IBJNews

ISO contract talks continue; union pitches 2-month extension

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra managers and musicians failed to meet a Friday deadline to agree on a new contract, but the symphony did not follow through on threats to cancel the first two weeks of its new season.
 
“Right now, we have no word of it being canceled,” said musicians’ union representative Jack Brennan. “We've been negotiating hard the last few days.”

Musicians’ previous contract expired Sept. 2. Representatives of the union and the financially strapped not-for-profit have been battling over a proposal to trim musicians' 52-week contracts to 38 weeks and cut salaries by 40 percent.  ISO also wants to reduce the size of the orchestra from 87 positions to 69.

ISO management last week told union negotiators that the group would cancel its Sept. 14-15 and Sept. 21-23 shows if no agreement was in place by Friday.

Instead, the union suggested a two-month extension of the previous collective bargaining agreement, along with a 17-percent salary concession while talks continue. Managers said they were reviewing the extension proposal.

Musicians’ chief negotiator said the two sides made progress this week with the help of a mediator.

“This proposed two-month contract extension will keep the music on stage for the people of Indiana and allows for a period where we ‘play and talk,’ which has occurred in previous contract negotiations,” Richard Graef, chairman of the musicians’ negotiating committee, said in a prepared statement. “It is unprecedented for the musicians to offer concessions during the ‘play and talk’ period.”
 
ISO spokeswoman Jessica DiSanto said management received the proposal just before 6 p.m. Friday—the same time it was released to the media.
 
“We haven't yet had sufficient time to analyze it and informed the union that we will respond tomorrow,” Di Santo said in a prepared statement.

Brennan said the union set a midnight Saturday deadline for management’s decision on the contract extension.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT