The AMPTP today sent the following message to its employers:
"We are disappointed to report that the federal mediation efforts between SAG and AMPTP failed in the early morning hours of Saturday, November 22nd, when mediator Juan Carlos Gonzalez ended the process.
"The mediation failed for one fundamental reason: SAG continued unrealistically to insist on a substantially better deal than all of the other major Hollywood Guilds and Unions have negotiated so far in 2008.
In the end, it was clear that SAG was not serious about using the mediation process to make a deal. Instead, SAG appears to have manipulated the mediation process in an attempt to achieve precisely the result it has wanted all along: A strike by SAG members.
"SAG has not justified why it deserves to be treated differently than the industry's other Guilds and Unions - particularly at a time of extraordinary economic distress for both the country and the entertainment business. SAG refuses to deviate from its unrealistic position, even continuing to cling to its proposal to change the DVD residual formula.
"AMPTP has already negotiated six major labor agreements in 2008 alone, including the pact just concluded with IATSE. We are prepared to conclude an agreement with SAG, but we simply do not see any justification for SAG receiving more than we have offered - a deal that is every bit as good as the ones the industry's other Guilds and Unions have negotiated in far better economic times.
"AMPTP's offer to SAG members is fair and strong - and at least until now, we have kept the offer on the table despite the precipitous economic decline of the last several months. Whether we will be able to continue to do so in the face of the economic downturn remains to be seen. We are now prepared to continue explaining the merits of our offer in every way that we possibly can. The more SAG members understand about the fairness and strength of our offer, especially during a time of historic economic distress, the less likely they will be to authorize a strike.
"We will also continue to place the burden squarely on SAG to explain why it deserves better deals than the other entertainment Guilds received earlier this year -- particularly in light of the fact that the earlier deals were negotiated during better economic times, and SAG is attempting to reach a deal now during a period of tremendous economic upheaval.
"Finally, and most importantly, SAG should understand that a strike would be economically devastating to the entire industry, including its own members, as well as to the overall economy. The unreal timing of the call by SAG for a strike in the midst of one of the worst economic crisis the global system has ever faced, demonstrates once and for all that SAG is completely out of touch with reality. A SAG strike in this financial meltdown would be like pouring gasoline on a fire, and it is astonishing that SAG would call for a strike vote when the rest of the country is reeling from an unprecedented financial crisis.
"Make no mistake about this: If SAG members authorize a strike, then a strike is all but guaranteed because SAG has shown no willingness to compromise on its unrealistic demands. Simply put, a vote to authorize a strike will lead inexorably to a strike, and a strike would cost SAG members far more than they can ever expect to gain.
"In short, over the coming days and weeks, AMPTP will continue vigorously to communicate our fundamental position: The six other labor agreements Producers have made this year couple significant economic gains with groundbreaking new media rights. The new media template simply cannot be abandoned at this point because it will undermine our industry's ability to compete in this new market. The bottom line is clear: No strike authorization - and no strike - can change these basic facts.
AMPTP… You aren’t even honoring the WGA contract you signed so what does it matter if SAG demands more? You don’t have any intention of paying anyway.
If you wanted to, you could just dip into the BILLIONS you’ve made on home video formats over the years (money you once promised but never shared with the Guilds), and stop being so incredibly disrespectful to the actors and writers that helped generate huge profits for you.
As an outsider (small satellite biz owner/former BtLer), may I please ask…or better yet; BEG all eligible SAG members to actually VOTE when the authorization ballots go out?!!??!
I realize that a vote that simply gives or doesn’t give authorization to strike belies the complicated nature of the situation; on the one hand you want to give your NegComm all the leverage you can, to get you the best deal possible, on the other, you don’t necessarily trust the controlling components of your NegComm to do everything possible to avoid more strife in our struggling economy before pulling the “trigger”.
My point is that whether or not authorization is given, weak voter participation will emasculate SAG, showing the AMPTP that membership doesn’t find this situation important enough to weigh in on, and if a strike authorization is given by 75%+ of a mere, say, 10% of membership, attendance at picket lines is not likely to be any more enthusiastic. If SAG members don’t care enough to weigh in, in significant numbers, how can you expect sister unions and the public to support your actions?
Now, I don’t want a strike any more than the next person, but I’ve been pro-labor my entire professional life, and if I must lose everything as a result of a Labor Action, then I must. Just please, please, PLEASE don’t make it be because a majority of the membership didn’t care enough to vote.
I BEG of you, SAG membership; VOTE!!! Vote with your conscience and your convictions, whatever they may be. Just VOTE!!!!!!!!!
Boy, I would have never known we were in extreme economic distress if I wasn’t told 20 times by the AMPTP.
That being said, SAG HAS to tread carefully here. They can’t come off as greedy no matter what. They have to focus on the fact that the AMPTP hasn’t honored the other deals as the reason that they are unwilling to accept the same deal.
The AMPTP are a bunch of liars. We learned it in the WGA strike and we it has been proven since. The AMPTP has not paid a single promised cent to the WGA members, has elongated the streaming window, and has reneged on the DVD deal.
I dont want SAG to strike, but the AMPTP must be broken. They are greedy lying bullies.
And I guess IATSE and the AMPTP did come to an agreement on a new contract. I don’t think I read anything from the IATSE except that some studios are calling it premature.
In any case, given the way you are acting, Nick (Counter) just go ahead and lockout the SAG. That way you can put another TV Season to bed and ruin at least one more including maybe killing the 2009 pilot season.
Just one more thing, I hope you get a super dry turkey for Thanksgiving, like the one in National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation, and choke on the wishbone. That is what you deserve you crook.
By the way, all you deserve for Christmas is a perp walk.
Strike authorization does NOT equal strike.
The only “good faith” the producers understand is faith in fear. Fear of labor, fear of their corporate bosses, and fear for their jobs. So the AMPTP is scared are they? Cewl.
The AMPTP has offered the following to SAG:
1. Give up protections you have had for a while in “Old Media”, some for the past few decades (consent to show your image outside of the original project, Force Majeure, scheduled meal breaks, etc)
2. Agree to the DGA deal wherein almost ALL your union protections will be eliminated.
I just don’t know why anyone would pay union dues to a union that had agreed to the above.
I do not believe that the DGA, AFTRA, IASTE (or at the very least, their members) understand how their financial future has just been eliminated. EVERY piece of entertainment will come primarily through the Internet very, very soon. Therefore, almost ALL projects will be Made-for-New-Media projects.
