This was sent to members by SAG’s National Executive Director & Chief Negotiator and uploaded to the guild’s website today:
Dear Member,
On October 19, your National Board voted by 97% – 3% to send out a strike authorization ballot to members if mediation in the TV/Theatrical contract failed. We made a determined effort to mediate the contract negotiations but could not reach agreement in the face of the AMPTP’s refusal to compromise. After mediation failed, a number of national board members publicly repudiated the board’s almost unanimous decision to ask the members to authorize the board to decide whether, and if so when, to call a strike. Although I believe giving the National Board the authorization to determine whether to call a strike is our best strategy, that strategy has been severely compromised by the division of a now deeply and publicly split National Board leadership. President Rosenberg and I called a special meeting of the National Board to attempt to resolve those differences. That board meeting ended with no action after two days and twenty four hours of continuous executive session. During the hours of that executive session, I proposed a compromise to move Screen Actors Guild forward. Because my subsequent letter to the board describing my proposal has been made public, I wanted you to hear from me what I proposed. If the National Board does not adopt this compromise, or otherwise change the decision the board made in October, the strike authorization referendum will be conducted, with ballots sent to every eligible member for a vote.
Please read my letter to the National Board. I encourage you to communicate with your elected leadership and me your views on this subject.
In unity,
Doug Allen National Executive Director & Chief Negotiator
—
Doug Allen’s Letter to the National Board of Directors January 14, 2009Dear SAG National Board Members and Alternates,
Because the executive session of our recent extraordinary National Board meeting occurred without my presence in the room, I want to directly communicate several points to all board members and alternates.
I began and ended my report to the National Board on January 12 by stating that I have followed and always will follow the directives of the National Board expressed by a unanimous or majority vote. Under my leadership all SAG staff has complied and will comply with those directives as well. I also said that I am by SAG constitution and by employment contract accountable to the board for my performance.
I welcome your review of that performance and respectfully request only that, in the interest of fairness, such review include the opportunity for me to discuss with the board any comments, questions or issues you wish to raise, not in lieu of executive session discussion, but prior to such discussion.
It is unfortunate that the important matters contained in the National Board meeting agenda were not accomplished at the meeting January 12 and 13. I know that opinions vary sharply on why that happened. From my perspective, to the extent AMPTP positions or actions are the problem, the solution cannot be determined by how intensely you fight among yourselves.
Regarding the TV/Theatrical negotiations, and the sharply divided opinions on the board about how to proceed, I offered the following suggestion to a cross section of Guild leaders during the period of the executive session. I asked that they discuss the suggestion with other board members in attendance. I proposed that the strike authorization referendum be suspended and that management’s offer be put to the membership in a ratification vote. I also proposed that, before that membership ratification vote, we meet immediately with the AMPTP to determine to what extent, if any, they are willing to improve their last offer, to maximize its chances for ratification. I further proposed that the offer then be sent to the members with Pro and Con statements from National Board members and that otherwise the Guild would remain neutral during any member debate regarding ratification. This process will give Screen Actors Guild members the opportunity to formally express themselves on the bargaining issues.
This suggestion was communicated to some, but not all board members in attendance, and apparently was rejected by some who heard it, at least in part, because they believe I could not be “trusted” to implement it. Since I am the one proposing it and since I have never acted contrary to the directives of the National Board, that is not a reasonable objection. In any case, if it is the decision of the National Board to proceed as I have proposed, I assure you that the staff and I will carry out your decision faithfully and diligently.
I will convene an Officers’ call this week to discuss this suggestion and how it might be considered and implemented. I encourage all board members to discuss these issues with the Guild officers or with me in advance of the call.
There are no more important issues before us than the conclusion of the TV/Theatrical Contract negotiations and the initiation of the Commercial Contract negotiations. Super-heated rhetoric through the press will not contribute to our success on behalf of the members. Working together to resolve your differences will.
Doug Allen
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.







Just make a decision.
Being in limbo is worse for everyone.
Strike or don’t strike, just make the decision.
Stop pounding on the table and do something, anything.
Strike, ok then strike.
Accept contract, ok then lets sign it.
This whole “negotiation” is a farce.
