EMMYS: ‘Big Bang Theory’s Science 
Has Summit Pulled A Rabbit Out Of The Hat With Dean Parisot … 
Scoot McNairy Shores Up ‘Black Sea’ Role 
‘Client List’ Season 3 Pickup In Limbo Over … 
New Myth, Toonz Ent. Help Launch Epiphany, A $200 Million … 
Amazon Orders Cop Drama Pilot Based On Michael … 
Third Point Raises Stake In Sony And Presses To Join Its … 
Lionsgate Acquires Pulitzer Prize Winner ‘Devil In … 
ABC Executive Quinn Taylor Moves To NBC To Head Longform … 
Future Of ‘Anger Management’ Co-Star Selma … 
Returning Showrunner Dan Harmon Slams … 
EMMYS: Will “Arch Rival” Matt Damon Be Jimmy … 
Neil Patrick Harris Takes ‘Hedwig And The Angry … 
‘True Blood’ Season 6 Premiere Draws 4.5 … 
Cary Woods And His Long Road Back Into Film; Makes … 
Sony Doing Two More ‘Spider-Man’ Movies, Sets … 
Dave Chappelle To Headline Funny Or Die’s Oddball … 
CBS Sets Fall 2013 Premiere Dates 
‘Man Of Steel’ Soars To $200.3M Worldwide In … 
WME Signs Stage Vets Michael Mayer And Stephen Karam As CAA … 
Bruce Rosenblum Joins Legendary As President Of Television … 
DEADLINE’s Exclusive SAG-AFTRA Post-Merger Details
January 31, 2012 – 8:08pm
Dear SAG and AFTRA Members:As you know, merger referendum ballots are scheduled to be mailed on or about February 27 – but members of both unions now have access to the complete merger documents online. Full printed merger documents will also be mailed to each voter with the referendum ballot, which will be due for return on March 30. This will give each member ample time to make a thoughtful and well-informed decision. Please click the below links to view the SAG-AFTRA Merger Agreement, SAG-AFTRA Constitution and the Pension & Health / Health & Retirement Feasibility Review.
CLICK HERE TO REVIEW THE SAG-AFTRA MERGER AGREEMENT.
CLICK HERE TO REVIEW THE SAG-AFTRA CONSTITUTION.
CLICK HERE TO REVIEW THE P&H/H&R FEASIBILITY REVIEW.
As a reminder, watch for the launch of the new joint website to provide members all the information they’ll want to consider before casting their votes. The website will include complete merger details, FAQs, and a comprehensive calendar of events to alert members nationwide to informational meetings and other opportunities for learning about the plan. Watch your email later this week for details of the website launch.
After more than a year of intensive work, we are extremely proud to bring you this historic opportunity. We also want to acknowledge the ceaseless dedication of the AFTRA and SAG members and staff who came together as the Group for One Union (G1) to produce this remarkable plan. We look forward to sharing all the details and answering any questions you may have. Finally, we are confident that SAG and AFTRA members will embrace this singular chance to harness the true power of unity, and that SAG-AFTRA will protect members and shape the entertainment and media industries for decades to come.
In unity,
Ken Howard, President , Screen Actors Guild
Roberta Reardon, President AFTRA
Editor-in-Chief Nikki Finke - tip her here.
Loading ...
Yep, as expected… Smells like a stinker!
Well, Ken Howard has shown how much work he puts in and how this “new UNION” will be so strong…bs. He’s a fraud, a non working nothing who occupies a seat and wants to be known as the “saviour” of SAG when he ignores all who speak to hima bout anything and keeps on protecting Roberta Reardon so that he will be remembered as a “hero”. THIS DEAL IS NOTHING MORE THAN WHAT THEY STARTED WITH AND THE ONLY THING DIFFERENT IS THAT THEY WANT TO DOUBLE YOUR DUES!!! Forget it folks, VOTE NO!!! When this gets out the Producers will be laughing so hard they will blow a gasket and we can thank Ken Howar and Ned Vaughn for their storm trooper tactics in ramming through the worst “merger” in union history. VOTE NO!!
DEAR SAG MEMBERS,
Please, I beseech you to stand as one union, the only true actors’ union against the traitorous actions of AFTRA!!!
AFTRA committed a horrible traitorous act in signing television contracts that were SAG for decades, taking those contracts hostage to force the merger in order to get to the SAG pension fund.
In a business that is so often a popularity contest, please feel free to be selfish and VOTE NO TO THE MERGER!!!
Why have we been given 50 days to analyze 10 years of legal maneuvering and language? Because this merger is a conspiracy between union trustees to create a studio controlled union!!!
