With the looming labor actions possible in the major orchestras of Seattle and Cleveland, it makes me wonder if there will be a shift in the largest budget level orchestras in this country. With the Big Five (now the Big Seven) orchestras in a Reagan-era arms race to maintain salary parity with each other (you can discern from the graph at Adaptistration that three of these orchestras are managing to continue their continual rise in pay levels, while the others are falling away to some extent) you’ve got to wonder where this will end. Cleveland is in a unique situation – it’s a smaller city by far than the others in the top tier, and may have a fundraising base that is similarly sized by comparison. Yet their salaries continue to rise. It’s not that they don’t deserve commensurate pay rates, the Cleveland Orchestra is one of the best in the world. The New York Philharmonic will have added $8 million to its deficit by the end of next season, according to estimates, with $4 million of that coming from the 09-10 season alone. Seattle is in a position where they are essentially rudderless, and with a lame duck music director and executive director (hand-picked by the MD), it must be harder for them to raise badly-needed funds on a consistent basis (aside from the end of year ‘messiah’ gifts from one of the deep pocketed mega-donors). Will Cleveland and Seattle end up like an over-zealous home buyer who got a jumbo loan with an adjustable rate and now finds themselves ‘upside down’ with their costs outstripping their ability to earn? I very much hope not.
Categories
One reply on “reckoning ahead?”
Actually, compensation does not necessarily reflect quality. It’s nice to be paid a fair wage, but a disparity may exist simply because other issues enter into the picture. Can it be said that Bernstein (who was a rich composer) was comparable to Mozart, who died a pauper? Good luck with the negotiations Cleveland – take what you can get.