“background performers” deserve protections. sag protections? in my opinion? no. however, again, it is a moot point, they are in sag, and they aren’t going anywhere. it does not, however, strengthen sag to include people who don’t walk and talk in movies and tv. it weakens sag - and sag has done too much of that already. sag should be lean and mean and use it’s power wisely on behalf of its membership. if it did more of that, we’d have far less runaway production, far less “right to work” state problems, far less “stretched too thin” problems overall. I have an actor friend, a “name,” who just read for a series that takes place in burbank, and is going to shoot in bogota, columbia. yes, you read right. if you naively think the amptp, at the top levels, are not bottom line corporate overlords, looking for ways to make the creative unions effectively obsolete, if you think the trends we see in the last 10, 20 years are not anti-union, anti-actor (as well as writer and director) for all but an elite few, if you don’t see that, and don’t understand that, IF sag strikes, IF they ask for and get a mandate, it will be because the membership understands the landscape and the way the business is going? I don’t know what to tell you. I will make one prediction though - something tells me you are not a person who walks and talks in movies and tv for a living.

On the 12 cents thing, I think we’re both on the same page. It is 12 cents, but it gets divided up by all the SAG members involved, and with WGA and DGA the number of individuals involved really drops. (Although I’ve seen a few movies (particularly Ivan Reitman ones) that had several screenwriters credited.

You seem to have missed my points to you, though. You made some truly unfortunate comments regarding background players, and with 26 years experience, I would think that you would remember that up to the 1980’s there was a Screen Extras Guild, and what happened to that guild. The fact that SAG then absorbed the former SEG members is not a bad thing in my eyes. What happened to them was awful, and I’d rather seem them organized than not. The tone of the comments you were making indicates that you may be seeing SAG as its own internal tier system - those who you feel belong in the guild, and those who you feel don’t.

I have no issue with SAG getting a fair contract - I hope to see exactly that. But I think asking for a 100% raise is not necessarily a fair suggestion. Of course, at this point, I think a lot of that stuff is already off the table.

My point about the “if” in your phrase “if sag strikes…” is that it is by no means settled that SAG even CAN strike. There is a lot of doubt whether a Strike Authorization Vote would garner the 75% approval that would be required. That makes the threat to do so (and the threat about the dire consequences for everyone) sound a bit less convincing. But the consequences for such a vote not succeeding are quite serious. As a 26 year member, I hoped that you would understand that.

first - 12 cents, vs. 4? if true (you don’t seem sure), my bad. but the fact that the sag residual is divided between 10,20 or more actors and the wga residual goes to 1 or 2 writers, makes it a moot point. as to “age discrimination” for writers over 45 - I’m an actor/writer/director with 26 years in the business, and what I meant (and what you both better take note of) is, it’s NOT the 29 year old tv exec that’s the problem - it’’s the fact that entertainment companies are no longer singular entities, and the “suit” at the end of all other “suits”? - is sumner redstone - a fat bald man with a bad hairpiece. all this carping is weak-ass bullshit - if sag strikes to get the amptp to make a fair deal, and some members of other unions end up sucking pond water on their mortgages or losing their jobs? hey, I seem to remember the other creative unions (ESPECIALLY SAG) showing solidarity with the wga for 100 days so they could get their due. you guys seem to be missing the larger picture here: the amptp is trying to turn the industry into a two tiered performer system - the stars, who get paid obscene amounts up-front, plus gross points, and the rank and file, who get scale and all the craft service they can eat. we have a choice: we can let them do that, or we can find our balls and shut down the whole fucking shebang if necessary to make sure we still have a shot at making a living. talk about naive…
Mrs Wakely
sag, aftra, dga, aea

Among other things, the backhanded slap at background artists shows an ignorance of what happened to the Screen Extras Guild and how it was crushed by the studios, and then how SAG absorbed those people. And that slap comes across as generally mean-spirited.

The DVD rate information is not correct. The SAG element has always been higher than 4 cents - I recall it being quoted as 12 cents during the WGA strike. It’s the WGA and the DGA that get 4 cents for home video residuals. SAG has always gotten more than that.

