So the SAG campaign for board of director seats currently underway is now starting to mirror the U.S. presidential race. That’s because a celebrity war is overwhelming the real issues at stake for the biggest actors guild, like residuals and non-union work in New Media for the new contract. But perhaps it was inevitable. After all, SAG and AFTRA battled over big Hollywood actor endorsements just six weeks ago, and this SAG election between Unite For Strength and MembershipFirst is a de facto referendum on whether the two warring thesp guilds should declare a truce and even join together. On Wednesday, Unite For Strength sent to the media a list of high-profile actors who are supporting UFS’s slate of candidates. Mostly, these are the same VIPs who vigorously opposed SAG’s MembershipFirst contingent’s open declaration of hostility on AFTRA and the ratification of the smaller actors and broadcasters union’s recent contract negotiated with the AMPTP. (This, after AFTRA pulled out of joint contract negotiations with SAG after years together of bargaining with employers.)
In an email message distributed to 38,000 Hollywood SAG members, Sally Field urged fellow actors to support election of the slate in order “to end the senseless war with AFTRA and start building a united front of actors to fight for more working opportunities and better pay.” While Lewis Black declared, “Enough is enough is enough. Membership First has the divide and conquer strategy all wrong – the idea is for us to be united and them to be divided so we do the conquering, not the other way around.” And Patricia Heaton said, “SAG’s ongoing battle with AFTRA and the fighting within our own union is weakening us at the bargaining table,” said Patricia Heaton. “We obviously need to chart a different course, and this election gives members the chance to do it.” Also on the list of supporters of Unite For Strength are: Alec Baldwin, Ed Begley Jr, Kate Burton, Stephen Collins, Peter Coyote, Marcia Cross, Jon Cryer, Tim Daly, Jeff Daniels, Tate Donovan, Victor Garber, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Tom Hanks, Patricia Heaton, Felicity Huffman, Melina Kanakaredes, Anthony LaPaglia, Rob Lowe, Peter MacNicol, William H. Macy, Camryn Manheim, Alfred Molina, Ron Perlman, Freddie Prinze Jr, Amy Ryan, Tony Shalhoub, Elisabeth Shue, Gary Sinise, Eric Stoltz, Meshach Taylor, John Turturro, Nia Vardalos, Kerry Washington and Steven Weber.
I checked and MembershipFirst has not yet, and may not, issue a counterpoint press release naming the high-profile actors in its camp. So who among the names on the 2008 Solidarity Statement here are MF supporters – Jack Nicholson, Sean Penn, Ben Stiller, Kevin Costner, Viggo Mortensen, Patricia Arquette, Rosanna Arquette, Ed Asner, Susan Blakely, Powers Boothe, Tom Bosley, Josh Brolin, Dixie Carter, Dave Clennon, Beverly D’Angelo, Bill Daniels, Laura Dern, Sharon Gless, Andy Griffith, Louis Gossett Jr, Ed Harris, John Heard, Marg Helgenberger, Holly Hunter, Sally Kirkland, Sheryl Lee, Ron Livingston, Tony Lo Bianco, Peter MacNicol, Amy Madigan, Debi Mazar, Anne Meara, Laraine Newman, Nick Nolte, Edward James Olmos, Alexandra Paul, William Petersen, Patricia Richardson, Rob Schneider, Martin Sheen, Harry Dean Stanton, Connie Stevens, Jerry Stiller, George Takei, Lea Thompson, Jeanne Tripplehorn, Rainn Wilson, and Daphne Zuniga?






I can’t wait to see what the comments will be here.
Uhhh, isn’t there a contract to negoiate?
Patrica Heaton–Loved the endless stream of Albertson’s commercials you pumped out DURING the COMMERCIAL STRIKE. Now tell me again about “weakening” UNION contract negotiations.
I have always thought the “Unite for Strength” team was a bunch of self propelled, “we are the ONLY working actors”, producers first (like Hanks) or in bed with producers (you-know-who), Anti-UNION, self-serving blow hards.
And now they’ve been joined by Heaton who talks about “weakening us at the bargaining table.”–LAUGHABLE! Since I’m sure you remember Patricia did and endless stream of new Albertson’s commercials through the duration the commercial strike. Yes, you could say that weakened us. So, Patricia, how should I vote?”