Guess what the proposed basic union minimum rate is for these projects? THERE ISN”T ONE.
Guess what the proposed basic union overtime protections are for these projects? THERE AREN”T ANY.
Guess what the proposed basic union forced call protections are for these projects? THERE AREN”T ANY.
Guess what the proposed basic union residual structure is for these projects? NONE.
Guess what the proposed basic union protections are for MINORS for these projects? THERE AREN’T ANY.
The list goes on.
Basically the AMPTP proposal strips actors of virtually ALL there basic working condition protections with the exception of Pension & Health contributions.
WHAT THAT MEANS is that only the Federal and State labor LAWS will protect you in Made-for-New-Media. You will be working for State minimum wage, your overtime will be based on State labor laws.
And that’s it.
DGA, AFTRA, and IATSE members: Why aren’t you pissed? Your contract for New Media looks JUST LIKE THIS. (I can’t lump WGA members in here because they KNOW how crappy their deal is. They did NOT want to take it)
The future for the content creators (if they want to work for these Media Corporations) is financially desolate.
Think about it.
By the way, to quote the LA Times today, “Late Friday night, the actors’ guild signaled that it was prepared to ACCEPT THE NEW MEDIA PAY TERMS if studios granted an increase in the residuals actors earn from DVD sales…”
SAG sounds incredibly flexible in that statement PLUS, the actors currently pay for their OWN Pension and Health contributions from their DVD checks. The increase they asked for would only put the onus on the Media Corporations to make those contributions themselves, as is the custom with all the other actor earnings. It was not so much a RAISE SAG was looking for, but an even treatment of the P&H payments.
Not only was this fair, but it would have shown GOOD FAITH that these Media Companies would INDEED revisit this New Media deal in 3 years. Based on the fact they have NEVER revisited that 20 year-old DVD deal, the unions (SAG & WGA, at least) have little faith that The Media Corporations will ever revisit the New Media deals that have been agreed to.
Additionally, history is full of strikes during “good financial times” and “bad financial times”. What would be a very bad idea is selling out not only 120,000 people’s ability to make any kind of a living, but the ability of ALL future actors’ ability as well.
Finally, a “strike authorization” is a tool of leverage in order to hopefully get a deal in place. Anyone who has been involved in personal negotiations knows that unless you have the ability to say “no” you have no leverage with which to negotiate the deal.
A “strike authorization” simply gives the SAG leadership the ability to negotiate effectively. It does not mean that SAG is going to strike.
Good points by anonymous (2). The WGA deal was voted on by only 35% of WGA members, with the AMPTP touting that 92% of the writers (only of that 35%) approved the deal.
As always, for those on whatever side of the issue interested in the truth, here it is:
The 11 to 6 vote had ZERO to do with mediation. That was a completely UNRELATED, UNOFFICIAL vote within the room. That vote was UNRELATED to the matter at hand. No mediator. NO AMPTP.
The VOTE THAT MATTERED was 15 to 2.
15 to 2.
THAT vote included voting members only. NOT alternates. BUT, it DID include newbies – including highly anti-MF, anti-Hollywood members.
The people who voted are people who can’t STAND MF. Who actively campaigned AGAINST MF in the election. People who PUBLICLY INSULTED SAG leadership and MF members throughout this entire negotiation process.
These people watched and listened and participated in the process INSIDE the room, after months of killing MF for it’s “failures,” and, in the end, they put their POLITICS ASIDE and voted in what was CLEARLY the best interest of the membership.
Now, unless you just want to open your blowholes for the sake of scratching your hateful itch – STOP LYING.
This is NOT ABOUT YOU.
in the future, i wish SAG would make voting compulsory.
if one wanted to remain in good standing, he/she would have to vote.
although the AMPTP is cockily betting we won’t muster the 75%,
they sure are blowing alot of hot air about it.
true to their bullying form.
HEADS UP TO NED VAUGHN …
…it was the federal mediator who broke off the negotiations with the
AMPTP, not the SAG negotiating committee.
get your facts straight, hotshot.
SAG has said they are putting together an educational campaign urging members to authorize a strike. This campaign has to show what a strike will do for the union. SAG can’t just simply lay out why the AMPTP sucks. We all know they do. What we need to know is how a strike will end up working in our favor. And what are the odds 75% will vote yes? And what happens if it doesn’t pass? Can’t the AMPTP come back and say, “Um, we’re offering you an even shittier contract now. What are you gonna do about it? Mwahh hahahah!”
No one wants to be out of work now. But no one wants a horrible contract. It’s a lose-lose situation here.
And now comes the AMPTP with “information” to the SAG membership body.
The AMPTP doesn’t want SAG to authorize a strike (of course), so it offers up this “information” to us as if we’re to believe/listen to our opposition, who has continually spread false information about these negotiations, has not paid it’s agreed-upon force majeure payments to SAG, has not paid WGA for it’s agreed-upon payment structure…
I could go on, but intelligent SAG members will know whom to believe.
Just because someone says (prints) something doesn’t mean it’s true. There’s no law that states that the AMPTP has to tell the truth to SAG membership. And from the AMPTP’s track record it’s pretty obvious that the word “honesty” isn’t in their vocabulary, not surprisingly.
Yes, every SAG member should vote. Every SAG member should read the [expletive deleted] that AMPTP is printing. You should read carefully the mail which SAG will soon send to you. Read it ALL so you know what the truth is, but do not be swayed by non-SAG detractors who have self-interests at heart. Then decide for yourselves. Only SAG will vote on the strike authorization – no one else.
As you all dig through the pros and cons of a strike authorization, always remember where the AMPTP “information” is coming from, what their record is on truthfulness and what their ulterior motives are.
Also – to all SAG members who are interested in what actually happened in the negotiation room:
It is THE AMPTP that is engaging in brinksmanship here – NOT SAG.
This press release from the AMPTP – is a LIE.
SAG went to great lengths to try and find common ground.
The AMPTP made NO EFFORT whatsoever.
The AMPTP, led by Nick the Bean Counter, is BANKING on SAG not calling its bluff – THAT’S IT FOLKS – THAT’S THEIR STRATEGY.
And that’s why the final vote from pro AND anti-MF members was 15 to 2.
15 to 2!
Do NOT be fooled by the AMPTP’S LIE: This is NOT a vote to strike. Period.
