Ethics and the jobs you play...

It is interesting to me that major acts are donating the funds they were paid to play for "ole Omar", in light of the recent issues involving him and that part of the country.


How do ethics or your principles affect where and for whom you play?

There are several large retail establishments, some manufacturers, a local college and a list of individuals I will NEVER play for. That goes for ALL Nursing homes, assisted living facilities, and similar places, including one local VA.

The nursing home thing is MY CHOICE, and I'm not trying to convince anyone else to do the same, even though I think that the best there are (especially in the "for profit" sector) are abominable.

What about you? How do ethics affect where and for whom you play?


Russ (picky old fart) Lay

Hi Russ,

Yes, there have been times when I have refused a gig due to my personal feelings. One type of job I shy away from is anything politically leaning to the left, or to the right. On the other hand I can think of one particular restaurant owned by a guy that I have heard not such great things about by other musicians and therefor tended to stay away from his establishments. Then one day I heard that he refused to serve a group of people, at least one of whom had questionable ethics, and I gained a lot of respect for the owner. Now I play there every Thursday.

As for the NH thing. I understand where you're coming from. But on the other hand, some of the folks stuck in those sometimes hideous facilities really enjoy the entertainment. And I feel anything that can take their mind off of their current situation even for a brief moment is a very good thing. Now that I have a regular day job I can't do many of the senior facility gigs. But when I was doing more of them, one job could be a lot of fun with a lot of interaction, and the next could be very depressing, but I always left feeling good knowing that I was able to bring back some memories from happier times to their otherwise dreary days.

Dave, my deal is, I am on the board of a group called Kentuckians for Nursing Home Reform, which lobbies for changes in legislation that impact the quality of care...things like background checks for ALL employees, required reporting of deaths to the coroners office, minimum staffing set as a function of the population, required training and other issues. We are resisted every step of the way by the nursing home owners and those who lobby for the for-profit nursing home sector. They are powerful and ruthless.

Thing is, while I see the enjoyment some residents have with entertainment, I feel that my time working on the web site, producing educational videos for the group, writing editorials for the cause and other efforts does more good than if I played at the homes. The educational videos I produce contain original music beds and I play one $350-500.00 job a week and donate the proceeds.

I was a primary caregiver for my father-in-law and his wife, who spent a miserable 14 years in nursing homes (11 years for her). I was there everyday, and got to really despise most of the people in nursing home management. As far as the workers go, 1/2 were there for the paycheck and the other half were there because they really cared for the residents.

Sadly, no amount of money can really secure adequate care.
That's why, I have dedicated the rest of my life to working for what we call "the Forgotten Kentuckians".

And, the Nursing Home Lobby is so rich and powerful, making a difference is very challenging. But, if it's doable, I'm going to do it, along with Bernie Vaunderheide, the founder and others.

Nursing Home Residents deserve a better end of life.


Russ

PS: Didn't mean to side-track myself. There are former Kentucky Governors I won't play for either....or major housing developers,,,,or the president of a small local girls college (what a jerk)....or....or....

How about you?


Russ(give 'em hell)Lay

Hi Russ,

I believe in your cause and commend you for the hard work. I'm sure there are many improvements that could be (should be) made in the way of senior care.

Dave

As a performer who prefers nursing homes to virtually any other kind of venue, I have a totally opposite viewpoint than Russ does. I could not, in fact and with all due respect, disagree with him more.

Given the "speed" with which industry-wide changes are realized in the long term care sector, a well intending person trying to change the system from the outside had better have the patience of Job. Of course its an uphill climb. A damn near impossible one, at that. I give Russ credit for his efforts and generosity on this matter, but I will not cede any moral high ground/ethical high ground whatsoever.

While residents may (and hopefully) benefit down the road from reform efforts, those same residents are lonely today. They are frightened today. They are confused today. What several of us provide on daily basis is a personal touch. A smile, embrace, a song, a laugh, etc. that in some way tells the recipient that they matter to someone.

I have trimmed back my Club work dramatically over the last few years to concentrate more on nursing homes and retirement communities. Because of ethics as much as anything else.

I am a professional musician. I could perform in any number of different environments around SW Ohio and make a comparable living. I choose to concentrate on enhancing as many lives of these folks as I can.

