Here is my COUNTDOWN TO JUNE 30TH package:
Part I: SAG/AFTRA/AMPTP Overview
Part II: The Details They Don't Want You To Know
Part III: Battle of the Superstars
PART I: SAG/AFTRA/AMPTP Overview
The sense of panic among actors, writers, directors and below-the-liners is palpable in Hollywood right now. Matched only by the angst of agents whose phones aren't ringing, and out-of-town journalists struggling to write "strike sequel" stories for Monday. Strange, isn't it, that the only Hollywood types without any visible flopsweat from the de facto shutdown of production are the network and studio moguls. Because they are the puppeteers pulling everybody else's strings. From behind the scenes, they order Hollywood to jump, and the town asks how high. And never more so than during all these guild negotiations. If only the entire industry could stay focused on the actions of Big Media and start pressuring the Hollywood CEOs to put people back to work. But instead everyone's attention has strayed to the carnival sideshow of SAG vs AFTRA, and AFTRA vs SAG, and Big Star vs Big Star, and all the other diversions in an already confused situation. Now take a deep breath and calm down. To understand what's going on right now, I first need to ask you to do the following: reflect on everything you knew surrounding the writers strike, and then throw it all out the window. What's going on with SAG and AFTRA and the AMPTP is the complete opposite of what happened a few month back. The writers were for the most part united. 
The actors are divided to the point of distraction. The writers went after the AMPTP and the Big Media behemoths. The actors are going after each other. The agents and moguls backchannelled negotiations with the WGA. Hardly any backchannelling is going on right now between the moguls and SAG, while the agents are sitting on their hands. All the moguls kept close tabs on pre- and post-strike talks with the writers. Now some CEOs are so disengaged they're not bothering to read their labor lawyers' memos, much less to demand updates. The writers strike crippled television while movies went virtually unscathed. But the de facto strike or de facto lockout, depending on your POV, has seemingly halted moviemaking while television production continues mostly uninterrupted.The result is that Hollywood has to rewire, reboot and rethink everything. In this case, past doesn't have to be prologue. There doesn't have to be a strike. In fact, I can definitely tell you that SAG has "never suggested that a strike was an objective or essential," I'm told by an insider. "Yes, it is an option. But SAG leadership has not been the ones threatening it or sabre-rattling." And another insider puts it even more forcefully: "Not only is there no strike plan, there is no strike authorization, and there is no requirement that SAG has to go on strike once the contract expires on June 30th. It's not uncommon in labor disputes for union members to agree to extend the contract or to remain working under the existing terms of the previous contract while negotiations continue."
The Screen Actors Guild released the following statement Sunday from national president Alan Rosenberg confirming it's not in strike mode: “We have taken no steps to initiate a strike authorization vote by the members of Screen Actors Guild. Any talk about a strike or a management lockout at this point is simply a distraction. The Screen Actors Guild national negotiating committee is coming to the bargaining table every day in good faith to negotiate a fair contract for actors.”
And yet there are highly organized factions at the top of the studios and networks, IATSE locals, AFTRA leadership, and even SAG's own board that want to scare everyone into thinking a walkout is inevitable unless there's complete contract capitulation by SAG leadership. I'm here to tell you this is untrue. So is SAG, which told members Sunday: "Unfortunately, there are a few press reports and blogs erroneously reporting misinformation based on false statements made by a few people who oppose our objectives to continue negotiating for a fair contract. Some have even implied that a strike is looming this week. Don’t let these scare tactics fool you."
Yes, there's a countdown to June 30th when SAG's contract with the AMPTP expires at midnight. What happens then? In all likelihood, the two sides will continue bargaining. (After all, the AMPTP is on record saying that the only reason it left the negotiations with the WGA after the writers' contract expired is because the guild called an immediate strike.)
A more defining deadline is July 8th when AFTRA announces its ratification vote results. So what happens then? Again, not a SAG strike. The guild's leadership understands that there's no urgency within the membership at this time for such an extreme call. Which is precisely why there's no impetus atop the guild to even consider holding a strike authorization vote. If one were held and no authorization given, SAG would suffer a psychological blow from which it probably couldn't recover this contract cycle. Ergo, no push for a vote.
However, it's underhanded for AFTRA to try to put one over on its members with language that a "yes" vote ratifies its recently drawn up AMPTP contract but a "no" vote doesn't just send the pact back to the negotiators to try for better terms but actually puts in motion something far more draconian which is to authorize the AFTRA board to call a strike.
Will AFTRA members ratify the new contract with the AMPTP? Two weeks ago, I would have said definitely. Last week, probably. And this week, I really don't know. All anyone is operating on is anecdotes and tea leaves. But every day that passes before that announcement is made, AFTRA gets more shrill and hysterical, and SAG gets more over-reaching and arrogant, as they battle over 44,000 dual members. Which is why I felt before, and still feel now, that SAG's anti-AFTRA ratification campaign was a big waste of time. Even SAG's board is divided on this issue. SAG leadership's explanation to its members is that a "no" vote is crucial to let the moguls know that AFTRA's lousy deal (undermining residuals, clips consent and other primetime network issues valued by actors who have those protections under SAG) won't go down with dual members. But the reality is that, even if ratification is rejected, AFTRA will still find a way to suck up to the AMPTP and redeliver only a slightly less lousy contract to its members. It's simply in the smaller union's nature to do that given its inferiority complex. However if the AFTRA pact is ratified, then SAG leadership will have been seen as squandering time and energy on a losing cause
But all this importance bestowed on AFTRA is absurd. The union is responsible only for three scripted network primetime series, one of which has been cancelled. The union should pick up a few more scripted network pilots by September. But its business in relation to SAG's is like a chihuahua pestering a mastiff. SAG, however, is worried about AFTRA's growing control over scripted cable shows and wants to "draw a line in the sand" on that issue. But I say this is not the proper time or place to deal with that now. Let the two unions stage a cage match after Hollywood gets back to work.
Finding itself SAG's target gave AFTRA more credit than it deserved. And so it emboldened AFTRA leadership to nip at SAG's heels. AFTRA president Roberta Reardon came up with a pitiful excuse to justify what was clearly a predetermined decision not to bargain alongside SAG. Instead, AFTRA truly made a deal with the devil in order to do the AMPTP's bidding. AFTRA relentlessly villified the bigger actors guild's current leadership which continues even now. Unfortunately, SAG bit back -- and the result has been spin and propaganda from both sides that is unsavory and unnecessary.
AFTRA also added insult to injury by starting this terrible bloodsport of pitting Big Actor vs Big Actor even though none of these AMPTP pacts affect any of these superstars. Not only have most not worked under AFTRA's contract for eons, but they have top agents who negotiate their individual deals. But AFTRA nonetheless was the first to officially email members and media a graphic of Sally Field, James Cromwell et al supporting ratification. Yes, AFTRA played the emotion card by spotlighting Sally Field, the woman who won an Oscar for her portrayal of union organizer Norma Rae. (But, interestingly, the email sent to members announcng her support was sent to "Everyone (Minus LA)". Hmm.
Guild contracts are all about strength in numbers, the power of collective bargaining, and looking out for the little guys. In entertainment, they're about protecting residuals which allow creatives to lead middle-class lives. They're not about Tom Hanks, Jack Nicholson or George Clooney. Do these A-listers have the right to express an opinion? Of course. Do their names carry weight? Sure. Are they relevant to this discussion? Hardly. I'd so much rather see all the superstars collectively call the moguls and put pressure on the AMPTP to deal seriously with SAG. (I'll have more about the SAG vs AFTRA Battle Of The Superstars in Part III posting on Saturday. There's so much that hasn't been reported...)
It was bad enough when the DGA and WGA were pitted against each other by the AMPTP. But now the Hollywood CEOs have found a new scapegoat for the de facto strike/lockout stalling Hollywood, and it's SAG. It's true that SAG has signed more than 350 guaranteed completion contracts with independent producers of films, the top 50 or so of which boast budgets between $14 million and $40 million dollars and represent in total hundreds of millions of dollars. But pro-AMPTP factions are out and about in Hollywood claiming that SAG has shut down the town. I don't know how that's possible. The Hollywood CEOs own the means of production and so only they have the power to stop principal photography on big studio films based on their own "fear" of a looming actors strike. But there is no evidence that the guild is contemplating such a labor action either in the near or distant future. So that fear is either irrational or manipulative.
As for the negotiations between SAG and the AMPTP, they are at a complete standstill. SAG national executive director Doug Allen recently broke his media blackout to make clear that it's not SAG who has been stalling. For instance, few people know that, when talks were resumed between the two sides after the May hiatus, the AMPTP refused to even offer the big actors guild either the WGA deal or the AFTRA deal. Instead, the Big Media cartel forced SAG to negotiate up from ground zero for weeks on end so that only as of today is the AFTRA deal even on the table. How is that fair pattern bargaining? Yet the moguls demand that SAG settle for the contract terms accepted by every other guild, especially on New Media. 
That's where the writers chose to draw their line in the sand, however faint, after failing to make lucrative agreements for each new technology that came along -- first VHS, then DVDs, now streaming and downloading. Had the Hollywood CEOs been honest and open to renegotiate the contract terms each time a new format caught on, these guild negotiations wouldn't be so arduous. Instead there are years and years of resentment to contend with -- as well as an infamously unmoveable AMPTP force, soon-to-retire Nick Counter, who craftily and contemptuously makes each guild essentially negotiate with itself by forcing the other side to drop issue after issue without any reciprocity. The writers got a little, but not a lot. Now it's SAG's turn to try for a little more which, under Favored Nations, will trickle down to the WGA and DGA.
So where are the moguls themselves in all this? Nowhere. I've been told in absolute terms that the Big Media CEOs have decided to return the process of negotiating these guild contracts to the AMPTP's sole oversight. That means neither Peter Chernin (News Corp/Fox) nor Bob Iger (Disney) nor Les Moonves (CBS), who all at one time or another took leadership roles during the WGA strike settlement, will volunteer to get involved this time around with SAG. A story which appeared back on June 18th in Variety under the headline, "Chernin, Iger May Resume SAG Roles," is untrue, I have been assured by several major moguls. (I'll provide more details behind the scenes of the negotiations in Part II posting tonight.)
