515 are looking for DJs

Is mise le key

jtsuited wrote: »

BECAUSE THEY CAN!!

And why can they?
Because a local no-name dj can be replaced by a hundred others and it will make no difference to revenue. If you are disposable in any job, you will have a low wage. The only reason that wage drops to 0 with local unknown dj's is because the local unknown dj's are in massive abundance and are willing to do it for free.

Jesus, it's simple facts and figures lads.

Ah here your either just looking to wind up & if not then you really are out of touch with some basic principles of working.

There are roughly 400,000 people on the dole, does that mean then my employer should be able to just start dictating how much he thinks i should get for my job? Or perhaps do my job for nothing because there are plently of people out there that can take my place given the opportunity?

The question is rhetorical, i am not looking for you to answer because to any right thinking person the answer is clearly absolutley not. To use as an influence your status to dictate terms & the fact that there is many more people willing to take your place to drive the value of what is being offerd fas someones service down to nothing in this case is an abuse of power & position. Of course there is always tendering that attempte to get the price in as low as possible but without anyone ever knowing what the other person is offering services for & the lowest bidder wins out but it is being given to you as a precondition that you are not getting paid & that you actually have to bring custom to earn the company money!

Look im sure the Doormen, barmen, Cleaners & Management are all getting paid & the 'Big name DJ's' so why not €50 for the new lad.

I will never agree with it no matter what kind of spin anyone trys to put on it.

Android 666

Is mise le key wrote: »

Ah here your either just looking to wind up & if not then you really are out of touch with some basic principles of working.

There are roughly 400,000 people on the dole, does that mean then my employer should be able to just start dictating how much he thinks i should get for my job? Or perhaps do my job for nothing because there are plently of people out there that can take my place given the opportunity?

The problem is there wouldn't be a queue of 500 bedroom workers willing to do your job for nothing in a vain attempt to be associated with your company so I think that analogy is a bit erroneous. I personally think DJs should be paid even a pittance but if I was 20 I'd probably be happy to be paid in beer. I think they've stated their case pretty clearly - if you don't like it don't do it. Not something I agree with but then I'm not running their business. If you're really worked up you could boycott them for not paying warm up DJs but I suspect you'd probably have to boycott every other club in town.

jtsuited

Is mise le key wrote: »

I will never agree with it no matter what kind of spin anyone trys to put on it.

even if you're proven wrong?

Is mise le key

Android 666 wrote: »

The problem is there wouldn't be a queue of 500 bedroom workers willing to do your job for nothing in a vain attempt to be associated with your company so I think that analogy is a bit erroneous. I personally think DJs should be paid even a pittance but if I was 20 I'd probably be happy to be paid in beer. I think they've stated their case pretty clearly - if you don't like it don't do it. Not something I agree with but then I'm not running their business. If you're really worked up you could boycott them for not paying warm up DJs but I suspect you'd probably have to boycott every other club in town.

Accepted but sureley just because its being pushed by every club doesnt mean you have to accept it as how things are, change can be made to happen. The roll over & die acceptance of the status quo is what people who are in a postion to abuse their power are hoping for.

jtsuited wrote: »

even if you're proven wrong?

???? Its not a case of it being black & white - Your right & im wrong definitivley,its whether or not you find those terms & way of conducting business acceptable. I dont & never will as it is again using your power in an exploitative manner. As said in one of my posts i agreed with what 515 said, 'If you dont like the terms then dont send in a mix'. Thats fair enough but i dont agree with their way of conducting business, so how can i be wrong from not agreeing with there approach to business.

You are a sharp guy jt so i find it hard to beleive you really think its that simple of being right or wrong definitivley.

jtsuited

I think we're looking at it from different angles here. I understand that if anybody does any sort of work they should be paid, but that's not the way the world works.

Is mise le key

jtsuited wrote: »

I think we're looking at it from different angles here. I understand that if anybody does any sort of work they should be paid, but that's not the way the world works.

Change only comes when what is perceived as being exploitative or unfair is challenged by the minority it affects otherwise the status quo continues unfettered.

Is mise le key

When i think about it taking in all that has been said in this thread you can strip it back to this,

There appears to be a culture or norm in the Clubbing business that it is OK not to pay the new lads until they have gained recognition, i dont agree that someone that puts in the effort to make a night the best he/she possibly can doesnt deserve to be paid something even if its a small amount. 515 could take from this thread a new direction & promote themselves as being the pioneers in the industry & breaking the ranks by saying it loud & clear we will look after our new DJ's even if it a token amount.

What is the capacity of 515 & entry fee?