Why is Ken Howard so behind the merger? Because he was either criminally irresponsible in losing those television contracts, OR he was in on it!!!
VOTE NO TO THE SAG-AFTRA MERGER!!!
So the combined entity is going to be a union and not a guild?
A “union” and a “guild” are the same thing. Guild just sounds more arty and prestigious. Technically, SAG, WGA, DGA, AFTRA, IATSE, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), the United Auto Workers (UAW), etc. are all “collective bargaining associations” under US Labor Law. As long as they fulfill certain requirements and are registered with the federal government, there is no legal or effective difference no matter the name. (Some organizations, like the Producers Guild or the Union of Concerned Scientists use the terms more meaning “a coming together” but are not legally unions in the labor sense.)
They are not the same
Check with unemployment
if you are receiving a pension from a “Guild” you are eligible for
unemployment benefits if you work and qualify.
If the pension is from a “Union” no matter how much you earn you will not be eligible for unemployment benefits
haven’t read the document so does anyone know what they will call the union in the long term or will it be sag-aftra forever
…they will have to call it SAFTRAG…
Read the Feasibility Review and you will see that it states in numerous ways by each of the lawyers, that we need a Feasibility Review or Study; to come to any conclusions. All the rest is written in such general terms and uninformed estimations, with no understanding of who we are and what we do; but most threatening of all, on page 6 of Deborah Lerner’s opinion, is what we’ve always known:
.
“There is no guarantee that our benefits will not be reduced if we merge the plans, if we don’t merge the plans, or if a new plan is formed and the old plans remain frozen.
In all of everything that is written, we have: the uncertainty of what will happen, that the Trustees of both plans have a Fiduciary Obligation to do no harm to either plan, that there is no guarantee that, that will prevail, and that more study would be needed to determine how any of this will work; but we’re expected to approve a merger and we’ll figure out what’s wrong with it at some undetermined time in the unknown future.
Nothing in all of the Merger Documents and Board decisions; relieves the Trustees and the Boards of their legal responsibilities, and they are as they have been, in the past 16 failed mergers; culpable and legally bound providing there are legal claims forcing them to act lawfully.
All of Jurisdiction can be and must be tested at law in accordance with the rules of scope in our gold book, because we’ve never gone beyond the internal mechanism to file legal claim. The NLRB, nor Labor Commission, nor 4 A’s are willing to go there.
An entire thesis, would be required to present a opposition statement that would properly refute the inconclusiveness of this so-called Feasibility Review they have given us. Only a great Legal team could do this properly, with our guidance. Pretty much as we provided the last time with the combination of Jeffrey Lewis Esq.; and Chris Katzenbach Esq; with the great help of the Mercer Report, which probably still applies.
Who’s going to carry that ball this time?
Tom
Tom-
The best way to ensure the health of both plans going forward is to merge the unions. By combining forces, and stopping the duplication and internal fighting, we can take on the real obstacles to members for the opportunity to have a middle class life….jobs with benefits. We have seen what happens when members benefits are split and when non-union work goes un-organized. I know change is hard, but it’s time for One Union. One Voice.
Anne…
What you say is nonsensical. The best way to ensure anything is never to just plunge forward with no advance plan. Yes, change is hard. What’s hard about it is making proper preparations. I can see you’re enthusiastic. By all means, communicate your enthusiasm. But to tell someone that the “best way” to do something is to just do it, without answering reasonable questions, is anything but transparent, or helpful. I, for one, get even more put off about a merger when questions are answered (or, actually, not answered) this way.
Anne –
My gosh, do you think it’s all roses and gumdrops if we merge?! Tom, myself and many many other people who are informed are trying to tell you all that there’s a damn good chance that if we merge…everything will go to hell. First and foremost…what is going to happen to people’s pensions? Do you think it’s fair to thousands of actors if they’re pension gets reduced because of the merger?
Will that be good? I’m guessing you don’t have a pension. You and others like you who have nothing to lose – unlike me – think more numbers means a better stronger union. BULLSH%t.
Bottom line, ANNE…get with the program and understand what could happen if we merge. Nothing good, only bad. Now is it such a good idea to merge?!
P.S. You’re bland rah-rah rebuff to TOM is indicative of all of you who have no idea what is at stake. Have some more Kool-Aid, Anne. You have no valid argument for why it’s good, but we have hundreds of reasons why it’s bad.
Yes, and the way to get to “one union” is to decertify the scumbag union, AFTRA.
I’ve read the whole farkocktah megila.
The producers and the networks must be in 7th.heaven. If this merger goes through it opens up a whole can of worms. A NEW UNION?
