Walla Walla Musicians’ Union Defends Standards Against Theater Management
A labor dispute arises at the local opera house over orchestra size and the quality of performance for the public.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
At the last regular meeting of the Musicians' union of this city, I was directed to call your attention to the headings of an article in your last week's issue regarding the Walla Walla theater orchestra. The Musicians' union has not assumed proprietorship of the opera house or its management. However, our by-laws, which call for an orchestra of seven pieces, were adopted because we consider it an injustice to the public and the musicians themselves for a smaller group to furnish music for a first-class theater. We believe the theater-going public, who pay first-class prices, are entitled to consideration. As our city is growing rapidly, the claim of the management that Walla Walla is too small a city to employ seven men for an orchestra is unjust to the public as well as to the musicians.
“We consider it an injustice not only to the public but to the musicians themselves for a less number than seven in the orchestra of a first class theater to try to furnish satisfactory music.”
This reflects the ongoing friction between unionized labor standards and business management's desire to cut operational costs. The debate over whether a growing city should demand higher quality entertainment versus cheaper, streamlined production remains a classic labor narrative.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.