Breaking: Philadelphia Orchestra quits wage talks
OrchestrasHours before the musicians’ contract expires tonight, the Philadelphia Orchestra and Kimmel Center have withdrawn from pay talks.
Nate West, Acting Assistant Principal Bass of the Philadelphia Orchestra said:’Our negotiating team was shocked and disturbed by management’s final offer, especially in light of our agreement to work together until a deal was done Friday night. Our musicians are among the best in the world, and management’s final offer seeks to silence our voices as we raise concerns about the direction of our ensemble, diminish our family leave benefits, and keep us dead last among our peers in compensation.
‘Ultimately, as a young musician, I have seen my peers choose not to audition for the Philadelphia Orchestra because of our uncompetitive salary and benefits—something that historically would have been considered unthinkable. The POKC’s final offer, and its refusal to continue bargaining, is unacceptable and demoralizing. As painful as it is for me to say, the POKC seems genuinely disinterested in ensuring that this ensemble continues to be one of the best in the world.’
The musicians have authorised their representatives to call a strike.
POKC is not the Philadelphia Orchestra Association, as we are all now learning!
Its motivations are quite different. See May 2023 tax filing at GuideStar and related discussion at
https://slippedisc.com/2023/08/did-diversity-kill-opera-in-philadelphia/
Shame on the management. One of the world’s top orchestras deserve a proper salary and working conditions so they can recruit high quality musicians and maintain their level.
Ready to make a donation, Sammy?
“Uncompetitive salary” of $152,256 (base).
If every other major orchestra made 155k base then sure… But they make more, so it’s not competitive. How much do professional tennis players make? Or lawyers? Where’s your logic? In many cities in this country and around the world, 152k is starvation wages, especially if you have a family. And there are countless people with not even 1% of the skill and talent of fine overall musicians, and they make millions. The world isn’t fair. $152k is nothing!!!
152k and starvation won’t fit in the same sentence.
You’re trying to compare compensation for skills that are in extremely high demand (technical specialists, sportsball stars, etc…) with those that aren’t (classically trained musicians).
All I’m doing is making the point that I’m sick and tired of people ganging up on musicians with the comments like “Aww the musicians are crying about making 150k a year. All I’m saying is, that’s not a grand salary in a major city especially with a family.
You talk as if somebody OWED you a “grand” income.
Very weird thinking.
Your salary, like those of all major US orchestras, depends on the good will of rich plutocrats. I guess you need to build a better connection with them, if you want more of their money, and a lifestyle more like their’s.
@People are so sensitive now makes ridiculous comparisons! Where in the world is there a mandate that professional musicians’ income should equate to that of tennis players and lawyers – or any other profession? There is none! Djokovic just pocketed $3 million at the US Open. Alcaraz $1 million for reaching the semi finals. Many musicians no doubt have put in a similar amount of hard work over as many years. But if they want the income of a tennis player or a lawyer they should have gone to a tennis academy or law school. Compare like with like! The Philadelphia players may have a reasonable grudge, but it is the Board and their Executive Director their fire has to be aimed at. Or just stay away from that orchestra and try to get a post at one which pays better. The world certainly is not fair but it is what it is. Good luck!
You can’t compare tennis superstar with musicians. USTA (the one operates us open) generated more than 500 million dollars in revenue last year, and that’s just one association. And tennis player generally retire at age of 35 and musician retire normally when they are 70. You got to be realistic as most orchestras heavily rely on donation to close the gap between ticket sales and its budget. You can’t ask for an incredible income when you don’t generate as much especially in the US the arts organizations runs like a business.
Berlin Philharmonic players make 120.000 US $ a year. And most other orchestras in Europe make less.
And what‘s the delusional reference to tennis pros and lawyers about? Have a go at a solo career then if you think you deserve more. And MIT graduates make less than 120k in average as starting salaries.
Many people have no education and they
Make millions.
HOW MANY PEOPLE MAKE OVER 100K PER YEAR?
The median income in the US is $44,225, but that doesn’t stop many Americans from pursuing more.
•18% of individual Americans make over $100k per year.
•34.4% of US households make over $100k per year.
Annual Income Share of Americans
Less than $100k 65.6%
$100k-$149.9k 15.5%
$150k-$199.9k 8.3%
$200k+ 10.3%
Just looked it up.
Can they bring the masks and vaccine passes back too? That will inspire more sympathy for them.
“Ultimately, as a young musician, I have seen my peers choose not to audition for the Philadelphia Orchestra because of our uncompetitive salary and benefits—something that historically would have been considered unthinkable.”