“What is called resignation is confirmed desperation.” — Henry David Thoreau
I’ve never made a good decision when I was desperate. So I can’t imagine any of the desperate comments on this story could glean any good out of the situation. I pray that cooler heads prevail. No matter what you think of the current SAG leaders (on both sides), the general membership is still dependent on them to do the right thing without compromising actors’ livelihoods and protections. That is what we have charged them with. To do less (do I hear AFTRA?) is fraud against the membership. I believe Doug Allen, politics aside, knows this and has stuck to his guns because of it, but now it appears he is afraid to fail — which is why we appear to have action then inaction. Very frustrating for everyone, which is why we’re partially in the situation we’re in.
But here we are. What can we do that is not desperate but moves us along? I believe the board should take a final vote on either a) strike authorization which voting would immediately be sent out or b) ask the AMPTP for their final and best offer and send it out for a membership vote. Those are our two best options that I can see. One or the other must be done immediately. Again, immediately!
The third option, which is what is happening now, is the stalling tactic. But this does not work with our opponent. Our opponent is too powerful and will find a way to reposition itself, considering this stalling tactic is so slow and allows for much time to reposition. Shock and awe might not have worked for Iraq, but it’s the only tactic the AMPTP understands and actually comes to the table on. Shock and awe gets shareholder and media attention and causes the AMPTP to fumble and show it’s real colors.
The continued fiddling while Rome burns is beyond frustrating. Everyone I know is in trouble. For the love of God, take some sort of action. I can’t believe that this is allowed to continue. Argh!
Working Actor:
I hear you, but that is incorrect. There is no “stalling going on” from MF – only from UFS. The national board – controlled by UFS – voted to send out the SAV Jan.2nd and the vote would haver been announced Jan. 23rd – a few days from now.
Why are we still waiting? UFS/NY/RBD/USAN/ and the “stars” – all the “moderates.”
UFS insisted on the Jan 12th national board meeting to “reconsider THEIR OWN VOTE.” And THEN – AT that meeting, with the majority and a simple plan – THEY COULD HAVE FIRED DOUG ALLEN, and replaced the negotiating committee to move this thing forward THEIR way. BUT UFS was cocky and unprepared and they BLEW IT.
NOW? Now, Doug Allen is willing to compromise and send out the contract, NO SAV, after quickly asking the AMPTP if they want to improve anything, in the hope it would pass the simple majority vote when sent out to the membership.
Guess who is trying to stop that?
UFS.
UFS wants to fire Doug Allen, replace the negotiating committee, THEN go to the AMPTP because they somehow think they will get Force Majeure and jurisdiction back.
But the AMPTP will NOT give force majeure and jurisdiction back, because the AMPTP is FREAKED OUT that there WILL be some strike in 2011, they KNOW we won’t all go out together, and when another union goes out, SAG’s force majeure rule kicks in, and they’ll end up owing SAG millions and millions of dollars.(like they do now from the WGA strike: 60 to 100 million and they WON’T pay it!)
UFS is where you should be focusing your anger because what UFS wants is one thing: MERGER WITH AFTRA. They campaigned on it, and that’s why they want control with this razor thin majority, because they want to weaken SAG and quickly merge with AFTRA. THAT’S their plan. They couldn’t give a rat’s ass about the assault on the middle-class actor in this contract or the very existence of SAG itself – because they want to END SAG.
THEN, they have this fantasy, that, somewhere down the line, in some alternate universe, a merged SAG/AFTRA new union would march into the AMPTP offices in 2011 and, because we now have “leverage,” they will GET BACK everything they GAVE AWAY – and ANYONE who knows guild history understands when the AMPTP gets something by contract – something huge (DVD residuals?) THEY NEVER GIVE IT BACK.
So, train your fire where it rightfully belongs: UFS. If not for their inept political grandstanding – this would be over by now.
I have over a great many comments. Although many valid points are raised on both sides, I must say that fault now lies in SAG’s hand for one simple reason: Inability to act as a coherent, UNIFIED body. Period. As a number of people have pointed out, SAG has DONE nothing. Much has been spoken of, and argued over, but nothing has actually been DONE. To me, giving the actual members of SAG a chance to be heard is an excellent idea. Send out the proposed deal, and let’s see how members vote on it. It would, at the very least, tell us where opinions lie. Or is it possible that there are those who fear members’ opinions?
