Different well-known actors in the past 48 hours have written in support for United For Strength or Membership First. Here’s Mike Farrell (supporting U4S) and Martin Sheen (supporting MF). I flipped a coin to determine which opinion I posted first:
From MARTIN SHEEN
To my fellow actors:If you’re one of the tens of thousands of S.A.G. members who don’t work enough or earn enough as an actor, you’re in danger of losing one of your fundamental rights as a union member. Unless you take the time, right now, to go get your S.A.G. ballot and re-elect MembershipFirst, you could lose your right to vote.
A slate of actors has emerged calling themselves “Unite For Strength”, with an overwhelming majority of their candidates determined to implement “Qualified” or “Affected” voting on all future S.A.G. contracts. Regardless of what they are claiming TODAY, if this group gains control of S.A.G.’s national board, they will start the “qualified/affected” voting policy in motion. Since February 2008, they have dedicated their energies in collecting signatures for their “Qualified Voting Petition.” They’ve proudly and publicly touted their list of supporters, including the names of very high profile actor/producers. They and their supporters have signed a petition that would end democracy in the Screen Actors Guild and create a ‘class system’ between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’.
The AMPTP, ( the group that represents our largest employers/producers) have publicly endorsed “Qualified Voting”. In their opinion, too many actors are voting on S.A.G. contracts. Clearly the AMPTP has something to gain if fewer members are allowed to vote: The potential of all contracts, no matter how weak, being ratified by a greatly diminished voting pool.
Many of the actors who signed the “qualified/affected” voting petition are themselves producers with very successful production companies. That’s clearly a conflict of interest.
It is safe to assume that strong and determined unionists like Crystal Lee Sutton, (the real ‘Norma Rae’) would never support “Qualified”/”Affected” voting. She would know that any proposed plan to disqualify a member’s right to vote would weaken the power of a union and its members. With regard to the Screen Actors Guild, the “qualified/affected” voting proposal, proudly advocated by “Unite For Strength” and their supporters, would deny 75% of S.A.G.’s membership the right to vote on our most important contracts. Those who will be most impacted by ‘affected’ voting are the same S.A.G. members who are having the hardest time getting hired- namely performers of color, seniors, performers with disabilities and woman over the age of 35. I firmly believe that the real ‘Norma Rae’ would never support any policy as divisive, as elitist and as discriminatory as “qualified/affected” voting. I’m confident that she, nor any other strong union activists like her, would ever support the inherent divisiveness of positions “Unite For Strength” advocates.
The proposed “qualified/affected” voting plan goes against not only the very essence of “unionism”, but it is also based on a false premise.
There is absolutely NO evidence that struggling actors vote any differently than those who are LUCKY enough to work consistently, particularly when it comes to contracts.
MembershipFirst is, and has always been, against “qualified” or “affected” voting. That’s one of the reasons why they have my complete support. They have consistently fought for all actors, regardless of earning levels. From A-Lister to up and comers, MembershipFirst has and will continue to keep their eyes on the prize and work diligently for all of the members of the greatest talent union in the world.
Please join me in voting for the entire MembershipFirst slate as listed below.
In solidarity,
Martin Sheen
—
From MIKE FARRELL
“What we’re deciding here will affect actors for a generation,” said Doug Allen to Time Magazine. This is the man who, with no knowledge of the industry, was hired by the small faction now in control of our union to be SAG’s National Executive Director. What he said was right, but probably not in the way he meant it.
Allen’s obedience to Membership First, the group now running things by dint of control of the Hollywood Board, may well “affect actors for a generation” by destroying the very union they are so misleading. It’s awful to watch this storied organization be highjacked and flown into a building.
I was thrilled to join the Screen Actors Guild almost 50 years ago, and felt the same way when joining AFTRA not long after. I’ve been proud of my union membership while building a career over the decades. How frustrating, then, to watch this disaster unfold.