Hollywood's top agents are no longer neutral parties. Unwilling to absorb another round of commission losses and bridge loans, they are very privately backing the studios and networks against SAG. "If I could break the union, I would," one tenpercentery topper tells me.
Finally, let's look at what leverage both sides in this labor contract negotiation have. It would seem on the surface that the moguls hold all the cards since they decide when Hollywood gets back to work and how much actors will be paid and the conditions under which the thesps will work. So, at some point soon, probably on or around July 8th, the AMPTP will pull the same maneuver it did with the WGA (and even with SAG back on May 6th) and walk out of the talks while at the same time issuing an ultimatum and blaming SAG for the stalemate. As for the arbitration process known as "last best offer," which would seem to favor the AMPTP in the likelihood the standoff continues, WGA exec director Doug Young has already informed his SAG counterpart Doug Allen that the Big Media cartel offered the writers "at least 10'last best offers" before the contract settlement was reached.
SAG, for its part, can start to organize rolling sick-outs of actors to delay TV and studio productions. It can threaten a boycott of the Emmys. And most moguls will admit that they can't keep a lid on movie production forever and need to start principal photography on many projects no later than September 1st. In addition, the Hollywood CEOs still have hanging over their heads those hefty force majeure liabilities ranging from $10M to $60M per company left over from the writers strike and payable to SAG, which has offered to engage in settlement talks if progress on the contract is made. Moreover, SAG can start meeting around the country with big institutional investors who own sizeable stakes in the Big Media companies. That latter strategy distressed the moguls enough to start getting serious about ending the writers strike as much as the guild's promise of Oscar picket lines threatened to KO the biggest night in moviedom.
And although the entertainment companies plead poverty to guild negotiators, the fact is business is very very good for Big Media even in today's down economy despite the recession and the writers strike. Meanwhile, New Media has become this sector's newest profit center, with NBC.com alone expected to generate "tens of millions" of dollars in revenue next year "in a business that didn't exist" a few years ago, NBC TV Network President John Eck said at a PricewaterhouseCoopers sponsored media conference just this week. So why shouldn't creatives share? But unless they negotiate a bigger piece of the pie now instead of later, history has shown that the corporations simply won't renegotiate new technology terms in 3 years, or ever, even as the business grows. That's certainly what happened to DVDs.
In conclusion, the quicker Hollywood realizes that SAG is not the obstacle here, the quicker this town will get back to work. No one knows better than the writers what torture dealing with the AMPTP really is. So it's important to note that whatever better New Media terms negotiated by SAG leadership will be enjoyed by both the WGA and DGA. That's because of a verbal "Favored Nations" agreement negotiated during the final days of the writers strike and considered binding by the guilds even if it was never formally written down. In other words, this is not just SAG's fight with the AMPTP anymore. It's creatives vs Big Media corporations. Let's hope Hollywood is back to work by July 21st.
The real attention should be paid to whether SAG will be able to “extend” the current contract, or by working without any contract in place, fall prey to the AMPTP implementing the “LAST, BEST DEAL” clause. Without a contract extension in place, SAG members must work under the terms of such a ‘presented’ “Last, Best deal,” even if it was rejected by their leadership, until a new contract is negotiated. Of course, the AMPTP strategy would be to leave the deal in place, until SAG leaders agreed to make it permanent… The AMPTP would essentially hold all the cards.
Comment by Rudi Rose — June 27, 2008 @ 5:47 pm
AMEN! It is great to hear someone finally say it like it is!
Thank you Nikki for putting this out there. I can’t wait to read the rest of the story.
Comment by Clayton — June 27, 2008 @ 6:34 pm
Just to clarify, SAG isn’t going out on strike. The only person that stands to lose a job is Roberta Reardon and that is for giving into the AMPTP. The sooner actors reject the AMPTP’s contract with AFTRA, the sooner joint negotiations with the AMPTP can begin. If AMPTP fails to negotiate in good faith, than we might see a lawsuit charging that the AMPTP was in charge of killing movie production.
On another note, the only reason why the AMPTP walked out of talks right after the start of the WGA strike is because the org is a child pure and simple. Real lawyers try to get a deal done as soon as possible. If the AMPTP had stayed past the WGA’s strike deadline and was serious about reaching a settlement, then a four month strike would have lasted four days at the most.
Comment by Jessy S. — June 27, 2008 @ 6:58 pm
Brilliant reporting as always, Nikki, thank you. If SAG, AFTRA and AEA want to keep asking me for separate dues, the least they could do is not engage in ridiculous, divisive fighting (SAG/AFTRA) or tell me that if I choose to do theatre in LA then I am fully expected to work for free (AEA).
Thanks for cutting through the crap.
P.S. When was the last time George Clooney worked for AFTRA scale? If anyone can dig this info up, it’s you.
Comment by Miki — June 27, 2008 @ 7:10 pm
AFTRA recruits no one but janitors, pizza delivery boys, and computer techs.
James Cromwell, Jason George, Tess Harper, Gabrielle Carteris, Matt Kimbrough — all working SAG actors — stepped up to the plate to serve on the AFTRA negotiating committee when it became obvious that membershipfirst Hollywood SAG Board Members weren’t going to stop their 2-year booger-flicking, scab-picking routine at AFTRA for daring to organize scripted cable after merger was Shanhaied.
But that’s old news, right? Read the papers today, whaddya find? More booger flicking from current SAG leadership (who’ll be replaced in September) and messing with AFTRA’s election — another hysterical and doomed tactic from a clique of aging actors with only memories of greatness…a-a-a-a-n-d fade out.
Comment by Working SAG/AFTRA Actor — June 27, 2008 @ 7:13 pm
Well, there it is nay-sayers, in black and white. If you put any stock in this ladie’s info, and read this post with an open mind, you can’t POSSIBLY finish it without at least admitting these things:
1. SAG is NOT the problem. A little too much smack perhaps, in response to AFTRA’s actions? MAYBE. BUT - as I’ve been saying over and over and over - SAG is NOT the problem.
2. AFTRA IS, if not THE problem, then at least a BIG problem. THEY undercut SAG, knowing EXACTLY what they were doing and why: to weaken, or attempt to weaken, SAG, and to ingratiate themselves to their corporate masters, the AMPTP.
3.All the other unions bitching and moaning on these pages, as I said, again, and again - IF YOU WOULD SHOW SOME GUTS AND SOLIDARITY WITH SAG IN ITS FIGHT, (which is yours too, as Nikki says) and come together against the AMPTP, which couldn’t give a shit about ANY of you, except for how cheaply they can get you, SAG would not be in this position. DGA? WGA?(by the way - WHERE ARE you WGA?!) IATSE? WHERE ARE YOU ALL? if you would get behind SAG in it’s perfectly reasonable set of demands, all fair and long overdue,and entirely reasonable set of contracr demands, YOU’D benefit AND everybody works. But no - it’s “SAG is a bunch of idiots. They’re leadership are idiots. They’re all overpaid already (how RIDICULOUS is that?!), you better not strike because of MY worries, I don’t really CARE what you want, you’ll never GET what you want and you don’t deserve it, etc., etc., etc.”, - shame on you all “creative union brothers and sister,” Thanks for all the help guys!
4. The AMPTP, the “suits”? ARE SHAMLESS, GREEDY PIGS, who, whatever they say in public (not much) In PRIVATE? They wouldn’t piss on an IATSE or DGA or WGA or AFTRA or SAG member if they were on FIRE. They just want cheap labor, they want to get everybody cowed and in line and they have no remorse about the principal obstacle in the WGA, AND, this current SAG/AFTRA labor impasse - THEM.
5. Finally, as I’ve been saying, again and again, the AGENTS - what SWELL GUYS - You read it here actors - “Agents are no longer neutral parties. They are very privately backing the studios and networks against SAG.”
Wow. If Nikki is even half right, and I have a VERY strong feeling it’s a LOT closer to completely right? - this is a bad, bad, press day for everybody who has been talking uninformed, arrogant, smack about middle class actors and their right to a fair contract negotiated by their DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES AT SAG.
That means YOU - agents, AMPTP, bitchers and moaners, etc.
READ IT AND WEEP LADIES AND GENTLEMAN.
Comment by Mrs. Wakely — June 27, 2008 @ 7:33 pm
So AFTRA announces its ratification vote results on July 8th, a.k.a. the first day of the TCA Press Tour, and you want Hollywood back to work by July 21st, a.k.a. the LAST day of the TCA press tour. Look, I’m all for the actors doing whatever they feel like they need to do to get the best deal they can get…but, seriously, can we at least just let the freaking tour happen this time? A poor TV critic like me can only afford to pay so many airline change fees…
Comment by T.V. Critic — June 27, 2008 @ 7:35 pm
“Agents are no longer neutral parties. They are very privately backing the studios and networks against SAG.”
Isn’t that collusion? Aren’t agents licensed in CA?
Comment by peggy — June 27, 2008 @ 7:57 pm
wow no strike? that’s great news. if yr right that’s a rad scoop.
now when is an online company going to acquire a studio and really reboot hollywood.
microsoft? google? what up?
Comment by bob-e — June 27, 2008 @ 8:06 pm
Nikki says “Agents are no longer neutral parties. They are very privately backing the studios and networks against SAG.”
This makes no sense. Why would agents back the studios and networks? They make more money supporting the actor unions.
Comment by Working Actor — June 27, 2008 @ 8:37 pm
Brava, Nikki!
You have encapsulated the whole, long, strange trip magnificently. Indeed the town keeps getting distracted by the jangling keys off to the side when the issues — the real bread and butter here — are nowhere near. You are a true Cassandra. Ah, but will the powers-that-be (on both sides of the tussle) hear the Truth? Don’t bet your house on it (not that its current value would be worth the bet anyway).
Comment by Alan Katz — June 27, 2008 @ 8:47 pm
Thank you for a clear, neutral and pragmatic post on an incredibly important and emotional issue.
Comment by Elliott — June 27, 2008 @ 9:41 pm
Thank You!
Such sweet words.
