Allegro
Divided No More
A series on the racial history of the AFM
Volume 124, No. 2February, 2024
Local 802’s DECIBAL Collective is flourishing. (See the Allegro stories “Introducing Local 802’s DECIBAL Collective,” “A Kickoff Event for Diversity at Local 802,” and “First DECIBAL Book Club a Success.”) One of the six working groups that emerged from the formation of the collective is producing a series of Allegro articles on the racial history of the AFM. This includes an examination of the “hyphenated” locals, most of which were the result of the merging of Black and white locals. Welcome to the fifth article in our series (read our first article, second article, third article and fourth article).
Terry Hilliard, a member of AFM Local 6 (San Francisco), is one of the few current members who was also a member of the previous Local 669, the segregated Black local covering San Francisco. Photo courtesy AFM Local 6.
The San Francisco musicians’ union has a long and rich history. In 1885, musicians affiliated first with the National League of Musicians, which soon folded up shop and conceded to the AFM. By 1897, San Francisco musicians were represented under the official banner of the AFM, as Local 6. Though Local 6 did not explicitly exclude Black musicians from membership, it did require an examination or audition. As was the case with many other locals, these auditions were a cultural barrier for Black musicians and prevented many from joining.
In 1916 Black musicians in San Francisco tried to form their own union. The AFL allowed charters for “colored” unions — and, by extension, the AFM did too. However, this required permission from AFM Local 6, and Local 6 denied permission. After almost eight years of struggle, Black San Francisco musicians prevailed, and Local 648 was chartered by the AFM in 1923.
During the 1920s, there were many employment opportunities for musicians. Radio was on the rise and most movie theatres had orchestras to accompany silent films. Local 648 adopted the same wage rates as Local 6 for this work. For a while, both locals thrived. These heady times came to an end with the advance of “talkies” toward the end of the decade. The AFM under President Joseph Weber struggled to keep theatre orchestras employed with a still-familiar argument that art cannot be mechanized. The ultimate loss of these jobs coupled with struggles of the San Francisco Symphony — and the Great Depression — led to a severe shortage of employment for musicians.
When Prohibition was repealed in 1933, Local 6 under new Secretary Eddie Love began a campaign of wage enforcement in the new clubs that were opening up. When the clubs pushed back, Love had the AFM put them on a “forbidden territory” list — something akin to our current “unfair” list. This not only prevented Local 6 members from performing in the listed clubs, it prevented Local 648 members from doing the same. This led to conflict between the two locals because club owners saw hiring of Black musicians as a way to increase their audiences while hiring less expensive bands. Plus, Black musicians needed the work. Several prominent Local 648 musicians were brought up on charges for violating the forbidden territory. In 1934, Local 648 appealed the forbidden zone designation to the AFM as Local 6 began using increasingly threatening tactics to get club owners to fire Black bands. Local 648, finding no satisfaction from the AFM, took Local 6 to court. AFM President Weber informed Local 648 that it could lose its charter as a result of taking the matter to court rather than resolving it internally. The court ruled in favor of Local 648, ordering Local 6 to stop interfering with the employment of Local 648 members. However, Local 6 was given ten days to answer the ruling, which kept the case open.
A few days later, Local 648 withdrew from the court action and the case was dismissed. It is possible Local 648 feared it would lose its charter as President Weber had warned. Local 648 Secretary John Terrell tried to mend fences by appearing at a Local 6 board meeting to discuss Local 6’s supervisory role over local venues. This attempt at reconciliation failed. On November 13, 1934, Local 648’s charter was revoked by the AFM, likely a result of pressure from Local 6 in an apparent power move as retribution for the court case.
Of course, Black San Francisco musicians didn’t go anywhere and some began to play nonunion. Some Black Oakland musicians petitioned the AFM for a new charter. As in the previous decade, the AFM kicked it to Local 6, which was only willing to give permission for a “subsidiary” local. Members of the “subsidiary” would receive the same wages as Local 6 musicians (assuming they were hired) and would pay the same dues, but would have no voting rights or the right to run for office. This left Black musicians with a choice between playing nonunion gigs and being in conflict with Local 6, or accepting second-class membership in Local 6. Subsidiary Local 6 was established on April 15, 1935. This made little difference as club owners continued to refuse to hire Black subsidiary members at the same wages as white Local 6 members.
