Paying the Orchestra

I'm guessing there are several questions here (not very well explained)... 1. What should people involved in productions be paid? Answer: See MEAA for award rates on a variety of roles. 2. Should people be paid based on their level of experience? Answer: No. It's fine if you want to make payments based on the level of involvement (ie. a director will be more involved and therefore spend more time on a show, than say, someone who just comes to help bump in), like a percentage. This is done all the time. However, it's unfair to base payment on level of experience. 3. Should some people be paid, while others aren't? Answer: This is what's termed as pro-am performances, and is done on a regular basis. Again though, it depends on the level of involvement of the people... don't just pick and choose who's going to get paid. Some people are paid because they have special skills others won't - a rigging technician who will set up a fly system for example. This is more inline with question two; payment based on skill. However, in your situation, I don't see any difference between an untrained musician and a trained one, unless the trained one is specifically called in to do a solo role. (Ie. don't pay the chorus, but pay the solo soprano). And no, I would not consider paying people based on their instrument. They may be harder to find, but each person puts in their own time and effort to learn it; and shouldn't be treated differently. I would say that borders on discrimination. Without knowing the details of the show, it's hard to answer this. Are you performing with a group, are you the organiser, are you the organiser of a new group... etc.? Perhaps you should look further into threads about amateur vs. pro, as well as check out MEAA. Additionally, look into how pro-am theatres/orchestras/productions work; your answer will lie somewhere in there. Sticky Apple Legs www.thepromptcopy.com/sal Puppets in Melbourne www.puppetsinmelbourne.com.au My puppets www.collectzing.com/collection/137/