Comment by Dave — June 27, 2008 @ 9:54 pm
I think you vote down the aftra contract and make the amptp deal with SAG, and let them know a crap contract is not going to fly.
Then you give the “Allen’s, Allan’s” the vote autho if they ask for it and let them go in the room with enough teeth to negotiate it’s members a good contract.
Then, you vote out this sorry excuse for leaders and merge the actors from Aftra with SAG and this will NOT happen again in three years time.
Thanks for the wrap up Nikki, excellent work and I applaud you for taking the focus off our badly behaved leaders of both unions, not the hard working members or committee members who donate their time, but the leaders who have let this descend into a civil war and made us a laughing stock at the expense of their members.
Their power plays only benefit themselves and I refuse to reward it, I am disgusted with Allan and Roberta.
I would sentence her to work her cable contracts for five years with no other income, and I would sentence him to work guest stars which are mostly “one day” now for a couple of years, without Marge’s paycheck to help.
They both have to go, but let’s push through this the best we can, and keep in mind they are inept but not the enemy, the AMPTP is pulling their strings.
Comment by sagmember — June 27, 2008 @ 10:25 pm
In terms of agents supporting the moguls, I think it is in fear of a strike. Remember that their business dried up almost 100% when the writers went on strike back in November. Besides they already have their own actors and actresses to support and can’t go adding new clients that “deserve” to break into the system.
Also, bob-e is correct in that an online giant needs to acquire a network/studio. For starters Microsoft should just stop thinking about Yahoo and acquire NBCUniversal for starters. That would help the stock better than any takeover of Yahoo ever would. Of course I would then see Google and Yahoo joining forces to take over Paramount and CBS, and then News Corp would fall to IAC which is InterActiveCorp, finally, Disney would fall to either Verizon or AT&T with the loser picking up Sony.
Comment by Jessy S. — June 27, 2008 @ 10:41 pm
Mrs. Wakely, you’ve done it again. You’ve read Ms. Finke’s measured analysis, and somehow managed to cherrypick her assertions to support your contentions. Tied with Jesse S for WORST BLOGGER EVER.
Comment by Scott — June 27, 2008 @ 11:04 pm
I never thought there would be a SAG strike. SAG needs to save face. If they strike, the town will hate them. If they take the same crappy deal as everyone else, they look like wimps. But don’t get me wrong…
SAG will take the deal.. eventually. But this way they can say “Hey, we aren’t striking, we are working hard for a better deal”. Late July-early August - “Oh well, guess this is the best we can do.” Crappy deal accepted.
I think all this pressure from celebs to take the AFTRA deal is actually orchestrated by SAG. They know they are ultimately going to lose, but need it to seem like they did everything possible.
Personally, I think the WGA should still be striking. The deals are not fair, not a single one..
Comment by victoria — June 27, 2008 @ 11:09 pm
Yes, I’m not clear on why the Agents would be backing the studios against SAG? Whatever the reasoning, that has to be an interesting side of the story in itself…
Comment by Sag Supporter — June 27, 2008 @ 11:43 pm
Who really butters the bread of the agents and managers these days?
Have big agencies successfully found their way into production?
A lot of managers get attached as producers on projects. Might this affect the perspective of at least some of them?
It does seem like the ground is shifting, and I have more questions than answers about this.
Comment by mheister — June 27, 2008 @ 11:56 pm
bravo Nikki. though i may not always agree with everything you say i applaud you for saying it!
now if only SAG and the rest of creative hollywood had your balls.
Comment by keven with an "e" — June 28, 2008 @ 1:34 am
mheister, I think that you bring up a very good point here about agencies and managers moving into the production side. I do not think it is a matter of them necessarily wanting to be producers, but I think there was/is a paradigm shift in the hollywood marketplace and the WGA strike sped up that shift. Agents’ and mangers’ clients are no longer getting the huge paydays (or even midlevel ones) they once were and they now have to look elsewhere to make up the profit loss, and, that place is the production side. What do you do when studios and even Indies aren’t paying your client their large salaries anymore? You go out and take ownership of the product and look to make up the ground on the backend and total profit.
Their has definitely been a difference in the way managers (at least in our firm) are looking at the material that is available and the actors themselves see it as well. Really respected actors that were making $250,000-$500,000 per picture are now fighting for schedule F and they are lucky to get it. As the private equity that swelled the marketplace 5 years ago slowly comes out and the studios are less focused on putting out a large slate and more focused on making a couple of big event tentpoles, everyone is squeezed. Their are only a handful of actors that can drive movie success right now and I think we are really shifting to a time, at least in film, where if managers, agents, actors, writers and directors really want to command pay checks, the producers want them to take some sort of risk to see their reward. A good manager right now can no longer sit back waiting for roles to come to their acting clients, but instead have to be producers and packagers.
I haven’t seen that managers or agents are necessarily on anyone’s side, but, instead they are trying to shift with the marketplace, which is producer driven, so they don’t go under. The next year or so will really start to unravel the way actors, managers and agents make money for the coming cycle in Hollywood. It is no longer enough for an agent or manager to just be able to recognize good material, but they know how to be much more business savvy than ever before. We will see who survives.
Comment by bewildered — June 28, 2008 @ 6:32 am
Victoria is right on. SAG needs to save face. And for those making comments on here who suffer from logorrhea: make your point and stop typing. The least effective way to win an argument/make a point is to write/talk too much.
Comment by Andy — June 28, 2008 @ 6:50 am
Nikki,
I give up. You are clearly on the Membership First mailing list. They are largely a pitiful group of has-beens or never-weres who’s only connection with the biz is being on the SAG board. The AFTRA negotiating committee were all working actors. They got a good deal, and Hollywood First is crying because they don’t get to strut anymore. Mem.Fir. has gone a long way toward destroying my union. The way to save it is for Los Angeles actors to wake up this September and throw the bums out. Until that happens, this group of pouting bone heads and their new warrior will continue down the road to extinction.
Another working actor
Comment by Disappointed — June 28, 2008 @ 8:16 am
Great! No Strike! But what about The Lockout???
Comment by Michael F. Workman — June 28, 2008 @ 8:52 am
Part of your argument is fundamentally flawed. You seem to assume that “SAG” and “AFTRA” exist outside the realm of their membership. The members ARE the unions. If an overwhelming majority of AFTRA members vote in favor of ratification, they will have made the determination that the deal is not “lousy.” Only the members can decide that. Not columnists. Not the elitist Hollywood SAG leadership.
Let’s examine the following statement: “the guild’s leadership understands there’s no urgency within the membership at this time for such an extreme call. Which is why there’s no impetus atop the guild to even consider holding a strike authorization vote.”
If the AFTRA agreement passes, many of the members of both unions will have spoken. Despite the SAG Hollywood campaign against the agreement and the extraordinary expenditure of the guild funds, the membership will be sending a clear message: “we, the members, are not behind the SAG leadership.”
You continue: “if one [an authorization] were held and no authorization were given, SAG would suffer a psychological blow from which it probably couldn’t recover this contract cycle.” In other words, if the elites held a strike authorization vote and the plebian membership were to vote it down, it would make it difficult for the elites to continue on their current self-destructive path. Assuming that the MEMBERS are the union (to demonstrate the cloudy logic behind your statement), “if SAG held a vote and SAG voted it down, SAG would suffer a psychological blow.”
Would SAG then be “scapegoating” itself?
I call the current leadership elitists because they assume that they know better than the members who elected them. They won’t call for a strike authorization, because it will fail. They know it, and that is why there “is no impetus at this time” to risk allowing the members to have a voice in how their union is run.
The fight is not between AFTRA and SAG. The fight is between the SAG Hollywood leadership and the vast majority of SAG’s members.
You, Nikki, have bought right into it.
Comment by Pat Skipper — June 28, 2008 @ 9:48 am
History is always forgotten… what a shame. We need to keep in mind what the “current” leaderhip has brought us. By current I don’t mean Alan Rosenberg, but the majority of the Hollywood Board who has been the driving factor in many issues for over 10 years and have acheived the following:
1) Brought us the Commercial strike which gained us NOTHING over the pre-strike contact except for a clause to study residuals for cable that never came to fruition. And of course a major loss of commercial income for SAG actors that STILL has not come back.
2) Defeated the first merger attempt because they didn’t want to be tainted by AFTRA’s “non-actors”. This was in the late 90’s when we all KNEW digital was coming and there would be jurisdictional battles.
3) Alienating the agents so we don’t have a franchise agreement and are left with GSA’s. I don’t see the agents coming back ever and actors are worse off now. You want to see animosity, ask an agency about SAG!
4) Defeated consolidation (i.e. merger) AGAIN, despite the fact that digital was even more prevelant and we all knew would lead to jursidictional battles.
5) Now they expect us to listen to them AGAIN and let them minimize AFTRA by a “forced takeover” of their contract ratification process.
Niki, if there was NO history here, I may agree with what you have written. However, you cannot deny that this history of anti-AFTRA by SAG and the previous poor decision making of the board in power have succeeded in making actors lives WORSE than they were.
If we had just consolidated, we would be UNITED against the AMPTP and be in the drivers seat rather than a passenger on this wacky rollercoaster. AFTRA membership voted to merge. The current SAG leadership actively rallied AGAINST it.
And how do I know that the same people are involved? First, just look at the SAG board and how many are “Membership First/Performers Alliance” members. Then look at your post from
http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/will-sag-and-aftra-debate-one-another/
Who exactly was Alan Rosenberg suggesting “debate” AFTRA? David Jolliffe who was a powerful force in ALL the above mentioned debacles.
SAG is on the WRONG PATH and it’s killing many actors careers. It’s time to look at their track record of bad choices and wise up.
Comment by Been There — June 28, 2008 @ 10:00 am
Scott - you tell me where I cherry pick!
1.”In conclusion, the quicker that Hollywood realizes that SAG is not the obstacle here, the quicker this town will get back to work.”
2.”Hollywood’s top agents are no longer neutral parties. Unwilling to absorb another round of commission losses and bridge loans, they are very privately backing the studios and networks against SAG. “If I could break the union, I would,” one tenpercentery topper tells me.”
3.”AFTRA also added insult to injury by starting this terrible bloodsport of pitting Big Actor vs Big Actor.”
