Should a minor be paid less than advertised rate for gig?

[parentologist]

I don't know what to do. Kid (14), was offered a church job for Easter. But then, the director asked if kid would take about 70% of what he'd already advertised the job would pay. There is no question that the kid can do the job, and well. Easter's only about 5 weeks away, and trumpets are in high demand for Easter church services. Wouldn't be the kid's first paying church gig.

Kid feels that maybe it's best to pass on this one.

Any feedback? Advice? My initial reaction was that this is akin to the old trick of offering less to a woman, than to a man, for the same job, 'because she doesn't have a family to support'.

[tim_wolf]

If the kid can play the part, he should get 100% of the pay. Age should have nothing to do with it. I'd pass too if I were him.

[Richard A]

Pass, definitely.
_________________
Richard Ashmore
I am a Mechanical Engineer and have many years of Social Distancing experience.

[LittleRusty]

I would simply say that he will play for the advertised rate.

I don't think it is reasonable to infer anything about the gig itself from the question. Some people always try to negotiate stated prices, on both sides of the transaction. It is possible the director has tried this on all of his hired guns and has nothing to do with age.

If the gig turns out to be unreasonable, then make the decision to not do it next year.

[parentologist]

thanks, that's what he's gonna do, unless they pay him the advertised price. He's definitely capable of playing the part well. He's already got an impressive resume, even for a talented high school senior, and he's only a freshman.

[Jerry]

Me, I would have NOTHING to do with this gig. On the surface, this sounds like he would be working with an unethical person. I don't like working with unethical people.

I like playing trumpet because it brings me joy. Working with unethical people makes me sick.

(But I may be totally misinterpreting what's going on.)

[parentologist]

Church music director responded that he would pay him the full advertised rate. Kid needs the money to help pay for music camp. So, much as I am wary, because of the advice given here, I'm gonna let him do it.

[trumpetchops]

I don't think it's any different than what I would do.

Get as much money as possible. If he can get a better job, turn down this one. If this is all he can get for little money, take it.

I know it's been worked out. Just in general.
_________________
Joe Spitzer
Monroe Ct.

[Robert Rowe]

I'd likely play, one-way-or-the-other, if I was the kid. (I was that kid, once, myself, years ago). I'd be determined to "light it up" ... (which I did, back in the day). It got me other gigs that help jump-start my career.

~ r2 ~

A good plan violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan executed next week ~~ Gen. Geo. S. Patton
_________________
~ Love animals ... don't eat them. ~

I miss Genghis Khan ....

[TKSop]

(I realise this is a resolved issue, but here's my thoughts anyway)

So... sure, it's good experience for the kid and it's putting him out there to earn himself more gigs...

BUT - if someone had advertised a job and then told the director that the fee had been slashed, but it'd be "good exposure" for him - would the director have taken the job?
Would most of us here?

End of the day, it's no different whether it's a kid or an established player - if they're good enough for the gig and they'll have to put some effort into preparing, then you pay them appropriately... no if's or but's.

[Brad361]

And I would add: ask if he will be paid immediately following the gig. I did an Easter gig a couple of years ago and even though I was told it would be “COD”, it took me three weeks of chasing them to be paid.

And as others have said, your son’s age should have nothing to do with it.

Brad
_________________
When asked if he always sounds great:
"I always try, but not always, because the horn is merciless, unpredictable and traitorous." - Arturo Sandoval

[razeontherock]