If you stuck an extra €0.20 on the price of entry & clearly stated it goes to the new DJ's starting tonight i dont think its going to turn many customers away & if you got 500 people in thats €100 for the DJ, if you only got 250 people in thats €50.

jtsuited

Is mise le key wrote: »

Change only comes when what is perceived as being exploitative or unfair is challenged by the minority it affects otherwise the status quo continues unfettered.

Marx and Engels figured all this out well over a hundred years ago.

The reason doctors get paid a lot is because there's not enough people smart enough to become doctors. The reason unknown dj's get paid little to nothing is because there's too many of them, and let's be honest, most people do it for sheer enjoyment.

I understand and appreciate your sentiment Is Mise, but it just seems far far too ideological and romantic in these days. Whether we like it or not, it's a business they run. Not a rave collective.

Is mise le key

jtsuited wrote: »

Marx and Engels figured all this out well over a hundred years ago. The reason doctors get paid a lot is because there's not enough people smart enough to become doctors. The reason unknown dj's get paid little to nothing is because there's too many of them, and let's be honest, most people do it for sheer enjoyment.

Time doesnt change what in principle is fair & just, doctors still take the hippocratic oath which originated from hippocrates over 2000 years ago seeing as you mentioned doctors, now to say because there is an abundance of potential people to do the work gives fair reason to pay nothing is absurd, if thats the case then their is an absolute wealth of free labor in hugeley populated underdeveloped country's. Happy days for big business! Yes?

jtsuited wrote: »

I understand and appreciate your sentiment Is Mise, but it just seems far far too ideological and romantic in these days. Whether we like it or not, it's a business they run. Not a rave collective.

One of my first point was this,

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67540026&postcount=52

Android 666

Is mise le key wrote: »

Time doesnt change what in principle is fair & just, doctors still take the hippocratic oath which originated from hippocrates over 2000 years ago seeing as you mentioned doctors, now to say because there is an abundance of potential people to do the work gives fair reason to pay nothing is absurd, if thats the case then their is an absolute wealth of free labor in hugeley populated underdeveloped country's. Happy days for big business! Yes?

Obviously if enough pressure is applied to companies, they are forced to act more responsibly (or at least seen to act more responsibly). That's why big business don't want to be seen exploiting third world countries and why we've seen a rise in Fair Trade products being used. A lot of us in our day to day lives probably pride ourselves on trying to live ethically.

The problem is that its hard to think ethically when you're pissed as a coot or caned off your face (which raises a lot set of other ethical problems) and so people aren't really going to give a fúck if the warm-up DJ is being paid and whether he's happy with the situation or not once they are getting their jollies.

If they thought that this issue was going to impact negatively on them of course they would pay their warm-up DJs but sadly they know that most punters won't give a damn.

The only way most people boycott things is if they are guilted into it (think of the starving Aids babies!!!) but the fact of the matter is that any of those DJs will know before they play that they won't be compensated and won't care, they'll just be delighted with the chance to play the Pod… well its kind of hard to guilt people about something like that, isn't it.

Is mise le key wrote: »

One of my first point was this,

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67540026&postcount=52

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say there. I hate the whole notion of playing for free because that type of exploitation is creeping in everywhere. In the design industry I work in is particularly guilty at the moment, a guy wrote on another forum about going into FAS and seeing to paying jobs being offered and 40 plus unpaid internships with vague promises of paid work at the end. You can be guaranteed that nearly all those internship will be filled despite the protestations of other people in the industry because there are a lot of desperate people out there and some companies know how to exploit it. Makes me sick but no matter how many people you tell not to go for those unpaid jobs, there be more waiting in the wings trying to do whatever it takes to get a job.

Is mise le key

Android 666 wrote: »

Obviously if enough pressure is applied to companies, they are forced to act more responsibly (or at least seen to act more responsibly). That's why big business don't want to be seen exploiting third world countries and why we've seen a rise in Fair Trade products being used. A lot of us in our day to day lives probably pride ourselves on trying to live ethically.

If you never pushed back at the forces that would otherwise exploit unremorsfully then we would be in a far worse world that we are now, the goal of any business that is inclined to exploit unethically is to drain the energy from its opponents & to discredit their alternative in support of its own business model.

Android 666 wrote: »

The problem is that its hard to think ethically when you're pissed as a coot or caned off your face (which raises a lot set of other ethical problems) and so people aren't really going to give a fúck if the warm-up DJ is being paid and whether he's happy with the situation or not once they are getting their jollies.

Yep so they also wouldnt bat an eyelid if there was €0.20 added to the entry fee either for the DJ's & only good press would come from that for 515.

Android 666 wrote: »

If they thought that this issue was going to impact negatively on them of course they would pay their warm-up DJs but sadly they know that most punters won't give a damn.