There have been struggles within the union over the years, of course – labor disputes, political disagreements and some name-calling – all part of the dynamic. But I went happily along, working and assuming the good people in charge would sort out what problems arose. Oh, I lent assistance once in a while, but always managed to avoid serious involvement like serving on the board or running for office. I had a job.
Then, about ten years ago, a scurrilous campaign against a very bright and effective president of the Guild made me pay closer attention.
Too late.
Richard Masur was ousted by a group of angry members, mostly commercial actors, who felt they weren’t getting their due. ‘What actor does?’ I wondered. Masur out, they put in a figurehead president who said he knew nothing and proved it, letting them run things while he did crossword puzzles. And run them they did, right into the ground.
In short order this group became led by agent-haters and those out to destroy AFTRA. Angry, organized and militant, increasingly thought of as “the crazies,” they reneged on a deal to renew the Agents Franchise, alienated much of organized labor and bullied their way by 2000 into a horrendous commercial strike they didn’t know how to end. The resulting six-month disaster cost actors and others careers, homes, businesses and hundreds of millions of dollars while sending commercials abroad and permanently disfiguring the marketplace.
When the instigators grudgingly got out of the way and let the adults resolve the strike, they quickly stepped back in, took credit, bragged about a “win” and proceeded to wreak havoc inside the union.
In 2001, a group of actors concerned about the damage done to SAG ran for the Hollywood Board, the root of the problem. (New York and the Regional Branches are not “real actors,” according to one of these Hollywood-centric types.) Surprising nearly everyone, we won. I became First VP under the leadership of President Melissa Gilbert.
Failing to win enough seats to control the Hollywood Board, however, we dealt with the majority’s hostility for a year before finally electing enough independent thinkers to reduce them to a snarling minority and begin to undo the damage. Working with New York and the Branches, we first negotiated a new agreement with the agents, which then had to be sent out for approval by the membership. Running a treacherous, fear-mongering campaign of lies and distortion that would make Karl Rove proud, the crazies, now known as Memberhip First, confused enough members to defeat the agreement, leaving SAG’s membership without the Agents Franchise protections they had enjoyed for 37 years – a situation that continues today.
Next, we resumed an attempt to join actors in a single union by merging SAG and AFTRA, a goal both organizations had been working toward for decades. But, with their usual cancerous tactics, the MFs managed to undermine it. (Requiring a supermajority, the effort – supported by over 58% of SAG’s members – failed by only a few hundred votes.) The destruction of this effort, a calamity heralded as a triumph by the MFs, proved a foretaste of the future. Winning being everything to some people, the bit was in their teeth – and they ran with it.
Retaking the Hollywood Board majority about three years ago, this faction now reigns over the entire Guild, wallowing in power while pretending to serve the members. Driving out or firing nearly everyone with enough institutional memory to threaten their 19th Century approach, they’ve paid off contracts at huge expense, spent the union into debt, elected another trophy president, brought in Mr. Allen and proceeded to metastasize.
Beginning with threats to “promulgate” a new relationship with the agents – a ploy that brought a quick and embarrassing slap-down – they next tried to strong-arm AFTRA into taking a back seat in the 2008 contract negotiations, which they intended to begin only at the very last minute in order to “pressure” the AMPTP into complying early to avoid a strike – a tactic so juvenile as to be laughable given the industry’s consolidation and its ability to stockpile.
Unwilling to forgo its historic position as equal partner in negotiations, AFTRA surprised the MFs by calling their bluff. After trying every other poisoned arrow in their quiver, Allen and company folded like an empty tent and embraced a suspicious AFTRA again, pretending it was all a misunderstanding.
With the DGA and WGA (after a three-month strike) making their deals, and facing pressure in the form of a “just talk” memo from the very stars SAG counts on for implicit muscle at the bargaining table, the MFs were forced to rethink their position and pretend to start talks. But some just couldn’t resist, and one more schoolyard shove at AFTRA caused the sister union to break with SAG and deal with the AMPTP on its own. Reeling, SAG’s militants scrambled, quickly claiming a right to meet the producers first. AFTRA obliged.
