Today, SAG issued the below statement denying media reports (not mine) that it had rejected the AMPTP’s “last best final” offer. Also, I’ve just learned that the big actors guild has signed guaranteed completion contracts with over 500 independent productions unaffiliated with the AMPTP,
while the Hollywood CEOs continue their de facto lockout by refusing to return to normal production even though SAG has said it has no plans for a strike authoritzation vote. Meanwhile, it came out today that the AMPTP threatened SAG at the end of yesterday’s session. I would have reported this, but the Big Media cartel’s negotiating group admitted saw fit to distribute transcripts of exec VP Carol Lombardini’s closing remarks to only what it considered friendly media outlets — the trades have it here and here — and not to me. The trades called it a “warning”: but it was a clear threat.
UPDATE: *After getting hammered over this news blackout attempt against me, the AMPTP tonight apologized “because your site is a central hub for negotiation news”. Once again, this shows what a rogue group the AMPTP has become and how the Hollywood CEOs need to tighten their leash on it and get back to being personally involved in the negotiations themselves.*
I have dutifully posted every AMPTP statement about the SAG negotiations which the Big Media clique has sent me. Tonight, I emailed all the moguls and their corporate flacks to complain about this gross manipulation of information about Hollywood labor negotiations. This AMPTP news blackout against me never happened even through the bitter WGA strike. But the coverage of the SAG-AMPTP bargaining has been even more slanted towards the AMPTP than during the WGA strike by these media dependent on studio and network advertising. Today’s trade headlines, for instance, accused SAG of rejecting the AMPTP’s offer when in fact SAG delivered a full counter-proposal. Another story today in Variety accused SAG of stalling the talks when in fact it is the AMPTP’s turn now to respond to SAG’s offer.
All I can think is that the cartel is really starting to sweat now. Lombardini is the same ultra-hardliner who issued that disgusting ultimatum to the WGA during the writers strike and is understandably loathed by a wide range of Hollywood guild negotiaters. Now she’s threatening SAG. ”It is no secret that we are in a deteriorating economy,” Lombardini said. “Our companies are not immune from the effects of this economic slowdown. It is very possible that, as a result of changing economic conditions, we will have to reevaluate the offer we have on the table.” However, someone needs to remind Lombardini in particular, and the AMPTP generally, that the Hollywood studios are having yet another lucrative summer movie season with nearly every film outperforming financial expectations, while the TV networks all enjoyed rate and overall revenue increases when they wrapped up their upfront dealmaking on advance advertising commitments for the 2008-2009 season. And though they all cry poverty publicly, heads of some of the studios and networks have told me their divisions contributed $1B in profits to the balance sheets of Big Media in 2007 alone.
Here is SAG’s statement:
Los Angeles, July 11, 2008 — The Screen Actors Guild national negotiating committee met behind closed doors throughout the day today discussing bargaining strategies. The negotiations team remains committed to continuing to bargain for a fair contract. “Our national negotiating committee did not, as has been erroneously reported, reject the AMPTP’s offer. Instead, we made a comprehensive counter proposal that adopted some of their proposals and offered alternatives on others. We significantly narrowed the gap between us while remaining committed to the principles of our bargaining priorities,” said Screen Actors Guild national executive director and chief negotiator Doug Allen. We will provide an additional negotiations update on Monday.
Here is the AMPTP transcript of EVP Carol Lombardini’s address to SAG at the end of yesterday’s negotiation:
I have been directed by all of the companies that are present here and the remaining companies represented by the AMPTP in these negotiations to respond to your reply to our Final Offer.
We thoroughly reviewed what you presented to us today. We are not surprised by your response given all of SAG’s recent statements in the press over the past few days. But we are disappointed. We are disappointed because either we have failed to convince you that this is the best possible deal you can achieve or, alternatively, because you continue to adhere to the notion that the package we have offered just isn’t enough for you, especially when comparable deals have been approved by writers, directors and actors.
It is important to be clear: What we gave you on June 30th was our Final Offer. It doesn’t get any better than that. That is the best deal you are going to achieve from us. At the end of any negotiation, both parties reach a crossroads where a tough decision needs to be made. Do we make this deal or not? I can tell you that, for us, this isn’t the best deal. There are many areas of our business that need to be addressed that this contract does not fix. But we believe, putting our wishes and desires aside, that this is the best deal we can achieve with you.
