I asked those in SAG critical of the AFTRA-AMPTP tentative deal to supply me with what are their point-by-point problems with it and how they see it negatively impacting their own union. Here is what I was emailed:
Gave Up Significant Jurisdiction in New Media
AFTRA accepted the DGA pattern that gave up jurisdiction over made for new media productions costing under $15,000 per minute. This would allow our signatory AMPTP companies to produce non-union.
SAG has signed more than 500 made for new media productions in the last several years – nearly all of them produced for less than $15,000 per minute. This also negatively impacts our existing contracts and marginalizes union work with our major employers. Gave Up Residuals in New Media
AFTRA gave up residuals on made for new media productions, except in one very narrow, and very rare instance (only when produced for more than $25,000 per minute for a consumer-pay platform.)
AFTRA’s tentative deal does not secure adequate residuals for television shows that stream over the Internet on an advertiser-supported platform.
This is a huge problem for SAG members because the new media platform could cannibalize some existing residuals models for both motion pictures and television when product moves to the Internet. AFTRA’s abandonment of residuals in new media means the beginning of the end of residuals in new media.
Made No Significant Gains for Middle Class Actors
Actors need real wage gains. Under AFTRA’s tentative deal, actors could be making less over three years, in adjusted dollars than they are today. AFTRA’s increase in minimums amounts to about 10% over three years. This is less than the current rate of inflation and below the projected rate for the term of the contract. Provisions for major role performers were not significantly improved. The money breaks provide little improvement. The trailer money break in the third year is less than weekly scale. All money and schedule breaks under the tentative deal become effective only in the second year and the schedule break increases do not include corresponding overtime breaks.
In fact, achievements claimed by AFTRA for major role performers are actually diminished in the third year of the contract when these performers are moved into a new pay schedule where they actually lose some of the overtime and travel pay benefits. Did Not Protect Actors on Clip Consent
AFTRA may have a tentative deal on clip consent but we don’t yet know the impact because their deal is contingent on the development of a process for securing consent. Because the process does not yet exist, we don’t know how it will work. What we do know is that the tentative agreement allows for clip consent at the time of hire without any conditions or protections. SAG believes that consent at the time of hire must have strong protections that prevent employers from retaliating against actors who refuse to give their consent. Without strong protections in place – AFTRA’s right of consent at the time of hire could easily become “Right to get fired at the time of hire.”
Did Not Advance Background Performer Proposals
AFTRA increased the number of covered background actors in television… by 1 — just enough to truthfully claim to have achieved something. More importantly, the deal failed to measurably advance other Background Actor issues. This deal also does not include any gains for stand-ins. So Called “Groundbreaking” Get in Background Rest Provisions is a Fantasy
AFTRA’s original list of “groundbreaking” gets for members included a line about securing rest provisions for background performers in Los Angeles. This has recently disappeared from AFTRA’s list of “groundbreaking” improvements. Why? Because the rest period covered in the “groundbreaking” deal point is actually only the minimum already mandated by California state law. Gave Up On DVD Gains
AFTRA dropped the proposal on DVD’s. SAG has not. After more than 20 years of ridiculously low DVD residuals on which SAG members pay their own P&H, SAG believes that asking the employers to pay P&H on top of residuals is a fair proposal.
Mileage – AFTRA withdrew this proposal.
Mileage reimbursement hasn’t changed in nearly 30 years while the cost of gasoline has gone up by nearly 700% – and is approaching $5 per gallon. If Disney can pay Bob Iger $90 million per year, and the other companies can pay the fat packages they give their CEO’s, SAG thinks they can increase the reimbursement for mileage so our members can get to the jobs.
Coverage – Differences between SAG and AFTRA.
SAG covers 100% of theatrical motion pictures and more than 90% of scripted primetime network and pay television series. SAG covered 92 TV series over the course of the 2007/2008 season.
AFTRA covered 5 scripted primetime network and pay television series in the 2007/2008 season. AFTRA previously negotiated with SAG on its Exhibit A contract before abandoning the joint negotiation relationship in late March just days before entering negotiations.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







i just have to say it kind of cracks me up to see the dissimilar posts before the WGA strike and the potential SAG strike. what a difference a letter makes.
Here is a fun game. Next time you are on a set with a non union crew ask the lighting guy or a grip if they are in the union. You will find a lot of them working off the card. They have no union loyalty.
No disrespect to Roxanne and Mrs. Wakely and other actors, but do you really expect sympathy for not getting MORE when your work is used over? Not to repeat the famous studio exec comeback that “my plumber doesn’t get paid every time I flush my toilet”, can you think of any other profession that provides a good or service and then gets paid every time that good or service is used? Do you pay your acting coach every time you use his or her technique? Do you pay your lawyer every time you use his or her advice? Do you pay your doctor for every additional day of health? (my doctor just called to follow up on some tests and I know he won’t be sending me a bill). Do you pay your teacher every time you remember something from school?
