M A RT I N C LO O N A N A N D J O H N
W I L L I A M S O N
5 T H S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 2
Researching The
Musicians’ Union

Outline
 Context
 Perceptions of the MU
 About the Project
 Why it is important

Context
 Amalgamated Musicians’ Union formed in
Manchester, 1893
 Merger with London Orchestral Union of Professional
Musicians in 1921
 31 482 members (2011).

Enemies of the Union
 “You are invited to attend a meeting in Manchester on 7th
May 1893 to discuss forming a Union for orchestral
players. The Union that we require is a protection Union.
One that will protect us from amateurs, protect us from
unscrupulous employers, and protect us from ourselves.
[J.B.Williams, 1893]

Perceptions
 London Orchestral Association: “organised tyranny which
is the curse of modern trades unionism in this country”
(1894)
 William Boosey, PRS: “these gentlemen who are the
spoilt darlings of the musical profession” (1922)
 McKay: “the ban did sterling work over two decades in
keeping professional British jazz and dance music white.”
 “Virtually every one of the music’s practitioners, nearly all
of whom were black, were kept out of Britain by an
overwhelmingly white organisation, the Musicians Union”
(2005)

Perceptions
 Oliver: “the ‘ban’ was as inflexibly applied as it was
stupidly imposed.” (1980)
 Frith: “the MU has always been out of touch with the
particular needs of rock musicians.” (1978)
 Street: “as each innovation appears to threaten jobs, the
MU has resisted each one in turn, first opposing multi-
track recording, then mellotrons and finally synthesisers
and drum machines. While inspired by a desire to protect
members, the MU’s policy appears as merely
reactionary.” (1985)

Perceptions
 Sweeting: “a left-wing, doctrinaire organisation as
secretive and tight-lipped as the KGB.” (2001)
 Mendick: “the glorious unreconstructed ways of the
Musicians’ Union . .you have a scenario that would make
Arthur Scargill weep with nostalgia.” (2001)
 Lawson: “it is a massive black mark on a Union that has
done so much for grassroots music. You’re effectively
crapping on the best music discovery, fan-
generating, culture-sharing, life-benefitting ecosphere
that musicians in the world have ever experienced.”
(2010)

About the Project
 Extension of previous work on music industries, generally
and
 Live music industry AHRC project –
 Importance of pre-1955 music industries
 Importance of MU in these agreements
 Primary source: Musicians’ Union archive @ University of
Stirling:
 Minutes and agreements
 Publications
 Correspondence

Importance
 3 main areas:
 trade union
 working as a musician
 the music industries

Importance / Trade Union
 Lack of dispassionate analysis from both inside and
outside the union
 No detailed history of the Union
 Footnote in the history of Trade Unionism – but
 Involvement in TUC and its leadership
 Unique contemporary nature of the Union

Importance / Working Musicians
 Debates around what constitutes a musician and who can
become a member
 Craft Union vs. General Union?
 Problems of acceptance of part-time/ semi-professional
members

Importance / Music industries
 Union missing from most accounts of British music
industries
 MU at the centre of agreements underpinning
relationships between employers and musicians – for
example:
 MU rates for live performance
 BBC / ITV/ Broadcasting agreements
 PPL / public performance
 Lobbying with other industry organisations on copyright related
claims

Conclusions
 Need for history of Musicians’ Union of interest beyond
labour relations / Union members
 MU as a lens for understanding the music industries and
how these have changed – specifically with regard to:
 Organisation of workers in the music industries
 Payments / how creative work has been rewarded

Conclusions
 Caves (2000): “ The basic forces driving the organisation
of workers in creative activities”
 Hesmondhalgh (2007): “how has creative work been
rewarded in the complex professional era?”
 Need to understand why it acted the way it did, when it
did.