Dear Actors' Equity, We need to have a conversation

(Photo: www.actoraesthetic.com)

Editor’s Note: Much of this article was written before AEA’s announcement of their membership changes and some of it has been edited to reflect those policy changes.

I feel terrible that I, and everyone quoted in this article (all of whom are members of Actors’ Equity Association(AEA) in good standing), feel the need to stay anonymous when writing to you. You’re our union – the ones who should be representing and standing up for us – not the ones we should be afraid of. Afraid of your anger, your retribution, and frankly just making our lives miserable.

I know that running a union isn’t easy – I actually used to work for AEA and some of the people there are wonderful – fighting hard for their members and championing them every day. Even in the best of circumstances, you have to deal with producers who aren’t always on the up and up, coordinating a million different contracts and codes under a million different circumstances. You have to be lawyers, diplomats, artists, negotiators, financial advisors…and nothing’s ever going to turn out as ideally as we would hope.

I remember when I joined AEA. It was such a day of celebration, one I’d worked towards for years. It felt like such a tremendous honor. I felt the same way when I began working at AEA – it was a privilege and I wanted to do my best to help the artists I was representing.

But then I got to see behind the scenes – both in working for AEA and becoming a Broadway performer and seeing how things operated in reality, as opposed to the way I’d always thought they worked.

Broadly speaking, it doesn’t feel like the union has our back.

I’m so glad we’ve finally started having a conversation about how racism at AEA and shady business practices are hurting artists (things recently got so bad that AEA members staged a full-on protest of our union – I’ve never in my life heard of workers protesting their own union…) but we haven’t had an airing out of the day-to-day policies that are making our working lives a living hell. I am not Black, nor was I on the recent CATS tour, so I want to leave leading the racial/financial conversation to those who are more qualified to do so.

I do want to bring to light a lot of the issues that have only been talked about behind closed doors, in whispers of “please don’t tell anyone I told you or someone will get mad at me.”

All of the following are direct quotes from AEA members in good standing on issues they’ve faced with the union. None of them were comfortable being named for fear of retribution or blacklisting:

“It feels like AEA is flat out designed to keep its members from working. And I’m not talking about ‘But I don’t care if that bus and truck tour is shady, I need the credit!’ I’m talking about ways in which AEA undermines our ability to work in situations that should be fully union sanctioned. For example, right before Covid, I was cast in a show that was supposed to go up in a NY festival under a showcase code. Everyone in every cast was AEA. Obviously, Covid put a gigantic halt to things, this year, with things opening up, the festival is back on (with full approval.) Well, our producers were trying to sort out the showcase code…and AEA literally wouldn’t respond. When they finally did they said (paraphrasing:) “We’re too busy trying to figure out the production contract, so we’re just not going to deal with the showcase code (and other codes/contracts) right now.” They basically canceled the showcase code for the indefinite future. Every AEA member in the festival had to be let go. Every show was recast with non-union performers. This was a project I’d waited over a year to do. I was counting on the income. And I lost the job BECAUSE of my union.”

~~

“Let’s just say AEA has a habit of changing contracts/codes/guidelines with no warning…plus it’s very difficult to even access them unless you’re an AEA member. This means that shows can get approval, be in production, and then suddenly find out about a change to something in the code that screws everyone over. This happened to me in a very personal, horrible way…I’m not allowed to go into details, but AEA changing their mind about something last-minute cost me a Broadway show.”

~~

“I worked for AEA, and I was horrified by the way some of the employees would act – especially at EPA’s. No one wants to say it, but there’s definitely an elitist vibe amongst a lot of people who work for AEA – many are failed performers whose big “claim to fame” is that they’re a member of AEA. They act like non-union performers are the lowest of the low, and they treat union members with disrespect because they have power over them. And it feels like they want to do everything they can to make it as hard as possible to join AEA – like that elitist part is so important to them. Like: “We don’t let the rabble in OUR union.” Every other performer union – British Equity, even SAG/AFTRA has an easier, much more straightforward forward, and achievable way in, allowing more actors to join and therefore more collective bargaining power. AEA just seems to want to keep people out, talk badly about performers who aren’t in the union and lord their power over the ones who managed to get in.” – EDIT: Just before this article went to press AEA posted plans for their new policy to make it easier and more accessible for actors and stage managers to join the union.