It shouldn’t go without notice that both sides have celebrity “juice” if you will, but those whose work you really respect all seem to on the Membership First list.
But don’t be a “rude little pig.” Vote on the issues, the qualifications of the candidates, and their philosophy. I would argue a philosophy that starts with “WE’RE THE ONES WORK WE KNOW BETTER!!!” seems to ignore all the others who work as well AND definitely excludes those who they feel don’t work enough to count in a UNION. And the very people they care abot the least are the ones who need the protection of the UNION–a UNION about ALL IT’S MEMBERS!
Clean up on Aisle “Unite For Strength.”
this is all about the contract. If mf does well they will take it as sign to get a strike vote. I don’t think they will win and if they don’t they should give up their positions on the neg comm. Why draw this out.
As Ms. Finke suggests, real issues in this election could be obscured by opposing endorsements from actors who are better-known than the rank-and-file.
For thirteen years I was a loyal follower of the party
which now calls itself “Unite for Strength.” In a series of elections, we were defeated by the more militant “Membership First” faction. In the most high-profile election, Alan Rosenberg won more votes than Melissa Gilbert, in a free and fair contest
for president.
Because I wasn’t paying attention to the issues facing S.A.G., I followed the guidance of Mike Farrell, Melissa Gilbert and others whose opinions I trusted. I learned to hate and fear MembershipFirst, without ever knowing what they stood for.
The Writers’ Guild strike opened my eyes. I hope I have a more informed, and more balanced, view today.
My own translation of”Unite for Strength” would go
like this: “Divide and Weaken S.A.G., Force it to Merge with AFTRA.”
As the Divide and Weaken strategy plays out, S.A.G.’s
bargaining position with the AMPTP crumbles, and we get a contract as bad, or worse, than AFTRA’s. The next three years will be hard for us, and the AMPTP will give NOTHING more in the next contract negotiation.
“Unite for Strength” has a program, a platform. It has two goals.
– Merger with AFTRA.
– The termination of labor militancy in S.A.G.
Let me try to explain why I oppose “Unite for Strength” and ALL its candidates including seven colleagues and friends. (And please keep in mind that I have never voted for a Membership First candidate or referendum position. And please excuse my long-windedness; I know I’m badly in need of an editor.
In my biased opinion . . .
. . . Merger would be a good idea, but not the kind of merger “Unite for Strength” has in mind.
The only way actors will ever achieve the clout they deserve and need is for the actors of AFTRA to extricate themselves from that sinking ship and to make S.A.G. their sole collective bargaining unit.
We AFTRA actors are hamstrung by the fact that our “Federation” represents news anchors, sportscasters, recording artists, weather report readers, station announcers, talk-show hosts, and on and on. Over the years, AFTRA has done a poor job of representing us on-camera actors — because AFTRA is too weak, too poor and too understaffed to do a good job of negotiating for all these differing constituencies and their widely varying contractual needs.
Let AFTRA represent those other constituencies. I wish them well.
Once upon a time, before the age of television, AFRA (minus the “T” for “Television”) may have done a good job representing radio actors, as well as all the other categories of voice performers in the medium of radio. But, since I joined AFTRA around 1975, my deals under their contracts have been consistently inferior to my SAG deals.
I plan not to vote for any of the “Unite for Strength” candidates. I reject them and their platform for two reasons, both compelling, in my prejudiced view:
(1) If “Unite for Strength” wins more than 8 or 10 seats in this election, it could be seen as a VALIDATION of the opportunistic, sell-out behavior of AFTRA’s leadership in the current round of negotiations. After all, these AFTRA leaders are the very people SAG’s “Unite for Strength” wants to bond with. “Unite for Strength” sees Reardon, Hedgpeth-Roberts, Kimbrough and the rest of that faction as their allies.
If you vote for “Unite for Strength,” you will be voting for the same AFTRA/SAG faction that gave us the defective, disastrous AFTRA sweetheart contract “model” which SAG is now trying desperately to repair.
(By the bye, if you don’t work as often as “Unite for Strength” actors do, they might take away your vote. These are the same people who tried to splinter SAG, at the worst possible time, by aggressively and publicly pushing their “Affected Member Voting” scheme. Ned Vaughn is the lead organizer of both campaigns.)