4.”In fact, I can definitely tell you that SAG has “never suggested that a strike was an objective or essential,”
5.”AFTRA president Roberta Reardon came up with a pitiful excuse to justify what was clearly a predetermined decision not to bargain alongside SAG. Instead, AFTRA truly made a deal with the devil in order to do the AMPTP’s bidding. AFTRA relentlessly villified the bigger actors guild’s current leadership which continues even now.”
6. “No one knows better than the writers what torture dealing with the AMPTP really is. So it’s important as well to note that whatever better New Media terms negotiated by SAG leadership will be enjoyed by both the WGA and DGA.”
These are… what’s the word, Scott… oh, yeah - QUOTES.
Please. “Worst blogger ever?” You are clearly in a headlock. You can cry uncle, or, it only gets worse. Time to own up to the fact that you are wrong. You wanna object? Take it up with Ms. Finke my friend. I’m just reading the news…
Comment by Mrs. Wakely — June 28, 2008 @ 10:28 am
Nikki:
I don’t know how you do it. Great article regarding the negotiations… as always. I sat on two theatrical negotiating teams and two of the commercial teams back when I was on the SAG Board. It is a very difficult road, for those who care deeply about this industry. Something many people don’t know, is that the elected SAG and AFTRA members who sit on the boards do NOT get paid for their hundreds and often thousands of hours of sevice to the unions and industry at large. That includes the SAG and AFTRA Presidents. They are operating out of love and commitment.
Contrary to what many think, it’s not always the best deal for one side or the other that makes for a good negotiation… it’s the FAIREST DEAL to both sides under the particular circumstances at the time. That’s NOT the jingoistic kind of thinking that makes the radicals of both sides of the table happy, but it’s true.
Another interesting event in the course of negotiating is that when a deal does become evident, the head negotiators of one side begin to sell the needs of the other side to their side and vice versa… Both sides should always have something about the deal that they reasonably don’t like… that’s what negotiation and compromise are all about. If one side feels overly screwed, the way SAG has felt over the past few years, that justifiably makes for a very contentious time. It helps to have CLEAR CUT ISSUES to rally a strike around, and the understanding that a strike often hurts in ways that are not always immediately evident. For management and labor. The last commercial strike is a good example… No one can deny that SAG actors working now on national and cable spots have a better deal than they did before the last brutal strike, but so do all of the non-union actors working what used to be spots shot under SAG’s jurisdiction that have been lost in the branches and even in LA. Those areas now have very good non union pools that grew during that strike. At an early point in my career, I worked out of the Florida area. There was no way you could make a living as a non union actor back then… Now, when I coach and consult with new actors, I tell them to think very carefully before joining the unions. They may have to give up their volume of work for quality of pay. One casting director out here (in LA) who I did six national SAG campaigns for has said that several of her major clients went non-union in their casting and NEVER came back.
But, those are the risks we take with a strike action. If we go out over this theatrical negotiation, we MUST be very careful to align MAXIMUM support from ALL ACTORS, union and non, AFTRA and SAG, in order for us to win in a timely enough manor that we can recoup what will be lost. I remember in the movie “HOFFA,” written by David Mamet… It’s about “What has been lost… and what has been gained.”
I am an Actor, it’s all I’ve ever been! I have also written and produced and I love this business!
Go Forward with Passion and Continue the good work.
Raymond Forchion
Comment by Raymond Forchion — June 28, 2008 @ 10:49 am
Nice, well researched article.
In my opinion, what Hollywood needs right now is a little bit of realism. Yes realism in Hollywood is a oxymoron, I know. Without the DGA and WGA, SAG is going to have a hard time getting a better deal. With everything the town has been through this year now is not the time for this battle. SAG is not going to get a deal that is significantly better than the other unions, there just not. The only way you really improve your bargaining power is by doing it together. That can’t been done now. So SAG should settle, the town should go back to work, and the unions should bond together so a proper fight can take place when the next contract expires.
Comment by dgamember — June 28, 2008 @ 10:50 am
Pat Skipper
Obviously an AFTRA supporter, I doubt Nikki has “bought into” anything. She seems, to me anyway, to be delivering the news. AFTRA’s merger efforts were voted down twice. The former SAG leadership (some of it anyway) and AFTRA lost. Sorry. It’s called democracy. You can continue to fight that battle, or you can move on. SAG members want a more consolidated union, not less. They want to rep ACTORS (as in Screen ACTORS Guild), not DJ’s, not newsreaders, etc., etc. AFTRA’s longstanding weakness as a union is not going to be solved by trying year after year to piggyback on SAG and poach their jurisdiction. My understanding is their current membership generally thinks they do a lousy job. This Nikki Finke post is definitely an anti-AFTRA post, but it’s not at all surprising to me. As a longtime member of both unions, I have worked some AFTRA contracts, and they are deeply inferior. The Membership First people, it seems to me, are a group fed up with inept leadership, acquiescent Presidents of SAG perfectly happy to merge with AFTRA and play nice with the suits, and, as you can see, they were voted out by the membership. The current leadership understands the law of the jungle, if you will: strength respects strength. The AMPTP, according to this post, the agents who parasite 10% of actors income, they all hate SAG, because they’d rather not deal with strong leadership that says: here’s a line in the sand. We won’t merge. We won’t agree to contracts with agents that put our membership at a disadvantage, we won’t go along with precedents of other unions when it doesn’t serve the particular needs of SAG actors, and, if necessary, we will shut the town down. But, ONLY if necessary. And what do they want in return? Respect. A fair deal for SAG actors. That’s all. Why is everybody so up in arms about that?
Comment by Tomtom — June 28, 2008 @ 11:17 am
Wakely-Wake up!
You get paid what you are worth no matter what the union says. If you are a relevant artist you will be paid as such. You will negotiate over scale deals with better than minimum residuals. If you get paid scale then you are worth scale or maybe even less.
There is no evidence to the contrary anywhere in any business in the world.
Your ego just can’t come to terms with this simple fact.
SAG will get what everyone else got. This is another simple fact. Get over it! If you want more money than become a more sought after artist.
Imagine a leaner meaner labor union with contract minimums that nobody settles for. Instead everyone is a sought after, working all the time artists demanding over scale and getting it.
Instead we have labor unions carrying a mostly unemployed group of dilettantes run by dysfunctional unqualified has beens.
It’s artistic Darwinism and you can’t evolve.
Comment by notgoingtoTip — June 28, 2008 @ 12:15 pm
TomTom, to dispel any further distortions, I have never run for union office, am not running now, will probably never run and have never publicly supported any candidate. So, I’ve never lost anything and I’ve got nothing to “get over.”
I voted for Alan Rosenberg and am disenchanted with lack of strategic thinking exhibited by the current leadership.
AFTRA negotiated a contract. SAG has nothing to show for 39 days in the room. So, who is doing a “lousy” job?
As for democracy, that’s what I’m asking for. When the AFTRA agreement passes, the majority will have spoken. That’s democracy.
As for SAG, I say let’s have a strike referendum. Let the membership speak. That’s democracy.
They’re afraid of their own membership at this point, so they won’t. And I reckon they’ll be plenty of chances for democracy come August.
We don’t disagree, you and I, on what we’d like to get from these negotiations. We disagree on what has transpired. SAG has screwed the pooch. That’s my opinion.
Finally, I think Nikki is perpetuating a myth in this column. It’s not a SAG-AFTRA controversy. A huge chunk of the membership isn’t behind the SAG leadership due to their tactics. It doesn’t have much to do with AFTRA, in my opinion.
Finally, it’s time that the leadership owned some of their failure. It’s never their fault, you see. It’s DGA or WGA or the agents or AFTRA.
It can’t possibly be that they don’t know how to build a consensus. It can’t be that their tactics have alienated the town and many of their members.
Tom, if you’ve figured out a way to have a career with a ten-percent-er I’d sure like to hear it. From my experience, they work pretty hard for the dough.
Not afraid to sign my real name,
Pat Skipper
Comment by Pat Skipper — June 28, 2008 @ 1:11 pm
Interesting Op/Ed piece Nikki. As usual lots of Op with The Ed. Meanwhile over at Variety they are reporting the SAG and AMPTP are meeting today for the first Saturday in a month since they begged AFTRA for more time because they were sooo close to a deal. No winners in this travesty of so called Labor negotiations. When the dust settles and we are all crazy busy with catch-up production I hope there will be lessons learned for future contract talks but I doubt it. Wish Wasserman was still with us.
Comment by Transpo — June 28, 2008 @ 1:51 pm
I have been telling people for weeks that the SAG leadership doesn’t really want to strike. They just want to have their leverage back that AFTRA stole from them.
The only way for SAG to accept what the WGA, DGA and AFTRA’s non-deal is for the member of AFTRA to vote NO on the new contract. That will force SAG and the AMPTP to start serious negotiations and gain a few added benefits over the AFTRA non-deal, but not by much. It will be a face saving measure that will put this town back to work. No strike. AFTRA will get back in pocket and take the deal that SAG wins for them.
Now, if AFTRA members vote YES on the non-deal, then all hell may break out because SAG will be left with egg on their faces and the studios will lock all actors out.
That will insult every actor who 80%actuallyly are unemployed most of the year - SAG will get the ratification to strike from its members because they will be left with no other choice.
If the studios don’t lock SAG actors out, SAG will be forced to take AFTRA’s deal but this will bleed into September - when… guess what people, SAG members will get to vote in new leadership.
That could be what the AMPTP is hoping for to get some of SAG’s leadership thrown out. Then close the deal that would be less than what AFTRA was offered in the first place.
.There is only one way out of this mess. If the AMPTP who holds all the cards can get the SAG leadership to agree upon a new contract before the July 8th AFTRA vote deadline then SAG will be heroes and AFTRA will take what the AMPTP and SAG negotiated. The SAG gains will not be that different from what the WGA. DGA etc. got but everybody saves face.
This town goes back to work.
Re: Agents working for the AMPTP - like duh - we all work for someone - who do you think cuts the check? Not Lisa Nicole Carson(Allie McBeal), the last time an agency waited for a b-level actor to pay them directly out of their check book was in arbitration.
