None of the big Hollywood or NYC management companies showed up like 360 or Brillstein, though half a dozen managers from the boutiques did. But many of the powerful PR firms like PMK/HBH, BWR, BMC, Rogers & Cowan, ID, Sue Patricola, Polaris PR, 42 West, and Wolf Kasteler, sent people. Nevertheless, attendance today at the SAG confab was surprisingly sparse. But the shocking news was that The Oscars didn't come up once, I'm told.
"I thought about asking about them," one bigtime flack said to me. "But it just felt too premature to bring that up in this conversation that was so focused on the issue at hand of why a strike authorization is so important to allow SAG to use that as leverage."
SAG president Alan Rosenberg, and Executive Director and Chief Negotiator Doug Allen, delivered the briefing which consisted of the same slide show they'd used at the SAG Town Hall meeting on Monday night. The pair "explained what a 'yes' vote means and what a 'no' vote means and how important it was they get the strike authorization. They cited historical examples of authorizations that didn't lead to strikes. And they outlined why SAG's needs are different from the directors' and writers' and prioritized the four outstanding ones: union coverage in New Media, residuals in New Media, force majeure, and product integration," a publicist who'd obviously listened closely told me.
It's interesting how these SAG bicoastal meetings, billed as "negotiations updates" with those folks repping the really big actors, had a calming effect on the publicists/managers who were there. "They seemed to me to be very realistic," said another PR heavyhitter. "From what I'd been reading about SAG, I expected a lot of anger and name-calling. I didn't see that at all."
The publicists and managers who attended and spoke with me complained of knowing so little about what had been really going on in the negotiations until today. For instance, two told me they didn't realize that this SAG contract doesn't affect cable TV shows. Others thought it was a vote to strike, not as they learned a vote to give the SAG leadership leverage with a strike authorization they might never have to use use. "When we voiced concerns about the timing because of the economy, they made some really thoughtful points and gave us statistics," one source said. "They made it clear that they don't want to strike, and that the economic pressures and the Industry pressures keep them up at night. But they said now is the time to protect the little guy."
Foremost on the PR peoples' minds was how actors were going to navigate the "very grey area" between breaking employer contracts and SAG rules on promotion in the event of a strike. But when the flacks asked to discuss this, "there was a lot of lawyer lingo. But then Doug and Alan made it very clear it was way too early to even consider that. They said a strike was only a last resort and hoped the authorization vote would have the impact of getting the AMPTP back to the table," one PR powerhouse told me. "So there were people who still walked out with concerns."
Rosenfeld and Allen said their goal was to "educate and inform us from their perspective so we'll understand and we'll encourage our clients to read what they're sending them and to make informed decisions before voting," one attendee told me. "And they said everything actors needed to know is on the SAG website."
SAG To Hold Bicoastal Meetings With Bigtime Publicists And Talent Managers
Carl Icahn Now Wants ALL Of Lionsgate
STOP THE MADNESS. This is a no win proposition. Even if they end up striking (which they will with a yes vote) and even if they end up getting something from the producers (which they won’t, but lets play pretend) it WILL BE A BAD CONCESSION. IT WILL BE A MEANINGLES CONCESSION, and worse in barley 2 and half years when they are at the table again they will be forced to stick to a bad deal.
NOW IS THE TIME TO CONCEDE, ask for an early re-negotiation next time. Go public on how this is based soley on the economics of the day, and as a gesture of understanding for the world situation, BUT THAT a much better deal is needed and expected at the next talks. Otherwise, the actors lose coming and going.
Why don’t they threaten to boycott the Golden Globes and the Academy Awards WITHOUT going on strike? REFUSE to do ANYTHING that is not a compulsory part of your contract. Refuse to do interviews for films that are about to be released, refuse to do any extra PR, all of the things that the actors CAN control doing and that we know the removal of those services will cost the studios money? Why won’t we do that? Because Alan Rosenberg wants to call a strike and get his 15 minutes in the spotlight. It’s not like a strike is going to hurt Alan Rosenberg’s chance of working. If anything, he should be concerned about how a strike will affect his income if Marg Helgenberger can’t work and then can’t make her alimony payments to him.
yes to strike authorization – and anonymous, there would never be effective early negotiations because there’s simply no leverage.
And with the hurt of the last strike still fresh i actually think the amptp might do the right thing this time and negotiate a reasonable deal with the sag, thus finally setting proper standards for the whole industry.
That’s an asinine argument, anonymous. If they strike they’ll get a crappy deal that they won’t be able to renegotiate in 3 years, but if they take a crappy deal without a strike now they’ll be able to renegotiate it in 3 years? Wake up and smell your own BS.
I think the publicists’ and managers’, I dare say positive reaction to SAG’s leaders and the information they received illuminates the truth of the situation.