#2 Compelling reason: If “Unite for Strength” achieves its ultimate goal, actors will NOT be represented by one strong union with greatly increased “leverage.” They will continue to be represented by two unions — WEAK and WEAKER — under one leaky umbrella, the AFTRA/SAG merged “ENTITY.”
“Unite for Strength” could borrow the rationale of a military official during the Viet Nam war: “We had to destroy the village, in order to save it.”
Unite for Strength: WE MUST DESTROY S.A.G., IN ORDER TO SAVE IT. (SAVE IT from the evildoers of MembershipFirst.)
I sincerely believe I’ll be choosing a better future — for myself and the next generation — by voting for Membership First. Which will be a “first” for me.
Dave Clennon
Exactly Redd Golde. Exactly.
Dear Hollywood,
Are the actors waiting for Christmas?
You have lost whatever advantage you had by not getting more PUBLIC SUPPORT on this SAG/AFTRA/AMPTP debacle a couple of months ago. Then it was a slow news time, people were on vacation, the kids were out of school.
Do you think that anyone is going to pay attention to you now?
The Olympics are here, then the Presidental election conventions, football and the TV seasons start, then the World Series. That small war in Russia. I know that I’ve missed a few events, but maybe you get the idea.
Not to mention that you’re going to have union elections in the middle of all of this?
IF you had done something in the past months to get some publicity, then the studios/producers might have come to the table with a different attitude.
YOU DIDN’T MESS UP THEIR VACATIONS WITH FRANTIC CALLS FROM THEIR PR PEOPLE, BEGGING FOR GUIDANCE ON HOW TO COUNTERACT YOUR LATEST PUBLICITY COUP. THEY DIDN’T SPEND SLEEPLESS NIGHTS, WONDERING WHAT TO DO NEXT.
YOU DID.
Now their kids will be going off to school, the studios will be coming off a record-breaking box office summer, DVD sales are up. You and your kids will be wondering if they’re gonna be wearing their cousin’s clothes, if they get to go to school at all.
About a month ago, I suggested that you have a parade, do anything to get support from the film and TV audiences. Get the audiences to put pressure on the studios/producers. Get some air time. YOU DID NOTHING BUT SIGN PETITIONS! Oh, wait, you did some interviews. Where you whined about the divisions between the two actors’ guilds.
IF the parade idea doesn’t appeal to you, there’s another, more subtle way…
Call a SEX STRIKE.
No signs needed, no picket lines.
Just good, clean fun.
NOBODY GETS ANY UNTIL THE ACTORS GET SOME!
NO ORGASMS FOR ANYONE!
You might have to enlist some of the other pros in Hollywood to make this happen, but think of all the snarky comments: “Hey, is that a scab or you just got some nasty disease?”
I can see the headlines now;
HOLLYWOOD SEX STRIKE, ACTORS DEMAND MONEY SHOT!
or
WILL SEX STRIKE CLOSE HOLES IN CONTRACT TALKS?
Right now, you’re more divided than united. That’s no way to win the war.
But you are doing a great job of SCREWING EACH OTHER OVER!
I love how most of the names who support Membership First are above the line actors who, for the most part, don’t work television and don’t work for scale contracts. We all know that the film world is like Wild West when it comes to money. Most of the people who support Unity for Strength are not above the line performers and do mostly television or are on television now, what some may consider the middle class actor. See why folks choose their sides…
I know it was just AMPTP-funded union bashing, but naysayers, this is why the WGA walked out the minute their contract expired. “Temporarily working without a contract” always becomes “working under the terms of your old crappy contract for a long time and imploding your union while you’re at it” because you’re essentially telling your employers that you don’t have the balls to strike. So they stonewall and eventually the union starts to eat itself alive because nothing is happening. If you’re going to strike you do it immediately – otherwise when’s a good time for “working without a contract” to become “oh NOW it’s time to strike?” The answer is never and that’s why SAG is going to get a crappy deal.
