Theatre Design & Technology - Fall 1987 - 7

Soun~
The Need for Union Representation for Sound Designers
RICHARD K. THOMAS

Charlie Richmond's "Sound" column in the Summer issue suggested
that USA supported a sound designers'local. This \\'as based on old
information and \Vas written prior to
the USITT Conference.
-ed.
ne of the topics I have researched over the last few years
is the difficult subject of union
representation for theatre
sound designers. Acceptance of
sound as a design element faces similar resistance as lighting design did
in the 19'+0s. Unfortunately, the dissimilarities between sound and
other design areas have made a similar acceptance more difficult.
However, there appears to be a viable
solution at the end of the proverbial
tLInne I.
My interest in this area began,
quite natLIrally, while I was a guest
sound designer at a highly reputable,
professional regional theatre. There
were the usual problems - equipment not working for levels (at the
local hi-fi shop for repair!, a somewhat timid freshman who had never
seen a reel-to-reel tape recorder before who was to serve as the sound
board operator Icheap laborl, and the
sound designer inadvertently left off
the posters and marquee [although it
had been agreed to in the sound design contract!. But when I walked
into the theatre to discover the sound
technician standing on tiptoe from
the top of a ten-foot stepladder while
reaching over his head to solder a replacement midrange to the Radio
Shack speakers in midair, I knew
there had to be a better way.
The logical place to start seemed
to be United Scenic Artists IUSA!.
After all, I was a designer, and USA
seemed to represent the rest of the
design team- scene design rs, costLIme designers, and lighting designers. In November 198.+ I was in-

vited by USA Local350 to Chicago to
discuss this issue with the USA
board. The board seemed to voice a
good deal of suPPOrt for this idea.
However, USA was involved at the
time in a possible merger with Local
29 in ew York, and was also heavily involved in negotiating a standard
contract for LORT theatres. The
sound design question would have to
wait. In the meantime it was suggested that I survey the field and find
a group of sound designers who
would be willing to work on the
union representation issue. Two possible problems were also discussed:
some of the membership felt that
USA was a union for visual designers,
not sound designers. Secondly, a
ound design union was already
being formed under the jurisdiction
of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees (IATSE) to
represent Broadway sound designers.
I contacted Jack Shearing of
Masque Sound in ew York, who
gave me some background on the forming of IATSE Local 922, the sound
design local that was formed in July
1985.
One of the problems for the Broadway sound designers was gaining recognition for their work. It is surprising to note that Abe Jacob has
designed sound for twenty shows
that have won Tony Awards, yet he
ha never won a Tony himself. He has
never even been nominated. They
don't give Tony awards for sound
design.
But the problem of recognition
goes much deeper than the size and
type of billing a designer receives.
The lack of acceptance of sound design as a fourth department along
with scenery, costLIl11es, and lights
has made working conditions difficult and often compromised the esthetics of the sound design. The
sound designer and board operator
were considered a pan of the elec-

trics department under the master
electrician. Most electricians knew a
good deal about lighting and not
enough about sound. Another practice that was particularly problematic was a carry-over from lighting:
the designer was not allowed to
touch the sound equipment. Although an acceptable practice for
lighting, this is not at all conducive
to good sound design.
Working conditions also varied
greatly from theatre to theatre due to
the lack of standard contracts. Issues
such as the use of assistants,
copyright protection, royalties and
rights in future productions, and the
ability to specify both the equipment
and sound board operator had to be
renegotiated for every show. This
may have been relatively easy for the
"old timers" but hard for beginners.
Particularly difficult to negotiate
(and often forgotten) were programs
for employer-funded health annuity
and other benefits.
There was also the problem of education and dissemination of information regarding new ideas and technologies. The group wanted to find a
way to stay better informed about
new technologies, such as TEF analysis. ew products were being introduced every day - some wi th a
strange new interface called MIDI.
Computer technology offered incredible new potential for sound in theatre. An organization was clearly
needed to maximize the flow of information and use of these new
abilities.
And finally, I got a very real sense
from Jack Shearing that this was his
way of "giving back" to an industry
that had been very good to him.
Clearly the top Broadway sound designers do not need a union for the
typical union problem-money'
Many pull down six-figure incomes
and can set their own working conditions. These are designers who have
TD&T

FALL 1987

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Fall 1987