It IS a vote to empower the negotiating committee, comprised, again, of both pro and ANTI-MF members to be able to walk into the room and tell Nick Counter that he needs to check with his masters, because, WHILE SAG – NO ONE IN SAG – WANTS TO STRIKE AND NEVER HAS?
Unless the producers are prepared to NEGOTIATE in good faith instead of stonewalling and then LYING about what happened and why – SAG WILL STRIKE.
Unless our negotiators have that weapon, there will be a long, long road of defeat after defeat for SAG at the hands of a merciless AMPTP that put all its chips on what they think is SAG’s weakness – and won.
Let our representatives at least have a chance! Vote “YES!” on the strike authorization ballot!
Poor Nikki…they sent you the wrong press release
“We are disappointed to report that the federal mediation efforts between SAG and AMPTP failed in the early morning hours of Saturday, November 22nd, when mediator Juan Carlos Gonzalez ended the process [that guy was muttering something about washing his hands of us and that he was so finished with any more mediations where we were a party but we don’t know why he finally cut us off…].”
“The mediation failed for one fundamental reason: we insist on treating all entertainment industry employees as identical and utterly fungible in their needs [just like all viewers, fans and consumers can only be distinguished by us as to how much of their money they’ll fork over to us unquestioningly, the more they fork over, the better they are]
SAG continued to ignore our fantasy word and totally illogical definition of pattern bargaining [i.e. whatever pittance we’re willing to give to one and later reneg on, every other will get until they get uppity and actually insist that we honor the bargain in which case we have the legal army on speed dial] That SAG would insist on a substantially better deal than all of the other major Hollywood Guilds and Unions have negotiated so far in 2008 scares the living bejeezus out of us unless of course we can give them what they want with our fingers crossed behind our backs and our lawyers at the ready, prepared to argue that we really didn’t mean what we put in out contract like with the new media provisions of the 2008 Minimum Basic Agreement with the Writers Guild of America or in the 2005 TV Theatrical agreement of SAGs where they claim we owe TV actors $60 million dollars for something called ‘force majeure’ which we think our lawyers made up to tease us with, and we’ll happily bankrupt our companies, alienate our consumers, impoverish our shareholders and employees and make the attorneys rich before we pay a single red cent to a writer or actor or anyone but ourselves under those deals. In the end, it was clear that SAG was not serious about accepting our definition of the ‘mediation’ process and take a crappy deal we might honor [or we might not, see the WGA and SAG situations described above]. Instead, SAG appears to have refused to play along with our delusional beliefs about the mediation process in an attempt to achieve precisely the result we think we wanted all along [we’re not sure ‘cause we’re delusional remember?]: A strike by SAG members.”
“Because we’re hung up on the dogma of pattern bargaining or more correctly our tortured definition of it [if it don’t fit, you still gotta live under it] we are unashamedly whining about how SAG has not justified to us why it deserves to be treated differently than the industry’s other Guilds and Unions [a lot of those union guys and gals do jobs that end in –er so they must all be the same, right?] – particularly at a time of extraordinary economic distress for both the country and the entertainment business, an utterly avoidable global economic catastrophe perpetrated by us and our bankster friends and fraternity brothers and their trophy wives, but hey we’re hoping you’ll overlook that inconvenient little truth and side with us because we have the cash, or at least the accountants we pay to tell us that say so…not that we’re going to share any of it with you or that we’ve ever honestly accounted for anything, but it makes us feel self-righteous and powerful, so we’re sticking to this view like Crazy Glue [and if there’s anything we know we know crazy]. SAG refuses to deviate from its unrealistic-from-our-delusional-view position, even continuing to cling to its proposal to change the DVD residual formula. [How dare they demand to be paid for their work…that leaves less for us, the rentier class! The nerve!]”
“AMPTP has already negotiated six major labor agreements in 2008 alone, one of which we broke in only 8 months [that’ll teach those writers to strike against us], including the pact just concluded with IATSE [which is news to Nikki Finke and the membership of IATSE but that’s their fault because they aren’t privy to our hallucinations]. We are prepared to conclude an agreement with SAG [dear God they’re keeping us from obscenely rich folks fun and putting the spotlight on our role as economic parasites so let this be over soon!], but we simply do not see any justification for SAG receiving more than we have offered [maybe we’ll pay them a pittance and maybe not because in our world since we have lawyers who can write one sided deals and everyone else doesn’t, our word is never our word and a written agreement means bupkis] – a deal that to our demented thought processes is every bit as good as the ones the industry’s other Guilds and Unions have negotiated in far better economic times[…pity poor Rupert Murdoch who is now only worth $3 billion and not the $4 billion he was worth a couple of months ago or Sumner Redstone who had to sell some stock to meet a margin call and to keep a blood-sucking trophy wife from taking him in a divorce, the ungrateful harpy! Who knew you can’t make infinite money in perpetuity off of lending money and collecting money from people whose wages are stagnating or declining?]“.
“AMPTP’s offer to SAG members is fair [by crooked casino standards] and strong [as used toilet paper in a Category 5 hurricane] – and at least until now, we have kept the offer on the table despite the precipitous economic decline [caused by the people who advise us in investing] of the last several months. Whether we will be able to continue to do so in the face of the economic downturn remains to be seen [Rupert Murdoch is terrified that he might lose another billion dollars or more so you should feel sorry for him and consider sending him some cash right now before he applies for some of that sweet taxpayer bailout cash…buh-bye Fox Business Channel and hello First National Fox Bank & Business News!]. We are now prepared to continue explaining the illusory merits of our offer in every way that we possibly can [except online because we haven’t a clue how those interwebz work but you should know that we’re going to dominate the business there if we have to lie cheat steal and oppress to make that happen]. The more SAG members understand about the [un]fairness and [utter lack of] strength of our offer, especially during a time of historic economic distress [and the sooner they stop laughing at the utter stupidity of this sentence so far], the less likely they will be to authorize a strike [and we’ll keep our fingers in our ears and loudly sing ‘Mary Had A Little Lamb’ until they start seeing things the way we do].”
“We will also continue to place the burden squarely on SAG [which is easy for us because we have a more than 75 year history of burdening actors with our insanity although we’re pretty new to the ‘screwing up the accounting’ part of our jobs…we’ve only got a few decades experience in the perpetration of those kinds of confidence games] to explain why it deserves different deals than the other entertainment Guilds received earlier this year [to us actors, writers, directors and crew are all employees, same schmame]– particularly in light of the fact that the earlier deals were negotiated before our financial friends’s chimerical creations went nuclear on the global economy, and SAG is attempting to reach a deal now during a period of tremendous economic upheaval [really we had no idea that you can’t get infinitely rich off of scamming middle class and poor people which is why we’re fascinated by government bailouts and money printing…free money forever? That’s what we want.]”