There are two potential outcomes here: 1) Existing leadership barely holds on but the AMPTP now knows that SAG will never muster the votes to actually strike. AMPTP exploits this by continuing to stonewall – after all, the current terms that actors are working under are quite favorable to them. Working without a contract continues for a few weeks. Then SAG accepts crap deal. Or 2) new leadership comes in. In an effort to prove that electing them was the right move and that golly, we’re reasonable, it’s just that those other assholes were assholes, they bend over backwards to be “fair and reasonable”. AMPTP smiles big and says lots of complimentary things in the press. Boy these new people are reasonable, golly gee if only those silly actors had sent them from the start! Behind closed doors they commence laughing their asses off. New leadership accepts pats on the head and smiles big. In the back of their mind they know they’re being laughed at but the bully is praising them – that’s what they want to hear. They choose to intentionally ignore this. Cognitive dissonance reigns. SAG accepts crap deal.
This is what happens when you send actors and writers in to negotiate against lawyers. Being here in Hollywood we should know a little something about specialization – we can’t even negotiate our own basically boilerplate performance contracts. So why do we send sitcom writers and dayplayers in to play point on union contracts? Chernin doesn’t act in one-hour dramas and Counter isn’t writing the next Batman. For that matter Hoffa didn’t drive a frigging truck.
So who among the names on the 2008 Solidarity Statement here are MF supporters?
NONE OF THEM YET — at least not publicly.
Signing a solidarity statement in support of the negotiating committee (and you know a union is doing a great job when it needs to ask members to sign solidarity statements) is a FAR cry from supporting MembershipFirst’s overall leadership of SAG.
I’ll lay long odds that very few of the names you referenced will publicly endorse MembershipFirst.
U4S keeps talking about ending the feud with AFTRA, but I have yet to see one word on how they plan to accomplish it. The last 2 merger plans were defeated by membership (not Membership First) because they were bad plans that gave way too much power to AFTRA. It also appears they’re being dishonest with budget projections, painting MF as fiscally irresponsible when it’s not the case.
U4S have several good points that I agree with on their platform page, but now I don’t know how honest any of them are.
Oh, and Michael Moore is a fat retard and Obama and George Clooney need to come out of the closet. Zing!
I’m probably the only person in town who hopes* there is a strike (yeah, I support Members First–I wish my own Guild were more militant, maybe we would’ve actually stood up and fought for what we really deserve), but it’s only because then I’d have an excuse for not working.
So far this summer, I’ve had over 60 meetings and not one job. And I hear from many of my friends that they’re in the same boat. Makes me wonder why we sold out so easily.
Stand Up Or Get Stepped On, that’s my motto.
*Not really, but I do support Membership First, because they’re on the right side of this battle.
so tom hanks was on FOX last night saying how bad SAG leadership is now.
WHEN IS THE LAST TIME TOM WORKED A WEAK AFTRA CONTRACT WITH NO RESIDUALS?
WHEN IS THE LAST TIME TOM’S LIVELIHOOD WAS CONTINGENT UPON A FAIR DEAL BEING STRUCK BETWEEN SAG AND THE AMPTP?
why would tom come out in support of A DEAL THAT IS,
(even in the estimation of unite for strength),
NOT GOOD ENOUGH AND POTENTIALLY DAMAGING?
because now, TOM IS A PRODUCER. he’s a mogul now and he’s got things to do and he can’t be bothered with some pesky middle-class
actors gumming up the works with their labor struggles.
he did MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING in canada under some ACTRA
contract
and BAND OF BROTHERS was done in england with some sort of
one time buy out deal.
all right tom. best wishes for your continued success with playtone.
if you were to ask, say, sally field, what her actual plan is for u4s, besides generalities such as she and the others express in their statements? I would bet the farm she’d have no fucking clue.
they don’t understand u4s is not going to win control of the board unless they win every seat, and that’s not going to happen.
they don’t understand that u4s, whatever its numbers, will have to walk into the same room mf has been in, with the same leadership, alan rosenberg and doug allen, under sag election law, and face the amptp, and somehow make good on their pledge to “get everything sag is asking for – and more!”
that’s not going to happen. why? the amptp has no intention of significantly changing it’s “last and final offer” simply because members of a different faction of sag are sitting in front of it. naive is the kind word for that.
so, the contract will continue to be handled by rosenberg and allen, under sag rules.
if the membership gives mf a vote of confidence in this election, mf has the option of calling for a strike authorization. if they get it, they can walk back into the negotiating room and say to the amptp. “give us a percentage of new media from first dollar and first airing, we’ll give you dvd (they’ve already taken it off the table in their latest public statements. I disagree with that) we’ll tweak a couple other things, and you’ve got a deal.” the amptp can, of course, say “no.”