Without going into all of the specific details, as to economics, we believe we presented you an extremely fair and lucrative package, particularly given the economic times we live in. For example, the increase in the Major Role performer rate in the first year of this contract is close to 6%. That would be an outsized increase in any contract cycle, but given today’s economy and the size of increases in general in other labor agreements, this is a large bump. Adding more money to this economic package would not only be unjustified, it would be irresponsible on our part. Therefore, the money is not going to change.
As for the New Media blueprint, we have told you that we have analyzed, considered, deliberated and discussed all of your proposals and counterproposals dealing with new media. Of course, we will confirm the items that we clarified on July 2nd as part of a Memorandum of Agreement when we reach agreement. But we have also informed you that we have made all the changes and modifications to that structure that we are prepared to make in an effort to address your concerns. In our assessment, doing any more will harm the overall structure of the New Media framework that we have worked out with every other talent guild.
So where does that leave us? We understand that you want more. I’ve never participated in a negotiation where one side or the other doesn’t. But now you have to decide. You can accept this deal, hold your heads up high, knowing that you have achieved the best deal attainable. Or you can continue to refuse to accept our Final Offer.
If that is your decision, it would be inappropriate for us to allow you to leave here today without understanding the potential consequences of that decision.
First – Under this Final Offer, once the deadline passes without ratification, retroactivity is gone. That results in a smaller package than the $250 million of gains contained in our Final Offer. And of course, it gets smaller each passing day.
Second – It is no secret that we are in a deteriorating economy. Our companies are not immune from the effects of this economic slowdown. It is very possible that, as a result of changing economic conditions, we will have to reevaluate the offer we have on the table.
Third – There is no question that given the uncertainty of not having a deal, some feature productions will go on, while others will not. Each one that doesn’t go forward results in fewer jobs and lost earnings for you. The risks are even greater in television. Continued uncertainty over contract status further jeopardizes scripted programming. Once again, it all amounts to less for you.
The decision is yours to make. We encourage you to let the entire membership decide.
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







Corrections-
Your confusing theory with facts. Why do you think the studios went up for sale? It wasn’t a hostile takeover. They were once private companies, not traded on the stock market. They were sold at 50 cents on the dollar and con-gloms were looking for a deal on libraries. They also want a discount on marketing their products. Why do you think product placement and endorsements are such an issue with this contract. They want their products on the shows that their studios produce.
Also, this will help you find your ass so that its not screwed on backwards. Now that the studios financials are part of a public entity, you or anybody else can look it up and find profit margins are narrowing.
Save your hackneyed community college theories for your term paper.
“Well yes, I suppose it is easier to negotiate a contract with a flock of picket-line crossers than with the actual picketers.”
Writer Bob, I based my comment in this thread on your quote here from February 20. I agree that in your responses, you clarified your position to reflect your anger at DGA leadership for conducting their negotiations, breaking the logjam and doing what they could to get the town back to work. But this first comment set off not only me but other posters, who began asking you about the “No Strike” clause.
You’re absolutely right that btl teamster talked about JJ Abrams crossing picket lines at Paramount, and that Jake Hollywood posted a bunch of really angry stuff before he was exposed as not being in the WGA. (And that unfortunately came after he claimed to be attending membership meetings and voting as a WGA member, which was a fatal blow to any credibility he might have had.)
So you’re correct that your follow-up posts redirected the vitriol toward DGA leadership. But the initial one is what kicked all this off – and if you’re saying that you understand how people can respect a picket line and yet still be compelled to fulfill their guild contract, I’ll accept that.
In any case, the issue is moot today. It is not likely that a strike authorization vote will be called, as it is even more unlikely that SAG could surpass the 75% membership approval needed to go out. Instead, we’re likely to see more rear guard actions and attempts to save face by Alan Rosenberg and Doug Allen before they recommend whatever version of the contract they can to end this matter.
Peggy:
RE: Your response to SAG PERFORMERS:
I don’t know any A-Listers myself – but I remember that there were a lot of well known names appearing in some of the very crafty things writers created for the You Tube clips during the WGA strike. How did that happen, and how can we call on those same actors again, so that if the writers are willing to create some really effective pieces again – for this cause – these same actors can appear again? Was it the writers who called on actors that they knew, or did those actors just volunteer somehow, or how did that happen last time?