Either way, the lack of decisive, IMMEDIATE action in the wake of such destruction is disgraceful. No more bitching, for either side. It is time for action. Period. Immediately. Put the egos away…
It seems to me that the prudent thing would be to temporarily remove Doug Allen as the lead negotiator, put a new committee together, excluding Rosenberg, and let them have a try at the AMTPT. Then take the results of that negotiations, the results of the failed Rosenberg/Allen negotiations along with a Strike Authorization vote and to the membership and allow the members to decide what road to travel.
@ Summer,
You are a complete fucking idiot. Learn some history.
Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Paine, Adams, — ALL LIBERALS.
Moron.
Hey everybody, Matt Mulhern is back. Yeah! My favorite punching bag! Lets go….
Okay, so first it was AMPTP that was the big monster, then all the “weasel” members who dared to disagree, now UFS, oh and of course Melissa Gilbert…
DAMN YOU MELISSA GILBERT!!! Youve destroyed everything!
How dare anyone disagree with MF. Dont you realize
Matt cannot save his money. He doesnet know how to budget and now he is willing to throw everyone under the bus to make sure he gets his precious money?
Again, just a couple of questions for Matt or anyone else that is pro strike. Have you stopped auditioning? Have you called your agent and said that until a proper contract is in place I will not work. There is no new media covered under the current expired contract, so I imagine that would be a deal breaker for you. RIGHT?
At least all these pro strike people have finally stopped lying and agree that a strike was what they wanted all along. Remeber back when it was just a strike authorization vote. “it doesnt mean there will be a strike”
A quick note to Justine B….hey when was the last time you worked a minimum wage job for $8.00 an hour. YOu have got a lot of nerve bringing that up when I am willing to be you have never worked minimum wage in your life. Futhermore, how unbelieveably rude to all of the hard working people in our society that do. Class act! All the way.
I am willing to bet that there are millions of people that would be happy to get that in these tough times. You know, all the people you are willing to put out of work so you can keep getting above $8.00 an hour. The people that not one of the MF/pro strike faction ever mentions in their posts.
You are all expendable to them. Craft service, suck it. Post people….eat a bag. Matt, Justine, MF need their money and you are all not worth worrying about.
Hey, you could all go work in theatre under a great equity contract and still act and be free of the chains that bind you to hollywood and all the “weasels” that are keeping you down.
hey “ich bin auchein werkunactor”
people working on television right now are seeing the reruns of their shows “moved over”to the internet and instead of receiving $3000
for a single repeat they are being offered $27 for six months unlimited
usage. what do you think that will do to the pension and health funds
in 5 years or so.
i didn’t say a goddamed thing about the AFTRA contract.
got a chip on your shoulder?
we’re talking about the SAG TV/Theatrical contract right now, genius.
the thresholds being proposed by the AMPTP are big enough to drive
a very expensive truck through…they are ludircrous.
it is a template designed to turn the entire industry NON-UNION,
and if you can’t see that, your head is in the sand
or up your ass. which is it?
nice nazi blog name, by the way.
Paris Barclay here.
I have received a number of emails suggesting that I am the “Paris (Not Hilton)” who made the much discussed comments here.
For the record, I am not the commentor. (Or is it commentator?) Either way, to quote Shaggy, “it wasn’t me.”
As a member of SAG, AFTRA, WGA and the First Vice President of the DGA, I have no (public) comment to make on these issues.
To Matt Mulhern: Before UFS even existed, Membership First was already screwing up. I believe that’s why UFS came to be to start with, to answer back to the damage being done by a leadership dominated by MF that was clearly growing reckless. To put this all on UFS is so preposterous as to be laughable. Then again, anyone who reads your posts know that you like to provoke at will, even when it is not based on any truth, which this most certainly is not.
I’ll be voting against the contract and for the strike authorization, if it comes to that.
Why? The contract is not good enough. End of story. That’s all that matters.
“We shall hang together, or hang individually.”
How does SAG wish to swing?
Hey Weasel — why do you brother us with all your BULLSHIT — nobody cares!!
Matt is discussing the current SAG issues — you are talking out your ASS!! You are so hung-up on being right you sound like a crazy person. And like most crazy people, you don’t know how to have a debate.
Get a life — you’ve just wasted 5 seconds of mine . . .
Working actor wrote…
“I’ll be voting against the contract and for the strike authorization, if it comes to that.
Why? The contract is not good enough. End of story. That’s all that matters.”