but, when sag then says “o.k. then, we strike,” believe me, the amptp is going to think long and hard about letting sag walk. they will lose billions of dollars. production will stop overnight. they can get somebody, a scab, to direct a sit-com. they can get somebody, a scab, to write an episode of “csi: miami,” but, they cannot survive without sag actors, especially the stars. sag walks. the stars walk. why? because, even though the stars, except for a brave few, have been curiously silent, or have endorsed aftra, like stout hearted tom hanks, any star that crosses a sag picket line? will be a pariah. and they know it. they’ll need armed fucking guards. and the business, starved of its actors, especially its stars? can’t survive. the producers know it. sag knows it.
if this all sounds unpleasant and radical to you? if you’re looking for a less confrontational alternative? I understand. but, what needs to be understood is: there isn’t one. not now. the amptp is ONE union away from setting a precedent that will allow them to push actors out of their fair share of money on the internet along with residuals – AND THEY KNOW IT – THAT’S why the producers are so pissed.
unfortunately, the time is NOW to confront them. and the only tool sag has in its box is – the threat of strike. otherwise? they roll over us, and set a precedent we’ll never overturn (dvd anyone?)
it’s scary, it’s a drag, it sucks, all that and more – but, contrary to the spin you hear from aftra and u4s, if sag started negotiating “early” as they were clamoring for, the amptp still wouldn’t have given us a fair deal on new media. no way. that’s their line in the sand. look what the dga got? after all their “research.”
why? because directors rely much, much less on residuals, so they agreed to this deal. and when residuals do come, they’re fat. 1 director.
the writers. much less reliance than sag. 1,2,3,4 writers split a residual. wga agreed to the deal,
because the dga swooped in, not for the first time, and undercut the wga.
actors? 30, 40, 50 split a residual payment? and actors MUST have strong residual protections or WE’RE OUT OF BUSINESS FOLKS. you think it’s hard NOW to eek out a living as a middle class actor?
imagine if, under this contract, you’re facing a sea of non-union actors, who will swarm in to fill that non-union space aftra already agreed to, where the amptp can “experiment” and where they need “flexibility” with a “new business model” – the EXACT same argument they made with vhs/dvd 24 years ago and they NEVER changed the residual rate, despite pledging to do so, “if business permitted.”
well folks, business sure permitted: “10.1 BILLION DOLLARS in DVD sales” (variety headline july 20th 2008)
actors lost HUNDREDS OF MILLION OF DOLLARS on that act of “trust” with the amptp. these are cold, bottom-line businessmen, whose sole mantra is “more profit – less cost” to think or “trust otherwise? is negotiation suicide.
so, sag members are beginning to wake up and pay attention. some, like the u4s supporters above, are not particularly informed. they just want to work. “stop the drama” they say. simple enough.
they want to “all get together, under one banner,” despite the fact that that option has been explored ad nauseum and voted down as unwise and unworkable and NOT IN SAG’s BEST INTEREST 16 TIMES since 1939(you read that right).
but, if they do some homework, they see this contract is THE seminal contract in recent sag history. why? because, unlike 3 years ago, the net is NOW a viable content delivery system for the suits. and in 3, 5 years, it will be THE delivery system for the suits. and the suits are trying to muscle actors, especially middle class actors, out of their fair share.
that’s what’s so ridiculous about this whole thing – what sag, led by mf, who were ELECTED “to take a harder line with the amptp” is asking for? is fair! it’s reasonable, and in some cases, overdue! the moon? the stars? nope. just a fair contract. that’s all mf wants. that’s all sag wants.
say, we get beyond the contract mess, in theory. u4s’s plan is to merge with aftra, although, as nikki reminds above, it was aftra that stabbed sag in the back by breaking its word to negotiate together, as we had for 28 years.
merger is not going to happen
it will be a multi-month, expensive, bitter process, which, if history is any guide will not produce a single union, for all the same reasons that have been gone over since 1939 until 2003. 16 merger attempts. 16 “no” votes by sag membership.
u4s wants, regardless of how they’ve renamed it, qualified voting. so, basically, their pitch is: “vote for us – so we can take away your right to vote!”
look folks, where the rubber meets the road in all this is THIS contract. is it helpful to have an opposing faction clamoring for change in the middle of a crucial contract negotiation? of course not. will this faction alter the negotiating dynamic and demands, even if they win every seat, which they won’t? of course not.
