Principle involved here or am I over reacting?

[leschirons]

Just got in from a gig. A long trip and not much money but we enjoy the place. Great crowd, up for it from start to finish. We're aware of how much the owner pays as a maximum (lower than our usual fee) but we agree to do it as it's fun. However, tonight was a little different. It was a great night and we see the owner (he's a Brit) passing round a glass, collecting "for the band" At the end of the night, we get paid our usual fee and for me, therein lies a problem.

Had he not collected any money "for the band" I would have been perfectly happy with my smaller than usual, but agreed upon fee but the people putting notes into the glass were obviously under the impression that the band would benefit from it yet only the owner has because, his contribution to the cost of the band is now much smaller. He was collecting for him, not us. I see this as immoral and dishonest and no different from collecting charity donations and then keeping it.

I have just told the band that I will not play there again but obviously if they want to, they can use a dep. This isn't about the money at all. It's the principle and the fact that at age 64, I no longer wish to deal with, or need to spend any time with dishonourable w***ers.

[skidder652003]

Thats completely immoral, and possibly illegal, deffo never play there again and make it known as much as possible on social media, outrageous!

[Len_derby]

It sounds pretty shabby if it's as you describe. I don't think I'd want to go back.

I've just come back from a pub gig where the professionalism of the landlord in his attitude to us was just about the opposite of yours.
My point being that in this game you win some and lose some.

[ahpook]

That's shocking.

[SteveK]

A bit tricky, this one! Rather like our beloved PM's tax affairs: Nothing illegal but morally highly questionable.
If tackled, the owner would most likely justify the pot as going towards your fee, without it... reduced fee or no gig. I am presuming that the total in the pot wouldn't have covered your fee.

EDIT: Actually, thinking about it some more - I don't think it was morally so bad of the owner. Maybe the "average" pot collection was factored in to your fee.

Edited April 16, 2016 by SteveK

[Funky Dunky]

I agree with the OP, that's shameful behaviour, but I imagine the owner is collecting money from the punters to meet your fee so he can pocket the takings from the till. Is it right? No. Is it nice? No. Fair? No. Smart? I hate myself for this, but.....probably.

It's sickening. I actually got mad reading the original post.

[ambient]

So he's getting a contribution toward your fee ? I could see your point if you were doing the gig for nothing, and he was collecting.

It's a bit like charging people to come in, but the charge is voluntary, and pay what you like.

If venues in France are like they are over here, then whatever your fee is, it's maybe quite a chunk out of his takings.

Edited April 16, 2016 by ambient

[40hz]

That's outrageous!

[discreet]

Maybe he would have found it difficult to pay your fee without the collection? I doubt his profit from drinks would have covered it. It's certainly thoughtless at best and morally suspect at worst, but at least he's willing to put live acts on.

It's a bit iffy I suppose, but worse things happen at sea, or something. And it's a great gig for you, otherwise. Do you really want to give it up? What about your adoring fans? Are you going to deprive them of their entertainment on a point of principle?

One of those rare situations where I can see both sides of the argument.

Edited April 16, 2016 by discreet

[leschirons]

[quote name='SteveK' timestamp='1460769252' post='3028668']
A bit tricky, this one! Rather like our beloved PM's tax affairs: Nothing illegal but morally highly questionable.
If tackled, the owner would most likely justify the pot as going towards your fee, without it... reduced fee or no gig. I am presuming that the total in the pot wouldn't have covered your fee.

EDIT: Actually, thinking about it some more - I don't think it was morally so bad of the owner. Maybe the "average" pot collection was factored in to your fee.
[/quote]

See your point, it's just that someone is clearly stating to customers that he's collecting for the band and intends to keep the money in order to pay less of our fee from his own pocket. If we had been hired on a "pass the hat and we'll make up the difference" basis, I'd have no problem. I really don't see any difference beteween this and pledging a charity a donation and then collecting more donations from others in order to pay your pledge. It all just feels so wrong.

Guess I should know better. Same old story about being constantly disappointed with people.

[leschirons]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1460772428' post='3028673']

Are you going to deprive them of their entertainment on a point of principle?


[/quote]

Absolutely. Principles define who you are.

[Grangur]

There's a fair number of times that I have sat in a bar over a single pint watching a band and noticed that every one else is doing the same. Being a total sad case I've thought then, the takings won't be able to meet their costs.

I can't blame the landlord for what he does. I'm with Discreet on this. Where the problem lies is "communication". He should have taken the time to communicate to you the facts. Or negotiate a deal of a fee plus "the glass".

Sure you can refuse to play there again. so now you have one fewer venue available to you, and the pub gets a different band, or the big TV goes on.
So who loses?

[neilp]

My view? It's morally indefensible, and probably legally pretty dodgy. Obtaining money by false pretences. He's collecting "for the band", not "for my till". If he told them he was going to put the money in his pocket and pay the band the agreed fee, would they have given the money? I think we all know the answer to that one....

Disgraceful

[SICbass]

[quote name='leschirons' timestamp='1460765910' post='3028663']
We're aware of how much the owner pays as a maximum
[/quote]

Is it part of your agreement with the manager that this maximum fee has to come explicitly from his pocket? Maybe it's always a mix like this and, depending upon how much the crowd donates, the manager takes more or less of a loss for which he then has to make up the difference.
Or was last night a change as to how you've done it in the past?
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I feel that specifics like this do throw a completely different light on the matter.

[TimR]

The punters have no idea how much we get paid or whether we get paid at all.

I'm sure if they knew we only got about £50-80 a night, or even that we only got what was in the pot, then they'd not be happy.