Yeah, that about says it. It’s really a shame that you can’t see past that. And that, for you, the story ends there.
Well, maybe it’ll go your way and you can witness the consequences of such an additude. And a bunch of people will suffer.
It really truly blows my mind how little sense of responsibility most people have these days. you just want what you want and you go get it and that’s ALL THAT MATTERS.
“people working on television right now are seeing the reruns of their shows “moved over”to the internet and instead of receiving $300″
Right. Obviously the studios are sacrificing lucrative syndication and rerun licensing dollars so they can make a couple thousand off of a single pre-show car add on streaming media. THAT’S THEIR EVIL PLAN. MWAHAHAHAHAHHA.
That, or they’re experimenting with modern shows or unsellable product (i.e. Freddy’s Nightmares) to see what infrastructure can be created with online content that, for now, may break even. Later this could lead to true revenue and then, and only then, will media be “moved over” from the marketplace where all the dollar is being made.
NEXT.
“what do you think that will do to the pension and health funds
in 5 years or so.”
Yes. Obviously in five years, SAG will be completely without any negotiating power because they gave up 3 years on a weaker contract. CLEARLY, they will be unable to get the attention of the other unions, rollbacks will last for infinity (or whatever other nonsensical numbers they’re claiming) and SAG membership will be enslaved at the level of Spartacus, or some such other nonsense.
OF COURSE, SAG must not lose sight of its immediate demands, such as the completely impossible desire to control/approve clip usage ON THE INTERNET, as if this is physical media like DVD. Good god, I can’t wait to see the army of non-existent office staff who are going to cost hundreds of thousands of dollars just to monitor a fraction of this information.
I mean, it’s not like “in 5 years or so” that technology, revenue streams and FLIPPIN’ SAG CONTRACTS will be at a different state. That’s ok, I know your response. IT’S NOW OR WE GET SCREWED FOR INFINITY. WAAAH.
NEXT.
“i didn’t say a goddamed thing about the AFTRA contract.”
Woah there, cowboy. No need for the language.
“got a chip on your shoulder?”
*cough*freudian slip*cough*
“we’re talking about the SAG TV/Theatrical contract right now, genius.”
Actually, there’s a lot being discussed. AFTRA is a pretty big FLIPPIN’ deal, considering that SAG is about to kiss primetime television goodbye for a long time.
“the thresholds being proposed by the AMPTP are big enough to drive
a very expensive truck through…they are ludircrous.
it is a template designed to turn the entire industry NON-UNION,
and if you can’t see that, your head is in the sand
or up your ass. which is it?”
Dude, if you can’t see the giant black limbo that SAG is falling into right now by it’s own hand, I think you should probably start checking other asses.
“nice nazi blog name, by the way.”
GREAT DEBATE SKILLZ, DOOD!
I’m curious.
If there is no contract permitting NBC to rebroadcast your movies on Hulu.com, Why doesn’t someone sue? Wouldn’t that be a positive step in the direction of forcing NBC to negotiate? (and concomitantly, AMPTP?)
There must be a retired Actor who can use the money and won’t be afraid of the AMPTP. Clearly it is, sans contract and payment, illegal to make money from selling commercials on rebroadcast shows. That “Broadcast” decision went all the way through the Supreme Court back when ISPs were so worried about “Content”. It doesn’t matter whether the “Broadcasting” happens over the air, or mountaintop repeaters, or Internet. It is illegal to make money by Broadcasting stuff you don’t own all the “Rights” to, isn’t it?
There are two sides to this Moving-to-the-Internet thing.
Simple question: anti-sag leadership, UFS, USAN, NY, AFTRA huggers, RBD:
what do you want?
this contract says:
1.phase out residuals “somebody” – I’m not sure what you’re talking about, but the main point here is “all content is going to the internet” – so, SAG must tie itself to a floating rate of distributors gross. they make money – we make money – they don’t – we don’t. the whole argument is, once you GIVE THAT UP – that concept, that basic structure and lock yourself in by contract to this formula the suits are proposing: No residuals for original content, tiny residuals for move over, or any re-use for the internet – you’re screwed.
what about that don’t you understand? do you think all content is NOT going to the internet? it’s not so much a question of EXACTLY how long it will take, but the knowledge that it’s already happening and is going to exponentially increase should, if you’re an actor, give you pause. so, that makes the deal we get RIGHT away vital, because the suits have ZERO history of give backs on big ticket items once they get the contract, like with DVD’s – and internet makes DVD look like the unicef change you used to collect on halloween. today? no. tomorrow? no. but – it’s coming and, having announced in the ny times in ’07 they want to “end residuals” – I for one, take them at their word. don’t you?
