Tonight the AMPTP issued this statement on something they call “final offer retroactivity.” (But if you ask me, it just sounds like the Hollywood moguls don’t want their summer vacations interrupted…):
“The Producers remain committed to making a deal with SAG as soon as possible, which is why the AMPTP’s final offer would make the wage and salary increases retroactive to July 1, 2008 if the agreement is ratified by SAG’s membership no later than August 15, 2008. Under the final offer, if the new agreement is not ratified by August 15, 2008, all changes in terms and conditions would become effective in the first payroll period after ratification. The Producers have included this traditional incentive in the final offer in order to get everyone back to work and end the de facto strike. The Producers’ final offer includes more than $250 million in additional compensation over the course of the three year contract, as well as groundbreaking new media terms. We remain hopeful that SAG will accept our final offer and that its members will ratify the new agreement so that these economic gains can go into effect at the earliest possible period.”
And SAG shot back:
“As management knows, and as we have often stated, the Screen Actors Guild national negotiating committee’s goal is to bargain a fair contract for our members. Our committee is at this very moment finalizing its response to the employers’ proposal of June 30. SAG’s national negotiating committee is scheduled to deliver that response at AMPTP headquarters tomorrow and prefers to do so in person rather than in the press.”
Meanwhile the AMPTP and SAG today sparred over a letter which the negotiating group representing the Big Media cartel circulated to 120 California state legislators today as well as the full Los Angeles City Council and the Los Angeles County Board Of Supervisors blaming SAG for the current “de facto strike” that has Hollywood at a standstill.
Here’s AMPTP president Nick Counter’s letter to legislators:
And here is SAG’s response from deputy national executive director Pamm Fair:
“We don’t think any legislators will be surprised that multi-billion dollar global companies engaged in negotiations with a union have resorted to rhetoric and mischaracterizations regarding union workers. While we have not yet seen evidence of a slowdown in production, any decrease in film and television production would be a result of the studios and networks that control the industry, not the actors they hire. Screen Actors Guild remains committed to bargaining a fair contract, and is available 24- hours a day, seven-days a week. If anyone is stalling, it’s the AMPTP by suggesting that bargaining is over, when we clearly haven’t achieved an agreement that is fair for actors and the industry.“
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.


Nikki,
Is there any way you could give us a brief history of how the AMPTP got formed? What was the industry atmosphere at the time? What was the political atmosphere?
It seems to me that the ability for the huge companies to band together has given them an enormous amount of leverage that is rare in collective bargaining. There will never again be a balance of power. The companies in the AMPTP are simply to large and can withstand almost anything any of the individual labor unions can throw at them.
But from what I understand, the AMPTP could only have formed at the permission of the Unions. Why would they have done this all those years ago? Maybe they simply didn’t see where it might lead? Were they fools? Can it be undone?
I don’t see how there will ever be a fair labor agreement again as long as the multi-billion dollar, vertically integrated companies who are sworn enemies and competitors are allowed to work together to achieve their one and only common interest: cheap labor.
Maybe a history lesson is in order to show us how we all got into this current mess. And if there’s any way out.
No evidence of a slowdown? WAAAA? Did you check the very public film permit website? Heres the link: http://www.filmlainc.com/FilmLA_Stats.pdf
permits were down 73% in the first quarter….plus there are no new starts for July….. How much evidence do you need?
“SAG’s national negotiating committee is scheduled to deliver that response at AMPTP headquarters tomorrow and prefers to do so in person rather than in the press.”"
Then why hire a PR Firm?
How much flip flopping bullshit is going to be acceptable to members before they kick the bums out?
What the hell is in the water in Hollywood?
That’s the only thing that can explain why 2 unions are too busy having a territorial pissing contest to realize that their “real enemy” (the moguls) are just sitting back and laughing their butts off.
To “John Chambers” in the other thread:
Absolutely! Good idea. SAG needs to make sure its contract expires BEFORE those of WGA, DGA and AFTRA in 2011. Make it a 2.5 year contract. The toughest union should lead negotiations for the whole town.
from wikipedia–
An ultimatum is generally the final demand in a series of requests. As such, the time allotted is usually short, and the request is understood not to be open to further negotiation.
What the AMPTP is doing is not negotiating and I don’t know how anyone can look at it differently. They say it themselves, it’s not like some sort of deduction…The arrogance of coming right out and saying it just make’s my blood boil. Never in my life have I seen any Management in a Union negotiation, as brazen as they are.
“NO SOUP FOR YOU!”