I know when I tell people how much we get for a night they're quite shocked that it's so low and assume we're getting £100 each.

If the punters thought the pot was your pay, you probably got a good deal if the landlord making the money up. It's another one of those bad communications things that we're all so bad at.

Really it's of no concern of yours or mine how the landlord finds the money, as long as you were paid the agreed amount.

I've only ever played two gigs where the landlord's had a good night and paid us extra.

.

Edited April 16, 2016 by TimR

[leschirons]

[quote name='SICbass' timestamp='1460790446' post='3028704']
Is it part of your agreement with the manager that this maximum fee has to come explicitly from his pocket? Maybe it's always a mix like this and, depending upon how much the crowd donates, the manager takes more or less of a loss for which he then has to make up the difference.
Or was last night a change as to how you've done it in the past?
I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I feel that specifics like this do throw a completely different light on the matter.
[/quote]

Yes, last night was the first time there had been an audience collection. I obviously can't comment on other band nights but the first time, in our four gigs. Strangely enough, it was the busiest it had ever been there last night with us playing with some people even doing a 150km round trip to see us. He also provides meals and by his admission was fully booked to the point that the band were going to have to eat outside in the rain or in their lounge upstairs.

[timhiggins]

In that case hes out of order as takings must of been higher than normal ,if his takings were lower than they had been when you played there before
it may have been acceptable' if ' he had filled you in on the situation but having a good night on the tills and collecting without anything extra for you sounds out of order, i would only play there for double fee in future or tell him to poke it.

[barneyg42]

I wonder if he has a brewery budget towards entertainment?
Brewery give him say £250, he does a pot and takes say £80 and literally pockets the change!! We've played a pub for the first time on a loss leader, ie take £50 less than our usual fee on the understanding that if we fill the pub we'll be on a better rate on further bookings. We duly filled the pub and in a the second half noticed a jug going round. Of course it was just to go towards our fee and not a bonus, the landlady said that she didn't get enough budget or takings to cover the bands. We were not happy and said that she might as well have charged at the door and of course she didn't reveal how much was collected but we could see notes in the glass! We didn't go back, we felt we couldn't justify our friends and fans dropping a few quid extra when they are being deceived that it is going to us.
Dodgy practice IMHO!!

[mep]

Do you know if he does this for ever band that plays and it's how he covers their cost. Never heard of this before.

[discreet]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1460772428' post='3028673']
Are you going to deprive them of their entertainment on a point of principle?
[/quote][quote name='leschirons' timestamp='1460783333' post='3028679']
Absolutely. Principles define who you are.
[/quote][quote name='leschirons' timestamp='1460792235' post='3028716']
...it was the busiest it had ever been there last night with us playing with some people even doing a 150km round trip to see us.
[/quote]

Doesn't the fact that some people did a 150km round trip to see you mean anything? It could be argued that you're letting these people down. I'd be a bit more pragmatic about it. Principles are a luxury for most - and you're lucky to be in a position where you can apply them in a case like this - but I can't help feeling you're being a little egocentric about it. What do your bandmates think?

Edited April 16, 2016 by discreet

[JTUK]

If this wasn't normal for him to take round a pot...AND also sold it to the punters as a collection for the band, then I'm fully with you.
I'd not play it again.
If he normally does this to make up the fee, then you've set a precedent for accepting theses 'rules previously so I wouldn't see why this has suddenly upset you.

But...you see it the way you see it.
Generally I don't like pots, but then bands and audiences are used to free music now if there isn't a ticket policy.

[chris_b]

Obviously it's not illegal to send the pot around or for the pub to say "it's for the band", and then keep it.

We've had that happen in the past. Currently all the gigs that put the jug around give us the money.

There are no "rules", so there is nothing you can do except cross the gig off your list.

If it's a good gig I'd still do it.

[JTUK]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1460795604' post='3028748']
Doesn't the fact that some people did a 150km round trip to see you mean anything? It could be argued that you're letting these people down. I'd be a bit more pragmatic about it. Principles are a luxury for most - and you're lucky to be in a position where you can apply them in a case like this - but I can't help feeling you're being a little egocentric about it. What do your bandmates think?
[/quote]

Nope, dodgy is dodgy. If people are willing to travel that distance, they'll travel to see that band again at another venue.

He 'specifically' held a pot for the band and it didn't go to the band. If I'd put money in for reason and it didn't make it to the band...
I'd be thinking I wouldn't be doing that again.

[leschirons]

[quote name='discreet' timestamp='1460795604' post='3028748']
Doesn't the fact that some people did a 150km round trip to see you mean anything? It could be argued that you're letting these people down. I'd be a bit more pragmatic about it. Principles are a luxury for most - and you're lucky to be in a position where you can apply them in a case like this - but I can't help feeling you're being a little egocentric about it. What do your bandmates think?
[/quote]

I mailed the band last night (2.am. actually) No replies but no doubt I'll find out their views when we meet up for a wedding gig today. Of course, there is a possibility that I've jumped the gun and that the singer (who originally booked this gig) was told at the outset that it's a pass the hat job and then made up to £xxx but has failed to impart this information to the band. We were simply told how much the venue pays for bands. Bearing in mind we've never seen this collection before, if that is the case, I will of course come clean to Basschat and recant my John Farrow view of "Tell him to f*** off"

[discreet]

[quote name='JTUK' timestamp='1460798879' post='3028799']
If people are willing to travel that distance, they'll travel to see that band again at another venue.
[/quote]

I don't know. How many decent venues are there in the wet bit of France..?