“Finally, and most importantly, SAG should understand that a strike would draw unwanted attention to us and our sharp practices, from not only its own members, as well as from every participant in the economy except for our bankster friends and our bought and paid for politicians. The unreal timing of our forcing SAG into a strike in the midst of one of the worst economic crisis the global system has ever faced [our buddies did that, aren’t they impressive?], demonstrates once and for all that SAG is completely out of touch with our delusional and laughable definition of reality. A SAG strike in this financial meltdown would be like calling the cops on our three card monte game, and it is astonishing that SAG would call for a strike vote when the rest of the country is reeling from an unprecedented financial crisis [caused by our friends and their Ponzi schemes which we stupidly invested in…who knew you can’t get something for nothing for all eternity?].”
“Make no mistake about this: If we can’t convince SAG members to humor our fantasies any longer, then a strike is all but guaranteed because delusional greedy executives whose fantasy world is challenged are bound to make threats and publically open cans of whoop-ass on so many fronts they can’t possibly close. Simply put, a vote to authorize a strike will lead inexorably to a strike [because you can’t challenge our fantasy world, we’re not listening, la-La-LA!!!], and a strike would cost SAG members far more than they can ever expect to gain [hint: no matter what we offer them we’ll do everything we can think of to not pay them just like we’re doing with the writers and new media residuals and the $60 million we owe SAG TV actors for force majeure payments].”
“In short, over the coming days and weeks, AMPTP will continue vigorously to communicate our fundamental position [i.e. we’re going to robotically repeat ourselves…it’s cheaper than hiring a real PR robot which would be cool but Rupert’s freaked about that billion dollars he’s lost and it’s cheaper to keep resending the same nonsensical tripe than paying a real talented PR person to come up with new ways to try and make the crazy seem logical]: The six other labor agreements Producers have made this year couple significant economic gains [well they’re significant until they try to collect on them and then they’ll vanish thanks to dispute resolution processes that like this federal mediation are red herrings] with groundbreaking [hint: you gotta break ground to bury someone or something, never to be heard from again] new media rights. The new media template [that template of pattern bargaining our precious baby delusion which we’ll fight to the death to preserve] simply cannot be abandoned at this point because it will undermine our industry’s ability to compete in this new market [and our magical little world in which only we live]. The bottom line is clear: No strike authorization – and no strike – can change these basic facts [and the fact that we can’t face the rest of the world and acknowledge that we’re wrong].”
“Much mogul love to all in the biz from your BFF, the AMPTP!!!”
AMPTP needs a better PR firm. A freshman in college could tell them their argument suffers argumentum ad populum.
I know, I know, they only speak Latin in college anymore and it’s almost not worth the trouble of remembering it once your out. But the premise is important. As I recall, argumentum ad populum is an argument that professes to be true because a number of others believe it is so.
We end up with fallacies like:
WalMart is the best place to shop.
Domino’s makes the best pizza.
Hugh Jackman is the best looking man in the world.
The AMPTP is offering SAG the best contract.
C’mon AMPTP flack. Give us some facts. Offer one actual reason this is a good deal for SAG besides everyone else in Jonestown enjoyed the Kool Aid.
And thinking people, please don’t buy into this lame not-even-sophomoric logic even if Hugh Jackman is a looker.
Wow! The more I read this statement,the more I sense innate fear and trepidation on the part of the AMPTP. Not for the industry or the financial crisis as a whole, but for themselves in the drag it’s going to be being forced to grind the wheels of Hollywood to screeching halt.
Too bad. Should of thought of that when SAG wanted to negotiate New Media
Remember AMPTP you just now reneged on WGA residuals deal and now the industry is watching what you do with that. Remember you still owe SAG members $60,000,000 I.E Force majeure and lastly,no one will ever forget how they got stiffed by the AMPTP on home video before.
New Media is the new savior and the new frontier for all (not just for the executives running the big media conglomerates) we should all share in it’s promise.
If you want play Scrooge this Holiday season go ahead, but people only watch A Christmas Carol for the redemption of Good over Evil and grace over greed.
Your “My way or the Highway” bullying tactics are hollow at best and your enthusiasm for spinning the financial crisis in your favor is deplorable and unforgivable. After all, your members can still buy their kids gifts this holiday. Shame on you!
Which side do you want to be on AMPTP. It’s not too late.
…And to SAG members who are still on the fence about which way to vote, you can take heart in the fact that the AMPTP will do/try anything to sway you to vote against a strike authorization.
Keep in mind that they are the O-P-P-O-S-I-T-I-O-N in this equation, and that they have repeatedly lied and cheated other guilds out of millions of dollars of income. You can pretty much figure that the truth is the exact opposite of anything they say.
This is a perfect example:
“Make no mistake about this: If SAG members authorize a strike, then a strike is all but guaranteed because SAG has shown no willingness to compromise on its unrealistic demands. Simply put, a vote to authorize a strike will lead inexorably to a strike, and a strike would cost SAG members far more than they can ever expect to gain.” They’re trying to scare you into believing that a strike authorization won’t matter to them, and so would be a de facto strike.
Now think about that: if that were true, why would they be campaigning against it? Because they don’t want it to happen. If they really didn’t care about it, they’d just keep their mouths shut, take it in stride and let it pass by into a strike.
Let’s stay on topic, huh? The authorization vote (whether it will lead to a strike or not) is NOT a strike in itself. The AMPTP just doesn’t want to have that piece of paper thrust in its face because they don’t want a strike either, and they’ll then have to face SAG’s membership resolve.
If you’re a SAG member who is planning on voting against the strike authorization, I ask you (rhetorically): are you saying that you agree to the currently offered contract (have you even read it)? Because that’s the choice you’re making.
You don’t have to believe me – you don’t even have to agree with me about what the AMPTP is attempting. But you can’t deny that the SAG NegCom is doing what’s best for SAG and our membership – for now and our future. The fact that the AMPTP is so vociferously arguing to the SAG membership is pretty telling as to how worried they are.
Now, who you gonna believe – SAG, or the enemy?