Given Russ' love of music and skill level, I ask him this. Isn't there even a little time during the month you could share your music, warmth and spirit with these people that would pay an immediate dividend? It might refresh your own battery as fighting that fight must take its toll from time to time.

As turnabout is fair play, I'll give some serious thought to see how I might contribute to helping the reform effort.

God Bless you, Russ...

Like Bill, I prefer playing NH, Assisted Living Facilities and Retirement Communities over restaurants and bars. I love playing for them, and they love my performances. I have a great relationship with each and every person I play for, I talk with them before, during and after the performances, and they are all wonderful people that outlived their bodies.

As for the political jobs, I play a fair number of fundraisers for the Democrats, Republicans, Independents and Tea Party. Ironically, the political jobs are a lot of fun for ME! I get to watch a whole lot of folks trying to buy political favors by paying $500 to $1,000 a plate for the opportunity to glad-hand some wannabe political candidate, eat finger food and hope this person wins so they can barter for some favoritism. For the first hour or so I play pretty much anything I wish--it's just background music at best. Then, the next hour is taken up with speeches, introductions, etc..., stuff that makes you want to puke because you know it's all BS. Most of the fund raiser jobs take less than three hours, you usually only play for an hour or so, pick up a hefty paycheck, wish them well, and go do the next one for the opposition. The political jobs only come along every two years--when it's election time. These jobs have nothing to do with ethics--it's just business.

Cheers,

Gary

LOL! Politics/Ethics. Oxymoron. Take the money and run (not for office) Gary.

Bill, my thought in posting this subject had to do with individual choices, what each of us can live with and how that affects our actions. It was not a, "My choices are more ethical than yours", or a slam against the idea that nursing home work is valuable, in terms of resident enjoyment. I did not intend to imply that playing nursing homes is less than legitimate work, or dispute the idea that residents enjoy the performances.

What I AM implying is, while you are saying that playing nursing homes is something you can do for lonely residents TODAY, what I'm trying to do, TODAY is end unnecessary DEATHS, RAPE, PHYSICAL ABUSE, OVERDOSING and other common types of UNNECESSARY SUFFERING typical of the industry.

This is all happening TODAY. It is a well-documented national
disgrace. The need for reform is immediate.


As far as your observation about the difficulty of affecting change, in light of the funds available at well-heeled "for profit" organizations and individual homes, you're right.

But, here in Kentucky, from an awareness and media exposure standpoint, we're in control. The "For Profits" know who we are, and, frankly, whenever a "fat cat" nursing home owner asks me to play at his business (usually at his expensive country club), he "turns and runs" when I tell him/her my name.


Bernie and I are both long-time P/R directors. He was the P/R director of the University of Kentucky for 30 years, the network voice of the Wildcats and long-time newspaper reporter.

I was P/R and Communications Director of one of the world's largest Electrical Manufacturing organizations for over 30 years, a long-time P/R-Communications professor at the Graduate School level and run a communications company with clients located all around the world.

Together, we have generated thousands of column inches of front page newspaper coverage, contacted primary legislative individuals and generated several extended investigative series with State-wide coverage. The "for profits" aren't even in the same game when it comes to media coverage and awareness.


Passing effective legislation to remedy documented problems is another matter. That's where the issue of lobbying and money rears it's ugly head.

As far as finding an hour to go to a home to perform, I'm working over 20 hours a week on the education/legislative issues for no compensation. I'm also writing a grant which will fund professional, full-time lobbyist, producing educational videos (email me for the link, if interested)and supplying content for the electronic public communications effort.

Again, here is where personal ethics is involved, but this work bills out at almost three times the hourly rate most musicians get for nursing home work and has the potential of helping stop the rampant abuse and raising public awareness of this horrific situation.

The one party a week I play generates enough revenue to fund 1/2 the annual salary of a professional lobbyist. Next month, we'll have a fund-raiser/dinner which will generate much needed additional funds.

All said, Bill, I don't find much different in our commitment to nursing home residents. The approach is just different.

And the ethical issues involved are the ones appropriate for each of us.

The great take-a-way is, you have compassion for what we call around here the 23,000 "Forgotten Kentuckians".

And that's GREAT!


