Getting paid

I have been away for a few days due to a very poorly Grandpa, but am still thinking about the CCS meeting (see previous three posts) and the issues it brought up. I still need to send them some feedback so I don't want to forget anything!

Adressing the conversation in order of relevance then, the most contentious issue and most pertinent for me, was that of the artist and their employment or working patterns.

It was quite worrying that the document talked of jobs, employers and skill sets (even standardising an artist job description!) when this model bears little relevance to how most artists operate. Personally, I am of the 'portfolio career' persuasion. This translates as: Working in the studio and exhibiting: at the Tate; for Oxford University; some (teeny) book sales; and getting paid for the odd talk or activity.

I have no pension, plenty of debt and certainy no savings. I feel foolish even saying that and still choosing to live my life as I do.

Additionally, the document did not address the fact that artists are responsible for generating so much of their own work; they do things for free, apply for funding or look for partnerships. Does all this activity fall under the radar then? Again a-n came into its own as one of the few bodies/publications that truly understands how it all works. I am often spurred on by the fact that I see my peers in the magazine. It is a bridge between the land of graduate to mid-career artist that is (I think) the most difficult.

cont..

and some issues to tackle:

Lack of awareness of employment opportunities within the sector.

Artists not trained for business.

Insufficient entry routes for young people into the sector.

Skills and experience do not match job vacancies.

Qualifications do not prepare fine art graduates for work or fully participate in the sector.

Lack of diversity among the workforce.

Not enough opportunities to develop skills in post.

Access to training for those outside formal employment.

Specialist training needs not met.

Staff retention in the sector poor.

Poor employment conditions.

Organisations lack people with business skills.

Not enough emphasis on leadership.

Insufficient auditing of skills needs.

Not enough sharing of good practice across the sector.

Insufficient partnerships between employers and higher education bodies.

Although some strong membership and representative bodies exist there are some gaps e.g. commercial galleries.

There is no professional union equivalent to Equity in the theatre sector.

cont. from previous post..

Just for starters, here are some facts to make you think a little. I also want to add in this from the Scottish Artists Union website:

"Statistically, visual artists remain at the bottom of the income ladder for all art forms. An estimated 5,000 artists are practicing in Scotland. The Scottish Arts Council Audit 2003 showed that 82% of visual artists in Scotland earn under £5,000 per annum and 28% are earning nothing at all from their arts practice while contributing an extrapolated £22 million to the Scottish economy primarily through purchase of materials." http://www.sau.org.uk/about/about.php

Now from the CCS/Arts Council document:

Key Facts about the Visual Arts sector:

The Visual Arts sector employs 37,480 people, 28,490 of whom are artists. Of these individuals 46% are freelance

• The sector features 4,580 businesses, of which 75% employ fewer than 5 people
• The visual arts sector covers individual artists, publicly funded institutions large and small, commercial galleries, studios, trade associations, art fairs and a vast range of employees, consultants, freelancers, volunteers
• The visual arts sector’s overall contribution to the national economy (GVA) is £1.9 billion. This is in comparison to the performing arts sector (£4.5 billion), and the commercial music industry (£4.2 billion)
• Surprisingly, artists are not included within the current definition of the creative industries in the UK
• 95% of people working in the visual arts sector are white, and 50% are female
• 22% of the workforce is based in London, 1% in Northern Ireland, 7% in Scotland, and 7% in Wales
• Employees are often highly qualified (38% with first degrees and a further 19% with a postgraduate degree or diploma)

I was asked by a-n to attend a meeting at the Arts Council in Manchester on Monday (just to clarify – time and travel paid for!). It was a really interesting trip, but I have had to leave it a few days before writing about it as there was just so much to digest.

The meeting was part of a consultation process giving feedback to a draft of The Visual Arts Blueprint: Towards a workforce action plan. This is a joint venture between Arts Council England and Creative & Cultural Skills (The Skills Council for the creative industries). The draft (51 pages) has been developed in consultation with lots of people in the arts, including EmiliaTelese from a-n.

It's difficult to know where to start as the document attempts to cover many things. I mean everything: artists, designers; freelancers; employers; job descriptions; addressing diversity in the arts; widening interest and knowledge of creative industries; creatives working in schools; schools, FE teaching and professional development on degree courses. I could go on. It is inevitable when something attempts to be so inclusive that it will fail on some counts, and the main problem that struck me (and others) about this document was that artists do not fit easily into any type of regulated guidelines, if at all. It did, however, address and provoke debate about some really important points such as internships as well as bridging the gap between contemporary artists and educators.

As there was so much to think about, I shall approach the document and resulting discussion one section at a time…

Internships.

I have just been reading Andrew Bryant's report about working with Tate media for three months. It sounds like great experience, and not something that could be replicated elsewehere.