Seriously? His young peers would rather cobble together a living making $139 per service for 70 services in the Harrisburg Symphony (if they’re lucky enough to even win an audition with a regional orchestra of even that caliber) along with running around unable to say no to every freelance gig offered? With no benefits?
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Every audition for the Philadelphia Orchestra gets hundreds of outstanding, applicants from top conservatories and second-tier orchestras, accomplished freelancers, etc., many of them playing their instruments at a virtuosic levels that would blow the average person’s mind. Tell me, If I won a job out of Curtis or my master’s a Rice and I’m now in my late 20s playing 2nd horn in the Richmond Symphony making $50k, I’m gonna look at an opening in Philadelphia and go, “nah, only $150+ base, and more prestigious orchestra… not good enough I think I’ll pass.” Please.
It’s easy to understand that he is speaking of top candidates choosing to audition for other top jobs, not total volume of candidates.
When are the auditions?
Philadelphia is a city of many, many extremely wealthy families and corporations who could easily give musicians what they deserve in compensation. Obviously, people on the Board with power to decide are using the tactics of Big Business to try to squeeze the process. What a pity!
Surely, there must be a better way to ensure a pay scale which can be adjusted at intervals, automatically, to reflect changing economic conditions.
If those wealthy families and corporations were willing to put up the kind of money needed for that, it would have been done already. As I’ve said here before, Philadelphia’s biggest corporations don’t support the Orchestra to anywhere near the extent that cross-state Pittsburgh’s companies do. They used to get money from China for their nearly annual tours and other activities there. But the combination of Covid and the troubles between the U.S. and China have likely shut off that faucet. And I assume that there aren’t as many people from the suburbs willing to go into town for concerts as there used to be for various reasons there is no need to address here.
Every city is different with what it values. Some of the largest cities/metro areas have just never been able to develop a major orchestra. Case and point is Houston. They’re older than Cleveland, they’ve had some heavy hitters as music directors, and the city has long been flush with oil money, but if you were to put together a list of the top 20 orchestras in the US, most people would likely rank them 20th.
For whatever reason, it does seem like Philadelphia residents and businesses have lost a lot of interest in the orchestra over the last 20 years.
While I am no historian of the Houston Symphony, it is a major US Orchestra in terms of its budget size, and as classified by the League of American Orchestras. Only a small portion of “major” US orchestras has anything close to annual budgets of 50 million dollars or more — seven currently, I believe, to include those in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Los Angeles, New York, and Philadelphia. With an annual budget in the 30-35 million dollar range, and music director compensation in the 500,000 dollar range, in no sense of the word is the Houston Symphony not a major US orchestra, despite an analysis that suggests that it should somehow have a budget of twice the size of the current one. In terms of its annual budget, it is more or less on par with the “major” orchestras in Cincinnati, Dallas, Detroit, Minnesota, and Seattle.
I suppose that the last and perhaps only determinant of a “major” US orchestra in a more traditional sense might be having an annual budget or financial support consistently large enough to tour to Europe or East Asia on any sort of regular basis. In this limited sense, the notion of the “Big Five” US orchestras is still somewhat relevant — of course that moniker now includes the Los Angeles Philharmonic and San Francisco Symphony. The Pittsburgh Symphony would really be the only outlier in terms of budget size versus consistent touring to Europe almost every other year, and especially under music director Manfred Honeck’s ongoing tenure. The Mellon Foundation is what I believe makes this scenario possible for the Pittsburgh Symphony Orchestra.
And as for the Philadelphia Orchestra, and other “major” US orchestras, while in the best of all possible worlds it would be wonderful to see top-level orchestral musicians paid more than handsomely, it is very difficult to raise enough funds locally and state-wide year in and year out to support an annual base salary of roughly $70,000-$90,000 for musicians in orchestras like the Oregon Symphony, Kansas City Symphony, the Utah Symphony, etc., let alone one like Philadelphia that has an annual base salary of about $150,000, and more than 85 or so full time musicians — and then you have still have administrative, operations, marketing, and artistic staff costs.
Ready to make a donation, Margaret?
“…dead last among our peers in compensation.” I certainly hope that this gets resolved quickly and to everyone’s satisfaction but this notion that “we play as good as those guys so we should get paid the same” just doesn’t cut it.
People get paid different amounts for doing the same job in different cities. Why? Because the cost of living and the cost of doing business are different. Does every school teacher in America get the same pay simply because they are all school teachers? Every bus driver, every plumber? Of course not.
I understand that the cost of living in Philly is about 5 per cent higher than the national average. Compare that with their “peer” orchestras in New York, Chicago, LA, San Francisco, etc.