To The AMPTP’s Real Press Agent:
You are CORRECT, sir! Brilliantly written. I would laugh even harder were it not for my “extraordinary economic distress”, unless, of course I was “in far better economic times”. Alarmingly, I simply cannot laugh any harder due to the “precipitous economic decline of the last several months” as I’m sure I would have “in far better economic times”. And finally…”We continue to do so in the face of the economic downturn time of historic economic distress …worst economic crisis the global system has ever faced, reeling from an unprecedented financial crisis.” Yep, that’s right, I merely cobbled together all of the breathless and histrionic outbursts of the “cool heads” at AMPTP. Thank God they and their good buds on Wall Street have it all under control!
i will be crossing the picket lines with my own sign saying that i do not support your strike.
If SAG does strike now then they will almost certainly lose the PR battle. They are of course right that they deserve a better deal, not to mention that the AMPTP are reneging on their WGA deal but the studios will still win the PR battle since they can sum it up in soundbite terms.
Actors ARE different. The AMPTP uses them to finance and sell films and TV shows. Alas, nobody buys a ticket based on who the writer, director, or producer is.
To all you kids up until Ed McMahon’s Evil Twin Brother’s post, which is all I can see at the time of my own post.
Imagine my shock of coming home this Sunday eve, expecting a bunch of hysterical irrational name-calling implicitly threatening union-bashing garbage from people too timid to post that hateful crap in their own names …
… only to see a string of thoughtful, funny, insightful, truthful, great posting.
You kids about gave me a heart attack.
I’m stunned.
Keep up the great work!!!
THANK YOU!!!
In solidarity,
sterling
The AMPTP says, “…a vote to authorize a strike will lead inexorably to a strike, and a strike would cost SAG members far more than they can ever expect to gain.” That is a lie, straight up. And it’s not a matter of what SAG hopes to GAIN, it’s a matter of the rollbacks SAG seeks to avoid.
The AMPTP still wants to roll back residuals, by treating New Media residuals differently than those from traditional media. They plan to move all content distribution to New Media. On a net basis over the next couple of decades or more, that is a HUGE rollback.
The AMPTP wants to roll back force majeur, which is already in the now-expired SAG contract, and for which they still owe actors quite a bit of money. Any give on force majeur is a rollback for the actors.
The AMPTP wants to directly fund non-union New Media projects. As of the last SAG contract, no signatory could fund any project that did not use union actors. Again, the AMPTP is demanding a huge rollback, and to break a precedent set back in Jimmy Cagney’s day, seven decades ago.
As others have noted, the AMPTP is forcing the WGA to take action against them to enforce the meager New Media provisions the writers did manage to win.
Using current economic conditions is also a sham tactic. The signatories are, whining and token cost-cutting notwithstanding, still quite profitable. The cost-cutting they’re doing right now is partially for show, and partially to maintain profitability. They are in almost the diametrical opposite position as the big three auto companies. Crying wolf at a higher decibel level does not change this truth.
BTW SAG was born, and initiated its first labor actions during the Great Depression. We are accustomed to making tough labor decisions during dire economic times.
There is, in short, a clear pattern of intent and demonstrated behavior on the part of the AMPTP aimed clearly at breaking all of the creative guilds. There is no way on God’s green earth SAG can stand for this and be anything more than the faintest shadow of its former self.
Let there be no mistake. Even though the actual strike vote has to happen on SAG’s side, the series of decisions that led to this moment, and the position SAG now finds itself in, are the full responsibility of the AMPTP.
The AMPTP forcing SAG to strike. Period.
Is anyone with anything to lose from a strike FOR a strike?
Is anyone with nothing to lose from a strike AGAINST a strike?
I am bored by the irrelevant and unprincipled opinions of anyone who falls outside either category. The simpering venality of BTLers who vilify actors for daring to stand up to the AMPTP’s untrammeled malevolence and bad-faith. And, conversely, the chirpy Braveheart-sounding motherfuckers who don’t sound like they have a single cent to lose from a strike and so have a very easy time hectoring the town to charge the guns at Galippoli.
If anyone here has a principled belief that cuts against their self-interest, let it be known. I find nothing noble or compelling about this partisan expression of consequence-free invective.
Basically, the AMPTP’s position is that they ran over the other unions, so they should run over SAG?
Now I am not on the studios side never have been, but right now simply isn’t the time to strike. Right now people should be thankful they have jobs and are able to do what they love and get paid for it.
Granted SAG doesn’t want to strike, because if they did they already would have done it last summer.
Granted were only hearing one side of the story the studios right now, like they always tell the truth *LAUGH*
Still SAG didn’t handle this situation the best, and had too much inner fighting going on, and wasted their energy on such drama. Instead of dealing with the studios.
My theory is wait until March/April the end of television season then full on strike. Maybe get the WGA out there with you, because of the studios not honoring their contracts. By then the economy is bouncing back *hopefully* and you will get the public’s sympathy on this.
What I don’t get is why the actors WANT TO BE IN STRIKE AT THE TIME OF THE OSCARS, AND THE GLOBES…. I GUESS THEY WERE WAITING FOR THEIR MOMENT…. WILL SEE WHO WINS AT THE END
Can’t the WGA strike with SAG now that the studios have broken the MBA?
Just a side note on all this:
Why doesn’t the DGA ever get into these skirmishes?
Because the DGA is the model for the AMPTP as far a unions go. And no it’s not because they are smarter than other unions.
The DGA is controlled by a small, elite group of members who instill fear and envy in all those beneath them. Because directors hire all those other below the line, everyone is whipped into by fear.
Those st the top get the big bucks and everyone else get the shaft. And if you complain, you don’t work. Period.
Hey AMPTP, this might help:
ne·go·ti·ate (\ni-ˈgō-shē-ˌāt, ÷-sē-\)
intransitive verb
: to confer with another so as to arrive at the settlement of some matter
transitive verb
1 a: to deal with (some matter or affair that requires ability for its successful handling) : manage b: to arrange for or bring about through conference, discussion, and compromise (emphasis added)
Source: © 2008 Merriam-Webster, Incorporated
Thanks for playing.
Didn’t we just finish 8 years of being lead by fear? The producers have to come up with a new dog and pony show. We just fought for change in our government, do they really think we’re not going to fight for changes in our income too?
united we stand divided we fall. The nature of these unions are divide.
We need an umbrella union to rep all the unions and only as one creative power do we fight, demand and strike.