AFTRA,SAG & WGA member
Comment by Chris Jackson — June 28, 2008 @ 2:14 pm
PatSkipper:
I guess you didn’t read Nikki’s post as carefully as you should when you said SAG has been 39 days in the room and what do they have to show for it:
“SAG national executive director Doug Allen recently broke his media blackout to make clear that it’s not SAG who has been stalling. For instance, few people know that, when talks were resumed between the two sides after the May hiatus, the AMPTP refused to even offer the big actors guild either the WGA deal or the AFTRA deal. Instead, the Big Media cartel forced SAG to negotiate up from ground zero for weeks on end so that only as of today is the AFTRA deal even on the table.”
Comment by Frances Fisher — June 28, 2008 @ 4:56 pm
“Instead there are years and years of resentment to contend with — as well as an infamously unmoveable AMPTP force, soon-to-retire Nick Counter, who craftily and contemptuously makes each guild essentially negotiate with itself by forcing the other side to drop issue after issue without any reciprocity.”
Huh? You mean the Verrone/Young/et al practice of dropping the demand for an increased residual on home video wasn’t part of their “strategy” as Verrone claimed? [sarcasm]
I would point out that the real problem with negotiations is that the guilds have their peers direct negotiations instead of experienced labor negotiators. For example, David Young was not an experienced negotiatior.
Everyone should know that when you take ANYTHING off the table, it stays off. The reason is that its withdrawl is an acknowledgment that its value is ZERO.
AMPTP guessed that the home video residual wasn’t important to the WGA Negotiating Committee. It guessed right when they withdrew it for absolutely nothing. Since you can’t suddenly reverse course and pretend that it suddenly does have a lot of value, the NegCom tried to portray Reality and Animation as strike issues. AMPTP knew that was B.S., and all it resulted in was confusing some of the prominent WGA members.
One of the lasting outcomes of the 2007/8 WGA strike is that its home video residual is locked in place - FOREVER. It was a major failure, because a significant portion of the pre-strike talking points was the pennies that the writers get on each DVD. News commentators would repeat it in the small amount of new coverage that the strike received nationally (i.e., small over the course of the strike as opposed to the several mentions at the start and finish). Any public failure is a major failure.
Guilds will keep on making the same shitty deals for the rank and file until they spend some money on people who know what the hell they’re doing.
It’s still not clear what SAG wants (that it can’t get in AFTRA’s contract) that would be worth striking for. For example, one of the issues that keeps coming up is mileage. No one is going to believe that an increased mileage rate is a strike issue. It’s the WGA equivalent of Reality or Animation.
Strike or not, AMPTP is not giving more than it has already given to the other guilds in shared interest areas.
Comment by Harold — June 28, 2008 @ 5:58 pm
Well according to Francis the other shoe dropped.
It seems to me with the better wages that SAG gets this should go a long way to saving the “middle class actors”
Bravo
Comment by just a thought — June 28, 2008 @ 7:42 pm
notgoingtotip
You seem to be arguing the same point ad nauseum. “What you’re worth?” and my “ego” have nothing to do with it. I’m arguing for a fair contract for the middle-class actor and you are arguing for… what, exactly? You are obviously visciously anti-actor, claiming time and again that, “if you want more money become a more sought after artist.” Van Gough died a pauper “notgoingtotip” (how appropriate), and, I don’t need to go into a historical perspective of artists not getting their “due” from the commercial climate they lived through. Art and Commerce are, and always have been, two entirely separate things. Are you a Republican, by any chance? Or a frustrated failure of some kind? One way or the other, you’re a malcontent who wants to sound off in favor of… what? I can’t figure it out. Producers? What is your beef? “Artistic Darwinism.” Well, how absolutely not relevant. We’re talking about a UNION LABOR ACTION. That’s where EVERYBODY gets better, more fair shake? Please stop posting.
Comment by Mrs. Wakely — June 28, 2008 @ 8:24 pm
Pat Skipper:
What is your goal here? to get a fair contract for the middle-class actor? Or, to, for some personal reason, see AFTRA come out on top in this struggle? You are, in case you haven’t noticed, essentially saying to Ms. Finke “you are entirely wrong. SAG is to blame, AFTRA is doing the right thing. The current SAG leadership and negotiators are dead wrong.” But, of course, none of that corresponds with Ms. Finke’s reporting. So, why don’t you take it up with her? Because, if her reporting is accurate, you are completely misinformed.
Comment by Tomtom — June 28, 2008 @ 8:25 pm
Dear Fellow Members of S.A.G. and AFTRA:
My conscience is killing me, and I can’t stay silent any longer. I can tell youfrom personal experience that it is in the best interest of all actors to Vote No on the AFTRA Exhibit A deal. Voting No is the only way to ensure that S.A.G.gets a better deal at the bargaining table and the best way for AFTRA to improve its own contract terms.
Last year, during the S.A.G/AFTRA Basic Cable conflicts, members of my show,KYLE XY, and I drafted an open letter that regrettably we never released. In it we complained about AFTRA’s Basic Cable contracts, and as importantly, detailed our experiences with AFTRA. The history of this experience is still relevantand bears repeating. So, bear with me while I quote from that letter:
“We never agreed to the contract terms that AFTRA negotiated after we had signed ourdeals; in fact,we didn’t even know the show would be covered by AFTRA. When our own union pieces together a contract using the worst parts of the standard cable series contracts from both SAG and AFTRA to make one document that most benefits producers, it is injuring its own members. Something is really wrong.
We suffered long workdays without overtime pay, forced calls without compensation for having very little turn around time to get to work the next day, and worked through scheduled lunch breaks with no penalties whatsoever.
This is a breach of its responsibility to protect its members. But this is only part of the reason for this letter.”
KYLE XY is shot in Canada, and produced for The ABC Family Channel. When it began airing in the summer of 2006, our ratings numbers were substantial enough for the network to be proud of them. ABC then decided to promote their cable affiliate by running Kyle during ABC primetime, Friday nights at 9pm. We wereall excited at the news. Wow, we now have two airings a week in prime time, on two networks. But we began hearing that there is a provision in our contract that allows a network to run a show a number of times for promotion.
Well, ok, so we don?t make residuals after all, but we’ll run a few times on network, and we’ll get lots of attention that will be good for everyone. Then, we found outthat the ratings numbers on ABC were not only good enough to stay on the network, but we actually began winning our time slot. ABC decided to air theentire season. Great,we thought. We’ll surely take home some residual checks now. We have to, right? Surely they can?t run all ten episodes as promotion and thereby tally up all that ad revenue with no compensation to us, right? Wrong.
They can because AFTRA gave them the right to.
We asked an entertainment lawyer how this could be, and on our behalf he began calling AFTRA for some clarification and to get a look at the contract that none of us had seen. There were numerous unreturned calls and emails to the contracts department. We weren’t sure what to do. Soon enough, we were into shooting season two. Summer of 2007 saw season two airing once again on both networks inexactly the same way but this time, it lasted only through the first four episodes, then, ABC decided to replace us with a different ABC Family show called Greek during that same ABC time slot.
In total Kyle XY ran a total of fourteen times on ABC without paying a single dollar in residuals of any kind. And because of the free exhibition days? clauses in the contract, we apparently may never receive any residuals for its runs on cable.
We feel that AFTRA as a union has fiduciary responsibilities to look after, protect, and fight for our rights as members. In our case it has failed miserably to do that. It is responsible for taking money directly out of our pockets. After all, it was not the producers or the network of our show that
crossed out provisions in our contracts. It was our own union. Furthermore, no one from AFTRA at any time contacted any of the cast to get our permission to make these changes (even though they claim otherwise).
We have learned the hard way that you certainly can’t count on AFTRA to protect you. On the contrary, for whatever reason, our union is clearly out to sabotage all the hard work that SAG has done over the years. We are clearly the losers. And we are not happy.”
For a long time last year we got no satisfaction from AFTRA. They failed to respond to our phone calls or emails, and even to the phone calls and emails of our attorneys. We talked to fellow actors and they encouraged us to make public our complaints. We never did, but we had to threaten AFTRA with the notion that we would go public before we finally got a meeting.
Early this year, members of the cast of KYLE XY met with AFTRA officials on two occasions to air our complaints. AFTRA never brought a copy of the contract to any of those meetings, although our attorneys finally got one. Since our union contract was up for renegotiation, some thought it would be smartest to take the show S.A.G.,but AFTRA insisted they could get us equal terms and conditions. They said we could be part of the negotiation. Oh, AFTRA renegotiated the contract, but we weren’t a part of it. They called us after the fact to say it was done. We still haven?t seen a copy of that contract, and I’ve been told not to expect residuals until overscale payment caps are reached, but AFTRA insists they did a bang up job on the renegotiation. Actors deserve better.
They also claimed they were filing grievances for workplace violations,but six months later we have not heard word one from AFTRA about these, nor received a penny in penalty payments.
I can tell you, I am still disappointed in AFTRA?s handling of our complaints. I am disappointed in how it responds to actors? issues and needs. I do not feel it properly or honestly represents actors at the bargaining table. I feel it purposely keeps actors confused about the process of contract negotiations and the results,and I am deeply suspicious that its recent behavior is all about serving the institution, and not actors, its largest constituency.
It has definitely let me down. I would prefer the Screen Actors Guild have a decent shot at improving wages and working conditions for actors, and I and a lot of other actors don’t believe that’s possible unless we VOTE NOon the AFTRA Exhibit A contract.
Thank you.
Bruce Thomas
Comment by Dan300 — June 28, 2008 @ 8:35 pm
Mrs Wakely-
Art and commerce have SOMETIMES been two entirely different things. I hate to break this to you so late in your career, but this is SHOWBUSINESS, not showART, not showUNION, not showSTARS-SAG-SAYS- SHARE-YOUR-MONEY with wakely. It’s business Wakely and the sooner everyone realizes it the sooner we can negotiate a business labor contract. Its not an art contract. It’s not about fighting for Van Gough. We make a product and sell it. If in the process you are smart enough and derive the pleasure of transcending product into message, that transcends into emotion, that evokes a resonance and that becomes art, well then we applaud you. For now get your pubescent hormonal instincts for altruistic quixotic revenge off the table so the business of SHOWBUSINESS can continue.
