1. The Musicians' Union in Historical perspective WWW.MUHISTORY.COM

2. Structure Project Outline www.muhistory.com A Brief History: Musicians as workers: Some significant themes: Technology The Music Industries Competition Genre Equalities

3. The Project Funded by AHRC and ESRC for four years from 1/4/12 Personnel: Martin Cloonan (0.2) and John Williamson (1.0) Aims: To use the MU as a prism to examine:  Musicians’ working lives  The music industries  British musical life

4. Outputs Book: Workers’ Play Time (MUP, 2016) Conference: Working in Music, Glasgow, 14-15 January 2016: www.muhistory.com/conference - places still available!www.muhistory.com/conference Exhibition

5. Sources Musicians’ Union archive: http://libguides.stir.ac.uk/content.php?pid=337208&sid=279 19688  Other archives: BBC,, PPL, TMA/SOLT, OEA/ABO  Existing Literature  Interviews  Result – top-down and London-centric

6. The MU’s History Amalgamated Musicians’ Union (AMU) founded 1893 by J.B.Williams in Manchester, the same year as the rival London Orchestral Association (LOA) Split in profession between “gentlemen” (LOA) and “players” (AMU) (Ehrlich 1985) Should musicians be in a professional association or a union? AMU = the type ‘organised tyranny which is the curse of modern trade unionism in this country’ (LOA 1894). Merger in 1921 with National Orchestral Union of Professional Musicians (NOUPM, formerly LOA) – formation of Musicians’ Union 2015: 30,500 members – approx same as 1960s – despite anti-Union legislation (1980s/1990s) which saw overall TU membership fall from 13.2M (1979) to 6.2 M (2011).

7. Musicians as Workers Craft Union or General Union? Open or closed? Membership open to: ‘Anyone who follows the profession of music (Handbook)  Who is allowed to join?  Who is/was forced to join?  Who chose/chooses to join?  Longstanding rule against playing with or employing non- members

8. Musicians as particular sorts of worker  Musicians work in various places, often as freelance  Typology:  Permanent  Seasonal/time limited  Casual ‘only 10% of musicians are full-time, salaried employees. Half of musicians have no regular employment whatsoever. The vast majority of musicians (94%) work freelance for all or part of their income’ (DHA 2012: 14). Implications for organisation

9. Technology Smith Main issue is ‘the continual battle with technology’ (2013) Frith: ‘the MU has always been out of touch with the particular needs of rock musicians’ (1978: 162) Street: ‘as each innovation appears to threaten jobs, the MU has resisted each one in turn..while inspired by a desire to protect members, the MU’s policy appears as merely reactionary’ (1986: 147) But MU has attempted to control, not simply oppose

10. The Talkies The Jazz Singer (1927, released 1928 in UK) “Silent” cinema saw widespread use of cinema orchestras MU membership: 20,000 (1928), 6,740 (1936) Revives through important deals with BBC and PPL

11. The Music Industries and the MU MU unique in having been involved in all the major agreement covering the music industries MU important in live music, recording and broadcasting – via agreement with Phonographic Performance Ltd (PPL) PPL: Established 1934 to collect royalties due to performers for public use of their recordings – owned by the record companies (Decca and EMI). “Featured” artists paid via their contracts, “non-featured” paid to MU 1946 – first full agreement between MU and PPL, implemented 1947

12. MU-PPL 1946 Agreement: Live Music  Limited public performances of records (i.e. the playing of recorded music in public). Licence depended upon records not being used:  ‘in complete or partial substitution for musicians employed’ or  ‘where musicians could, having regard to the size and nature of the theatre etc., be employed’ ( EC Report, 1947: 23).  Thus MU persuaded PPL to issue licences for playing records by large venues on the condition that such venues also employed musicians (but PPL and MU have different priorities)

13. BBC Always heavily reliant on live musicians Becomes biggest employer of musicians ever (MacDonald 2010: 4) Series of “needletime” agreements with PPL limits records on radio until late 1980s Feels ongoing obligation to the music profession 1988 MMC Report on Collective Licensing signals end of PPL ability to impose both needletime and conditions on venues

14. Competition. Constant issue – e.g police and military bands and, especially, “aliens” 1935-1954 - “ban” on foreign musicians entering the UK - “what do we want Louis Armstrong for? We’ve got Kenny Baker” (cited Blain 2012, Godbolt 1976: 55). See Cloonan and Brennan “Alien invasions”, Popular Music, 32:2, pp.277-295

15. Genre  Gentlemen (orchestras) vs players (pop) – still?  MU negotiates with orchestras  Little negotiation in pop (other than BPI for session players)  Other genres  MU as a hindrance to music making?

16. Equalities I : Gender Feminist accounts of music industry largely omit Union (e.g. Steward and Garratt 1984, O’Brien 1995, Leonard 2007) Continuing issues of inequalities in music profession (Scharff 2015) 1948: 1 st woman on EC (1990 2 nd ) 2013: 1 st woman chair of EC, women now 23% of members History: Hard drinking culture and women seen as competition LGBT+

17. Equalities II: Race Opposition to “alien” musicians – accusations of racism 1947: ‘it should be the policy of the Union to oppose any attempt at discrimination amongst Union members on the grounds of race, creed, colour or sex’ (MU: 2/1/7/1949) 1958: La Scala, Wolverhampton 1957: Ban on members playing in South Africa 1984: Fine for Queen for playing Sun City

18. Conclusions The history of the MU offers an insight into the working lives and practices of musicians since 1893 Musicians as workers – examine agreements Changing technology – MU tries to control 1946 PPL agreement is important in understanding post- War period and relations with employers in broadcasting, record companies MMC 1988 Report sees end of needletime and restrictions of PPL venue licences – MU’s influence goes ‘right down the pan’ (Scard 1991) AMU formed to protect musicians against ‘amateurs, unscrupulous employers and ourselves’ (Joe Williams) Ongoing battles

21. The 1946 MU/PPL Agreement  Limited public performances of records (i.e. the playing of recorded music in public). Licence depended upon records not being used:  ‘in complete or partial substitution for musicians employed’ or  ‘where musicians could, having regard to the size and nature of the theatre etc., be employed’ ( EC Report, 1947: 23).  Thus MU persuaded PPL to issue licences for playing records by large venues on the condition that such venues also employed musicians (but PPL and MU have different priorities)

22. MU/PPL and the public use of recordings First PPL funds for “non-featured” artsits reached Union in 1951. What to do with them? How to distribute them? ‘For the benefit of all musicians’ (Martin 1996: 16).  Minority of recording musicians impacting adversely on the majority who earn from playing live  Fear of being seen as a “yellow” union PPL placed limits on the use of the fund. Could not be used for ‘the purposes of furthering any trade dispute or for any purpose which may be contrary to or adversely affect the interests of PPL or its member companies’ (EC Report 1947: 23) Concerns about potential for recording strike (like AFM, 1942-44 and 1948) and ex gratia payments

23. MU/PPL & Broadcasting BBC becomes biggest employer of musicians in 1930s and possibly biggest employer of musicians ever (MacDonald 2010: 4) “Needletime” agreements restricted amount of time PPL granted for the playing of records on BBC radio. Accepted by all parties – PPL fears records on radio hits sales, BBC accepts an obligation to employ musicians 1964: Needletime disrupted/weakened by pirates’ “Non-stop pop” 1967: Radio 1 – impact limited by needletime 1970: I am ‘opposed to all needletime’, Harry Francis, MU official PPL and BBC both fearful of MU srtikes Needletime remained in place until 1989 (following MMC Report on Collective Licensing). After MMC Report MU influence “Went right down the pan” (Scard 1991)