I would love to vote to strike against these fuckers but I can’t. too many good people will suffer and what did the writer’s strike give us? was it worth it?
As when a military defensive is failing, we need to retreat, regroup, retrain, restrategize and come back stronger or we hurt ourselves and our loved ones in this industry more than our enemy.
Don’t those so called SAG “moderates” feel stupid now!
The AMPTP will never negotiate in good faith. Rosenberg et al. had a good strategy with dealing with them — by acting strong. They would have gotten the deal of all deals. But AFTRA undercut them with a rotten deal that got rid of ALL RESIDUALS (work on an aftra 1 hour yet? You’re in for a treat!) and the Mike Farrell contingent of SAG poo-poo’ed Rosenberg for wanting dual members to scuttle the deal.
SAG membership — you pussed out and didn’t back your leaders. Now you’re about to receive the mother of all screwings.
Wow. They’re actually getting worse at their statements since our strike.
“In the end, it was clear that SAG was not serious about using the mediation process to make a deal.”
Followed two paragraphs later by:
“…we simply do not see any justification for SAG receiving more than we have offered…”
So, SAG showed themselves to not be ’serious’ about the mediation process by actually expecting the AMPTP to negotiate as part of it?
These are evil little fucks, SAG. Look at what they are already doing to us as far as not paying what they agreed to pay. Go get ‘em.
By the way, just what the hell use is a federal mediator? Can someone explain to me this monumental waste of time?
To Get Real, I have got some news for you. Actors only make up about 10% of the AFTRA. The rest are Local and National TV and Radio Personalities and Syndicated or network talk or game show hosts with a few minor exceptions.
Also, to those of you that believe that only 35% of WGA membership voted for the deal the ended the strike, I am guessing that the strike affected about 35% of the membership. Guess what, WGA membership covers more than just scripted network programming and all movies. There are guild members working all over the country for broadcast news organizations as well as all daytime talk shows where the only one that was affected by the strike was Ellen Degeneres’s show. On its own, ESPN employs thousands of writers just to do research for live game broadcasts while others process highlights for Sportscenter.
The best part is that Hollywood “dealmaking moguls” outsource their negotiations to a Nick Counter-type because they can’t actually do real business deals like the ones with SAG and the WGA.
Ironically interesting…in the way that makes short sellers of stocks salivate.
I’m against a SAG strike, but I have to admit that the AMPTP statement reeks of strike fear. The way that statement stumbles over itself in repetition is like barely contained anger or fear. It’s almost despondent.
Despite being against the strike, that statement begins to make a case for giving SAG the authorization to call one. The statements leading up to, and during, the WGA strike were much more emotionally detached – as one would expect them to be. This one is nearly panic-stricken.
I hope SAG doesn’t strike, but I can understand how its confidence in doing so may have increased after reading that statement.
The AMPTP has not been paying the New Media residuals to the WGA and thereby violating a contract. Why? Could it be that they are larger than expected? Could it be that do not want SAG to see those numbers – it would require opening part of their books – so they can continue to plead poverty?
The studios and networks should be ashamed of themselves.
Wow. It’s funny, things had calmed down for a while, and I thought all the empty rhetoric might be a thing of the past.
I can’t describe how much this board looks EXACTLY like it did during the WGA strike.
I guess no one has any interest from learning from the past. What was the old rallying cry? ‘Won’t be fooled again?’ Because of one story lacking detail regarding non-payment of residuals, you’re certain the AMPTP has been twirling their mustaches and plotting the demise of unions? Yeah, you got their number, guys. Change is gonna come.
Get real. If anything, the WGA screwed the pooch by striking early, instead of waiting for the actors. When that happened, it sent a clear message that it was every man for himself, and the DGA let it be known that there are people in Hollywood still interested in working for a living. I know, it’s an outrageous idea, but humor us.
But no, have fun on your picket lines. And please, strike captains, please keep the populist nonsense to a minimum. I know you’re excited to have whistles and cowbells, but some of us are trying to work, please. And a reminder, as so many of your WGA brethren were oblivious, the cops can AND WILL come and tell you to shut up when we’re on location. Thanks, and have fun. See you on the other side.
I’m putting my faith in my union to hold firm. This is the latest attempt by the AMPTP to break the union(s). They’ve already done it with the WGA. Do you see the WGA doing much of anything about their signed contract already being broken? If the WGA really wanted to do something that would have a very real affect on both their union’s future and help SAG and future negotiations, they would call a walkout right now! But, they won’t. The AMPTP figures that since they already got the WGA to wimper, they can get SAG to crawl and beg, then they will no longer have to worry about any entertainment union…ever! It’ll be all over but the memories…
I’m sure that the strike will go forward, and I’ll just have to deal with not seeing this season of Supernatural play out the end. Oh well. I hope SAG gets what they want and that all of the members in the long term end up feeling that the damage its going to inflict now will be worth it in the end. I say that sincerely, I really do hope that a couple of years down the line everyone feels that they’re getting something that was worth all the pain. Actors provide me with a lot of entertainment, so they should go get their money. I’m really not looking forward to seeing American Gladiators resurrected again, though.
DIS 21
TW 8
CBS 5
VIAB 13
GE 15
Billions in profits?
The unions are killing the American auto industry. (You don’t see Toyota/Honda/BMW/Mercedes jetting to DC with hat in hand, yet they employ a growing number of american workers.)
The truncated tv season created by the strike killed nearly all of last seasons scripted shows.
I agree, talent needs their fair share, but at what cost?
And what is a fair share when the corporations that own the production companies are worth a small fraction of their former value? A few decades back, the shares of these entertainment companies were skyrocketing. Doubling, tripling in value. Now, the entire business is on shaky ground. DVD sales are dropping. Attendance is going down. TV ratings are plummeting.
Is it better to kill off the companies altogether so no one works?
Get real, “Get Real” -
AFTRA did not make a “deal that got rid of all residuals.” The AFTRA Primetime (Exhibit A) residual schedule is EXACTLY THE SAME AS SAG’s Primetime.
It is Doug Allen, Alan Rosenberg, and Membership First “leadership” that maneuvered SAG into it’s present lose/lose position. Disaster either way. Congratulations.
Mediation was a gift to UFS – who wanted to give Membership First a chance to settle. The rest of the non-MF coalition would have canned Doug Allen right away.
