Bookings that are a law unto themselves!

[Robanti]

One of my cancellations rang 6 weeks after the event after several letters chasing my entire fee to ask if I would give a cancellation discount. I said no, I require my full fee as on that day in July I could have worked for several bookers.

I received my cheque last week minus £ 50.00!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This was NOT what I agreed to.

There is not much I can do about it. I could take them to Equity but it seems a lot of hard work for £50.00.

All I would like to do is make sure nobody else works for them in future.

The booking is as follows:

BLUBBERHOUSES DUCK DERBY ON 15TH JULY

If you are local to the Leeds area and they wish to book you in future years, I would suggest you say no as they are not good employers and I certainly will never do that event and would go out of my way to see that nobody else does.

[johnstoate]

Some people!! - On a more serious note though, I know that we are always making suggestions for galleries Chris, but... Might it be an idea to have a 'blacklist' of dubious bookers, accessed by password, perhaps, on similar lines to the 'equity' dodgy agents list?? - It strikes me that it might be a useful add-on. But what is the general concensus?

[Chris]

And just who would decide who these bookers were John? On whose say-so?
And should we also offer potential bookers a blacklist of poor or unreliable performers? Again who would decide the content?
And would you be willing to underwrite the costs of potential libel actions? I haven't got such funds.



<p>

[johnstoate]

Oh, forget I spoke, it was only a suggestion! - Or did Tony's post never happen either?? - enough already.

[Professor Eek]

There could be a list of 'poor experience with ... ' next to performers name, i.e.

Newtown Council - contact Prof X for details

This way nothing is published other than the fact that a user of this board has had a problem with someone listed and is prepared to discuss it if contacted by other board users.

A possible solution.

However, in my 'umble opinion, it's unlikely to be practical, kept up to date and will most likely have few 'non-private' bookers on it.

[Trev]

I actually agree with Chris on this one. I think it would be too problematic and potentially dangerous (if not open to abuse).

Chris's point about performers is also very relevant. Imagine if one of us has a bad day (they happen) and someone decides to create a list of bad performers, having a cold, car beaking-down or poor sound equipment on one day could put you on the list.

It would be too much to manage. Keeping it to word of mouth is probably the better option.

[Chris]

Eek by his reply has obviously appreciated the problems - but not sufficiently.
If I were to publish a page with "Poor experience with... Newtown Council" as he suggests, that in itself could be deemed defamatory. Newton Council might well feel that Prof X had not had a bad experience with them, but that they had a bad experience with him. They might argue that by inviting people to contact Prof X to hear him detail his false accusations was aiding in the broadcast of the libel.
John Stoate says that Equity publish such a blacklist. Not to my knowledge. What they do have is a legal department funded by membership subscriptions (I don't charge you subscriptions) to which anyone with a grievance can seek help. This legal department will investigate your claim and if necessary back your case against a booker and try to get you your money.
They do publish an instruction to members that before accepting an engagement from a certain list of managements they, the members, should contact the Equity office. But this is a list of managements with issues which Equity's legal department have investigated, it is not a blacklist of managements simply named by aggrieved members.

I think it pretty obvious that were I to publish such a list of individual's grievances, without legal scrutiny, I would be asking for trouble.

And as for John's huffy response to my original disquiet, just because Tony made a hasty and perhaps unwise posting is no good argument for encouraging more of the same.



<p>

[Professor Eek]

I can only apologies once again for not being up to standard Chris

I shall go and give myself a damn good thrashing

[Professor Eek]

Oooooh that's better - Nice - quick but nice

[Robanti]

My posting was not unwise. I took time out to warn others of a bad booker.

If someone books you and then does not pay what is due, I simply want no other entertainer to have to work for such unrealiable bookers.

It seems to me that this board is a good way of passing on such information to fellow performers so they do not suffer the wrong doings I have found out.

In life we can all pussy foot around and let people off acting as they should not, I do not like it. If someone does not pay me what is due, then I pass this information on to others in the hope that other Punch performers do not work for them in the future as they do not deserve it. As I reminded them, they will run out of Punch performers before Punch performers run out of fetes and galas.

No doubt someone else will take on the booking next year (as it certainly will not be me!) and get paid no problem if the event is not cancelled and that performed pissed about with their payment. Cancellations due to bad weather is not good enought. We are in BRITAIN where it rains, so if you have not contigency for that HARD LUCK, you still have to pay me if I take on your booking.

I will in future keep my posting to - "oh what a lovely old postcard there is on ebay".

Tony

[Professor Eek]

I, for one, was grateful of the posting Tony.

It is not a booking I'll take on (geographically unlikely any har) from an ethical stance.

Please don't just post about all the lovely fluffy bunniness - there's a place for that but I find the debates on here really useful in helping me work out what's going on at 'Planet Punch' and I value your contributions.

Don't be bullied into being a fluffy bunny - join the 'Elmer Fudd' society now - membership is free and you're a founder member!

Eek - A fuddite

[Trev]

Tony's post has given me an idea...

why not combine it with John's idea and publish postcards of bad venues and sell them on e-bay (gets the booking fees back)?

That way we can pass the word on secretly!

(so, I know not to take a booking from any black-and-white 1905 London agents)

[johnstoate]

Sorry if you think I was being Huffy Chris, It could just be a reaction formed of late-night doses of 'the vitriol pen' in reply to posts which were simply intended as a point of view, relevant to the subject in hand, and as a further stimulant to discussion. Thankfully, we do not all share the same views on everything, 1984 has been and gone.And, despite the efforts of the few, we remain as individuals, THANK GOD!! - (Whatever you conceive that to be!)

[lesclarke]

At least BLUBBERHOUSES DUCK DERBY is a memorably titled event, so if anyone is contacted it should 'ring a bell'!

[Chris]

John, if you put something up for discussion then you can't complain if it is discussed. If it is an ill thought out idea which is potentially dangerous to me and this website then I don't think it vitriolic of me to point this out.

<p>