2. bye bye clip consent: an actors image is his wallet. if we don’t get substantial protection here, giving in to the excuse that it’s too labor intensive, it SEVERELY undercuts an actors ability, his or her representatives ability, to have much control over the way they are being exposed. you become the victim of a thousand mash-ups and you have no right to fight back. the “boundless sea” of clips you allude to (while in the same breath trivializing the internet as it relates to the current tv and movie model) HAS to be policed in some way, or actors will not be able to have careers without being subject to the whim of people who really have no right to either misuse intellectual property, or just plain yahoo’s with a computer havin’ fun – DOOD!
the burden should be carefully considered – is it the employers obligation to police clips, does it become against federal law, with international law invoked as well, and severely discourage random mash-ups? does the union set up a well-funded task force of geeks that do this 24/7 – responding to complaints? do the studios? I don’t know the exact answer, but I do know it must be slowed down and it must be illegal and it must be subject to oversight, or actors can’t function.
3. new product placement rules for TV and film and YOU’RE in a commercial, whether you like it or not! And – you’re not being paid AND if you refuse you’re fired and if it conflicts with any product you go up for on a commercial audition that you WOULD get paid for – you can’t go up for it!
4. force majeure goes away. protects you in case of natural disasters – fires, floods, hurricanes that can disrupt your job, protects you if another union goes out on strike – as we see right now, sag is owed 60 to 100 million by the amptp because of the writers strike – and they won’t pay it! and the main reason the suits are so hot and bothered about force majeure is, they know the unions won’t line up in 2011 – and when someone goes out before sag – our force majeure rule kicks in – and the money sign stars clicking for sag.
5. a nonunion space in your own contract? under 15k per minute, when the current rate is 2k per minute – you really think , minus union talent and crew, the suits can’t make original content – 1/2 hour, hour, all kinds of ancillary stuff – webisodes, etc., for UNDER 15k a minute – therefore nonunion? of course they can! that’s why the suits are fighting so hard to avoid full jurisdiction. they plan to exploit the living shit out of that space! and the covered performer thing. do you think they went to all this trouble to carve out this nonunion space to constantly be putting covered performers in it and flipping it union? why would they do that?
so, outside of general disgust at the glacial pace and the infighting and they dry up of some jobs right now – what do you want? do you want sag to eat this shit sandwich? do you want ufs to take over so THEY can eat this shit sandwich? (and they will)
outside of “I wanna contract – whaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!”
what the fuck do you want?
Give it a rest boys and girls. It’s time to put up or shut up.
My only question here is this…
Why are there so many of you who don’t even want to let the membership vote? Why are you trying to decide for the members and deny them their right to vote?
Both sides seem to be guilty of this.
Put the contract up to a vote. Be done with the drama. The whole town is tired of watching this vicious, petty “F-U” cycle going on within the SAG board.
somebody,
there was an article in the NY Times in June of 2007, dude, in which
several media moguls were quoted as saying they planned to eliminate
residuals.
and now, dude?
we’re being offered a contract that offers next to nothing in terms
of residuals in new media.
veoh and hulu and the like are now showing product provided to them
by cbs, abc, nbc, etc., making money through paid ads and splitting the $$$ with the providers. and the actors directors and writers of those shows? they get zilch.
“OH! BUT IT”S A NEW FORMAT. THERE’S NO WAY TO KNOW YET IF IT’S
PROFITABLE!!!”
*cough* pile of bullshit*cough*
so let’s take a wild guess and say … YOU’RE NOT AN ACTOR.
clip usage?
an actor’s likeness is all he or she has ultimately, and now the studios want
to be able to use our faces however they want, without consent
for little or no money.
using a person’s likeness without their consent is actually a
violation of California law, dude.
that is unless we GIVE IT AWAY with all of the other things the studios
are demanding in this contract.
the residual thing, dude, is an important step in slowly but surely turning the industry NON-UNION.