Unable to deliver what they’d long promised with tough talk, SAG hit an impasse with the AMPTP after weeks of head-banging. This opened the door for AFTRA to step in and negotiate like professionals. Adding insult to self-inflicted injury, AFTRA made its deal, securing some gains SAG had not been able to achieve, and sent the contract out for approval by its membership.
Then, in an act of desperation, the MFs, over the heated objection of the despised minority from NY and the Branches, voted to further deplete the union’s coffers with a campaign (variously reported to cost $100,000 to $200,000) of lies, distortion, obfuscation and misrepresentation, telling dual-card holders to disapprove the contract. (This while obscuring pertinent facts: all members of AFTRA’s negotiating team were also members of SAG; the AFTRA deal was based on a template established by the DGA and WGA; AFTRA’s negotiators took advantage of research done by the DGA on the key issue of New Media that SAG had disdained.)
In no surprise to anyone but their true-believers, this fundamentally anti-union tactic failed, digging the MFs – and with them our once-esteemed union – into the ever-deepening hole in which we find ourselves today.
And so, the power-obsessed group currently in control of the Hollywood Board – which carries with it the majority vote in our national union – has so completely screwed things up with their behavior that they’ve destroyed the credibility of a once-powerful institution and put us all in a situation that may well “affect actors for a generation.”
This can change in the incipient Screen Actors Guild election. A group of independent, thoughtful, concerned actors has mounted a campaign for seats on the Hollywood Board. If they succeed it will shift the balance of power in our union – not away from Hollywood – but away from mean-spirited, destructive, profligate behavior and back toward becoming the respected Guild I was proud to join.
Ballots will be coming soon. If you vote in Hollywood I urge you to support the 31 candidates running as Unite for Strength – www.uniteforstrength.com – and vote, in addition, for two independent candidates, Morgan Fairchild and Susan Boyd Joyce.
Respectfully,
Mike Farrell
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







Oh Mike… while your tacky 9/11 analogy didn’t exactly shoot your opinion piece to hell, it came pretty close. Now I have to use a wipe on my screen.
Here is what they propose for qualified voting:
For TV/Theatrical contract voting, an “affected member” is any member in good standing who, over the previous 2 contract terms (6 years) or total years as member if less than 6 years,:
1. Performed an average of 1 day of principal work or 6 days of background work per year (or an equivalent mix thereof); OR
2. Had average TV/Th residual earnings per year equivalent to 1 principal day at scale; OR
3. Is fully vested in the SAG Producers Pension Plan and has previously worked under the TV/Th contract.
Are you serious? All these because they ask that you at least work 1 day a year. It seems pretty fair to me. Or that you are vested and previously worked under the contract. That means that even Justine Bateman can vote under number 3.
I bet you wouldn’t want a grip who only works one day a year to safety off that 50 by 50 ft silk over your head, or that hair person that works only one day a year to give you your haircut before your big scene, or that assistant cameraperson to keep focus on you if they only worked one day a year, how about that gaffer that only works one day a year lighting your close up? It never ever happens that way.
Ask your self why?
The choice is really quite simple:
If you feel that SAG is in a stronger place now with the AMPTP and that AFTRA should be beaten into submission or that it’s possible to force AFTRA to get out of representing actors at all then vote for Membership First.
If you think that AFTRA and SAG should work TOGETHER and stop fighting each other and form a united front against the AMPTP, then vote for United for Strength.
The Qualified Voting is a red herring of misdirection designed to generate fear.
Every letter for or against by a name actor distracts from that core issue.
SAG members, make a choice – Continue the fight with AFTRA or get ALL ACTORS into a united front against the AMPTP.
Yes, it really is that simple.