This sounds terrible and short-sighted on management’s part. I’m so sorry.
Nate West’s blurb about declining to audition for The Philadelphia Orchestra is complete nonsense. When one factors in the cost of living in the Philadelphia area, one sees that those musicians live extremely comfortably, much like their counterparts in Cleveland.
As I said in my comment above. The market is oversaturated with hundreds of elite level musicians, most of them more than qualified to play in an elite orchestra, who are lucky make a career in a 2nd- or 3rd tier regional orchestra making a $50k salary at best or $115 per service at worst for a few dozen services, along with maintaining a full teaching studio and scrambling for gigs. No health benefits, no 401k match, certainly no pension, etc.
I understand they want to be paid on par with the other Big 5 and elite orchestras on the west coast. Fine and reasonable. But saying that his young peers are declining to audition because of the compensation is disingenuous and, frankly, insulting to all the incredibly talented and accomplished musicians who would give anything to win a job in an orchestra that offers the prestige, legacy, caliber of play, soloists and conductors and *compensation* of Philadelphia.
Perhaps the orchestra’s MD could participate to the salaries. He doesn’t seem to be underpaid given the overpriced wardrobe he showcases everyday on his Instagram. Wearing Dior at Toronto International Film Festival today, for instance.
Did he rock the same Oompa Loompa short-pants get up that he was seen wearing in Venice? That hilarious shot made the rounds among the Met musicians, I guarantee you!
Lol!
I am always on the side of musicians… but I simply can’t entertain the idea that musicians are turning down auditions for Philadelphia because of “uncompetitive salary and benefits”. You would have to be really top of the top to turn down an audition for that orchestra. Regarding cities with lower costs of living than Philadelphia and comparable orchestras, I can think of only two: Cleveland, and *maybe* Chicago. Most musicians these days will take what they can get, so long as they can live on it.
“Most musicians these days will take what they can get, so long as they can live on it.”
Amen Kyle. If you are downvote this comment or any that I’ve made above regarding this quote, heads up, it’s a quote meant to mislead the ignorant. If you are downvoting it, you have no clue what it takes to make it as a musician, even if you’re from a top conservatory with an impressive resume, awards and experience. There are thousands of extraordinarily talented and accomplished musicians scrambling and hustling to piece together a living – running from gig to gig, teaching, working towards another master’s degree from CIM or Rice or Indiana or NEC – unable to say no – all while toiling away on excerpts and paying their own way to auditions should they even manage to make the cut to prelims.
It’s pretty typical for both sides of a labor negotiation to engage in some dramatic exaggeration. Management will say they’re about to go out of business without cuts, orchestra will say nobody wants to play there anymore. It’s part of the game.
Nonetheless the right thing to do is to support the people who actually make the music, not suits.
It’s the “suits” who have to raise the money to pay the “people who actually make the music.” Right???
And since they’re apparently no good at it, maybe the suits should be the ones to take a haircut.
If you want to talk philosophy, do the suits have a product without the orchestra? Perhaps they should realize they don’t exist without the orchestra and it should be in their own interest to make sure they have the best available product
“Nonetheless the right thing to do is to support the people who actually make the music, not suits.”
Actually the ‘suits’ are there for a reason, believe it or not. Musicians have a habit of putting themselves at the center of an imaginary universe.
This dispute is hardly just about finances. Their management’s proposal would unilaterally vest disciplinary power in managements control. This means tenure, harassment, workplace rules, and future contracts would all be eroded and manipulated to gain control over the musicians. This is borderline fascist people.
https://operawire.com/philadelphia-orchestra-management-derails-negotiations-ahead-of-contract-expiration/
“Their management’s proposal would unilaterally vest disciplinary power in managements control.”
That’s how it works in most unionized workplaces. The CBA still provides for an investigatory and disciplinary process that the unions is involed in, but given that liability ultimately rests with management when there’s a problematic employee, they do get to control all disciplinary issues.
Management gaining control over musicians is not ‘fascist’. It’s called management for a reason.
Claiming that the pay is uncompetitive is partially true, partially not.
Music schools are collectively cranking out thousands of graduates each year. Between Philly, BSO, NYP, LA, SF, Cleveland, CSO, and the Met, how many entry-level positions are open up a year? 20? 30? Even with lower pay than its peers, Philly still gets to be highly selective with who they hire.
As I’ve said before, Philly was struggling to get to 70 percent attendance pre-COVID. In the 2023-24 season, they’ve reduced the number of concerts and prices — it doesn’t seem like management is posturing for the sake of it.