IATSE right now is probably going to vote down the shit deal
they’ve just been offered.
the AMPTP is out to eliminate organized labor in the industry. period.
and people who don’t want to hear it say, “Well, we’d never let that happen.” well, it’s happening
wow! the AFTRA thing is a big deal, huh?
ask any actor what contracts ( and i know you’ll say, but SAG doesn’t have a contract) have been more lucrative for them,
and they’ll tell you SAG, every time.
if AFTRA winds up taking over the whole ball of wax, i hope
their future dealings with the AMPTP will consist of something other
than the, “Sure, whatever you say. We’ll take the deal.” strategy.
“do you want sag to eat this shit sandwich?”
Short answer? Yes.
Long answer? How about you choose a FLIPPIN’ sandwich and stick to it. Right now SAG reminds me of my 6 year old sister crying and screaming in line at the restaurant because she doesn’t want to make a choice about what she wants. SAG NEEDS TO STOP WHINING AND DO SOMETHING., THEY ARE LITERALLY RUINING PEOPLE’S LIVES.
Furthermore, Matt, if you want me to take a mogul’s statements as representative of the overall plan that the studios have to eliminate residuals, then you’re going to lose a lot of people outright… including me.
If we’re going to play the “evil plan” game, then I can come at you just as strong for the total BS that Doug Allen has been serving for months regarding the impact of the strike and his completely intentional misinformation regarding the GCC’s. I don’t believe a word this guy says at this point, but I’m more than willing to believe a lot of SAG membership is going to get hurt by the deal and not all of them are as mindlessly selfish as most of the pro-SAG posts I see on this site.
You and I both know that this industry cannot survive if people can’t make the living to fill the jobs, evidenced by what’s going on right now. That means that residuals will have to be reworked to fit the new business models for SAG, WGA and DGA, but the problem is that the model does not yet exist. The marketplace is not there and the argument that does is mostly semantics.
Some of SAG’s demands, no matter how reasonable THE FEARS, are unreasonable in their application. Making matters worse, there are too many problems clouding the dialogue that should be happening to smooth out this slow transition (AND IT IS SLOW), ranging from internal union politics to a nationwide financial crisis. Are the AMPTP being stingy bastards who don’t care about anything but the bottom line? YES!
That’s no excuse to shoot the industry in the head at one of the worst times in recent economic history WHEN SAG DOESNT EVEN HAVE A PLAN. Do I hate SAG? No. Do I despise those who blindly wave around phrases like “Now or never” or “No residuals for 50 years now!”? YES.
I’m responding to you because I can clearly tell you’re not an idiot. I feel sorry for everyone who is going to see revenue they believe is due go on hold or disappear in the short term, but the AMPTP won’t be able to get anywhere if everyone unites and goes at them in 3 years. Meanwhile, SAG needs to get their shit together, repair their relationship with AFTRA and choose what they want to fight for.
Residuals? Makes sense to me. Clip usage? I work in a field that deals with this, and the desire to control ones’ likeness is irrelevant if it completely denies the reality of the technology, legal work and necessary means of communicating approvals. The reason for the demand comes from the right place, but it’s still completely unreasonable.
The Internet is an instantaneous medium and if the industry tries to regulate it at the level SAG demands, the technology and consumer demand (i.e. piracy) will completely outpace the market and leave everyone in the business without a semblance of control. We need to figure out how it works before we throw shackles over everything.
You have every right to be passionate Matt and I don’t disagree with all your qualms, but people like Harry98 are doing nothing to offer political/commercial discourse and its the hilariously inane ramblings of just finger pointing, paranoia and generalizations that’s going to keep you guys divided and on the verge of splitting your union apart. It would be a shame if that happens, but that’s where this is going if patience and focus don’t appear soon.
helen of peel,
by all means, let’s send out the AMPTP’s offer and let
membership vote it up or down.
i will be voting it down. it’s un-signable.
my feeling is that the U4S/USAN coalition is afraid that there are alot of
members who feel as i do and the damn thing might very well be voted down.
then what? then maybe we would have to put politics aside and work
together as a union, however we may feel about one another.