David Jolliffe — “Ja”, Mike Farrell — “Nein”.
Why is anyone surprised by Mr. Farrell’s indignant, inappropriate and insensitive comments? When he was vice-president under Ms. Gilbert, his anger and sarcasm toward any member that did not agree with him was shockingly palpable. On one occasion, at an membership meeting held at the Wadsworth Theater, when a point-of-order brought to his attention that there was no water available to the members in attendance(even the water fountains were inoperable), he held up his own half-empty bottle and suggested that it be passed around so that each member could take a sip. To say you could hear a pin drop in the auditorium would be an understatement.
To this member, he has zero credibility.
It’s not Farrell against Sheen.
It’s Membership First against Unite for Strength.
I’m not thrilled by either group, but I know one thing.
Membership First has already failed. They have no plan other than to bitch about the AMPTP and AFTRA, not necessarily in that order. They have no solidarity, they have no credibility.
All they have is has beens like Joliffe insisting they’ve done a fabulous job, while anyone who actually works commercials knows the 2000 strike was a disaster. The contract’s worth more now, after eight years of inflation? Great.
But what would it have been if almost half the work wasn’t driven non union?
Failure First is done for. Even if Unite for Strength isn’t perfect, they can’t do worse than the clowns who’ve screwed up the past three years.
Dump ‘em, and let’s try again next election cycle.
Qualified voting is such a non-issue. Less than a quarter to a third of the SAG membership ever bother to vote on anything. They do not bother to return their ballots even with the postage paid for them. MF’s are just running scare and grasping a straws to stay in power. Their tactics have lost this contract negotiation and they don’t want to admit their defeat. Let’s get some new folks in there and see if we can move forward for a change.
@playmaker..stop making sense, no one will listen
..they’d rather equate qualified voting with separate water fountains and whatnot, not actually read the proposal, easier to lie about it if they don’t read it, you see. I have no problem with actors who actually work the contracts voting on them in this way; One thing you can count on is that people will act in their own best interest; Therefore, having the people who works these contracts be the ones voting on them makes sense, as they will(surprise) act in their own best interest, which means a better contract. By extension, when I work on said contracts, I, and everyone else who works them will benefit. and, as a black actor, I find it very offensive that anyone would equate AMV with what america went through during the height of the civil rights movement..no Bull Connor-esque
figure is going to be in front of SAG headquarters with dogs and a firehose, stopping members from voting..having said that, I find it equally offensive of Mike Farrell to use 9/11 imagery to illustrate his points..waaaay over the top, Mike. No one’s gonna die here,over this. Get a fucking grip.
playmaker says: “this is all they ask…” and then lists
the qualifications that have proposed for affected member voting.
the problem is that once the the voting standards have been changed from ONE ACTOR – ONE VOTE, the door will have been opened to
change the qualifications again and again.
enthusiasts would argue “that would never be allowed to happen”
but since this would be decided by the board, it would depend on who was in power. and if those people were less well-intentioned than i believe ms. brenneman to be, anything is possible
interesting to note that the amptp has strongly suggested that SAG adopt qualified voting. the ATA too.
why? because they know a smaller group is easier to control.
unite for strength cannot now believably claim that AMV
is a “non-issue”. they formed the U4S party, so to speak,
as a way to push forward this agenda of qualified voting.
that was the primary reason they got together.
they’re trying to backpedal now because they’ve learned it’s
a wildly unpopular idea and it’s election time. oops.
their financial accusations have been disproven,
and now the only plank of their platform that they have left is their
insistence that we merge with aftra.
merger? okay, what’s their plan? we’d all love to hear it.
if they had plan i think they would have spelled it out by now
since the election is hard upon us.
they say that they” want everything MF wants and MORE” in terms of this current unresolved contract but they don’t say how they would go about doing that.
they say that MF mishandled the negotiations and that MF drove AFTRA from the table.
but, ironically, if AFTRA had negotiated with us we might very well be stuck with this contract that U4S itself says is not good enough.
in a 50/50 negotiation it only takes one vote to push something over the edge.