Comment by NotgoingtoTip — June 28, 2008 @ 10:46 pm
OK now for some history. 15 20 years ago when HBO wanted to do their own series. The IA signed the HBO contract which is 25% less than the prevailing regular IA agreement. The WGA and DGA fell in tow. SAG on the other hand felt they where better and wouldn’t agree. Therefor AFTRA.
there’s no one to blame other than arrogant SAG leadership all the way down the line. Years past and whatnot.
I personally think it’s a drag that stuff that starts on cable moves to network with no compensation for those who worked it. We work as hard on those cable thing as anything else, but a free ride is a free ride.
My thought is forget the internet for now and focus on how and where today the content get delivered.
I spent this past week working around verison trucks wiring fiber optics. those guys are working 24′7 guess who is making bank
Comment by just a thought — June 28, 2008 @ 10:46 pm
Tomtom,
You said “They want to rep ACTORS (as in Screen ACTORS Guild), not DJ’s, not newsreaders, etc., etc. AFTRA’s longstanding weakness as a union is not going to be solved by trying year after year to piggyback on SAG and poach their jurisdiction. ”
Let’s just do the math, shall we?
SAG membership 120,000
AFTRA Membership 70,000
Dual card holders 44,000
Let’s subtract the 44,000 dual card holders from the 70,000 and we end up with 26,000 AFTRA only members.
Now let’s add that 26,000 to the 120,000 for total membership of 146,000.
SO the WORST case scenario is that 26,000 out of the total 146,000 are NOT current SAG members. That’s approximately 18% (I rounded up).
Now, out of that 26,000 there are certainly SOME who are actors who have not yet qualified for SAG. Let’s say 1/3? That leaves approximately 17,334 members of the combined union that are NOT actors. That makes just under 12% of the total membership NOT Actors.
Thus any combination of members would equate to 82% CURRENT SAG MEMBERS and 88% ACTORS (could be more or less depending upon the makeup of the 26,000 non SAG AFTRA members).
The jurisdicational issues surrounding AFTRA have been around for 70 YEARS. In 1980, both unions had the foresight to see that there was going to be jurisdictional problems and create Phase 1 (First phase to MEGER) in 1980. We have negotiated Primetime contracts under that until this year.
With the digital age, the lines are now and forever blurred. And the current leadership (see my previous post) shot down merger TWICE.
There is no going back to the status quo. This issue is here and must be addressed. The jurisdictional battles have just begun. Regardless of what occurs, the AMPTP will do more contracts with AFTRA even with identical terms.
We must look to the FUTURE, like the leaders did in 1980 when they implemented Phase 1. We MUST unite together or we will all certainly suffer as a result.
Comment by Been There — June 28, 2008 @ 11:11 pm
They just want to have their leverage back that AFTRA stole from them.
What leverage? SAG went to the table first. They failed to get their deal then despite Allen/Alan’s assertion that they were so close.
This entire attempt to conflate AFTRA’s negotiations with SAG’s is annoying. All this time SAG execs should have been ramping up their fight against the AMPTP instead of AFTRA. How does this make SAG achieve a better contract?
President after President, from Gilbert to Hessinger and now Rosenberg, the SAG execs talk a mean talk, but when it comes down to action they bumble around like a bunch of Keystone Cops.
I wish the execs and their board would worry more about SAG and their negotiations and stop fighting it out in the trades with AFTRA with expensive page ads that does nothing for the negotiating process.
Comment by realunionist — June 29, 2008 @ 4:02 am
When I read the assertions attributed to Bruce Thomas, I wanted to know whether AFTRA had acted appropriately. I contacted several AFTRA execs who worked on the Kyle XY contract (and I wasn’t alone in contacting them).
Early this morning, one of them sent me the following. As you’ll see, as usual, the truth turns out to be far different from the Me.First claims.
The critical line is at the bottom:
Regarding the ABC re-airings, the performers are all substantially overscale. The crediting of their overscale compensation is the real reason as to why they have not received residuals for the ABC re-plays.
———–
The original Kyle XY Contract was negotiated prior to the performer’s signing their original deals. That contract was reflective of the budget of the show at that time, and the importance of encouraging work opportunities for actors. The terms were based on the then WB/UPN Supplement given the budget at that time.
With respect to the airings on ABC network, there were in fact residuals called for in the contract and there was absolutely no agreement by AFTRA that such airings were promotional. The cast was advised of this at a meeting (see below).
As Jennifer noted, because the performers were significantly over scale, these residuals were pre-paid or credited. Further, the number of airings on ABC network suggested by Mr. Thomas’ (Bruce, not Bill) letter far exceeds the information we have.
If there are more ABC Network airings than previously reported, that will be investigated again.
The original contract was set to expire on June 30th. In early/mid-January, AFTRA alerted the company that this contract would have to be renegotiated, and that AFTRA would demand an increase in terms for the actors. We advised the company to expect that we would be speaking to the cast first, and then getting back to the company with official proposals. This was before I was aware of any concerns on the part of the cast members.
In fact, we subsequently met with the cast members (and some of their agents) to update them on the outstanding grievances, to advise them that the contract was up for renegotiation, and to get their concerns and desires for renegotiating the contract. As I recall, anyone who did not get a copy of the original contract at that meeting was sent a copy shortly thereafter by e-mail.
The members’ concerns as outlined in this meeting were raised with the company, and the priorities as defined by the members were in fact ultimately agreed to by the employer. This was reported to the cast members in a second meeting, where the terms of the proposed new agreement were reviewed with them (and their agents) in detail for their approval first, before anything was confirmed and agreed to with management.
Because the members were leaving to resume work in Vancouver, staff waited for the members to take time to consult with each other. We heard back via e-mail from the members that they were satisfied with, and agreed to, the terms of the re-negotiated contract.
Specifically, the new contract, which is effective July 1st, will require Exhibit A terms with a per-run Sanchez residual formula, plus no pre-payment/crediting if there are any free TV network re-runs in the future.
I do agree with Mr. Thomas’ observation that the drafting of the new contract has taken longer than it normally should. We fully expected to have the drafting completed and sent to the members by this month.
Regrettably, for the past month in particular, due to the attacks on AFTRA and the dis-information campaign that has been leveled against the new Exhibit A contract, the AFTRA staff has been unfortunately diverted from doing its normal business on behalf of members, to deal with correcting and responding to the misinformation and dis-information that has generated confusion and anxiety among AFTRA members.
As you can see, this unprecedented and unfortunate situation has not only wasted SAG members’ resources, but also wasted AFTRA members’ resources that would be much better spent serving the immediate needs, concerns and contractual rights of working members.
We are in the process of finalizing the drafting of the new agreement, and expect that it will be in the hands of the cast members within the next two weeks.
–
Bill Thomas e-mail attached to the above:
—
Subject: RE: KYLE XY Actor Says “You Can Keep Your AFTRA Contract.”
This is the report from Jennifer:
‘There are many inaccuracies and untruths in this email. First of all, we distributed copies of the Kyle XY agreement to the members of the cast.
On turnaround, I have spoken to the manager and agent of member(s) this year experiencing the long days and forced calls. I alerted Kim and Joan and they began discussions with ABC Labor Relations to address the problem. There is a claim before arbitration as to whether or not the company can credit turnaround penalties, which was an issue for AFTRA and the cast members.
Regarding the performer(s) who called most recently regarding the long hours, I requested specific dates and times since this would strengthen our position with the company. He/she/they never got back to me. We are still pursuing the claim with ABC, but I need more specifics. Our review of the Kyle XY time records has not shown a lot of turnaround.
Regarding the ABC re-airings, the performers are all substantially overscale. The crediting of their overscale compensation is the real reason as to why they have not received residuals for the ABC re-plays.
As for the unreturned calls, that is just not true. I have returned all of the Kyle XY cast calls that have come to me.’
Thanks.
Bill
William F. Thomas
Executive Director
AFTRA Los Angeles
5757 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90036
Comment by Hello, Dan300 — June 29, 2008 @ 5:23 am
Been There -
You do make an interesting point.
If broadcasters, DJ’s, musicians, singers, and other AFTRA specialties could get the same kind of treatment as specialists in SAG (SAG does have some contracts for specialties where voting is limited to affected members, like dancers), why not simply fold those 26,000 AFTRA-only cardholders and their specialties, along with all the acting and other television contracts, into SAG???
Rather than merging with AFTRA, AFTRA’s contracts, health & pension, and other union functions would be subsumed into SAG. SAG is certainly ready on day one to manage and improve upon the Shedule A, cable, and network code contracts. There might be a bit more of a learning curve with broadcasters, but I see nothing insurmountable here. Also, if at the end of the day the moguls are negotiating with the Screen Actors’ Guild, SAG’s going to be able to bring significant improvements to a range of contracts. Put into business terms, folding AFTRA into SAG would be something more akin to an acquisition than a merger.
The win for AFTRA-only members here is that not only is SAG the powerful and prestigious union, but they would receive the benefits of being with a creative guild that looks out for its members first instead of the institution. They would find this a refreshing change.
AFTRA leadership can vote tomorrow to submit a dissolution referendum to its membership and turn the keys over to SAG. As James Cromwell wrote at the end of his response to a post on my blog, “One Union, Now!”
Comment by mheister — June 29, 2008 @ 8:52 am
oh, the pain, the sheer agony of being wrong. the statistics, the rants, the denial, the inability to see reality as it stands before you. that’s what comes to mind when I read the bitterness of the pro-aftra, pro-suit malcontents in response to the original post by nikki. sag doesn’t want aftra, doesn’t like aftra. aftra is incompetent. the suits are liars and thieves. the top agents are colluding with the suits and would (also) love to break the union. the merger was voted down twice. sag wants to be a union for actors, not a union for dj’s and anchormen, and voice over people (bless them all). I reiterate:
1.”In conclusion, the quicker that Hollywood realizes that SAG is not the obstacle here, the quicker this town will get back to work.”