Well, I was fortunate to be one of the observers at last Thursday’s Hollywood Board meeting. Unlike the other divisions, Hollywood board meetings are open to members in good standing. Back in 2006 MembershipFirst demanded that Hollywood board meetings be more public and they made it happen. No other SAG division has followed that example. Anyway… a MF board member made the motion to support Doug Allen and his compromise. (sending out the June 30th deal from the AMPTP). There was lengthy debate from both sides. Everyone had the opportunity to share their opinion and ask questions. Doug Allen was there to answer any question. And he did. None of it was held in executive session. After everyone who cared to had the chance to speak and/or ask questions, it was brought to a vote. A roll call vote was requested. The final vote was 24 “yes” to 14 “no”. No one from UFS voted for the compromise. Not one. And although there has been resent conflicts within MF, all MF board members who attended voted up the compromise. So, really, WTF!? UFS first votes up sending out the strike authorization in Oct, then they immediately join the New York Board to launch a public campaign against a strike authorization. Then two UFS board members, Ned Vaughn and Adam Arkin request a meeting with Doug Allen to discuss the confusion surrounding the strike authorization, Doug agrees to move up the date of the already scheduled January plenary to talk about those who want to reconsider their Oct. vote, but what actually happened is that UFS, NY, and the RBD hi-jacked the meeting and turned it into a tar and feather session against Doug Allen and the negotiating committee. When they failed that attempt because they were just not experienced enough to go up against the MF minority, they, at the last minute, had Gabrielle C., (the person known for wanting to weaken SAG in order to expedite a quickie merger with AFTRA), pass around a piece a paper, requesting signatures from New York and RBD members without telling them exactly what they were signing ( it turned out to be a really poorly executed written assent, which was deemed not worth the paper it was written on by both inside and outside SAG lawyers), and now this unknown majority has sent a letter to the media,yet not to anyone at the Guild, demanding Doug Allen’s head. Have you noticed that there are NO signatures attached to that letter!? Why don’t these people sign this letter? And why did they send it to the media without sending it to the Guild? The same media that announced on the 12th that Doug Allen had been fired when he hadn’t. (how is it that Dave McNary still has a job?)
Make no mistake. The AMPTP could give a flying you know what about who sits opposite them during negotiations. If UFS truly believes that they can find someone who can actually convince the AMPTP to give SAG full jurisdiction in all production made for New Media, residuals in that platform and retaining Force Majeure and honoring the hundreds of thousands of dollars still owed to SAG members due to the WGA strike then why don’t they reveal who that person is? Because it certainly isn’t John McGuire. He’s been sitting third chair during these negotiations since April 15th, 2008 and supports Doug and the negotiating committee. It certainly can’t be Steve Diamond. Anyone who’s read his tirades must realize the man sounds like a jilted lover. Who is this powerful person UFS has waiting in the wings? Short of Barack Obama, it better be someone who can really intimidate Counter and his gang.
The reality is that they have no one. They, along with Jamie Cromwell et al want to destroy SAG. Plain and simple. Merger, merger, merger. Remember during the last SAG elections, UFS campaigned on a merger platform yet never revealed their plan. Well, here it is. We are all witnessing their plan. That’s why they were furious with the Vote No campaign SAG waged against AFTRA’s primetime tentative agreement. That’s it in a nutshell. They want to merge with AFTRA with AFTRA taking the lead in our contracts and our careers!!
Oh, hey, what happened to all of the blt’ers telling us actors to just shut up and take the damn deal on this site? Did they actually take their fingers out of their ears and hands away from blocking their eyes, to actually read that piece of shit their leadership is begging them to accept? If you haven’t done so already, please go to http://www.400hours.com. It’s worth a few minutes of your time.
I’m a WGA member and impartial observer (as much as anyone can be impartial having felt the full brunt of the AMPTP during our own go-round).
Matt Mulhern sure takes a lot of flack on this site. Yet consistently, in post after post, he sticks to the issues, lays out his argument, and defends his positions.
As opposed to most of his detractors, who namecall and speak in generalities. I’d say 5% of the posts blasting Mulhern even bother to present any argument at all, much less refute Mulhern’s specific points.
Tell me why the guy’s wrong — that’s how you change minds. Not by ranting about Membership First, or the Allens, or the failing economy.
The AMPTP wants everything and gives away nothing — ever. They respect strength, and nothing else.
Frank
“They, along with Jamie Cromwell et al want to destroy SAG.”
So much for any credability to your argument. A huge post that I wanted to take seriously drowned out by more angry, fear-filled paranoia and character assassination. GOOD JOB, DOOD.