U4S and their supporters are critical of rosenberg and allen
for not closing the deal.
well what were they supposed to do? cave? take the easy way out as AFTRA has done by giving the amptp everything they wanted?
if U4S gains control of the board do you think that the amptp is going
to offer them more because the “reasonable” people are now in
charge of the union? no way. they’re going to say here’s the same deal,
take it or leave it.
all of the things that we enjoy as SAG members … good wages,
good working conditions, health and pension plans, and residuals .. were won by SAG people who came before us and fought for them.
unfortunately, the conglomerates have seized the advent of new technology to try and eliminate residuals among other things.
they’re playing hardball and SAG leadership is hanging tough in a bad situation.
Just pull up Farrel’s ugly, insulting, totally inappropriate reference to 9/11 the next time you hear somebody say it’s only the conservatives who are the fearmongers and haters. What a sick joke.
And Wayne Rogers was so much better in M*A*S*H, Big Head.
Labor Relations 101: Class is in session. Today we are going to examine a rather remarkable upside-down labor/management universe. We are going to study how a group of rapacious, brutally greedy media companies, *that viciously compete with each other*, somehow banded together to successfully dismember one of the most powerful entertainment alliances, the Screen Actor’s Guild, and AFTRA. You would think, that despite their differences, these two organizations would understand that the AMPTP, collection of dozens of big and small production organizations, could be challenged only if they stood strong, if only for the purposes and duration of the contract negotiations. But, as we will discover, that modern battles are not won by the heart, but by the head… as the AMPTP showed… if you will open your texts to Chapter One, “How Dumb Can You Get?” we will proceed…
David Jolliffe,
I have one question for you and for everyone that reads this board:
Is SAG a more powerful, more ably run, more unified union in the year 2008 than it was in 2003 when Membership First came into power?
You know what Dave, don’t bother answering the question. The answer is obvious.
If you are thinking about voting for MF, just open your eyes.
harry98-
What you don’t work at least 1 day a year? You mean to tell me that you go in the hole every time you have to pay dues? Acting is just not your bag harry98… im sorry that I have to be the one to tell you this.
This election is not about AMV. It’s about the fact that there is no contract. You can use all the excuses in the world but the buck stops with leadership. They didn’t get it done. Simple as that.
Everyone knows you don’t have to make excuses for wining strategies. Losers make excuses, winners accept responsibility. MF has done the opposite.
There is a third choice:
All actors in one Union: Screen Actors Guild.
Then all acting earnings would go into one Pension fund (with a higher accrual rate than the smaller union); all earning would be applied to one Health Plan (with lower premiums than the smaller union).
The membership needs to get involved.
hey playmaker?
the fact that there is no contract is because what is being offered is unacceptable.
the dga went out of turn and agreed to a deal that is good for them and them only.
the wga was weakened by a powerful group within their own union and
they settled for the dga ‘template’ that is no good for them.
poor little aftra? they threw themselves on top of this same bum deal and yelled, “WE’LL TAKE IT!” wow, that’s some crack negotiating.
even unite for strength says this contract is no good.
what’s your deal in this business playmaker?
are you some showrunner? are you one of the guys that attended that
dinner with sorkin?
tired of some little actors interrupting your revenue stream?
i’m sorry hotshot, i missed your post where you explained what is is you do.
this election is about one group who is still fighting to get a good deal for it’s members,
and another group who will go along to get along and
“Live to fight another day.” trouble is they never fight.
funny how you didn’t address any of my points with facts,
you run away from the AMV thing just as Unite for Strength is doing and you start by saying, “Wow you must not be much of an actor if you don’t work one day a year.”
can’t you do any better than that?
c’mon you’re a writer, aren’t you?
i tell you what, you don’t even have to use facts.
just make something up.