2.”Hollywood’s top agents are no longer neutral parties. Unwilling to absorb another round of commission losses and bridge loans, they are very privately backing the studios and networks against SAG. “If I could break the union, I would,” one tenpercentery topper tells me.”
3.”AFTRA also added insult to injury by starting this terrible bloodsport of pitting Big Actor vs Big Actor.”
4.”In fact, I can definitely tell you that SAG has “never suggested that a strike was an objective or essential,”
5.”AFTRA president Roberta Reardon came up with a pitiful excuse to justify what was clearly a predetermined decision not to bargain alongside SAG. Instead, AFTRA truly made a deal with the devil in order to do the AMPTP’s bidding. AFTRA relentlessly villified the bigger actors guild’s current leadership which continues even now.”
6. “No one knows better than the writers what torture dealing with the AMPTP really is. So it’s important as well to note that whatever better New Media terms negotiated by SAG leadership will be enjoyed by both the WGA and DGA.”
sorry fellas…
Comment by Mrs. Wakely — June 29, 2008 @ 9:13 am
Frances, lovely to hear from you. I read Nikki’s statement and now I’ve re-read it, and I stand by my observation that SAG has accomplished nothing in 40 days. I would ask you to show me one instance in the history of organized labor where management didn’t force labor to bargain from “ground zero” (ie the existing contracts).
Pat Skipper
Comment by Pat Skipper — June 29, 2008 @ 9:54 am
Tomtom,
Yes, I’m saying Nikki is wrong here, that some of her reporting is inaccurate and many of her conclusions are just plain wrong. I’m not saying SAG is wrong, just that they’ve messed it up.
Nikki’s article is an op-ed piece. That it appears alongside “hard” news like agency changes and movie grosses makes it appear like it’s news.
My fake-named friend, I know it’s convenient to believe (and insinuate) that everyone who disagrees with you has to have some nefarious motive, but the truth is I’m a middle class actor who wants to get back to work. That’s all.
ps
Comment by Pat Skipper — June 29, 2008 @ 10:03 am
I’m waiting with baited breath for the Parts II and III!
Comment by Robert Benard — June 29, 2008 @ 10:21 am
I dont see AFTRA voting their primetime deal down it closely resembles the network code of AFTRA that covers daytime soaps, talk shows, game shows, variety, syndicated and reality programs. That ciontract wass ratified in April 2008 by a margin of 93.25%. I see the primetime deal passing
I would not be surprised if there is a strike and some shows have their seasons cancelled, that some of the actors try and get on Daytime soaps since they will be in production no matter what happens with the primetime-film deals.
This happened durring the Writer’s strike. I can see it happening here.
Comment by John — June 29, 2008 @ 11:46 am
mheister,
I concur. Actually you pretty much outlined the Consolidation effort of 2003. It would have created different sections for different talent types who would all vote on contracts that they were affected by. And again, the 12 - 18% of “non-actors” would not have any significant impact on the contracts for Actors.
It was brought down by the same Hollywood Board majority that is in power today. The thoughts against it were the same as you see posted here today. SAG is for ACTORS only and should be dilluted by working with any other types of performers. Certain SAG can’t represent NON-Actors.
I guess voice over, background, puppeteers, stunt people are all considered actors (we currently represent all those factions in SAG), but the line was drawn at broadcasters, musicians, DJ’s (I don’t even know if DJ’s ARE members of AFTRA) and their ilk. I think that all those factions are valid artists.
I can say that I have heard those same “non-actor” arguments for years in the SAG boardroom and other meetings. The fear of a “broadcaster” or other “non actor” being President of SAG was leveraged significantly to derail consolidation 5 years ago.
But with the math, it’s clear that the combined unions would have a vast and significant majority of Actors AND have the increased clout of UNITY.
No matter what the outcome, ALL of this would have been avoided by consolidating. And the current SAG leadership not only shot down that chance (twice) but agressively hounded AFTRA and tried to minimize their input on the contracts. Now they are spending significant amounts of time and OUR dues money on what amounts to a hostile take over of a sister union.
History has a way of shining a bright light on decisions. And I am hard pressed even in retrospect to find anything that the current Hollywood majority has done right in the last 10 years since they took control of the board. Giving them more power will let them assume they have a “mandate of the people”. And we’ve all seen what happens when someone thinks they have a mandate!
Comment by Been There — June 29, 2008 @ 12:01 pm
Dear Mrs. Wakely,
Nikki writes: “AFTRA gets more shrill and hysterical, and SAG gets more over-reaching and arrogant, as they battle over 44,000 dual members. Which is why I felt before, and still feel now, that SAG’s anti-AFTRA ratification campaign was a big waste of time…But all this importance bestowed on AFTRA is absurd. The union is responsible only for three scripted network primetime series, one of which has been cancelled. The union should pick up a few more scripted network pilots by September. But its business in relation to SAG’s is like a chihuahua pestering a mastiff. SAG, however, is worried about AFTRA’s growing control over scripted cable shows and wants to “draw a line in the sand” on that issue. But I say this is not the proper time or place to deal with that now. Let the two unions stage a cage match after Hollywood gets back to work.”
Mrs. Wakley writes: 2. “AFTRA IS, if not THE problem, then at least a BIG problem.”
Nikki makes clear that the SAG’s AFTRA side show is just that. You read her text and say “SEE, THE GREAT NIKKI FINKE AGREES WITH ME”. Learn to read, douchebag.
Comment by Scott — June 29, 2008 @ 12:55 pm
Mrs. Wakely writes: “Or a frustrated failure of some kind? One way or the other, you’re a malcontent who wants to sound off in favor of… what?”
Truly the pot calling the kettle black.
Comment by Anonymous — June 29, 2008 @ 1:01 pm
been there
you, and others, continue to state that “the sag leadership brought down the merger.” that is revisionist history. did some members of the board CAMPAIGN against merger, did they advocate for their opinion, that a merger was not in the best interest of SAG? of course. that’s what you do, as an elected official, you decide on an issue, then you advocate for it. what you seem to be missing, is, despite the MASSIVE campaign to try to get the merger passed by AFTRA, THEY LOST. TWICE. and it was NOT “the leadership” who made that happen, it was THE MEMBERSHIP - you know - the people who sifted through the AFTRA bullshit, then came to their own conclusion, and voted NO. TWICE. stop laying your bitter losses at the feet of membership first. they have spoken out on the issues, and they have WON. WHY? BECAUSE THEY’RE RIGHT.
I sense a similar AFTRA, increasingly hysterical, and panicked attempt to strong-arm the dual card holders on THIS vote. example: as nikki says - they are LYING when they say a NO vote is a strike vote, which they do, in their email to their own members from two days ago (I received it) It is a complete, unabashed, lie. to obtain a strike vote, AFTRA would have to poll the membership a 2nd time, with a 2nd vote to get strike authority. doesn’t it concern you that this piss-ant union you all seem so wrapped up in defending, is LYING to you, the membership? read nikki’s post - she confirms what I’ve just said. we would have “unity” if aftra would stop poaching sag shows and concentrate on serving its own membership, and try to do a better job of that FIRST. according to the letter from an actor printed above, he and his fellow actors went through hell on the AFTRA contract for KYLE XY. why in the hell would sag want to merge with an incompetent, evasive, irresponsible and DISHONEST union such as AFTRA? and Pat Skipper, you say it’s op-ed. well, it seems to me, if there’s op, it’s supported by ed. I don’t see a lot of grandstanding by nikki in the piece. I see a lot of reporting, none of which has been seriously challenged. your first obligation is to be honest with yourself, then, perhaps you can be honest with others.
Comment by Delight — June 29, 2008 @ 1:02 pm
Mrs. Wakely,
I want to thank you for your apology in your recent post. I’m sure you meant it in reference to your previous posts where you told other people to shut the flarn up or where you told other people to stop posting. As you admitted, it is indeed painful to admit when you’re wrong, and I’m glad you’re doing so, even if it’s beginning in a projection toward other people. I understand this may take some time - that headlock you referred to with Scott appears to be going the other way, but we’ll all know by July 8.
Been There and mheister, I agree that the current SAG/AFTRA rift can find its origins in the failed mergers. But I have to provide one more ingredient to that situation. During both recent merger moves, I was approached by friends who told me they were joining AFTRA specifically because of the merger. They intended to simply pay their way into AFTRA and then get to be in SAG without going through the process or the waiting that most SAG members have done. I don’t think this was lost on the memberships of either guild. And when the votes were tallied, in each case you had a solid approval for merger from AFTRA and a much less solid one from SAG. In the last one, the SAG votes finally broke 50% but didn’t reach the required threshold. So the AFTRA side wanted the merger, but the SAG side wasn’t as enthusiastic either time. Now we have a situation where the AFTRA group has gone and negotiated its own contract away from SAG - effectively taking its bat and ball and going home. Truly an unfortunate situation, but not one that wasn’t foreseeable.
I would love to see a solution to this, but I don’t think one is coming until after this negotiation cycle is finished and both guilds have their next round of elections. And I don’t subscribe to the Jessy S. series of fantasies about government hearings and panels appointed by the President. This is a matter that will and must be solved here in Hollywood by the parties involved.
Comment by Kevin — June 29, 2008 @ 1:02 pm
EXAMPLES OF MRS WAKELY’S CHERRY-PICKING. THANKS FOR PROVING MY POINT.
oh, the pain, the sheer agony of being wrong. the statistics, the rants, the denial, the inability to see reality as it stands before you. that’s what comes to mind when I read the bitterness of the pro-aftra, pro-suit malcontents in response to the original post by nikki. sag doesn’t want aftra, doesn’t like aftra. aftra is incompetent. the suits are liars and thieves. the top agents are colluding with the suits and would (also) love to break the union. the merger was voted down twice. sag wants to be a union for actors, not a union for dj’s and anchormen, and voice over people (bless them all). I reiterate:
1.”In conclusion, the quicker that Hollywood realizes that SAG is not the obstacle here, the quicker this town will get back to work.”
2.”Hollywood’s top agents are no longer neutral parties. Unwilling to absorb another round of commission losses and bridge loans, they are very privately backing the studios and networks against SAG. “If I could break the union, I would,” one tenpercentery topper tells me.”
