<p>MODERATOR'S NOTE: This thread is the result of moving a series of posts discussing this topic that ensued on an unrelated thread and so it can continue and be found in searches, I have moved those posts over here.</p>
<hr>
<p>soozievt, your story reminds me of a question I've had for a while--This is off topic for this thread, so my apologies. But what is your advice about when to get equity? This classmate of your daughters--if she landed a B'way national tour role, did she then elect to get equity immediately? When did your own D get equity? I have heard from several people that the best strategy is to wait to get equity until you are well established and fairly certain you can get regular equity work. What do you think? What has your D and her friends done? Thanks.</p>
<p>Connections, it is a great question, which really should be its own thread. There are several discussions on this topic on this forum if you do a search. </p>
<p>To answer your question, yes, that friend became Equity immediately after graduation. She played that role on tour and on Broadway for four years and is now in another Broadway show. My D’s first audition was literally the day after graduation and she got cast. It was a short tour and she got her Equity card by doing it and so she has had it since soon after graduation as well. Many of D’s friends have it too. </p>
<p>If you have an agent, it doesn’t matter that much if you are Equity or non-Equity because the agent can get you auditions for Equity shows. But if you don’t have an agent, and you attend open calls, and you are non-Equity, you can’t attend Equity calls (or sometimes you can be seen if time allows), and can only go to non-Equity calls, which can be a drawback. Then again, today, many tours are non-Equity and so if your kid wants to do that sort of work and can get it and build a resume up, it might be a good way to go. As with everything, there are pros and cons with each option. My D is not that interested in the whole non-Equity national tour thing as she really is based in NYC and wouldn’t want to be away for a year. She is cast in something this coming season in two cities that will take her out of town for four months but I doubt she’d want to be gone longer than that. My D was happy to get the Equity card right away.</p>
<p>soozievt, thanks for answering! I should clarify–I don’t mean if you have the <em>opportunity</em> to get equity. I mean if you do have the opportunity, do you decline? We know of several actors who have done this and who purposely, as a strategy, refrain from getting their card until they are well established and know they can work reliably, that, say, four or five professional theatres know and like their work so they know it’s likely they will be cast consistently. As I understand it, the thinking is that if you get your card before you’re established, you exclude yourself from many opportunities and run the risk of shutting yourself out too early. I am no expert, and I wondered what the best approach really was. Getting their cards before they were ‘well established’ doesn’t seem to have hurt your D and her friend, that’s for sure! Also, maybe it’s different for straight actors, who have fewer options?</p>
<p>connections, what timing are you talking about as to waiting until they are ‘well established’? While they’re still in college or after graduation? If someone is auditioning for an Equity production, then declining a role if they are cast is not a very wise decision. Many new college grads will be auditioning for non-Equity tours and, so, they will then not have the option, but if they’re cast in an Equity production, they automatically will get Equity status. I don’t think that there is much point in ‘holding out’ or ‘getting established’ once college graduation has occurred. My D had her card very soon after graduation, as did many of her friends.</p>
<p>Connections, actually I knew what you meant! And it is a question that is debated a lot (and has been on the MT forum in past discussions). There is no one right answer and there truly are pros and cons with either approach. By the way, in some instances, I don’t think you can decline the Equity card (I might be wrong…hope someone corrects this), such as if in a Broadway show…I think you have to sign the Equity contract. In other situations, it may be optional. And yes, some say that a young person may wish to hold off in joining Equity because if they are Equity, that can close out many non-Equity opportunities such as many of the current national tours or like you say, some regional professional theaters. And those may be “easier” (not easy) in terms of chances of being cast and getting work. If a person can work consistently for such theater contracts, it may make sense to do for a while, and earn money, build a professional resume, etc. Again, however, if you are non-Equity and WANT to audition for some Equity theaters or contracts, including Broadway shows, it can help to have an Equity card to be seen for these things. Not to mention, often (but NOT always), an Equity contract can pay better than a non-Equity one or have better working conditions as part of the contract. Keep in mind that some Equity contracts don’t pay that great too. I understand your point about if you have a Equity card, you might be shutting yourself out of many tours or certain regional work. That never seemed to be a consideration for my kid. She is based in NYC and prefers working there overall. She still has done various performance things that were not Equity per se, and so having an Equity card hasn’t closed her off from being involved in new works, readings/workshops, cabarets, etc. I think your D will do well to talk to professors to get their take on it and to many recent grads who have both taken and not taken their Equity card. My kid never thought twice about taking it right out of college. As an aside, there are some benefits with being Equity, such as my D is getting affordable health insurance through AEA. Another aside is that in my D’s case, she doesn’t ONLY do theater. She is also a singer/songwriter with an active performance career in that area as well as in theater, and also is a musical theater writer/composer with a lot of work in that area and so her professional life doesn’t revolve solely around whether she is cast in a show or not (though she is in the middle of a 12 month period of being cast consistently in theater productions as well as her other pursuits).</p>
