Comments (10)

• Good. When the weak spined UFS pulled their coup they thought they could muzzle the truth. Membership First is what their name implies, putting the membership first. UFS wants to accept a shitty deal, push for qualified voting, and spend millions more on trying to overturn the will of the membership by merging with AFTRA. UFS is afraid to let the membership vote because they know the membership despises their tactics and their willingness to to sell out our future.

  I replaced SAG’s site on my favorites list with Membership First’s new site. Long live free speech!!

  Oh yeah, send the SAV out to the membership for a vote. Let the AMPTMP weasels know that the membership will not let them steal our future.

  Comment by send out the SAV — Wednesday March 4, 2009 @ 8:30pm PST  Reply to this post

• The truth will get out with Membership First!

  Comment by that's it folks! — Wednesday March 4, 2009 @ 11:43pm PST  Reply to this post

• From the Membership First website:

  Anne Marie Johnson writes, “The following is my opinion. I am not speaking on behalf of Screen Actors Guild:”

  Something is terribly rotten when an elected official of a union had to write this disclaimer before addressing the membership.

  UFS and David White are running a dictatorship and are opposed to freedom of speech. If you look at history– that is to say if anyone in this town can read– you will see dictators are rarely about the rights of the people or in this case the membership.

  UFS and White are no less diabolical than history’s other dictators gagging the voices of elected officials. I suppose next they’ll furnish us with shackles.

  Comment by zackery — Wednesday March 4, 2009 @ 11:54pm PST  Reply to this post

• I went to that website and it nothing else but another pitiful sign that SAG is fighting amongst itself…STILL! I work in this industry and I was in full support of SAG fighting for what they want- but that was last summer. Shit or get off the pot.

  It’s embarrassing that nothing has been done so far. Nothing. It’s absolutely ridiculous to send a SAV- send out the vote to accept or reject the last & final offer. DO SOMETHING. Anything. Just stop the internal fighting.

  In such horrible economic times, it would be almost heroic if for the greater good- your members accept the offer and WE all can get back to work.

  Comment by Fed up — Thursday March 5, 2009 @ 5:05am PST  Reply to this post

• Uhm, while I agree that we should be sending out the SAV at this point, the whole “merging with AFTRA overturns the will of the membership” talking point is, you know, bullshit. The majority of the union – 58% – supported merger the last go-round, and we’re infinitely more united in the commercial negotiations precisely because we’re working together.

  More generally, the hard core supporters of both sides of our internal feud are the main thing that’s hamstringing the union. “UFS are spineless monkeys!” “MF are self-involved snakes!” How does all of this crap get us a contract? Here’s hoping that in September a new group of people beholden to neither side get elected because our intramurals are killing SAG.

  Throw the bums out. All of them.

  Comment by Anonymous — Thursday March 5, 2009 @ 6:02am PST  Reply to this post

• AMJ and the remaining possibilities Reply with quote Edit/Delete this post
  Nothing is served by not acknowledging the fact that there WAS an SAV that was NOT sent out, because the former leadership was thinking three steps ahead, worrying too much about the campaign to defeat the SAV, and hence, they did nothing.

  I have enormous respect for Anne-Marie and the other MF leaders, and former NED Doug Allen. But portraying what has happened so far without noting your own part in it is useless. I hope the leadership – the MF leadership is, as I write this – talking to IATSE membership. The ONLY way SAG will get a fair deal, which means full jurisdiction from dollar one and a percentage of distributors gross in new media, is to ASK the question, via an SAV “will you give us a fair deal?”

  If the answer is “no” – and we can manage to go out WITH IATSE? ALL WORK STOPS.

  How long will shareholders of multi-billion dollar companies whose only subsidiaries doing well are entertainment companies, tolerate executives who are causing a work stoppage due to denial of perfectly reasonable and fair demands for this contract?

  To say SAG should sign this deal and wait 2 to 3 years while the AMPTP figures out how to “monetize the internet” then, expecting they will either come back to us and make a fair deal, OR, that we will ALL go on strike? – is MADNESS.