3.”AFTRA also added insult to injury by starting this terrible bloodsport of pitting Big Actor vs Big Actor.”
4.”In fact, I can definitely tell you that SAG has “never suggested that a strike was an objective or essential,”
5.”AFTRA president Roberta Reardon came up with a pitiful excuse to justify what was clearly a predetermined decision not to bargain alongside SAG. Instead, AFTRA truly made a deal with the devil in order to do the AMPTP’s bidding. AFTRA relentlessly villified the bigger actors guild’s current leadership which continues even now.”
6. “No one knows better than the writers what torture dealing with the AMPTP really is. So it’s important as well to note that whatever better New Media terms negotiated by SAG leadership will be enjoyed by both the WGA and DGA.”
sorry fellas…
Comment by Scott — June 29, 2008 @ 1:07 pm
Please correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the 2003 merger proposal also include a new board that would be over three divisions with equal weight but decidedly unequal numbers?
What I was suggesting was not a redo of the 2003 merger proposal, but rather for AFTRA to essentially fold up its tent and hand the keys to SAG. The single union emerging from this would be SAG, with additional separate affected member voting contracts for broadcasters, DJ’s, and some other specialists. After the acquisition, SAG would work to bring former AFTRA contracts in line with SAG standards.
Comment by mheister — June 29, 2008 @ 7:28 pm
Kevin, the fantasies regarding government hearings aren’t fantasies at all. During the strike, the WGA had solid support from the people at large, and the people need hearings just to create news and get other reports from both sides. At the time the strike was settled, there was one hearing staged by the LA City Council on the effects of the writers strike, as well as a informal trip to Washington that would have lead to a series of congressional hearings on the strike. Finally, the WGA pulled the AMPTP toward the NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) due to the lack of a settlement or even negotiations.
Now imagine news reports of NLRB rulings against Nick Counter coupled with him sweating bullets while facing Senator Byron Dorgan knowing that he killed a settlement with the WGA at 11:59:59.9 PM due to his ego. There is no telling how bad the AMPTP would have been beaten up had they flushed a sure settlement that was created by three network moguls who were to face protests at their annual meetings in March and also see the loss of the Oscars if there wasn’t a settlement. These hearings I have been harping on the past few days are not fantasies, but dread for everyone in moguldom.
Comment by Jessy S. — June 29, 2008 @ 7:32 pm
Jessy s the pipe dreamer
Your analogy to the baseball strike is stupid because, Baseball enjoys protection from anti trust laws. Its the only reason the congress got involved. The nfl and the NBA enjoy the same protection.
The NRLB has consistently rule against labor in favor of big business. You should understand that. BTW what state does your senator come from, your state of mind.
Comment by just a thought — June 29, 2008 @ 10:40 pm
mheister
I am not in favor of absorbing AFTRA and them just giving SAG their keys.
SAG for one has never dealt with TV productions in the daytime like game shows and soap operas and are not familar with how they operate many daytime actors want to remain with AFTRA but we should just screw thenm over because some actors cant live on 200,000 plus a year for salary. Please I lived on less than 12,000 a year. It can be done. Stop being Greedy!!!!
Comment by John — June 29, 2008 @ 10:50 pm
I cant wait for July 7th or 8th when AFTRA announces its vote and I bet it will be for ratifaction. all they need is 50.1 % of the vote. their similar contract for the network code which covers all daytime , variety, syndicated and reality programs was ratified by a 93.25 % approval. I dont see the prime-time deal failing. then SAG will have to settle for that deal.
Ive said it before SAG is not unhappy with AFTRA’s deal, They are upset they didnt get it first. then they could say we did all the work and AFTRA just went in and agreed to the deal we worked on. its all about power when it should be about its members. Grow up SAG and get on with your job, making sure your actors are taken care of.
Comment by John — June 29, 2008 @ 11:31 pm
It may be worthy to highlight this paragraph from the AFTRA response to the Kyle X/Y situation: “Specifically, the new contract, which is effective July 1st, will require Exhibit A terms with a per-run Sanchez residual formula, plus no pre-payment/crediting if there are any free TV network re-runs in the future.”
Implicit in this paragraph is that the Kyle X/Y cast was NOT covered under Exhibit A/Sanchez residual formula before July 1, 2008. IOW, AFTRA negotiated a lousy contract on Kyle X/Y, then they heard not just from the cast but the cast’s lawyers, and after that they provided copies of the contracts to the cast and renegotiated so that if ABC strips Kyle X/Y in prime time again, the actors will receive AFTRA-appropriate residuals.
Also implicit in this - AFTRA didn’t get the Kyle X/Y cast a penny for the prior ABC network prime time “promotional” screenings of the show.
A portion of AFTRA’s response reads: “Regrettably, for the past month in particular, due to the attacks on AFTRA and the dis-information campaign that has been leveled against the new Exhibit A contract, the AFTRA staff has been unfortunately diverted from doing its normal business on behalf of members, to deal with correcting and responding to the misinformation and dis-information that has generated confusion and anxiety among AFTRA members.”
What AFTRA is admitting here is that their management is piss-poor. They should have staff specifically to handle this public relations work related to the ratification vote for Schedule A (part of their organizing department, possibly?), or they should hire a PR firm to handle this, to keep their regular staff free to do what should be their first and most important job - protecting the rights of their members on the job. If I were in Roberta Reardon’s position, heads would damn well roll over this kind of basic incompetence.
Another paragraph from the AFTRA missive on Kyle X/Y: “On turnaround, I have spoken to the manager and agent of member(s) this year experiencing the long days and forced calls. I alerted Kim and Joan and they began discussions with ABC Labor Relations to address the problem. There is a claim before arbitration as to whether or not the company can credit turnaround penalties, which was an issue for AFTRA and the cast members.”
Again with the basic incompetence. It sounds to me like AFTRA had received complaints from cast members about these short turnarounds at the time they were happening. It’s the responsibility of union staff to take these complaints straight to the producers within twenty-four hours and let them know on no uncertain terms their production will be shut down if turnaround times are not respected.
Turnaround isn’t important just to the actors for sleep and performance-related reasons, it’s important to their safety. The last thing any actor wants is for the person bolting down that heavy light or prop right over their heads to be running on four hours or less of sleep four or five days’ straight. That’s a recipe for a funeral, and it’s happened.
AFTRA unintentionally let out some hard and not-very-pretty truths about how their union actually functions on a day-to-day basis for its actors.
Given the nature of the complaints of the Bold & Beautiful cast, accusations of unresponsiveness by AFTRA staff are not limited to one show. The union is displaying a pattern of such incompetence. And frankly, the AFTRA officials - elected or staff - who are responsible for this incompetence should be ashamed. And replaced.
Comment by mheister — June 29, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
“President Connolly created a Strategy Cabinet of elected National Officers and key committee chairs to oversee this independent future. This cabinet first met in the spring of 2004. There, NED Greg Hessinger presented a stark financial future. Without increasing jobs, without organizing new work, without streamlining its operations, AFTRA could be out of business in a decade. The decision was made to make AFTRA’s mission to organize work for itself for all categories to be sure, but freelance actors represented the largest population and the area where the most erosion of AFTRA’s work had occurred. This had happened again in part because merger, if achieved, would bring all actor’s work under one banner. Now that it had failed, twice in five years, AFTRA had to change its culture. It had to look to save itself and no longer expect support from SAG. It began its march for independence, therefore implicit competitiveness in television, with SAG. ”
That was written by Aftra’s Matt Kimbrough.
Interesting that Aftra continues to share SAG offices across the country and SAG foots the bill - $2 million dollars worth of support. So much for independence.
Setting the record straight:
Membership First was a Minority voice during CONsolidation/Affiliation. SAG (Melissa Gilbert/Bob Pisano) and Aftra(John Connoly/Greg Hessinger) together spent almost $4 million dollars of our dues money trying to get it passed. (Remember opening your residual check? We were innundated.)
Membership First had $80 grand in donations and a truck.
Aftra “anyone off the street with a check can join” members voted it up.
Screen Actors Guild “gotta have work to join” members voted it down.
I wonder how many people joined Aftra in the past few months?
to Pat: If the Amptp were genuine with regard to their alleged stance on pattern bargaining, they could have put the tentative Aftra deal on the table weeks ago to get things moving. It’s still not there.
Comment by Frances Fisher — June 30, 2008 @ 1:21 am
mheister wrote:
The turnaround times for Actors are usually different than crew. Under some of the IA contracts they are the bare state minimum 8 hours if working at the studio. Luckily, I’ve only worked on a handful of shows wherethe UPM and the Producers were dicks enough to call crew back at the minimum time. I usually got ten to 12 before I started my 24/7 always on call job with an 18 to life contract.
Comment by BTL Mom — June 30, 2008 @ 6:59 am
Delight,
You said “they are LYING when they say a NO vote is a strike vote, which they do, in their email to their own members from two days ago (I received it)”
Please take a look at
http://www.aftra.com/aftraflash/08_06_26mem.htm
The Ratification before the AFTRA members SAYS a No vote DOES allow the AFTRA board to call a strike.
Your AFTRA Primetime TV contract ballot information clearly says:
A “YES” vote is to approve the package as recommended by the AFTRA National Board.
A “NO” vote is to reject the recommended package and simultaneously authorize the AFTRA National Board to call a strike at a time to be determined by the Board.
There doesn’t seem to be any wiggle room there. It looks very much like the truth to me.
Comment by Been There — June 30, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
A NO VOTE MEANS NO
And that’s all it means.
A “No” vote IS NOT a vote for a strike on the AFTRA
Primetime Exhibit A ballot.
AFTRA’s National Executive Director sent an email stating that actors must
either accept the AFTRA deal or go on strike. What about going back to
the table? Is AFTRA saying they won’t go back and bargain a better deal
if AFTRA members vote this deal down?
The SAG National Negotiating Committee knows that a “No” vote makes
a strike LESS likely because it shows that all actors want a better deal.
Just look at the actual ballot. There is no mention of a strike authorization
on the ballot form itself.
———————-
all this may be a moot point however. I think the news for AFTRA supporters just got worse. have you read the new post, partII?
Comment by Delight — June 30, 2008 @ 3:23 pm