Coup de tat – Why are you such a A**hole? Why can’t you have a healthy debate without being such a child every time out? Think about it – all you do is turn everyone off.
Peace!
Writer Bob and kevin,
Any comments I made about JJ Abrams crossing the picket lines were not made about him as a director, they were made about him as a member of the WGA. During the writers strike scripts were not to be re-written, you were suppose to shoot it “as is”, this was not the case with Star trek, because JJ Abrams got a pass. Well, that’s O.K., because the WGA response was…JJ has always just really, really, really, wanted to film Star Trek.
I didn’t agree with everything the leaders of WGA did. But I fully backed the writers, especially on my show, enough to picket with them. Just so you know, I never saw any person picketing being rude to any crew member showing up for work. I still feel everything starts with the writer, I still feel the writers should get the biggest slice of the pie…not DGA,and not SAG.
Writer Bob said on his show there is talk about supporting the actors. On the 2 shows I work on, the subject of actors is silent, really silent, from the top on down. I don’t think this silence has to do with the working actor, it has to do with the way the SAG leaders have acted.
I’ll save you time on Forsyth. He has the look of a younger somewhat better looking dark-haired Jamie Kennedy. A Costar credit on “Dirty Sexy Money,” a middling agent, and fairly impressive IMDB ranking of 24,000 considering–possibly due to his out-of-the-box marketing.
btl teamster,
I hear you. But I should point out that in your post back during the strike, you were responding to my defense of DGA members. I had stated, clearly in too broad a fashion, that DGA members had been honoring the picket lines on my show. You corrected me at the time to say that JJ Abrams crossed the line to direct the Star Trek movie, while also being a WGA member – as an appropriate note that not everyone necessarily supported the strike or was honoring the picket lines.
Some really unfortunate things got said in that rant, particularly the throwing around of “scab” by Jake. His attitude was that anyone that reported for work at all was somehow a scab. I took exception to that, which led to my curiosity that uncovered the fact that he wasn’t in the WGA in the first place. And I should add the footnote that writers on two television series I have worked since the strike expressed both horror and anger that anyone could have been throwing around terms like that toward people who weren’t in the WGA, and the anger got louder when they heard it was being used by someone who wasn’t in the WGA.
In the current dialogue, my point is simply that there are WGA members (and some non-members) who were adamant about making sure the town stood behind them and refused to work during the strike, who are adjusting their position, now that they have a new contract which still includes the “no strike” clause. I understand that Writer Bob was careful not to actually say that, but he wasn’t the only posting here or elsewhere.
And again, the likelihood of us seeing another strike hit the town is very low, even now. What we’re waiting to see now is how the other shoe drops and the confrontation ends. It won’t involve pickets, but there will clearly be a lot of anger left over on both sides. And the next series of negotiations in 3 years will be crucial. I personally hope that all 3 major guilds can find a way to pool resources and information. My fantasy is to see them somehow find a way to work together on the negotiations so that they can’t be pitted against each other – but that would require years of groundwork and I don’t think the personalities involved will allow it.
Hey Coup De Tet,
You sound like an oil company executive. Crying all the way to the bank hiding behind this “profit margin” shit.
Maybe the “profits” from entertainment should be accounted for separately including branded entertainment revenues.
Maybe actors writers and other artists shouldn’t have to care about how much light bulbs are selling for in order to get a fair deal on DVDs and reruns, much less have to shamelessly plug the fucker in and talk about how great it is during a scene? It’s a light bulb for god’s sake. They burn out and you replace it without blinking. Just like actors. The disposable,replaceable un-artistic mentality of the congloms is why no body is watching. Why put forth the effort for quality programming with talent for better ratings when you can just screw in another short lived show to round off the bottom line?
The current financial structure you speak of in your post is valid. The moguls using those figures to appeal to the talent base of our industry for negotiation purposes is not.
PPS
BTLTEAMSTER – Visit http://www.trekmovie.com
There are extensive comments posted there by the writers of the Star Trek movie concerning re-writes.
According to the large number of posts by Trek fans asking about that very topic, the script was not re-written or touched in anyway during the WGA strike.
The writes indicated that a lot of interesting insight came up during the shoot they had to pass on because they were not allowed to re-write any portion of the film during the strike. They clearly state that if the strike were settled before principal photography ended, they might attempt to re-write and then re-shoot those scenes if time allowed.
Where the hell did you come up with J.J. Abrams re-writing the Trek script during the strike?