Yeah – I worked on a “AFTRA one hour” and have qualified for medical and added a pension credit because of it. And if SAG goes on strike, there will be lots more “AFTRA one hours” to work on.
Bottom line – we’e all screwed beyond belief. Tough enough to figure out how to survive this economic climate. A piss-poor strategy by SAG has resulted in a lose-lose scenario. And we will all now pay the price, as studios ramp down production in anticipation even more than they already have.
What a horrible mess. And namecalling and finger pointing isn’t going to help.
SAG is unreasonable. AMPTP is outrageous in their deceit and hyperbole. And everyone is going to lose.
Nice work, dickheads.
@Keven:
Part of me thinks you have it exactly right. Until actors, writers, directors and crew are able to negotiate as a single entity — and threaten work stoppage as a single entity — the producers will always win out, because they’re too big for any single group to successfully challenge.
On the other hand, though? If SAG and AFTRA can’t even hold together as a collective bargaining unit, how could SAG, AFTRA, WGA, DGA, and IATSE possibly cohere? And even if they could come up with a list of demands that every division agreed to, what would happen when the AMPTP agreed to grant them to some but not all (which is likely what would happen)? One of the groups would want to strike. Another group would say, “No, we’ve got what we want, let’s move forward.” Bad blood would start brewing across the guilds, the AMPTP would do everything they could to exploit it, and the situation could get even worse than it is now.
That said, I think the best of all worlds would be if SAG and WGA could have coinciding contract deadlines without being explicitly beholden to one another. (The DGA doesn’t need to be part of the equation, since their strategy seems to be “act like we’ve won no matter what we get.”) AMPTP would be harder-pressed to screw them both at the same time, since a strike by both guilds would be impossible for them to shrug off.
The BOTTOM line:
The threat of a strike has already lopped off about 40% of the staff jobs (with benefits) at my post-production facility. We have all had to take significant cuts in numbers of hours worked. When former employees come to work, they do so with no benefits, hourly pay only, and no job security now or in the future.
Whether or not SAG is getting screwed by AMPTP (not offering an opinion here), not whether the studios are greedy or not, profitable or not, morally bankrupt or not…Actors have a great career when it goes well – good pay, benefits, residuals, free time when they’re not working
Other professionals in the motion picture and television industry:
decent pay, no job security, no residuals…
The potential for a strike is driving me and my co-workers out of this industry, into foreclosure, into bankruptcy.
While I generally support unions and strikes, this IS NOT THE TIME !!
If SAG failed to make a deal when they could, I’m truly sorry, but PLEASE, don’t destroy the lives and livelihood of all of the rest of us in the industry !!!
Can I ask someone who KNOWS to explain this to me about Force Majeure and French hours…
If that is taken out of the SAG contract that means that in the case of work stoppage from strikes or acts of god (like a tornado destroying the set) I could be held INDEFINATELY without pay until the project starts up or the studio releases me? Or I could be held a certain amount of time without pay until the project starts up or the studio releases me – if so, HOW LONG?
And why wouldn’t it be illegal to be prevented from seeking work for extended periods of time without compensation? Am I just supposed to file for unemployment, because they base that off of some previous 12 months base or something, which doesn’t really apply to actors or creatives.
Also, this thing about French hours – I would still be protected by california labor law to get my lunch break at 6 hours in of at least 30 minutes and my two 10 minute breaks during the day, right? Or if not, why wouldn’t that apply? And would that mean that people would shoot more outside california in places with bad labor laws? And the French hour thing, does that apply to all levels of production and everyone on cast and crew? Or would certain people get a normal lunch time still and the rest have to make do? And does that just mean that the craft service is contantly serving up freshly cooked food thorughout the day – or do you get whatever is there whenever you can get away from the set?
And to be clear, the writers, directors, and AFTRA accepted the removal of force majeure, or they never had it? And they have accepted the french hours?
ALSO, What if we just don’t negotiate a new contract for a year or two or three and see what happens, would the AMPTP just shut us out? SAG can enforce its no non-union work in new media rule to its membership as they are planning toon Jan 1, and so studios would still have to abide by SAG rules if they want any SAG talent. If we go ahead under the old contract which at least has force majeure and we get to control our image etc. Is it in our power legally to say we are just going to continue to work under the old contract?
Sure we wouldn’t get residuals from new media (but it’s not like the writers are collecting that now).
If we just say, we are extending our contract for another 2 years, there would be no reason for a de-facto “strike/lockdown” because there is 2 years of safe production. And AMPTP would have to deal with the fact that they could either continue to pretend there is no way to make money in new media and hold up their new media plans or go ahead and then when the contract extension runs out we will see how things have been going for teh DGA and WGA and AFTRA in their payments and ability to earn a living, and what the new media situation is like in general.
And of course we insist to get paid the 60 million in money owed to SAG members.
If we say we want to work under the old contract and the AMPTP says no because they think they can strong arm us into the same bad deal as the other guilds – that would mean they are creating a work stoppage. THEN THEY ARE THE BAD GUYS NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT – they are the ones shutting down the town and we can sit back and say “what is the problem, we are happy to go to work under a contract which you thought was fair 3 years ago and we think is still better than anything you are currently offering.” As the AMPTP keeps insisting they are offering us raises in pay of sorts – all their “200 million in whatever over the next three years type announcements…” How can they argue if we say we want to work without a raise?
“Can’t the WGA strike with SAG now that the studios have broken the MBA?”
We writers had our strike. Whether you supported it or not, whether you think the deal was a good one or not, it’s been done. We’re done. I didn’t blame the actors who believed in the stand we were taking, but crossed our line and went to work anyway because they were contractually obligated to do so. Hopefully, if the actors do go on strike, they’ll feel the same way toward me.
Whatever happened to the “demonstration” the corporate shills and trolls tried to organize at SAG this morning??? I saw more people taking a smoking break outside. Maybe they got lost trying to find their way over to SAG from the AMPTP headquarters.
Actors are smart enough to see through shams like this. They know who is holding up this deal, and it’s not SAG
This is a fairly foregone conclusion save for one minor factor.