Subsidiary Local 6 struggled during World War II as many of its members were drafted into the armed forces. Local 6, though healthy by comparison, had its own problems. Former Local 6 Secretary Love, having been hired away to work for AFM President Petrillo in New York, was found to have embezzled a sizable sum of money from Local 6, mostly in the form of fines on members and fees from radio stations. He was expelled and began working in the shipyards.
Meanwhile, Subsidiary Local 6 worked hard to maintain cordial relations with Local 6. As the decade wore on, other Black subsidiaries began to win charters of their own and these new Black locals petitioned Petrillo to put a stop to subsidiary status for “colored” locals. Subsidiary Local 6, however, petitioned the AFM to remain in subsidiary status, possibly to curry favor with Local 6 and entice it to accept Black musicians as full members. After further flattery and tokens of appreciation, Subsidiary Local 6 Secretary Alex Forbes made a proposal to Local 6 for “absorption” of the subsidiary into Local 6. No action on the proposal was taken by Local 6’s board and one could surmise they decided a separate “colored” local was better than welcoming Black musicians into Local 6.
On March 7, 1946, “colored” Local 669 received its charter from the AFM. This setup could have been similar to the one a decade before, when Black union members consistently lost work to their white colleagues. But now the Black population of San Francisco had increased, taking housing emptied by the internment of thousands of Japanese Americans. This larger Black population led to more demand for blues and jazz. The Fillmore district became awash with clubs, all catering to Black audiences, with performers such as Benny Carter and Saunders King. In 1948 Blanco’s Cotton Club opened and, like its counterpart in Harlem, only hired Black bands. When union members from other industries threatened to picket, Secretary Forbes sued the San Francisco Labor Council and they backed off. Black and white audiences mixed at the club and this began to be the case all over the Fillmore district.
Two locals covering the same jurisdiction was becoming cumbersome. Mixed-race bands had become more common though Black musicians were often discriminated against in venues where they performed. Traveling Black musicians were required to register with “colored” locals around the country. The civil rights movement was growing, and there were legal cases prohibiting subsidiary “colored” unions and second-class status as well as growing political pressure on the AFM to end racial exclusion. The AFM’s integration lagged behind many other unions because it didn’t want to dictate policy to its locals.
There was also growing pressure within the state of California. Los Angeles Locals 47 and 767 merged in 1951, and activists in the L.A. area drew attention to racial discrimination in the growing studio and radio fields. Local 669 President Elma Graves began talks with the Local 6 board. She, along with other AFM convention delegates, presented the AFM’s International Executive Board with a proposal of amalgamation. The proposal was sent by AFM President Petrillo to Local 6 to be voted on in December 1956. Despite its extremely favorable terms for Local 6 members — and unfavorable terms for Local 669 members — it was voted down by the Local 6 membership in a poor turnout poll after a quiet campaign against amalgamation by some Local 6 officers.
After the vote, Local 6 was excoriated in the press. Local 47 applied further pressure by proposing an anti-segregation resolution at the 1957 AFM convention. There was considerable opposition, not just from white locals but from Black locals, particularly large Black locals like Chicago’s Local 208 and Philadelphia’s Local 274, whose members feared losing hard-won assets as well as losing influence over their administrations. Local 47’s resolution was referred to President Petrillo, who seemed uninterested in pursuing integration as an AFM mandate but at the same time was facing increasing political pressure from inside and outside the AFM.
In April 1959, the state of California passed the Fair Employment Practices Act, which forbade exclusion from a labor organization because of race. The state’s attorney general sent an assistant attorney general to inform Local 6 and 669 that they should merge — and if they needed a mediator, he could act as one. Local 669 pointed out that they were not segregated — they had a number of white and Asian members as did many other “colored” locals — but they were open to amalgamation. In early 1960, the two locals finalized a merger agreement, far more favorable to the members of Local 669 than the 1956 proposal. Amalgamation took place on April 1, 1960. By 1963, former Local 669 member Vernon Alley was elected to Local 6’s board.
As of May 2022, Local 6 members who were former Local 669 members were Frank Fisher, Terry Hilliard, Tom McElroy and Carl Porter.