Well it certainley is negative for them here & this thread has received over 3000 views!

Android 666 wrote: »

The only way most people boycott things is if they are guilted into it (think of the starving Aids babies!!!) but the fact of the matter is that any of those DJs will know before they play that they won't be compensated and won't care, they'll just be delighted with the chance to play the Pod… well its kind of hard to guilt people about something like that, isn't it.

Well in the end as pointed it out it does boil down to the individual & i dont like it.

jtsuited

Is mise le key wrote: »

now to say because there is an abundance of potential people to do the work gives fair reason to pay nothing is absurd, if thats the case then their is an absolute wealth of free labor in hugeley populated underdeveloped country's. Happy days for big business! Yes?

If what I'm saying is so absurd, I want you to look at where all the clothes you are wearing right now are made. Unless you buy hemp clothing or other such stuff there's a very strong probability (maybe certainty) that something you are wearing was made in South East Asia.

The labour is so cheap in those countries, there was talk a while back that certain textile companies were actually rounding down the costs of labour to 0 in the pricing of their products. This means that in the context of the market value of the goods, the labour costs are negligible.

Now as a humanitarian with a conscience, this reality may disgust you (I know it disillusioned me in my floppy haired lefty teenage years). It might be morally wrong to exploit so greatly, it might be fundamentally unethical to bolster this awful dynamic through unfair international trade agreements, but the one thing it's not is 'absurd'. Because it's going on right now and you know it.

I know it might seem like we've gone way off topic, but the 'scandal' involved in this thread fundamentally comes down to questions of business ethics. And that's a far more complex issue than just stating that because bouncers and cleaners get paid, so should the dj.

Edit: And just for the record Is Mise, I'm not disagreeing with your opinion here. If there were more people like you, the world would be a better place. It's just that humans are far more shortsighted, greedy, and self-serving than they are altruistic. If natural selection had favoured altruistic traits more than the ability to accumulate resources, we'd be a lot better off as a species. But it didn't. And well, there's feck all you or I can do about that.

Is mise le key

Is mise le key wrote: »

now to say because there is an abundance of potential people to do the work gives fair reason to pay nothing is absurd, if thats the case then their is an absolute wealth of free labor in hugeley populated underdeveloped country's. Happy days for big business! Yes?

jtsuited wrote: »

If what I'm saying is so absurd, I want you to look at where all the clothes you are wearing right now are made. Unless you buy hemp clothing or other such stuff there's a very strong probability (maybe certainty) that something you are wearing was made in South East Asia.

The labour is so cheap in those countries, there was talk a while back that certain textile companies were actually rounding down the costs of labour to 0 in the pricing of their products. This means that in the context of the market value of the goods, the labour costs are negligible.

Now as a humanitarian with a conscience, this reality may disgust you (I know it disillusioned me in my floppy haired lefty teenage years). It might be morally wrong to exploit so greatly, it might be fundamentally unethical to bolster this awful dynamic through unfair international trade agreements, but the one thing it's not is 'absurd'. Because it's going on right now and you know it.

I know it might seem like we've gone way off topic, but the 'scandal' involved in this thread fundamentally comes down to questions of business ethics. And that's a far more complex issue than just stating that because bouncers and cleaners get paid, so should the dj.

I agree with all you said & do fully understand how the world works, but the context you think i was using 'absurd' is wrong, i was saying the idea that it is somehow ethical & justified was 'absurd' just because there is an over supply of potetial labor, there is two words in the middle of my post you quoted that puts into context of what i was saying highlighted below,

Is mise le key wrote: »

now to say because there is an abundance of potential people to do the work gives fair reason to pay nothing is absurd, if thats the case then their is an absolute wealth of free labor in hugeley populated underdeveloped country's. Happy days for big business! Yes?

jtsuited

Android 666 wrote: »

I agree wholeheartedly with everything you say there. I hate the whole notion of playing for free because that type of exploitation is creeping in everywhere. In the design industry I work in is particularly guilty at the moment, a guy wrote on another forum about going into FAS and seeing to paying jobs being offered and 40 plus unpaid internships with vague promises of paid work at the end. You can be guaranteed that nearly all those internship will be filled despite the protestations of other people in the industry because there are a lot of desperate people out there and some companies know how to exploit it. Makes me sick but no matter how many people you tell not to go for those unpaid jobs, there be more waiting in the wings trying to do whatever it takes to get a job.

The people to blame for this joke of a scheme (i think it's called the wpp or something) are the shower of retards named FAS and the even worse gobsh1tes who work for free.