Russ

PS: The idea of exploring support for causes like ours is admirable, but if you do it publicly, don't be surprised if the nursing home jobs quickly disappear.

Good stuff, Russ...

I have to imagine the current "anti-gov't." attitude being advanced by many on the right, especially the media, makes it more difficult not less, to pursue more aggressive regulations. "Regulations" is code for big/intrusive gov't. who secretly desire the most socialized state possible.

I must say, why can't the "free market" sort this out? Enough people die wrongly or too early, won't people stop patronizing the poor performing facilities? Of course they will. What are we? Stupid? Do we really need more government?

Pretty soon the Gov't. will be telling us what medicines are best for us, what therapies are the most efficient, etc. Rationing and Death Panels are surely just round the bend.

Would you please show where in the Federal/State Constitutions where it says the Gov't. has the right and or duty to legislate ANY of this?

Thanks!

(Please note that my tongue is firmly planted in my cheek...)

Bill, from a liberal standpoint, I'm really against more government regulation. And, I'm a liberal journalist who does not understand your implication that, somehow, the liberal media is less than enthusiastic about ending elder abuse and shoddy practices in nursing homes or impeding the process.

But, I'm more interested in changing the way things are in the majority of the "hell holes" called "for profit" nursing homes. And that necessitates working with government agencies and legislative groups.

Your suggestion that most people are smart enough to let market pressure correct the inequities is surprising. The great majority of nursing home residents are simply parked there by family members and only visited occasionally. If you really looked, the abuses are real, and fighting ANY attempt at regulation by the "for profits" is easily verified.

For 16 years, I have been in a nursing home once a day....probably far more hours than you have spent entertaining in them. I have looked behind the facades.
I have seen the abuse. Today, I'm waiting for a call from Hospice concerning a lady who is in her last 24 hours. I have been visiting her in a really marginal home for 11 years. I took care of her husband, a Parkinson's patient, before that.
Yesterday, an untrained, uninformed aid tried to feed her. She had been on a liquid IV only for 8 days. The reaction was violent and completely unnecessary.

It may not be the Government's responsibility to fix things, but DAMN IT, SOMEBODY HAS TO, or at least try.

You may be right. In many ways, we may be as far apart in our thinking as possible on this issue.

From my standpoint, you have the right to think whatever you want. So do I.

And, for the rest of my life, a major effort will be made by me and my organization to fix the inequities and educate as many people as possible about this national American tragedy.


Be well,


Russ

Man, did I get things off track. The question of ethics and performance involves much more than the nursing home issue.

What about others? Where do you draw the line(s)?

Russ

Russ-

Did you not see or just skip the last 11 words I wrote on my previous post?

We're singing the same song, lol...

This thread is taking a turn that may just send it to the Bar, which is fine. But let's not forget the original question that Russ asked, "How do ethics or your principles affect where and for whom you play?
Granted he did slightly touch on a political issue and of course the nursing home, etc. issues, but I think the main question is still an interesting one.

Bill, sorry, I was called by Hospice on Tess and in a hurry to get to the home (she died at around 12:30AM). I did NOT do you the earned courtesy of reading your last line.

Sorry for the "single focus" but I've always thrown everything I have into every project, and this nursing home issue is what I want my legacy to be.


We need to visit, soon!

Russ

Dave, I was such a drinker for so many years that, when I quit in 1988, I decided never to play bars. I play patios and dining rooms with full bar service, so I'm talking out of two sides of my mouth, but it makes me feel bad to think I'm contributing to the alcoholism problem.

For so many years, I got "mellow", let's say, with the crowd. As the only sober one in a lounge, the world looks vastly different. I saw how drinking ruined health, careers, families, etc.

That's something I really feel bad about and am struggling to not be involved in. It's really difficult (read "impossible") to find jobs where drinking isn't part of the program.


Russ (reformed alcoholic) Lay

ethics and performance...

How about bar owners who like to get a free ride!

You can play for some expences and free drinks

We allways refuse these offers!
(and believe me we do not need the money, we are playing for fun with our band)
1. These owners usually underpay there staff.
2. You ruin the market for professionals who need to make there living out of these jobs
3. Bringing + 10.000 euro's in equipment and getting payed
by drinks and some expenses, doesn't make sense at all..