Conclusion – Since 95% of SAG’s membership hasn’t worked at all, or much, in the acting field in years, SAG’s lack of “qualified voting” means that its membership can almost uniformly approve a strike and have absolutely no negative effects from it whatsoever. If you haven’t acted in a decade, why not vote for a strike. After all, if you ever do work again, you can get that extra nickel. I don’t really see how the vote could fail … except …
Minor Factor – The BTL’s (and probably other guilds; sans the WGA) will probably jump all over SAG if there is yet another income outage over a group asking for sacrifices from others, so that they can secure a benefit. The WGA strike taught that the sacrifices being made by others will not translate into rewards for those others, and that was a lesson hard learned. SAG will be unable to pull the income rug out from under people again with the same “we are all in it together” and “if we win, you win” lies – those were disproved even when people weren’t losing their houses. That will never fly here.
Of course – one thing (the majority of SAG has nothing to lose by voting) has nothing to do with the other (unrelated third parties being upset about that).
I continue to be amazed that 5 (I will not count the WGA, even though they were the ones who actually struck, and should be the most offended) unions do not stand up and say “stop calling us morons, you morons”. SAG has never given thought one to what that means about the other unions to refer to the universally signed deal as a “crap deal”.
To ‘Thanks!’
If someone knows more fill it in, but…
Without knowing the proposals I’m guessing, but force majeure is generally what would allow for your release if the production is “frustrated” without the producer having to pay out your full contract. I would suspect that if it’s removed then the producer is expected to buy you out (like if you were in a production that was struck) rather than cancel the engagement. Not sure how this applies to being held.
French Hours typically have a built in paid break, either before the shift, or maybe a short one in the day. Food is available all day. Don’t imagine that production would go elsewhere because of the provision though. A lawyer may know better but collective agreements tend to allow for certain variations to labor code.
SAG is working under their old contract; AMPTP hasn’t locked out yet. I don’t know if your strategy would be a sound one. You’re going to want to get a raise at some point.
There should be an “ENTERTAINMENT GUILD” that covers all of the working entities in the business! Drop AFTRA. Drop SAG. Drop WGA. Drop DGA. DROP IA and form the “EG”. With that kind of muscle the AMPTP might actually live up to their contracts.
Clearingstuffup wrote, “Of course – one thing (the majority of SAG has nothing to lose by voting) has nothing to do with the other (unrelated third parties being upset about that)”
To clear up your misunderstanding in the above (what I will loosely call,) sentence, there has never been a voter turnout in any SAG election greater that 35% of the membership.
It would seem that those who believe they have no stake in the vote might be the 65% that don’t vote–ever.
Anonymous wrote:
This is juvenile. Who cares “how many people in our industry” are against the strike? Who cares how many people in China are against the strike?
All that matters is how many SAG members are for or against the strike.
4,100 random people signed.
There are over 120,000 SAG members who may feel otherwise.
Even from the limited SAG postings here, your statement is obviously false.
Unlike the way the AMPTP is stiking it to them currently?
Sure you do. No surprise that you threw in the perfunctory “i support you” disclaimer.
Which would be a tragedy. But those same drivers, grips, make and hair have to understand that actors will do what is right for actors. Nobody would expect grips to vote to their detriment just so actors can benefit.
Yawn.
Yeah, and in three years, you’ll be back here spilling the same whinny garbage.
and you’ll see how many people in our industry are against a strike in this current economy. Saturday there were 4 signatures now at 2 pm monday and over 4100 signed. sag has no support for this strike and if they send out the strike authorization and don’t get the 75% then the amptp will really stick it to them. i support sag’s cause but a strike at this time will destroy so many lives of drivers, grips, makeup and hair, ie all the below the line hardworking people that make this industry happen. sign the deal, get united and give hell in 3 years.
In three years? Are you on crack? Clearly, you are only looking out for you and other below the liners – not the actors families. Why shouldn’t SAG protect their own as well. You are asking them give up their right to adequate compensation to protect your own income. Without SAG, WGA, DGA – the creatives – there would be NO job for below the liners like you. Period. If you don’t support the guilds, no matter their decision, then get the hell out of Hollywood!
Dear Anonymous, and ALL who would vote “no” in regard to strike authorization:
I’ve asked this several times, yes, I have yet to see a single answer.
What do you think will happen if SAG gets less than 75% “yes” votes on strike authorization?
I have my own ideas on what would happen, as I’ve spent a great deal of time thinking about it. What are your thoughts on what will happen if the “No” vote is 76% or more?
No offense, but given that nobody who intends on voting no has said specifically what they expect to happen, and neither I nor anybody else have yet to prompt a response … I’m starting to wonder if those who plan on voting no *have* thought about what the result of that vote will be.
Surely, you’ve considered the consequences of a “no” vote, and intend to vote that way. For goodness sake, is it too much to expect from -anybody- who intends on voting “no” 1) what result they seek to achieve with the no vote; 2) what will actually happen if 75% is not achieved.
=====
So that I’m not accused of not posting what I believe to be the consequences of my own “yes” vote, and others if they achieve 75%, here’s my opinion if the vote goes that way.
Possibility A: Producers decide that the summer roster of TV should be more than “Dog’s Ass. The new reality show” and that the summer roster for film would make more profit if it does not consist solely of “Dog’s ass. The movie.” And Dog’s Ass, the musical, as based on the reality show. So, based on actualized concern that the strike possibility is real, they start negotiating with SAG for the first time instead of their “stick this up your ass, we will under no circumstances negotiate” rhetoric.
Possibility B: Producers get anxious around awards show time, and actually start negotiating, instead of COMPLETELY refusing to negotiate.
Possibility C: Producers are willing to tank all awards shows, and we go on strike. And depending on how long NO SAG production is made, and SAG members hold the line determine what producers “new last final offer” is (similar to the many bogus “final offers” the WGA received before receiving several new “final offers”).
Those are my thoughts on what will happen if the vote is “yes,” as to strike authorization.
====================
Seriously. I’m perplexed that NOBODY that I recall who plans on voting “no” has posted their thoughts on what will happen if the “no” vote is 76% or more of votes returned. NOBODY to my knowledge has posted what will happen with a no vote instead of merely posting what won’t happen (i.e., strike).
It’s in the best interest of everybody that you post whatever you think will be accomplished with a “no” vote, and what the results in the real world of that vote will be. SURELY somebody who plans on denying SAG strike authorization with their vote has thought of what -will- happen, and what our industry universe will look like, so for goodness sake, can you please share those thoughts? Sincere thanks.
PLEASE demonstrate that you’ve thought about the consequences of a “no” vote, by putting forth what you think they will be.
Goodness knows the “yes” vote has put forth 100x over their thoughts of what the consequences of lack of strike authorization will be … what are your thoughts?