~~

“It feels like they don’t seem to care how many jobs they lose for us. It used to be that every Broadway tour was union, now it’s down to two, maybe three shows. I’m tired of the argument that “not allowing tours to be union is punishing them for unfair practices.” I’m sorry, I call B.S. Equity has too many insane, nonsensical requirements for producers, and it sometimes feels as if removing AEA approval is fun for them – gives them a sense of power. Yes, there are shady producers but there are a lot of great producers out there, who want to go union, and it’s like equity is doing everything they can to keep them from being able to. Their attitude is insane. Remember when they were calling for the public to “ask if it’s Equity” and boycott non-union Broadway tours? Who is that serving? It’s like they’re living in fantasyland. No one’s going to boycott anything, and you’re just hurting the non-union actors who are in the show. They’re not working to actually give us good labor practices (look at the way they screwed everyone on the few tours that are Equity sanctioned!) So what are they trying to do? Regional theaters can only afford a few AEA guest contracts – so they bring in one or two Broadway names, and the rest of the roles go to non-union artists. There’s basically no equivalent of the showcase code outside of NYC…other than having access to EPAs and ECCs, and needing to be in the union to perform on Broadway…what is our union actually doing for us? To be honest, if it weren’t for access to EPAs most people would give up their card in a heartbeat.”

~~

“I remember being in a Broadway show when there was going to be a vote on changing how many shows, in a row, producers could schedule during a holiday week. It was insane! A schedule that would literally kill you. I remember one of the stars of our show getting up on stage during our meeting about it and literally begging for it not to be approved – saying how it was hard enough to stay healthy and in top form for a usual eight-show week (which for some shows includes a Friday night, double Saturday and double Sunday in a row,) not to mention time away from families. They were crying. This big star was crying, asking the union to stand up for us. It was clear none of the Equity members wanted this. We made it very clear. It went through anyway.”

~~

“Remember when AEA threw out the LA members’ vote about LA area AEA contracts because they didn’t like the way the vote went? Yeah, that was the moment I was like, ‘I think we need to break off and start a new union from scratch.”

~~

“Not many people realize it, but Equity still hasn’t gotten it together to figure out requirements for staged readings. This hasn’t meant that readings are delayed, it means Broadway producers are casting their readings non-union. Why would they wait around for some indefinite date when Equity figures out what’s going on? There are great non-union actors out there, and there’s no “loyalty to Equity” that Equity seems to think exists for some reason. So we’re all losing jobs.”

~~

“Look, I get that Equity’s filming policies are supposed to be there for our protection. I’ve been screwed over by people using footage of me without my permission (or compensating me,) so I get it. But really some sort of middle ground HAS to be reached. The legalities, fees, and hoops to jump through for archival filming are ridiculous, not to mention that none of it can be shared – even if that is detrimental to the union performers. Have you seen the number of auditions that don’t just want a filmed submission – they want footage of you onstage, so they can see how you are in a theater in front of a live audience, not on camera. Guess what? We legally can’t get that footage. I was involved in a show that got a huge press offer from a big deal outlet. The catch – they needed to get some brief clips of the show to use as part of their piece on us. The union said no because of the contract we were under. We lost who knows how many ticket sales and major press… why? Because the union was trying to protect us…from what exactly? Every union member I know has asked friends to come and secretly film them on stage so they can have footage for their theater reels (yes, this is a required thing, and no, renting a theater and filming yourself doesn’t count because they want to see you in front of a live audience…which you can’t film because of AEA rules…) It just feels like our union doesn’t care about the realities of what we need…they just want to be bullies. “My way or the highway.” And their way isn’t really accomplishing anything.”

~~

I wanted to add something here as this article was primarily written before AEA’s announcement that they would be changing membership eligibility to make it possible for any professional actor to join the union. Though this article isn’t about that specifically I felt I should address it.

I’ve long felt, for a myriad of reasons, that AEA was far too exclusive. The founder of OnStage Blog, Chris Peterson, said in an article on the subject that AEA felt more like a country club than a union, and I honestly couldn’t agree more. In an ideal situation I think that, like many other countries, opening membership could help remove some factors of gatekeeping which have historically kept out non-white and differently-abled performers, could give us more collective bargaining power and might force us into a place where, since there (potentially) wouldn’t be a huge, very talented pool of non-union actors, most projects would have to go union – meaning, for one example, AEA artists could actually be a part of Broadway tours again…

But, as I said, that’s in an ideal situation and is predicated on AEA making further changes to adjust to this new policy. Opening up membership, but keeping contracts restrictive means that either artists will choose not to go union and the status quo will remain, or lots of people will go union and, instead of switching to union contracts, theaters will be forced to simply close down. AEA needs to find a path not just for more artists to join the union, but for theaters and theater companies to have easier access to AEA contracts.

I personally know the pain of getting my card and suddenly no longer be allowed to perform at the theater where I practically grew up. As many others have said, more members doesn’t automatically mean more contracts. In fact, it could potentially further minimize the contracts we currently have. And who knows how EPAs will go now…there may be so many people trying to be seen that it just becomes impossible to get an appointment.

What I hope is that AEA doesn’t think that big, sweeping gestures with a good tagline are enough to repair the damage the union has done (and is continuing to do as of this writing.) REAL change at all levels and in all areas has to happen. There has to be follow-through. There has to be a game plan otherwise, we’re just in for more problems. Potentially new problems, but problems nonetheless.