I thank you from the bottom of my pocket book/ I mean my heart.
There are countless "musicians" around here who will play for chicken feed and drinks. They ruin the prices for everybody.
DonM

You bet. It sets a very bad precedent.

Kind of an aside to the OP but still regarding ethics. Don't know if this has happened in other parts of the U.S. but I don't see why not. ASCAP or BMI (not sure which, maybe both) have hired local musicians to go undercover and search out clubs that don't pay royalty fees and then rat them out along with the musicians that play those clubs. I know of several musicians who lost regular long-term weekly gigs due to this. The question is who deserves the term 'unethical' to be attached to their name the most, ASCAP or BMI for coming up with the idea, the club owner for not paying royalty fees, or the musician(s) doing the ratting-out?

“An ethical person ought to do more than he's required to do and less than he's allowed to do”

- sorry double post, Nigel please delete

Excess in anything is created by the individual's inability to handle whatever ...
Drinking alcohol in itself is not illegal, and within reasonable limits - not hurting anyone in the process - is part of social activity ... I don't think I am contributing to the problem of over-consumption by gigging in a place that is serving alcohol ... if I'm not there, someone else will be ... if that makes me un-ethical, then I guess I am guilty ...

What does a musician have to do with paying Ascap or BMI? To my knowledge, we don't. Clubs do. If clubs play cover songs, they are required to have a license and it's been that way for decades. The club is responsible, not musicians, right?

Now, if the club fired bands who play cover songs because the venue was too cheap to pay the license, who's the bad guy? I dunno, seems to me that a club that genuinely cannot afford a license is either lying, too cheap to fork it over, or about to go under anyway. I don't think licenses cost that much, in the big scheme of things, which is a club's annual budget. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The copyright laws seem pretty straight-forward... if you (venue) profit from the intellectual property rights of others (songwriters), you must buy a license so that royalties can be paid to those who created the intellectual property. As for Ascap and BMI and the way they operate (which some say is inconsistent but I have no way of knowing that), I don't have an allegiance to them, only to the principle.

disclaimer: I am by no means and expert on the subject.

What I do know is that public places (bars, restaurants, shopping malls, etc.) are expected to pay royalties for commercial music that is played for public ears. The way I understand it is that these fees will cover commercial music being played live by a musician/band and also pre-recorded. I also understand that if a venue does not pay royalty fees, then it is the responsibility of the musician/band to pay those fees when playing commercial music. So it is not necessarily the club owners responsibility. The owner could choose to either not have music, or hire musicians who only play original material, or hire a musician who plays commercial material and pays the proper royalties. Based on your last paragraph where you said "if you (venue) profit from the intellectual property rights of others (songwriters), you must buy a license so that royalties can be paid to those who created the intellectual property I would think you agree that if playing somewhere that does not pay royalties, then it is up to the musician to do so, right?

No, my understanding of this has been that it is not the musician's responsibility to do this, it is a venue's responsibility. What's a musician going to do, say, "Show me your license?" Also, all musicians having to buy licenses seems ridiculously onerous. I'll try to check elsewhere on this.

The only thing I can think of is that it could be that you are correct BUT that ASCAP/BMI, etc. do not enforce it against musicians, only against venues. Whatever it is, I don't see how they could enforce it against all musicians even if they wanted to. Well, I guess they could, but gee there are a bazillion bands playing covers. Far more than those who play only originals. That would be tough to do.

Musicians are responsible for licenses when they record a tune that was written/published by someone else.

Venues pay for the fees when they hire people to play live music, or for that matter, recorded music...

Bill, you are right about the principal of songwriters and performers justifiably getting royalties. The problem is in execution. Reps are gangsters who use every type of intimidation technique possible.

You can negotiate a fee based on number of seats, size of group(S), number of nights, etc. No one can tell you how
funds are divided so that Bill Pittman, for example, gets his fair share.

I used to play a hotel where the ASCAP folks stayed. They were invariably rough, large and pushy. They surveyed all the entertainment guides and newspapers , on line entertainment guides, etc. Then, for those who were not licensed, they started a process of collections.

REALLY Pains in the A**!


Russ

PS, as far as fees go, a place I played 6 months a year (I was the only entertainment) paid $5100.00 in annual assessments, which also included some piped in, recorded music.