Great! All the benefits for members that SAG has battled for since 1933 will be up for grabs in the next negotiations. Residuals? Sorry! Increased contributions to your P&H plans? Sorry! Internet use? Sorry! What you’ll strike? Are you kidding; AFTRA doesn’t strike! Besides we can use our NON -UNION AFTRA people. Safety on the set? Come-on; actors are a dime a dozen!
Follow the money folks; the only people who will make out like bandits are the lawyers and maybe a couple of announcer, DJ, newscaster,singer,dancer and musician types. (Some of my best friends are singer-dancers and musicians)(I have no lawyer friends).
BTW, how many millions and millions of dollars did AFTRA steal from
SAG when they abandoned our joint negotiations in 2008?
A proud member of SAG & AEA since 1966. I pay dues to AFTRA
Seems like the AFTRA members have a lot more to gain than SAG members. Increased dues and an open door for people who didn’t earn their way in sounds like a lot of BS to me.
For those SAG members in favor. Whatcha gonna do when it bites you in the ass? Say “oops”. It will be too late.
Don’t screw it up for the rest of us.
Anne Gartlan says –
“The best way to ensure the health of both plans going forward is to merge the unions.”
We should all read the Feasibility Review.
At least read the one-page “Executive Summary” (p 2, of 36), written by (surely) our Executive Directors, Kim Hedgpeth-Roberts and David White.
The Summary is the section in which the pro-merger professionals take their best shot at winning us over by “summarizing” the opinions of seven pro-plan-merger lawyers.
And the Summary is a sloppy, redundant, almost incoherent document that asserts that the lawyers we hired to give us their legal (and political) opinions “conclude” that, in general, mergers of pension and health plans can be done. They’re legal. (If you pay enough lawyers, I guess, to make sure they’re legal.)
The Summary goes on to declare that an un-named “government agency in charge of mergers” says that “plan mergers do not pose any increase in the risk of loss of benefits …. ” [Couldn't our Executives have taken a minute to look up the name of that "government agency"? The PBGC?]
So, no INCREASE in the risk of loss of benefits, according to the unknown government agency.
Very reassuring.
The rest of the seven (unnumbered) Executive bullet points carry on the effort to persuade us that neither of our plans will suffer and that merger of the Federation and the Guild will make it easier to merge the plans, according to their lawyers. “[U]nion merger would provide a realistic opportunity for …. ” And, in the next bullet point, “[U]nion merger would facilitate the possibility of …. ” (Honestly, I couldn’t invent redundancies like these, even for a scurrilous satire.)
Bullet point Six (by my count) begins, “The merger process for plans is not particularly complicated.” When I read that sentence, I relaxed completely and just let the waves of merger euphoria wash over me.
I’m rambling, no? Reading bureaucrats’ translations of legalese does that to me. Back to Anne Gartlan’s optimistic declaration of faith:
“The BEST WAY to ensure the HEALTH of both plans going forward is to merge the UNIONS.”
That is a leap of faith that is not warranted even in the sunny blithering Executive Summary of (I assume) our highly paid National Executive Directors. They give the top weasel word “would” a thorough work-out (see above for two examples), and even they don’t say “The best way.”
Speaking of weasel words, the title of the document about the plans is “Feasibility REVIEW.” Not a serious Study of the probable impact of an actual merger of two specific unions upon the actual health and pension plans of those unions. What we get is a “Review” of the opinions of seven hand-picked lawyers who have worked on other plan mergers, not the real, specific plan merger we’re actually faced with. No research. No fact-based projections. Not a single reference to the actual trustees of either plan, 50% of whom are our employers. The actual trustees who would, IF they elect to, negotiate and authorize the actual merger of SAG’s P&H with AFTRA’s H&R.
Couldn’t Kim and David and our officers and Board have consulted with one or two actuaries and other numbers crunchers? Why no “Feasibility Review” of THEIR opinions?
Looks like “dereliction,” to me.
(Disclosure: I’m not a lawyer or an accountant. Maybe I’m not reading this document correctly. Maybe Anne Gartlan’s faith is well-founded.)
YOU OBVIOUSLY ARE A PROPAGANDIST FOR AFTRA, you should be ashamed of yourself hijacking the contracts! But you’re not!