<p>I cross posted with alwaysamom…she expressed it much better than I did! I agree with what she wrote. Once out of college and becoming professional, I would lean toward taking the Equity card (which may be different if still in school or younger), and also it is not an option if cast in an Equity show.</p>
<p>alwaysamom, I’m not being very clear! I don’t mean declining the role. I mean declining the card. For non B’way, with the exception of a handful of theaters, if you are cast in equity theaters, you get EMC points as opposed to the card itself. So you’d get work in equity theaters, and even gain the EMC points, but when you reach 50 and are able to get the card, you just decline that option. Or you decline membership in EMC when you are near 50. I don’t mean non-equity tours. My S is EMC and this something several actors have advised, and at my D’s college, this is also advice they were given. They have been told that they will know when the right time is. But again, I’m also wondering if this is advice better suited to straight actors as there are fewer roles? Many regional equity theatres have limited budgets and so all things being equal - particularly if you are young and not established - will cast non-equity over equity. So if you are equity you run the risk of getting locked out of roles. </p>
<p>So in your own D’s case, has she or her friends had any problems getting work? I am uncertain about this strategy and would be very interested in hearing what people think.</p>
<p>connections, hopefully others will chime in. While my D has done some straight theater, she is more involved in musical theater and other musical performance. Alwaysamom’s D is more straight theater and is a playwright too. </p>
<p>Also, alwaysamom and I were talking more of Equity theaters where you must sign an Equity contract if cast. You are talking more about theaters that will cast non-Equity actors and they can earn EMC points. So, if your young person wants to do a bunch of work in those sorts of theaters, waiting for the card may be an option to consider. For my D, I guess she is more apt to try for Equity contracts where non-Equity is not an option and it has nothing to do with EMC points (she has never had points). So, I suppose looking at one’s goals and where they want to be based and work is a consideration. I think in NYC, it is nice to have the Equity card for theater work.</p>
<p>soozievt, thanks, that is good to know. You are very generous to share your insights. My own kids are not interested in starting out in NYC however (for many reasons). I agree with you about NYC, but I wonder if the strategy of being equity pays off much more in NYC than in other cities? Or does it matter?</p>
<p>connections, I’m no expert on this topic. But if your kids talk to recent grads from their universities and who are settling/working in cities where your kids want to go, that is a good way to get a handle on it. For instance, if your kid wants to be in Chicago and if there are a handful of very good theaters that allow you to either take the non-equity or Equity contract and just earn EMC points and where there may be more opportunities for them to be cast as non-Equity, it may make sense to hold off on the card for a bit. I’m friends with a mom whose son graduated a few years ago from Northwestern who is doing well in the Chicago market and opted to not take his card yet.</p>
<p>Equity exists for a reason. I can see why a young actor might feel like it is a good option to decline their membership because they fear they will be taking themselves out of the running for roles. Kids gotta work. That is a shortsighted viewpoint, though. Without AEA, wages would be pretty darn low across the board. I come from a steel town, and a union family. I am a realist and I’ve seen unions contribute to their own downfall, but I have also seen unions do great things for professions. Unions, whether it is a teachers union, carpenters union or stage actors union, are necessary for things like fair wages, working conditions, healthcare and other benefits, etc. </p>
<p>If every actor waited until “the time was right” then the union would go away pretty darn quick and even the working actors would be eating rice and beans.</p>
<p>This is going to show how naive or dumb I am, but I am a union worker (teacher) and non union workers cannot be hired in my profession. How is it a show can have both union and nonunion workers? Doesn’t that defeat the purpose of a union? I’m confused…</p>
<p>@bisouu: Equity operates under many different contract regimes around the country based on the size of the theatre, the local market conditions, and other factors. For most regional theatres, only a handful of Equity members must be employed per production.</p>
<p>Equity has to be flexible in order to maintain a foothold in anything but the largest houses. In general, it is a very tenuous business and a difficult one in which to try and operate within a typical collective bargaining agreement.</p>
<p>Also, recognize that in Right-to-Work states, Union Security Agreements, such as the one you refer to, are prohibited (your state, California, is not a Right-to-Work state). Workers in Right-to-Work states cannot be forced to join a union in order to be employed. In Texas, for example, teachers do not have to join a union.</p>
<p>To clarify, though, as non-union in a union theatre, you can certainly get paid (not just a stipend). You just get paid less. How much less varies from theatre to theatre. </p>
<p>bisouu, you are not dumb! There are many different types of equity contracts. Regional professional theatres do not have the same types of equity contracts as B’way theatres (there are a couple of exceptions, not many). The idea is that a small professional regional theatre in a small city or town would not be able to financially sustain equity contracts for all actors and would therefore go under. So different professional theatres have different equity contracts with different pay scales and different requirements. Many regionals are permitted to hire non-equity actors; the exact percentage depends on the theatre’s equity contract. If any of you have gone to a regional theatre, and you look at your playbill, you will see asterisks next to the actors’ names saying “denotes membership in AEA…” On B’way, everyone is equity. But if you go to a regional theatre most anywhere else (again there are some exceptions), you will see that <em>some</em> actors have asterisks and some do not.</p>