so, what are we talking about?
we’re talking about one thing: why won’t the amptp agree to a percentage deal from first dollar and first airing on the internet?
why is the amptp clinging to a relatively arbitrary series of “floors” (15k per minute, 330k, or 450k for series, whichever is lower) which are so much higher than the current average cost of one minute of original content for the internet – 2k?
the reason? the amptp, long before any of these negotiations began, with any of the creative unions, made a corporate decision that their goal going into these negotiations was to hold the line on new media. especially to muscle actors out of residuals.
producers HATE paying residuals. it is THE bane of their existence. they rue the day they agreed to it, in any form.
now, since middle class actors rely on residuals for anywhere from 20 to 50% of their yearly income, the current leadership , yes, mf leadership, understands that this is a MUST HAVE for sag.
why? because, in their own words, the producers know production is inexorably headed towards the internet. it is a “vastly cheaper delivery system.”
they say “3 to 5 years” (last sunday’s ny times, jeff bewkes, president, warner brothers)as their best guess as to when this will be standard.
they already have language in the aftra contract that allows all this to begin happening now. aftra is, and will be negotiating deals with the amptp that, if the content is made for the internet, and run and reused on the internet? there will be NO RESIDUALS FOR ACTORS. EVER.
the current aftra contract has language that, even if the production is union? the residuals will be non-existent, or so low as to be a non-factor. there is ONE very narrow exception for content made for a pay for play platform, such as itunes.
the current aftra contract says producers have to “ask” you if you will agree to, say, wear a budweiser hat in a scene in a movie for no apparent reason – but if you say “uh, no, if you don’t mind, I’d rather not – that feels a little exploitive – and I make most of my living in commercials, and since this movie could be running somewhere in perpetuity on the web? I would never be able to audition for any other beer commercial again. ”
to which, under the language in the aftra contract, there is NOTHING that prohibits the producer from saying “oh. o.k. – well, you’re fired. NEXT!”
u4s wants to merge with aftra. they want to “take a less adversarial stance” with the amptp. and they want qualified voting.
that’s it. that’s their platform.
sag faces nothing less than a neutered union in this contract. if we agree to the current terms now, how will we overturn the precedent set now in the next contract?
we’ll have to strike. the amptp is PISSED that sag is the one union standing between them an an open field on new media. dga has given them what they want. wga has given them what they want. now, aftra has betrayed sag, and given them what they want.
sag is the only union left. so, do we come together, and let our democratically elected leaders face the tough position they’re in, knowing the membership is behind them?
or, do we elect a whole slate of new candidates who profess an approach to the current negotiations that asks for exactly the same thing, which they won’t, by any rational understanding of the process and sag law, get?
Dear T-Rex,
My my, you certainly seem to have a lot of time on your hands. Sorry, too busy ( I work for a living) to read your lengthy rant. If their weren’t so many like minded people on this blog, you fit exactly the definition of an internet troll.
Hey T-rex – you could have said what you had to say in a sentence – you should learn to edit yourself – you’re not that interesting – i don’t give two shits what an overpaid movie star has to say about my unions – there is a contract that needs to be settled – rail on you assholes – there will be no strike – cause your leadership has failed you – and there about to pass up retro-money as they watch aug 15 pass them by…send all of ‘em to the moon, alice, and get some leadership who knows when to say, “…deal.”
Just so all SAG members know this:
Tom Hanks is a union busting producer(Playtone). Most, if not all of his projects are done out of the country and certainly out of Hollywood. He avoids unions at all costs. He does not pay his actors residuals if he can avoid them.
In a private meeting with SAG elected, Hanks responded to an invitation to participate in the wages and working conditions meetings prior to the start of negotiations:
“I don’t care if you guys want paper or plastic cups on the set, just take the DGA deal.” His words, exactly.
Hanks did HBO’s Band of Brother’s (with SAG actors) under contracts that did not provide coverage for the American Actors. He did it in Europe.
He did “John Adams” in eastern Europe.
He did “My Big Fat Wedding” in Canada.
He’s a union buster with a slate full of projects done outside of the states. But, he makes a shit load of money off of our blood sweat and tears.