At the same time, it’s a fair question to ask what is management doing to increase revenue, and at what point will the management team resign and make way for new leadership if they cannot reverse declining profits? This is where you need a strong board of directors to set revenue goals over the next several years and hold the management team accountable if they cannot meet them. Say what you want about the corporate world, but the management team doesn’t get to keep their jobs when revenues fall year, after year, after year.
That’s right, management should have known far in advance what the far side of a global pandemic would be like, especially its sociological impact. Sheesh. Oh to be ensconced in the pious comfort of being a musician.
Attendance was down well before the pandemic. If management thought that after the pandemic attendance would be greater than it was between 2015 and 2019, then they’re bigger fools than I already think they are.
Pretty sure most of the people on here implying that “the musicians are asking too much” are from the “nobody wants to work” and “live within you means” crowd.
I don’t necessarily agree that musicians are asking too much, but I’m a big fan of “live within you (sic) means.”
I suppose there is room for debate on the “nobody wants to work” issue. I understand there is a narrative touting Bidenomics, but the reality of inflation coupled with “help wanted” signs everywhere i live seems to imply there might, in fact, be an issue with finding people who want to have a boss and show up to work on time (much less accomplish anything while on the clock).
The sound you hear in the background is Yannick stressed as he tries to figure out how to make an Instagram post based on this in which he makes everyone like him for two more minutes
I predict a bathrobe will be worn!
You forgot an adjective: “skimpy”.
Everybody assume they should earn more… but how to pay with empty halls across the world? You can be as skilled as possible, but If no one is interested to pay… Good Lucky!
“Learn to code”
– Joe Biden
“Go to work to make the solar panels”
– John Kerry
I hope it is resolved soon.
This is completely off-point but lots of fun anyways. This great orchestra has performed them all. My list of 10 greatest composers (warning, there are more than 10):
1. Mozart;
2. Bach;
3. Beethoven;
4. Tchaikovsky;
5. Brahms; Dvorak;
6. Debussy; Wagner;
7. Mahler; Sibelius
8. Brückner; Stravinsky;
9. Puccini; Saint-Saëns ; Ravel
10 Grieg; Chopin.
Of course, it is a personal list and tastes change. There are also many fine composers not on my list plus many who did not show the diversity of works of the above. Note that Chopin barely made it for this reason.
Is this comment for real or are you that high?
The concept of “fair” has, long-since been abandoned. What our Western Society rewards is not based on fairness, nor on what one does; rather it is based on the uniqueness of what one does AND how many others are willing to pay to watch/listen to or use what is one’s talent or ability. As an Emergency Medicine professional, I am remunerated well compared to the most other people, however, my colleagues & I do save lives on a daily basis, yet none of us receives ⅙ of the average salary of a Major League baseball player, because far fewer could do what he does (unique) than the number that could become good Emergency Medicine professionals AND tens of thousands want to watch him play, far more than want to watch me put in a chest tube. Fair? Equitable, considering the importance/significance of my work compared to that of an MLB player? That doesn’t matter in our culture. Professional musicians in World Class orchestras are doing phenomenal and very important work and should be highly compensated. But they’re not going to get the crowds of Dave Matthews or Taylor Swift (not a great reflection on our society) so they’re not going to be receiving even a significant fraction those entertainers, and other like them, receive. Yes, it’s true:it’s not fair.
Thanks for atrempting to reveal economic secrets that have been known for centuries but it seems you still have not grasped it fully. The salaries you mention are perfectly equitable, it’s just that you have a subjective definition of ‘importance’ that you think is objective.
Importance is demonstrated by the way employers pay their employees. The objective element is in looking at and comparing the salaries & jobs, then drawing conclusions. The employers are subjective; crunching the data is objective.
But who ultimately suffers? The patrons!
Pay is only part of the picture. 15 positions are unfilled. A couple might be acceptable, 15 really is a lot.
That’s not entirely the management’s fault is it? It’s the musicians who sit on committees and have no hires in auditions
The 2011 contract negotiated during a “faux bankruptcy” subtracted 10 full-time players from their roster – one of management’s demands. These vacancies have never been filled because management has never funded them. Subs play in those spots. Musicians can’t decide on audition winners when no auditions are scheduled.
Obviously, a despicable management attempt at “union-busting”! Sounds like something Starbucks would do!
Sadly, the musicians are living in a dream world. The demand for classical music, opera, and ballet is decreasing to such an extent that the performers’ services simply do not command the value they once did. It will come down to the survival of the organizations and how much donors are willing to underwrite. Dependence on contributions is already very heavy, but there will be a limit. Performers don’t have many chips to bargain with.
