CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE TUCSON SYMPHONY ORCHESTRA

 

(Editor’s remarks are in italics.)

EXHIBIT 6: AFM TO ORCHESTRA, Mar 15, 1999

HIGHLIGHTS:

AFM explains why the charter of Tucson Local 771 was revoked.

Some of the reasons cited are: "long history of noncompliance with the AFM bylaws", musician complaints and a "threatening and frightening atmosphere".

"[Phoenix] Local 586 is one of the shining examples of a successful local union."

The AFM is a "powerful union", the new local "one of the best" which can provide "the kind of service that New York, Los Angeles, Nashville and Phoenix enjoy".

Staying with the AFM would be a "wise decision" for "good representation, effective communications and successful dispute resolution skill".

(Once again, the reminder is omitted that, under the AFM, orchestra representatives would be restricted to AFM members only - at this point down to about 30% of the orchestra. Furthermore, the other 70% of the orchestra would not have a vote in ANYTHING. The tone of the letter has changed considerably since the previous letters, where union members that also served on committees were "naïve" and "working in tandem with management". NOW, everything will be a "win-win" situation with all the solutions the AFM has imposed without any input from the musicians. )

 

 

OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

STEVE YOUNG

1501 Broadway, Suite 600

New York, NY 10036-5503

(212) 869-1830 Fax (212) 764-6134

 

Date: March 15, 1999

To: The Musicians of the Tucson Symphony Orchestra

From: Florence Nelson, Janice Galassi, Jeff Tomberg

There may be some musicians who do not understand the circumstances surrounding the International Executive Board’s (IEB) decision to revoke Local 771’s charter. Hopefully, this letter will clear up some of the facts.

At the time the charter of Local 771 was revoked, there had been a long history of noncompliance with the AFM bylaws. Some of these violations included:

 

Article 5,      Section  1 Implementation of a classification of membership without membership approval

Article 5, Section 20, 29 Failure to hold a new member orientation

Article 5, Section 34 Failure to reprint the bylaws within 5 years

Article 5, Section 35 Failure to update the roster of members

Article 8 – various Failure to report information to the International President’s Office

Article 7, Section 2 Refusal to obey a decision of the IEB

Article 7, Section 9(b) Failure to respond to warning letters within the prescribed time periods.

Article 8, Section 7(b) Lack of timely per capita payments

In addition, over a long period of time, we received numerous complaints from the musicians about the lack of ratification of agreements, problems regarding contract interpretation and concern about a threatening and frightening atmosphere that emanated from the office towards your members. Over many years, both the President’s Office and the AFM Secretary-Treasurer counseled by telephone and corresponded with the local officers to discuss these irregularities.

We have been asked why the current board members were not warned prior to the day that the Local jurisdiction was transferred to Local 586. In fact, the officers and executive board of Local 771- as the AFM knew them to be - were advised about the impending consequences of their actions - or lack thereof. In fact they received notification on March 3, 1998, giving them 60 days notice to show cause why the charter should not be revoked. The letter also advised them that they could appeal this decision to the IEB. It is unfortunate that Local 771 did not respond within the 60 days, as set forth in the notification letter. Their failure to respond was in the context of noncompliance with numerous advisories that had been sent in the past and many complaints from local musicians.

The decision to revoke a charter is a difficult and substantive one for a union to make. The members of both locals are effected. The additional responsibilities for the new officers are monumental. The AFM had to weigh its obligations to uphold the bylaws and continue to provide service and support to the musicians in Tucson. Fortunately for all, a solution, Local 586 was within 120 miles of Tucson.

Local 586 is one of the shining examples of a successful local union. The officers are some of the most highly respected in the AFM and Vic Kottner has served as chairman of one of the most active and prestigious AFM committees during the International AFM conventions. When discussion took place about the way to obtain the best representation for the Tucson musicians, it was easy to see that within a short distance, there are officers who know the symphonic community, have had extremely successful results with negotiations and knew how to enforce and administrate collective bargaining agreements. They have the resources to hire experienced, competent counsel, consult with successful public relations firms, encourage activity in the player conferences and have a highly respected position within the entire labor community in Arizona. When Local 586 agreed to support and represent the musicians in Local 771 the decision to extend the jurisdiction of Local 586 to include that of 771 was considered a win-win situation for everyone. The goal of the Federation was - and remains - to improve your level of representation.

We strongly suggest that you study your options very carefully. You have the possibility of belonging to a powerful union with a most successful local. You deserve to be represented by one of the best and receive the kind of service that New York, Los Angeles, Nashville and Phoenix enjoy.

Also, we recommend that you work with your current officers to strategize and commence the negotiations for your next collective bargaining agreement. You will quickly learn that good representation, effective communications and successful dispute resolution skill lead to good contracts, better working conditions and job security.

Finally, we are confident that you will make the wise decision to remain with the AFM and receive the kind of strong representation to which you are entitled.

 

Florence Nelson, Janice Glassi, Jeff Tomberg

 



BACK TO FRONT PAGE

BACK TO SYNOPSES