<p>If you are equity, there are two potential problems. First, you are not permitted to work in non-equity theaters so if you are still not established, you run the risk of not getting cast in roles that could boost your career. Secondly, as the above post points out, you also run the risk of not being chosen over someone a bit cheaper.</p>
<p>I am not at all arguing against equity. It is essential. I am in fact a unionized teacher and am very pro-union. In fact, this is probably why I’m posting this question; it runs against my grain to have this strategy for the reasons CollegeSearchDad brings up.</p>
<p>I am just trying to understand when or if this strategy should be used, how it should be used, under what conditions, etc. Not that my kids would listen to me anyway…</p>
<p>I keep cross-posting with folks! What a wonderful community–thanks to everyone for your voices and thoughts. And sorry for hijacking this thread. If this continues, I think Soozie’s advice is sound and I can just post this on its own thread.</p>
<p>If the theaters have the option to hire equity/non equity actors, then the actors should be allowed to work either job too…JMHO. An equity actor should be able to sign a waiver or something and work in a non equity role if they want…I read that article that was posted above and it made me a bit sad for the actor who couldn’t do new and upcoming readings because she was equity…</p>
<p>bisouu, good thought-- actually, sometimes an equity actor can sign the waiver and work in a non-equity theatre. The theatre applies for an equity waiver and if the organization agrees, the actor is permitted for work in the theatre by special contract.</p>
<p>But this goes back to being established. The theatre is not allowed to do that a whole lot so they are motivated to ask for waivers only for actors they really want. (It’s expensive too.) The union doesn’t work if non-equity theatres can pay equity actors a low rate. Then the union would have no clout.</p>
<p>Professional theatres are strictly regulated in the amount of non-union actors they can hire. It can’t exceed a certain amount. It depends on the type of contract.</p>
<p>connections, thanks for clarifying. I know how the issue of points can make it a difficult decision in some cities but, in most instances, I think it’s wise to join Equity when you are able to do so. Most Equity members get their status by being cast in Equity productions, not through the points system, so the decision becomes moot. My D has been fortunate enough to be employed continually since graduation with no break. That certainly isn’t the norm, but her situation is a little different than most, as she is a playwright as well as an actor, so, much like Soozie’s D, she is involved in performance as well as in other ways in the theatre world. I honestly don’t keep as close track of her friends as I used to, as she graduated almost seven years ago now! The few who I do hear about from her have been working fairly steadily but not continuous employment and so are not as fortunate as she’s been.</p>
<p>There have been many Equity vs. non-Equity discussions here through the years. There’s not a right decision that is universal, as many factors must be considered. Equity is having its own issues now, too, most recently in the past week or so with the announcement that two new tours are being launched with tiered contracts, Newsies and Kinky Boots.</p>
<p>I agree that Soozie may want to move these posts to their own thread for further discussion. :)</p>
And it is a question that is debated a lot (and has been on the MT forum in past discussions). There is no one right answer and there truly are pros and cons with either approach. By the way, in some instances, I don’t think you can decline the Equity card (I might be wrong…hope someone corrects this), such as if in a Broadway show…I think you have to sign the Equity contract. In other situations, it may be optional. And yes, some say that a young person may wish to hold off in joining Equity because if they are Equity, that can close out many non-Equity opportunities such as many of the current national tours or like you say, some regional professional theaters. And those may be “easier” (not easy) in terms of chances of being cast and getting work. If a person can work consistently for such theater contracts, it may make sense to do for a while, and earn money, build a professional resume, etc. Again, however, if you are non-Equity and WANT to audition for some Equity theaters or contracts, including Broadway shows, it can help to have an Equity card to be seen for these things. Not to mention, often (but NOT always), an Equity contract can pay better than a non-Equity one or have better working conditions as part of the contract. Keep in mind that some Equity contracts don’t pay that great too. I understand your point about if you have a Equity card, you might be shutting yourself out of many tours or certain regional work. That never seemed to be a consideration for my kid. She is based in NYC and prefers working there overall. She still has done various performance things that were not Equity per se, and so having an Equity card hasn’t closed her off from being involved in new works, readings/workshops, cabarets, etc. I think your D will do well to talk to professors to get their take on it and to many recent grads who have both taken and not taken their Equity card. My kid never thought twice about taking it right out of college. As an aside, there are some benefits with being Equity, such as my D is getting affordable health insurance through AEA. Another aside is that in my D’s case, she doesn’t ONLY do theater. She is also a singer/songwriter with an active performance career in that area as well as in theater, and also is a musical theater writer/composer with a lot of work in that area and so her professional life doesn’t revolve solely around whether she is cast in a show or not (though she is in the middle of a 12 month period of being cast consistently in theater productions as well as her other pursuits).</p>
I agree with what she wrote. Once out of college and becoming professional, I would lean toward taking the Equity card (which may be different if still in school or younger), and also it is not an option if cast in an Equity show.</p>