In truth, actors (and directors and writers) are the only people that get paid over and over for the same work. As Jenna Fischer was quoted today in THR, “You become an actor because you have this little need to be loved or seen or whatever”, yet you talk as if you’re providing some community service. Earning $40,000 doing two commercials and a tv episode, 6 days work total (as a family member did last year) should be cause for gratitude not more grief. The reason the average actor makes $40K is that he/she only works a few days a year, and the reason he/she only works a few days a year is that there are so many other actors who want to make $40K working a few days a year.
MrsWakely, did you ever know that you’re my hero? (At least right now, anyway)
You saved me loads of typing, and added your own personal touch to boot!
The FIRST thought is for COUNT YOUR BLESSINGS: It angers me when someone lashes out using ignorant, illogical arguments. I’m sorry to say it, but your rationale is just plain ignorant and uninformed, you obviously didnt think it through – nor did you read the post you were referring to very well. OF COURSE the plumber doesnt get paid over and over again every time we flush the toilet – Flushing the toilet isn’t generating the flusher any money you moron! Every time that episode of your favorite TV Show runs – the network is getting paid from advertisers – and since the actors in that show helped create that “income generating” show, they ought to get a piece of the income generated. Plus, the plumber can go out and fix a damn toilet every day of the year if he chooses to get off his ass and go to work that day – while an actor cannot simply go to work every day he chooses. The rest of your ill-informed ignorant analogies follow the same insane reasoning.
Second thought: As a dual cardholder – I will be voting this crappy AFTRA contract DOWN. I am not a fan AT ALL of the current SAG Board – I’d sooner spend a night in prison than at dinner with them – but thats personal – this is business. I was at the meeting as well – and personalities aside, they do indeed have well reasoned points of contention, and AFTRA negotiators would be hung for treason if their actions were a matter of national allegiance.
Third Thought: RCS – No one put a gun to your head and made you do what you do for a living. Actors and Writers did not negotiate your contracts for you, and without the writers – none of us would have a f***ing job. If your job is so miserable, or the pay isn’t what you want – DO SOMETHING ELSE – its a free country. Dont spit your venom and self hatred onto others who have chosen another profession – it is not their fault you have the contract you do, that you get paid what you get paid – nor is it their fault that you do something you apparently dont thing you get paid enough for. That’s your union’s job – talk to them. Writers, Actors, and everyone else for that matter – including BTL – have a right to ask for whatever they think is fair – they have a right to bargain, and negotiate, just like YOU DO. You cannot POSSIBLY believe that it is ok for you to ask actors to forego their rights to bargain and negotiate just because you are not happy with what you get paid! It’s our turn to bargain, STAND OFF. We weren’t standing over you, breathing down your throat while your contracts were negotiated – you got a problem with your pay rate? Get another job or talk to your union about it. Don’t blame it on another union doing what they have a right to do. Do you have any idea how long it takes to write a feature film script to completion? do you have any idea how many scripts actually get bought? Writers and Actors are not yelling at you to “quit your bargaining so we can work”. You are overstepping your bounds.
Fourth Thought: IF…….IF this AFTRA contract is voted in, and IF SAG is forced to follow it – I guess the smartest thing to do would be to take whatever money I have left in savings (after having literally NO work available this year for me AS AN ACTOR), and invest in the stocks of these media congloms – because after they are done bending everyone over, they will be laughing all the way to the bank. This way, if these new contract provisions leave me in the future with no way to share in ridiculous profits generated by content I have helped create – I can share in their ridiculous profits that way instead.
First, to answer the question, I can name two; and it’s no coincidence that they’re tangentially related to the current subject: Authors and Musicians. (Copyright law, anyone?)
As was pointed out several times during the Writers Strike, and as I will (perhaps) manage to expand upon ,somewhat, here-and-now (with heavy paraphrasing and alteration):
Talent isn’t the plumber fixing the broken bowl; that might more accurately represent the AMPTP when they pull up their pants, hide the ass (and its hairy crack) that they’ve been showing plenty of ever since they waddled their way into our home, and get down to the business of fixing things instead of lying to the homeowner (the unions?) in an attempt to inflate the repair bill (without much worry, knowing it’s hard for us to wait for a second opinion (negotiate from a position of strength) while the shit storm (strike anxiety) brews).
The water represents content; and it fills the toilet bowl to either entertain, or to simply wash away boredom while (in most cases) generating revenue (WARNING: Blatant invitation for this to devolve into a commentary about entertainment being “In the toilet”). This is similar to when water fills the toilet bowl to allow us to forget what is (or hopefully soon after was) inside while (in most cases) generating revenue for the water company (the entertainment industry).
Make more sense now?
Talent is what the water company relies on to ensure that it can provide (and the customer can receive) a constant stream of clear and potable water. Perhaps something along the lines of: R&D/design (writers), standardizations/filtration systems (directors), delivery systems (actors), and the like. Without these components acting in concert, the water company would just be a twinkle in some civil engineer’s eye. Revenue sharing, in some form, is an integral part of a complex compensation model that finances the whole operation.