These industry pros have no reason to support SAG’s position unless the deal the AMPTP are offering will cost actors substantial money and thereby substantially cut down on the PR and managers commissions and ability to stay afloat.
SAG members please don’t listen to rants and misinformation circulating town and these message boards. I urge all SAG members to get the actual facts about this contract offer and the devastation it will cause to our future.
When the facts are out there I have no doubt our leadership will get the strike approval they need.
Attend the meetings. See the website.
Managers and publicists only want to hear that there’ll be no strike. If they seemed to react positively to the meeting, it’s because AR and DA were convincing in relaying the notion that authorization won’t necessarily lead to one. But this is baloney. Authorization won’t give SAG any leverage at the table and they know it. They plan to strike and if they get the authorization, they’ll use it. Talk about devastating.
“And with the hurt of the last strike still fresh i actually think the amptp might do the right thing this time and negotiate a reasonable deal with the sag, thus finally setting proper standards for the whole industry.” .. Hey “common sense”, what do you base this fantasy on?
I’m a little bothered by the statement “now is the time to protect the little guy” since the audience to which it was directed does not have anything to do with the “little people” that make up the majority of SAG. It is no wonder that the topic of a lost awards season wasn’t broached, since these people would all be singing a much different tune had it been. I know that I agree with what SAG is trying to achieve, but they are incredibly inept at doing it. The majority of the union shouldn’t give a shit about the awards shows, and most likely they don’t. Not now. The little people are more concerned about not working for the next 3-4 mos that a passed strike authorization and successful continued negotiations would take before this industry finally started its march towards relative normalcy. The SAG negotiating committee needs to ACTUALLY be in touch with the little people (the majority), to whom it is becoming more and more evident, especially with the holiday season upon us, that it may (again, I am a ‘yes’) be in their best interests to vote ‘no’ and get back to work at least a fiscal quarter sooner than if a strike authorization passes. After all, it has been the little people who have been bearing the brunt of the quasi-de-facto strike environment that this industry has been slogging through since the WGA butchered their negotiations and struck, NOT the people who are flush enough to pay a these huge PR houses a minimum of $4500/mo. Doug Allen and Alan Rosenberg need to reach a drastically bigger audience, the one that actually is in dire straits, if they really want to secure the authorization they seek.
I wonder how much impact can have a strike authorization promoted as a we-won’t-really-strike authorization…
i am still laughing a bit at the uninformed folks who said that they really felt like the understood things better and even learned a few things (ie. cable etc) The reason a lot of managers didn’t attend the meeting is because most of us have been paying close attention to the goings on. most of us are very tuned in to what gets paid out. i don’t know a lot of managers who are supportive of the strike. i for one am not. i have encouraged all my actors to vote no and have had many in my office at the same time to have our own discussions about what is going on. i have also found that a lot of actors just don’t understand what is going on. i have sat down with a lot of them and gone over both sides.
the bottom line here is that SAG is not acting in the actors best interest and it is time for them to get their collective heads out of their asses. and perhaps it is time to put a couple of managers, agents and one or two non-industry folks on the board (as non-voting members) to help advise the actors in the future. they have looked to us for support, advice and counsel in the past….now we should help them with their union if they are going to continue on.
I continue to be amazed at the ignorance of the experts in our industry. How hard is it for managers and pr people to stay on top of the issues involving the careers of their clients? Too hard, it seems.
As long as you all are reading what comes from the maw of the mother ship,
balance it out with some of the truth:
http://sagdecision.com/
http://www.unitedscreenactors.com/
So your mouse clicks are verifiable? It’s the same site as the no strike petition. Your petition will have the same problem.
Actors will only hurt themselves and their careers if they strike at this point — How Rosenberg doesn’t get that even suggesting a strike negatively effects his own group. SAG does not deserve a better deal than the other unions and wasting everyone time pretending that they do is just nonsense. Rosenberg should be more concerned with the current shrinking job market for actors.
It may already be over, comrades. Television studios are already quietly (or not so quietly) making the shift to becoming AFTRA houses. This is after a long period of SAG growing its television business by leaps and bounds. Say what you will about what a monster AFTRA is but they’ve played this brilliantly. In one fell negotiating cycle they will transform themselves back into the primary union for television talent. I love SAG, but let’s face it, I’ll be making my money from AFTRA almost entirely. And for that, I’m grateful to them.
And of course the SAG band plays on, posturing and kvetching and holding rallies.
For other recent historical reference points see the UAW. They’ve done amazing things for their membership, truly amazing things, but they somehow missed the transition to modernity which happened at all these new factories (for Hondas, BWM’s, and Toyotas) in the South.
To know how to negotiate brilliantly, to concede a battle to win the day, is something that is beyond SAG.