I don’t get paid for it either, but I did hear the last 15 mins. of the radio show and I can tell you which of the presidents sounded like they had a gun at their head. I’m in the IATSE and we’ve had some pretty obnoxious leadership over the years but this guy sets a new benchmark. I’m sure that’s a good thing when you’re sitting across the table from the Spawn of Satan I mean Nick Counter, but it sure doesn’t play too well on the radio!
Now that we know how the vote went can we please please figure out a way to claim victory and get a contract and get back to work?
Jimmy Miller,
I think I can answer your question. Although I am not well versed in the history of Hollywood labor, I do have a very good background in business negotiations.
It is in the Unions’ interest to negotiate with all producers at once instead of having to negotiate seperate deals with one. There are two very big reasons for this. First, time. It could conceivably take up to 3 years just to negotiate with every producer individually and at a minimum you could expect at least a year. Doesn’t leave much time left for any other business, the union would be bogged down in perpetual negotiations. Second, it is preferable for the Union to have one uniform contract instead of dozens of individual contracts. That would add more stress on the Union to manage all the verious terms and conditions of different contracts. Also, having different terms would lead to in-fighting and confusion in the Union as same members would be working under different terms (the member with the lesser terms will take issue with his contract not being as good as the other member).
Like I said I have no knowledge on the specific sitation, but I am pretty certain the general reasons I gave above had something to do with why the Unions’ preferred to and still prefer to negotiate with AMPTP instead of individual companies.
God,i always hate the AMPTP’s use of words like
“GROUNDBREAKING” or “REVOLUTIONARY”.
Makes me sick.
Intrigued – thanks for the response.
But, if that were really the case, why did the WGA have negotiating separate contracts and trying to divide the AMPTP as the center of its strategy?
Divide and conquer. Remember?
I think it’s because they know that the price they pay for dealing with the behemoth of the AMPTP dwarfs any inconvenience that negotiating separately with member companies might cause. There is a committe devoted only to negotiating. I think there are worst things than asking them to do it full-time than once every three years.
And I don’t think union members working for employers with different contracts is an issue. It’s not for the UAW or the Teamsters, is it?
No, just certain employers become preferred by members. Which means the competition is among the employers, which means…oh yeah, they are motivated to actually move toward deals that are actually fair instead of dictating the terms to the limit that thier public images can withstand before actually harming their stock price.
And if it were really about convenience, then I’m sure the AMPTP would agree to the forming of the AMPTG, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Guilds. An umbrella organization that hires a big time lawyer to negotiate all contracts on behalf of all members of WGA, DGA, SAG, AFTRA and IATSE.
Because let’s be real about something. The biggest reason these unions don’t get along is because they are pitted against each other by the AMPTP. Look at how the process forces each union to fight with the other. If they were allowed to form an alliance that was meant to use their collective power in the same way as the AMPTP to actually get fair terms for every worker, they would love each other and be united. And that would scare the living crap out of the AMPTP because they might actually have to stop paying Les Moonves more than anyone else on the planet and start paying labor a fair share of the massive revenue the industry pulls.
I’m pretty sure the AMPTP would veto any similar attempt at “convenience” faster than you can say NLRB.
I don’t understand the “retroactive” carrot the amptp is dangling in front of SAG as a threat. As a survivor of the SAG strike in the 1980s, I remember the moment there was a strike I lost my job working for Norman Lear, and the whole town shut immediately. No one was working. How do you get retroactive pay when no one is working?
@Comment by Jimmy — July 9, 2008 @ 11:10 pm
The ‘divide and conquer’ strategy actually had contracts that paid even less than the one being offered. It was a ploy by the WGA that also got some memebers to get back to work. (no shockingly their bigger money members) That’s why they had the clause that made those contracts kick up if the full negotiated contract was more lucrative (which they all were) if any of those guys were smart they would have made it a ‘done deal’ contract and paid less for ‘defecting’ from the producers side.
That won’t happen though since they like to kiss the ass of the talent.
NO SLOW DOWN! Then how come everything is on hold?
SAG need to just take the deal, all the other unions have. If they don’t this will make them look greedy.
Suck it up take the deal and try again in three years. Stop the inner fighting and come together as one!
Oh wait that would require logic and brains, something that is missing here.
to actorjames: I have to admit it, your comment about SAG being the “toughest union” is the first genuine laugh I’ve had reading this blog in a long time.
Mazeltov.
Just this afternoon the story on this dilemma came out on an AP wire. The way the short article read in the local paper here was that the studios had issued an ultimatium to the SAG. But the within the body of the article AMPTP was to go SAG on their offer. But Aug15 appears to be strike date. It’s now interesting that studios are getting involved in this and one wonders how nasty could this get now. Just speculating.