  One thing SAG has going for it right now? The ONLY thing? WE STILL HAVEN’T SIGNED THIS DEAL.

  Hollywood must lead the way. I met with some New York actors in NYC last night and some L.A. actors as well, and the simple truth of New York is that, while there IS some support here for bold action, Richard Masur and his seeming delusion he’s still the president of the Guild, has NY on it’s knees, begging to find a way to sign this horrible deal.

  Their WORST fear is SAG Hollywood finds a way to unite with IATSE and confront the AMPTP. Until Richard Masur is removed from the government of SAG for good, as long as he has his hands on or near power in NY, the New York division is being rendered mute. Richard Masur is the puppet-master holding the strings of UFS and the current dissent in Hollywood. He TELLS Ned Vaughn what to do, how to navigate the political waters in L.A. in pursuit of HIS wet dream – a SAG SO weakened it is pushed to merge with AFTRA.

  Hollywood needs to grab the reigns of power back from UFS and hopefully forge an alliance with IATSE that FORCES NY to be supportive.

  THEN – we go secure our right to a fair contract – BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.

  Comment by Matt Mulhern — Thursday March 5, 2009 @ 12:47pm PST  Reply to this post

• at this point, I am hopelessly confused about what the factions within SAG want what.

  Is there a simple run down available outlining warring factions, what they call themselves, who’s affiliated, and who wants what ?

  Comment by completely confused — Thursday March 5, 2009 @ 5:40pm PST  Reply to this post

• I agree with “completely confused”. I’d love to hear from someone in the know about which factions want what and why.

  Comment by camrob — Thursday March 5, 2009 @ 8:40pm PST  Reply to this post

• The “moderates” (UFS/NY/RBD/USAN) want to take this deal, yesterday. Then, they would love – UFS – to pick up a few more seats this summer, running on having run on gotten a contract signed, whereas MF (”hard-liners”) didn’t. Then, they would like to merge with AFTRA. Then, they seem to be suggesting they, having merged with AFTRA,will come back in 2011 or 2012 and get all the things they gave away BACK from the AMPTP, because having merged with AFTRA will give them the “leverage” to confront the producers THEN as opposed to NOW.

  The “hard-liners” want a deal that has full jurisdiction – no nonunion work allowed in SAG’s contract. One of our “core principals,” by the way, and never allowed before. Ever.

  They want SAG actors to be tied to the producers profits as a percentage of distributors gross, which basically boils down to “you make money in new media, we make money. You don’t, we don’t.”

  There are other important issues “hard-liners” want – but the above are the non-negotiable.

  There is NO precedent for the producers EVER giving back money to SAG, once they get us to sign on the dotted line. EVER. Not on VHS/DVD residuals, first negotiated in 1986 and NEVER renegotiated – event though the AMPTP “promised they would!”

  Not on cable residuals, first negotiated in 1988. Same thing. Terrible deal for actors on residuals. “We’ll get back to you later” (the producers). Only recently, after 20 years, a slight bump. 20 years.

  On DVD residuals? The AMPTP STILL call it a “non-starter” – after 22 years. They have made billions upon billions, and SAG has lost hundreds of millions in residuals for you and me, fellow SAG actors, and, going into new media, they are saying the EXACT SAME THING: “Trust us. In three years, we’ll renegotiate.”

  The so-called “hard-liners” are saying: “bullshit – give us a fair deal now.”

  The “moderates” are saying “O.K. – we’ll take the deal as is, we’ll ’study the data’ about money in new media, and then, we’ll trust your word that you’ll come back and renegotiate. It’s not worth striking over now.

  That’s the difference, in a nutshell.

  Comment by Talon — Thursday March 5, 2009 @ 9:41pm PST  Reply to this post

• All I can say, lets start talking again!! Are there about 40 features on hold how many pilots are there under sag that are filming here in LA? Please let me know , if there is no more talk, let the people decide if we should take the deal or not!!!! bye, Robin

  Comment by Robin Glendale,Ca — Saturday March 7, 2009 @ 8:06am PST  Reply to this post