Every time the water company delivers water (and revenue is generated) a fraction of this revenue is shared as part of the compensation model I just mentioned. Most of the time the water company can reuse (via film) the same R&D/design, standardizations/filtration systems, delivery systems, etc. to provide plenty of water (and plenty of revenue in the process). When this is not the case, and the water doesn’t flow, there’s little or no revenue to share. New production processes replace that which is no longer able to produce water (and revenue), and the cycle begins anew.
As for the part about actors and $40k/yr: it isn’t simply the number of actors involved in the limited work availability, but other factors; such as the need for specific persons to fill roles that are narrowly-defined by context. Such amounts–usually multiples of that in fact–are demanded by corporations for seconds of airtime every day. Are you trying to say a corporate “person” has a right to such pay for seconds of work, while a flesh-and-blood “person” does not?
I attended last night’s SAG Town Hall meeting in LA, which was called to update members on the status of SAG contract negotiations and to educate dual-cardholders on the deficiencies of the proposed AFTRA contract. The text of the main handout was published by DHD.
I’d like to offer a few of the opening statements, paraphrased here unless quoted.
Alan Rosenberg:
“We’re not here to vilify AFTRA. I was an AFTRA member before I was a SAG member.”
In reference to the current situation – AFTRA’s proposed deal, SAG’s negotiations – “That’s what’s at stake here. The future of the acting profession”.
Doug Allen:
He reiterated that it’s not about politics or institutions or personalities, rather, “It’s all about actors”.
After recapping briefly recent history, he said on May 6 – after AFTRA, WGA, AFM, and the Teamsters were invited to and attended most SAG bargaining days – negotiations were suspended by the AMPTP and “We handed the ball off to AFTRA transparently….”
SAG gave AFTRA all of the sensitive internal documents to help AFTRA negotiate.
SAG observers did not have the same access to AFTRA negotiations that SAG gave AFTRA. AFTRA kept SAG observers out of negotiations the last seven days before AFTRA came to their agreement with the AMPTP.
SAG is opposing the AFTRA agreement because unequal contracts for the same covered work allows producers to pit one union against the other at the expense of actors. “Competition in this environment (between unions) is bad, not good”. Companies will of course pick the union contract with the lowest terms, not the highest.
The AFTRA deal does not address actors’ priorities, including many which the two unions agreed upon in the joint wages and working conditions meetings.
If AFTRA members vote down the deal, it forces AFTRA back to the table, and it actually makes a strike by SAG less likely. It also makes it more likely both SAG and AFTRA will get a better deal.
Questioners also had a few interesting things to ask and/or share.
One questioner said he has friends being pressured by their agents and/or managers to ratify the AFTRA contract. The response was that some of the agents or managers may not be entirely disinterested players in this, as AFTRA allows them some level of investment in production. IMHO, every actor should keep in mind that your agent and manager work for you, not vice versa. Why would they encourage you to ratify a deal that gets you – hence them – a smaller chunk than SAG should be able to get, and mortgages New Media forever (sunset clauses notwithstanding; the AMPTP conveniently forgot their promises to revisit VHS and later DVD), unless they have competing interests? Agents & managers work for us; we can ask these questions of them.
Another questioner – a dual-cardholder – shared that he received a robocall from James Cromwell extolling the virtues of the AFTRA deal. Apparently this person wasn’t the only one, and a suggestion was made to initiate robocalls against the AFTRA deal. No commitment was made by SAG leadership in relation to that suggestion.
At least two, possibly three actors asked where the stars are. IMHO, each SAG card is worth one contract vote, so star wattage is of limited relevance to me. However, after these queries, a prominent actor who quietly waited her turn in line did step up, announce herself, and pose a question to the presenters about clip use from the floor. Mr. Allen explained SAG’s proposal includes a range of protections on how the clips may or may not be used. The actor asked about clip use in commercials. Mr. Allen said SAG’s proposal would prevent that.
Force majeure also came up. AFTRA has deferred to SAG on this. SAG’s position is that force majeure is sacrosanct, and the AMPTP needs to pay up on the 80+ productions with outstanding claims from the WGA strike.
SAG has not yet asked for a strike authorization. Mr. Rosenberg reiterated that nobody wants a strike less than he does. He’s unemployed, as his SAG duties have taken up all of his time, and he doesn’t want to put his wife – Marg Helgenberger of CSI – out of work.
Most of the attendees are dual-cardholders. I would characterize almost all of the questioners as being very concerned about various aspects of the AFTRA deal, and about the future of union representation for actors. Mr. Rosenberg actually invited anyone who would like to defend the AFTRA deal to step to the front of the line. No takers.
These are my primary recollections from the town hall, FWIW.
I remain vehemently opposed to the AFTRA deal first and foremost because of the New Media non-union exemption, and from what I saw last night, apparently I’m not alone.