Dear mheister,
Good to hear from you again. Yes, these arguments are the same old ones, but they are still irrefutable, whereas every argument in opposition to AVM is filled with holes, which I pointed out many month ago.
The fact that AMV in the constitution, the fact that our national, state and local democracies are filled with AMV, the fact that EQUITY and WGA has AMV (WGA has 4 classes of membership, yet only one can vote on anything) yet neither has imploded, the fact that the statistics from the SAG website disprove the ‘minority’ canard, the fact that phrases like ‘one member, one vote’ and ‘it’s not democratic’ and ‘disenfranchisement’ and ‘Fi-Core’ are sentiments or speculations and not arguments, the fact that current tort and union law doesn’t support even the remotest possibility of a successful ‘class-action lawsuit’, the fact that paying one’s dues in no way guarantees one’s desire get work as an actor (are you claiming ability to see into the minds of 120k members?), the fact that SAG sends out certain contracts (interactive, puppetry, eg.) to only those work it, thereby giving precedence to AMV – all of these facts are indisputable.
I just thought I’d run by a few of them in case you’d forgotten.
Mike, you lost my respect by writing the hijacking and flying a plane into a building comment. What were you thinking? Yes, it got my attention. No, it didn’t make me buy into your opinions. It just made me feel sick to my stomach. Martin Sheen’s thoughts make sense to me, but yours just appear to be making an attempt to intimidate.
Todd
good luck with that spin. It’s over pal.
“If you’re one of the tens of thousands of S.A.G. members who don’t work enough or earn enough as an actor, you’re in danger of losing one of your fundamental rights as a union member. Unless you take the time, right now, to go get your S.A.G. ballot and re-elect MembershipFirst, you could lose your right to vote.”
Great job Marty!
With that paragraph, you have assured a UFS victory.
LP !!!!
what, no disparaging remarks aimed at backround people?
you’re slippin’ chief.
harry98-
Oh harry…. They didn’t go out of turn. WGA was asked to start negotiations in 2006. Yep thats right a full year before the contract was set to expire. They decided instead to stall and back time it off the end of the contract to use a strike as leverage. It can’t be your turn if you step out of line. In fact the DGA waited and waited and postponed.
That is an undeniable fact that throws your whole argument out the window.
Im sorry you got here late.
Don’t believe me. Try Google.
“It’s awful to watch this storied organization be highjacked and flown into a building.”
The fact that you equate maintaining voting equality in a union to terrorist attacks on 9/11 fucking turns my stomach. Mike, I am thrilled to know you are no longer in office for my union.
You don’t agree with wanting to fight for our rights with agents, producers or AFTRA – how the hell did you ever get elected in a position of power in a worker’s union in the first place?
gee playmaker!
the wga was invited to negotiate a whole year ahead of time and they didn’t jump at that swell opportunity??!!!???
oh, they’re just bad kids.
but the dga did the right thing, huh?
they’re so smart!
they all raised their hands up high and said,
“Oh teacher, teacher, pick me! Pick me!
I know the answer!”
and the answer was, “There’s nothing for US in this deal, so fuck it.”
and professor Counter said, “Correct and that’s the ONLY answer.”
why don’t you go make plays somewhere.
I find it ironic that Membership First is making an issue out of the potential voter disenfranchisement of U4F. Currently, both the NY Board and the RBD (and the members therein or should I say “hobbyists”) feel completely disenfranchised by Hollywood’s stranglehold on the National Board.
So, yes, let’s worry about the potential and ignore the actual. Ignore the man behind the curtain. Ignore Membership First very vocal disdain for the RBD (well, THEY aren’t real members anyway, so who cares?).
some guy
think of it as low hanging fruit.
the ned and amy tree has so much to offer in the really bad idea categories.
I don’t really think the l.a. board thinks of people in dallas, who are in sag, as hobbyists. I think they just think of them as sag members. who live in dallas.
more power to ‘em. yee-ha.