I have been an orchestra musician for 40 years now, and I would have thought I had heard it all. Oh wait, I guess I have. All these comments, warning about the death knell of US orchestras, especially the major ones, have been going around for decades. Nothing new to see here, especially the comments about musician’s wages being too high. We’ve heard it all before. Thing is, as in any business, the market determines the price. And the market is strong, atm – look at Boston’s (BSO) recent settlement. The Philadelphia Orchestra Musicians are not asking for the sun, moon, and stars – they are asking for competitive wages and benefits, appropriate for their standing as one of the world’s top ensembles, and in comparison to their peer US orchestras, which is their market. Exaggerated rhetoric comes with the territory in negotiations of this nature. They’ll figure it out eventually.
I can’t speak for Philadelphia but in LA, the LA Phil musicians make excellent money teaching, both privately and in music schools. Some also get other well paying gigs- notably playing on movie soundtracks.
As a classical musician for a top-notch orchestra, you should be able to charge top dollar for private lessons.
Why the F*CK are you dragging LA into every conversation you could find when you only ever worked in a very peripheral role for them and are now based in NY?
“But no one will audition for us with pay SO LOW.” This is the battle cry of every US orchestra regarding contract negotiations and it’s just hilariously funny. I guess they think that there are still naive people out there (who actually care about classical music) who will buy this line of balderdash. Also, the musicians might want to look at the responses to this post. This is presumably peopled by individuals who have a passion for classical music – so if the majority of them aren’t supporting your cause, you might want to take that under advisement.
Exactly who are the peers, amongst whom Philadelphia’s salaries rank “dead last”? Is it the old Big Five? Is it an updated Big 5? or 10? 20? It would be helpful to see a list of base salaries of, say, orchestras with annual budgets above $30 million — along with an index of relative cost of living in the host cities.
Actually they are dead last among the old big 5 and the big two on the west coast. They’re just ahead of National Symphony and frankly they should be doing better. For your info, Boston signed a contract that will take their salary over 200k by the end of it’s duration, no changes to their health insurance and benefits and they still have a pension. Chicago is still negotiating, from what I’ve heard the issue they’ve been stuck on is the coming years without MD and how to navigate auditions and tenure process. Muti left CSO with around 25-27 unresolved positions, some on tenure but majority open, so the fact that Philly is complaining about having 15 vacancies is really not such a big deal. Anyway let’s wait and see how they do and where that leaves Philly and SFS in their current plight.
Even if Yannick worked for free and spread out his salary among the musicians, a member of the Philadelphia Orchestra would only make a few hundred more a week before taxes. Hardly a game changer. So to again complain about his outfits and Dior – by the way, a brand popular with BIPOC, so technically that’s inclusive – that’s a little bit rich.
The Philadelphia Orchestra has been one of the finest orchestras in the world for decades. Greatness requires years to achieve but it can be lost in an instant. Management must find a way to compensate the orchestra at the level it deserves or they will lose what it has taken over a century to achieve. Their wonderful maestro has brought them to a higher standard that must not be ignored.
I have yet to see an orchestra unable to fill any open positions. If anyone declines to audition for ANY major orchestra, there are zillions of very good players in line waiting to take that job. Anyone declining to audition is NOT an argument any more than not having a big salary makes you a lesser orchestra. Pay in London orchestras is WAY less than American ones and they are considered world-class.
I remember as a young basketball fan, I got mad at the NBA players for not accepting whatever they were offered to keep games going and avoid a lockout. Then I realized that the money either goes to them or stays in the execs hands.
Way too many haters in these comments.
What people don’t get is all the high paid IT and management jobs will be replaced with AI. Even with streaming, live classical music lives and musicians have irreplaceable skills.
Ever thus. Both the venue and the Orchestra’s administration will lose a lot of money if the musicians walk out.
You are assuming that the Kimmel Center and the Orchestra are profit making entities. Actually the two will gain revenue, or cut losses, through the strike, by not having to pay musicians’ salaries or incur the expenses of keeping the hall open. One of the ironies of strikes is that the striking employees (in this case the musicians of the orchestra) partially finance any future wage increase by means of the money saved management during the duration of the strike.
The only musicians who care about labor issues in top-5 orchestras are other musicians in top-5 orchestras. They all circulate the exact same talking points about competing with their “peer orchestras” and losing out on “top talent”. We’re all happy for them if they get their 200K base salary or whatever they’re seeking, but….as a colleague in my orchestra put it, “if you can afford to go on strike, you don’t need my help”.
Hopefully Yannick will be on strike too…