And just to clarify, I won't play for free. There are loads of guys out there who will. If everyone has a problem with the idea of dj's playing for free, blame the dj's, not the promoter.

jtsuited

Is mise le key wrote: »

I agree with all you said & do fully understand how the world works, but the context you think i was using 'absurd' is wrong, i was saying the idea that it is somehow ethical & justified was 'absurd' just because there is an over supply of potetial labor, there is two words in the middle of my post you quoted that puts into context of what i was saying highlighted below,

fair point, but like I said, you get into question of business ethics then. For example, the primary moral obligation of any company is to it's shareholders. Not it's employees, not it's customers. So then the can of worms that is business ethics gets really confusing...

ianuss

jtsuited wrote: »

fair point, but like I said, you get into question of business ethics then. For example, the primary moral obligation of any company is to it's shareholders. Not it's employees, not it's customers. So then the can of worms that is business ethics gets really confusing...

It's not a moral obligation, it's a legal one. Directors are bound by law to act in the company/shareholders best interests.

Is mise le key

jtsuited wrote: »

fair point, but like I said, you get into question of business ethics then. For example, the primary moral obligation of any company is to it's shareholders. Not it's employees, not it's customers. So then the can of worms that is business ethics gets really confusing...

Ahh yes this is an entirely sepertae thread if were to open up the can of worms that is Capatalism which is the exactly what you have just briefly touched on with that,

jtsuited wrote: »

the primary moral obligation of any company is to it's shareholders. Not it's employees, not it's customers. ...

Right wing, Neo liberalism, Capatalism......lets not go there on a music forum:D

jtsuited

ianuss wrote: »

It's not a moral obligation, it's a legal one. Directors are bound by law to act in the company/shareholders best interests.

Sorry should have stated it's an obligation by law. Isn't there something in the memorandum/article of association about it?

Android 666

jtsuited wrote: »

The people to blame for this joke of a scheme (i think it's called the wpp or something) are the shower of retards named FAS and the even worse gobsh1tes who work for free.

And just to clarify, I won't play for free. There are loads of guys out there who will. If everyone has a problem with the idea of dj's playing for free, blame the dj's, not the promoter.

Yeah, I don't like the way they are running it but the onus really is on the individuals to not work for free. Nothing will change until all DJs decide collectively that they want to be paid. Which, let's be honest is never going to happen…

ianuss

jtsuited wrote: »

Sorry should have stated it's an obligation by law. Isn't there something in the memorandum/article of association about it?

No, the legal guidance comes from The Companies Act.

Memorandum of association sets out the company's objects and powers (basically its constitution).....it's effectively a contract between the company and shareholders, and also between the shareholders themselves. If a shareholder wanted to sue a director for acting beyond their powers, or for not acting in the interests of the company, they would seek to use the memorandum to prove that. But it's The Companies Act which sets out the law.

Articles of association are the internal regulations of the company. Shareholder meetings, voting rights, payment of dividends, yada yada yada.....

ianuss

jtsuited wrote: »

The people to blame for this joke of a scheme (i think it's called the wpp or something) are the shower of retards named FAS and the even worse gobsh1tes who work for free.

Totally agree with this. That scheme is a fukkin joke. Whatever about working for an hour or two, in a nightclub, doing something you love anyway, this scheme lists jobs where companies are looking for people to work, in some cases, for 40 hours a week. For nothing! It's scandalous.

There are tonnes of companies out there totally abusing the current climate as an excuse to justify their sh1tty behaviour.

empirix

once again i state that this is a joke, any dj that agrees to this is well probably just starting out or a youngster, anyway i imagine the sets on offer would be pretty lame

jonnk28

hey man do u support traktor in the club as that what im useing gona do a fresh mix if so

Android 666

jonnk28 wrote: »

hey man do u support traktor in the club as that what im useing gona do a fresh mix if so

The perfect end to an elegant and sometimes heated debate encompassing business ethics, company law, the predicament of promoters in the current climate and the willingness (or unwillingness) of young DJs to be exploited. Grrrreat!

brianc27

jonnk28 wrote: »

hey man do u support traktor in the club as that what im useing gona do a fresh mix if so

they will only support serato.

Is mise le key

Android 666 wrote: »

The perfect end to an elegant and sometimes heated debate encompassing business ethics, company law, the predicament of promoters in the current climate and the willingness (or unwillingness) of young DJs to be exploited. Grrrreat!

And with that superb observation i think the Mods should now close this thread on this post with a link to the poll thread started where people can then cast their vote & deliver their summation.

Cast your vote here

seannash

no need to close it,its run its course but who knows who might need to give us an update

cjfitz

515 tripod wrote: »

Its aimed at anyone.

If your having problems getting the mix to us....drop me a PM and I will send you the e-mail to send your details to.

Did so - heard nothing back!