natural death in committee.

You've heard the old expression, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!" Gentlemen, the system ain't broke, and it doesn't need fixing!

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee for the opportunity to present the views of those who would be victimized if HR.226 were to be enacted.

I will address any questions you might have.

This is to inform you of our opposition to S. 481 and H.R. 226 that regard live entertainment. These bills would be very detrimental to the live entertainment industry.

As producers of live entertainment for corporate conventions the extra costs and paperwork associated with these bills would force many of our clients to cut their live music budgets. The result would be more musicians out of work and less live music. We feel there is no reason to change the current status of the laws that have worked so well in this industry for many years.

Please voice our opposition to these bills when you attend the hearing this week. Thank you for your time and efforts.