Now, think about that, fellow SAG middle-class actors, hell, ANY SAG actors: “Band of Brothers” – a great, great show. It will sell, in it’s DVD box set, for decades. It has already sold millions and millions of copies.
And Tom Hanks, who is worth, what, conservatively? I won’t even hazard a guess – gives the SAG actors a one-time buy-out deal on residuals for the DVD box set?
And a paltry one at that?
Why? Does Hanks need the money? Could the producers not afford to give the SAG actors a fair cut of the DVD?
No. Come on. One reason: greed. Get a bunch of no-name actors, who MAKE the show work (well, Ron Livingston, but still – if you stop 100 people on the street in Davenport, Iowa and say “who’s Ron Livingston?” Every single one of them would say either “I don’t know,” or, “he owns the feed store down the block.” Not a “name” in the box office sense. Terrific, terrific actor (and supporter of MF, by the way).
Just to clear up any lingering doubt among SAG actors whose side Tom Hanks is on? TOM HANKS. He support U4s and the AFTRA deal, because he wants to avoid SAG wages, SAG residuals, SAG protections, in short – SAG.
And what union covered every single movie he’s EVER made – provided the wages, when he started out and desperately needed them, provided the workplace protections when it WAS an issue for him, provided residuals when that “Bosom Buddies” check actually paid his utilities bill?
The Screen Actors Guild. That’s who. Thanks Tom. You fucking rat.
Its fun to watch gaggles of leftists rip each other apart.
T-rex,
Nowhere has U4S said that they seek to take a less adversarial stance with the AMPTP. That claim is just not true. Ned Vaughn said that SAG and AFTRA need to take a less adversarial stance with EACH OTHER, not the AMPTP! In fact, Vaughn said that that they’re absolutely not afraid of a fight with the AMPTP and, according to their website, they seek seek for actors all that the current negotiation committee is seeking and MORE.
As for affected member voting, IT’S NOT PART OF THE U4S’s platform! Yes, many of their slate supported affected member voting, but Vaughn has gone on the record that it’s no longer being pursued. Actually, this “radical notion” of affected member voting (which is written into the SAG constitution, by the way) means that actors and background actors need only have worked one day on that particular contract to qualify to vote on that specific contract. That’s it. If I’ve never worked an animation contract, why should I vote on that contract? I’d STILL be able to vote on other matters which apply to me, including the general elections. Yes, you read that right. Actors would still be able to vote for the SAG board, president, etc. – just not for a contract on which they haven’t worked. The WGA, DGA and just about every other labor union out there have the EXACT SAME PROVISION in their contract voting. Does that make them elitist bastards? Letting the complete membership vote on contracts which only a few of them work only weakens SAG’s leverage when it comes to negotiating that particular contract. Besides, it doesn’t matter anymore. Affected Member voting on contracts isn’t part of the U4S slate.
Regardless of whether you love AFTRA, don’t mind them or think of them as a scumbag union (I personally resent that I’m a member of AFTRA and have to pay dues to both), it’s all just a big b.s. separation of actors. As any Economics 101 student can tell you, competition (i.e., SAG & AFTRA) inevitably leads to lower prices (translate – lower minimums for actors). Who cares who walked out first or who stabbed who in the back?? The AMPTP isn’t divided now, so why should actors be? Let’s put all the stupid, childish animosity between SAG and AFTRA behind us (what are we, 8 years old?) and finally merge the damn unions so that actors can have some REAL muscle and be able to push the AMPTP around for once.
58% of SAG members voted for the merger in 2003, only 2% shy of approval. 79% of SAG members polled afterwards said they wanted the merger but were nervous about their pensions vanishing into thin air. This was misinformation. Maybe it was fear-mongering stirred by the Studios but individual pensions are insured by the federal government, in a manner similar to how FDIC insures bank accounts up to $100,000.
U4S is made up of working actors, stunt performers, stand-ins and even a couple of actors with only a couple of credits. There’s a lot of misinformation out there about their stance. They’ve pledged to bring a real battle to the AMPTP and I think they’ll get more leverage if AMPTP doesn’t have a wussy competing union (AFTRA) against which to play SAG. When SAG and AFTRA do merge, the terms of that contract will be able to be stronger than either of what SAG or AFTRA would be able to get individually.
