I thought it might be interesting to conduct an experiment of looking at old problems through the filter of asking new questions. Hopefully, this approach can be applied to lots of situations.
For today’s exercise I intentionally picked something that might seem unsolvable if one only relies on divisive and calcified perspectives.
THE TOPIC: INCREASING AMF MUSICIANS EARNINGS IN THE NEW GLOBAL MARKET.
There have recently been a great many conversations about the “fairness” for AFM musicians earning “working wages” without backend Secondary Market residuals or residuals for product created for and airing on streaming services. For this post I am hoping to skip the rhetoric typically surrounding these conversations and instead try to practice asking fresh questions towards a belabored subject.
PREMISE: INCREASING THE FREQUENCY A PERSON WORKS INCREASES THEIR INCOME
For the purposes of this exercise, let’s assume a musician makes $100 per hour.
Working a 40 hour week would be $4,000 per week.
Working 50 weeks per year would make $200,000 per year.
- QUESTION #1- CAN A MUSICIAN WORK 8 HOURS PER DAY?
- QUESTION #2- HOW DO SESSION LENTHS IMPACT THE ABILITY TO WORK AN 8 HOUR DAY?
- QUESTION #3- CAN SESSION LENGTHS BE REVISITED?
- QUESTION #4- CAN A MUSICIAN WORK 40 HOURS PER WEEK?
- QUESTION #5- IS THERE ENOUGH WORK CURRENTLY TO ALLOW FOR MUSICIANS TO WORK 40 HOURS PER WEEK?
- QUESTION #6- WHAT CHANGES COULD BE CONSIDERED TO MAKE WORKING 40 HOURS PER WEEK MORE VIABLE?
- QUESTION # 7- IS THERE ENOUGH WORK CURRENTLY TO ALLOW FOR MUSICIANS TO WORK 50 WEEKS PER YEAR?
- QUESTION #8- WHAT CHANGES COULD BE CONSIDERED TO MAKE WORKING 50 WEEKS PER YEAR MORE VIABLE?
Whether earning $200,000 per year is “fair” or a fair living wage is a different subject. Let’s not go there for this exercise.
What I first wanted to explore is whether there are fresh questions to ask and explore and answer before even getting there.