The raises in the current SAG conditions list would not just be “cost of living” or anything similar. Massive raises were indicated, including a doubling of rates for background players. I’d love to get a 100% raise myself, but it’s not a feasible position at any time.

Finally, Mrs. Wakely seems to not understand that SAG has yet to call a Strike Authorization Vote, a process that will take at least 3 weeks. There is a lot of speculation that this may be due to SAG not being assured of getting the 75% votes in favor of striking. Membership First does not hold an overwhelming majority of the membership, and there are many dissenting voices who will not vote for a strike or any other extreme measures by this group. If Alan Rosenberg honestly thought he would get that 75% plus, he would have called for the vote by June 1st, just like the WGA did when they had their strike ballots in the mail by October 1st last year. The fact that no ballots have been sent out means that as of July 1st, SAG members across Hollywood will be working without a current contract. It does not mean that a strike is imminent or guaranteed. Some people seem to think that a strike can happen like a blitz or an audible play. It can’t. The membership has to overwhelmingly vote to do it. And if that vote is held and fails, it would backfire in a terrible fashion for SAG.

I really hope that “Mrs. Wakely” understands the consequences for the rhetoric in that post, particularly if that vote gets called. And it really is an “if”, not a “when”.

Screen Actors Guild:
A union for SCREEN ACTORS (actors who walk and talk in movies and TV)
NO ONE ELSE SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN. NOT:
Extras (sorry, “background performers”)
DJ’s
Voice over people
Singers
Dancers
And so on
No offense to all. Just, get your own union, and stop crashing mine.

DEMANDS:
1.A slight raise in a 30 year old joke: 4 cents per DVD, split between 10, 20 actors on a project.
2.A raise in top of show (highest rate for guest appearance in TV show) because suits no longer honor quotes (rate you were last paid in similar class of role) and middle class actors would like to have a shot at making a decent living, which under the current contract, we can’t.
3. A percentage of all Internet revenue off OUR WORK.
4. Collective bargaining on force majeur.

If you don’t walk and talk in movies and TV? Get the f*** out of the way.

If you’re IATSE? or DGA? or WGA?

Shut the f*** up. This is a SAG negotiation. We want what we want. We need what we want. We’ll get what we need. You got a problem with that? Take it up with YOUR union.
And Suits? The stars are the stars. You are not the stars. You are bald, fat men with bad hair pieces. You are the sad and lonely people who swim like pilot fish under the mouths of the people who make content, which you suits then sell. People don’t go to the movies to see you, or the writers (mad props, but, true) or the directors (same) they go to see the ACTORS. ESPECIALLY THE STARS. And, if SAG walks? That means the stars folks, not just the rank and file. You will be out of business the second SAG says “strike,” and you will not have a business until SAG says “stop.”
Your choice. It’s really a fair deal when you look at it.
Best wishes!

And guess what a strike is? A failure to make a deal. And everyone please…this is not about the principles of fairness or the future of the industry or whatever rhetoric gets thrown around by either message boards or bullhorns…this is about plain old dealmaking. And SAG is so farcically bad at it that they are putting the entire business on the line. It would be funny if it didn’t tens of thousands of livelihoods at risk.

But hey…I’m just a shill. Right?

Such desperation is understandable. The “heroes” of their faction have deliberately maneuvered SAG into its weakest position in decades. Why? Ego, insularity that is out-of-touch with rank-and-file and working members, and ineptitude borne out of psychological infirmity.

The AFTRA deal will pass, SAG will settle, and, hopefully, the voting members of the SAG Hollywood Division will awaken.

We aren’t buying all the “pro corporation” bullshit they’re spreading, thanks for keeping the real news up front.

So with the current state of things, all I can really hope for as an actor who is looking towards their own future, is that AFTRA is forced back to the table and as a result gets a better deal for it’s members, and SAG gets a decent deal that they are happy with. A deal that hopefully provides some security for the future, and helps to preserve an actors integrity. That would be great. And if all that could happen WITHOUT a strike, that would be even greater.

…and too bad there wasn’t just ONE actors union too, that’d be nice. A united voice is much more powerful than a divided one. Ah well, one can dream, right? Guess all there is to do is to wait and see how it all plays out…