I have nothing against the members of MF. Many of them are wonderful actors and genuinely nice people, but it’s absolute lunacy to think that SAG actors are going to rip up their AFTRA cards and refuse any AFTRA acting gigs. Would you turn down a Series Regular job on DAMAGES? Hey kid, you seem like a nice waiter and you might be great for my AFTRA show. It would be $20,000 a week but your residuals and DVD would suck. Think that waiter will say, “Take your AFTRA series regular job and shove it! AFTRA’s a scumbag union!! I’m gonna’ stick with my waiter job!” If you’re a working schmo actor in L.A. like me, you’ll take that AFTRA job and you’ll be grateful for the work. Even if it does mean that your residuals and DVD checks will suck.
I believe in what Uniteforstrength is trying to do and I intend to vote for their slate. I’d recommend taking a look at their official website to learn more about them, instead of all the spin and lies (from MF moles?) on this board and others like it.
SG
bark-at-the-moon
“i don’t give two shits what an overpaid movie star has to say about my unions -”
“there about to pass up retro-money as they watch aug 15 pass them by”
what a bunch of pussies. I mean, seriously.
henry 5 at agincourt: “hey – there’s a shit-load of those fucking french motherfuckers. let’s go home.”
so the big bad producers are scaring you? you want to roll over for them? you want to “strike in three years” but, not now, if it’s necessary? (hint: it’s probably necessary)
you want to take the aftra contract, so we can all “get back to work?”
you want to set a precedent that gives away residuals on the internet?
o.k. we’ll do that. but first? nap time.
sally field does not understand or care that supporting u4s means she’s supporting a future in which actors will work, in perpetuity, for a couple hundred bucks a day and no residuals. NO RESIDUALS.
she wanted sag to accept the dga deal. what an idiot. she has no understanding whatsoever about how residuals work. and she probably couldn’t define the term “financial core” if a gun was pointed at her face. but she’ll learn what it means very quickly if u4s passes qualified voting.
tom hanks is a producer. patricia heaton is a scab. alec baldwin doesn’t give two shits about you and your residuals. these people are union-busters.
WAKE UP! your union needs you now. it’s balls to the wall time and, yeah, it’s unpleasant. this union was formed for a reason, and that reason was to PROTECT ACTORS.
tom hanks does not want to protect you. he wants to protect himself. sally field, bless her, is too dumb to understand what’s she’s doing. she’s getting very bad advice from very misinformed and ego-driven motherfuckers.
your fellow actors (u4s) are FUCKING YOU. and some of them have no idea, because they’re accepting the word of agenda-driven advisers without doing any independent fact-checking.
u4s are SHEEP. no, they’re worse. they’re PUPPETS. puppets of a defeated and divisive regime that would rather fuck their fellow actors so they can say they won than do what’s right for the future of the union and its members.
Who supports MeFirst?
Almost no one these days.
They’re the little engine that couldn’t.
Member of both unions here. Can’t stand anyone who’s running for office, at least not the slates. Signing the solidarity statement doesn’t mean one supports MF.
(Heaton did those spots during the grocery workers’ strike, didn’t she? Not that that makes her the labor solidarity poster girl.)
I hate the AFTRA “contract”. Troll or not, I don’t think Scott or Bark-at-the-Moon actually read what T-rex had to say. T-r makes a compelling (albeit long-winded) argument, and so far it’s the sanest I’ve heard.
I don’t want a strike. I also don’t want to lose out on residuals, or for the AMPTP to give my work to non-union actors. Too late for AFTRA. Not too late for SAG, not if we authorize a strike. It may be our last chance to maintain acting as a job instead of a hobby.
Unless we’re Hanks, of course. Oooh, I can see him grinning at the camera, holding up his first SAG card with pride.
The DGA are AMPTP ball washers. The WGA sold out. AFTRA is the AMPTP’s bitch. Roberta Reardon is satan. SAG is the only good union. With strong leadership. It’s time to STRIKE STRIKE STRIKE. I’m out of work anyway, (I got my SAG card at an “upgrade party” on Sex, Lies and Secrets”) so screw it. Let’s burn this town down.
“it’s balls to the wall time” …………. R e a l l y ! ………….. I thought it was
“Haven’t heard anything from the leadership in weeks, what the fuck is going on time”
But that’s just me. ………Leaders are suppose to lead. Not really happening. but I’m sure I’m the Douche’ in all this….. Right?