Anne Gartlin,
I thank you for your service and well meaning intentions, but:
I’ve addressed all that above. You obviously didn’t read it; but even the most staunch proponents understand the logic of needing real Feasibility Studies of how everything will shake out once the unions are merged; which at this point, even you and our other leaders admit you don’t have a clue about. I can furnish volumes of documented reason as to how and why we have not succeeded in merging. The primary reasons concern the disparity of the Pension and Health of SAG; and the Health and Retirement Plan of AFTRA; and of equal disparity, is; Governance. Yours by Convention without consent of the Membership; and ours by Referenda of, for, and by the Membership. We are currently a microcosm of our dysfunctional Federal Government. Rampant Partisanship, Unbridled thirst for power; and what these slogans: One Union, One Voice; There’s Strength in Numbers; go to prove, is that we are blinded from understanding or wanting to understand and educate the reasoning behind having One Union, under One Roof; for Actors only. We don’t need to be governed by Broadcasters, who don’t even have to work Union Contracts, but I, as a past National Board Member of AFTRA , myself; know very well the power they sway and how they will continue to rule in the new union. And who do they represent if not the corporate powers that we are indentured servants too. David Clennon qualified it best in his brilliant piece about : Aristocrats of a Liberal Persuasion. That’s what we have now, guiding this Merger proposal; and all the minions who have drunk the tea.
Fraternally
Tom Bower
I’m still concerned about the, what is it, 40,000(?) AFTRA members not currently in SAG who will suddenly basically gain admission without working for it or paying for it. It seems that would also flood an already competitive marketplace. That part just is not fair. Either those currently in only one union need to pay their way to full-fledged membership as those who have already paid for separate SAG and AFTRA memberships have done, or some of us should be looking at a refund.
Talk of Decertifying AFTRA has been going on for years and years and years and it hasn’t happened. It will never happen. It’s a huge organizational nightmare. Besides, would SAG be willing to take on all those AFTRA only actors on free of charge? I think not.
To answer Bruckey’s question about what the new union will be called; it’s intended to be SAG-AFTRA United. It should be called SLOGANS; because that’s all the majority of proponents can offer. Some are so arrogant as to say; we don’t have all the answers, but we’ll work it out after the merger.
I can’t take Slogans to the Doctors and Hospitals who cured my wife of Breast Cancer, at a cost of $200,000 +; paid for by SAG P&H. I can’t take SLOGANS to my Mortgage Company; of which i’m lucky to have; and is paid for by my SAG Pension; which our SAG Lawyers, in their Feasibility Review; state clearly: We cannot guarantee that Benefits will not be reduced under a Merger, where we don’t know if the Plans will be Merged, not Merged; or have a New Plan, while the old Plans are Frozen.
Come on guys; even if you think there is no other way to solve disputes over Jurisdiction; and there is; but even if you believe there isn’t; we most definitely need a bonafide Feasibility Study to determine, what Contracts we do jobs under; how the money is dispersed to the Plans; and countless other questions that we need unbiased answers for, before plunging in, with SLOGANS as to how we are going to work it out later.
I’ll leave you with this: under the Merger without all the determinations; do you think we are going to get the best Contractual Terms and Accrual Rates for Pension and Health that we have now under SAG; the lesser sums under AFTRA; or something in between. Can all the experts guiding us to the Promised Land, answer even that one little question?
Tom Bower
Craig, if you ask @ the Union Meetings a question the leaders on the dais don’t like or prefer not to answer you’ll be curtly told the reason that x cannot be accomplished is because SAG is a Guild & not a Union…
Anne — HOW?
Are you really willing to vote blind just hoping they get the details right when they “figure it out later”?
Do you sign contracts without knowing the details first? Because that’s what you’re advocating. And it’s one of the stupidest ideas I’ve ever heard.
Right On Anne! I’m tired of being run over by the Studios. We need some real bargaining power and this is it! Enough of “What’s AFTRA gonna give me”, and “What’s SAG gonna do for me”
Anne -
But as you know, just because the plans can theoretically be merged,
doesn’t mean that the trustees are under any obligation to do so.
Half the trustees are from the corporate side.
So, if merger passes this time and the corporate trustees decide it’s not
in the best interest of the corporations to merge the plans then guess what ?
They won’t merge them.
And there’s nothing we can really do about that, is there.
Then what happens ?
We freeze those two plans and start a new one for SAG-AFTRA.
Well, the trustees and the corporations are not really under any obligation to start
a new pension and health plan for the new union, are they?
In 1960, SAG had to surrender all residual rights to shows and films done before that year
in order to get the pension and health plan we have now.
What will they want this time ?
All residual rights prior to 2012 ?
We don’t know.
And what about those two frozen plans ?
If all new earnings will be credited to the new SAG-AFTRA plan
and all residuals prior to 2012 are eliminated,
how do the old SAG and Aftra pension plans get funded, if at all ?
Are there any contingency plans being formulated by the architects of this merger ?
Any sort of, chess strategies going on ?
Any “what ifs” ?
Any “Plan B’s” ? Or “C’s” ? Or “D’s” ?
ERISA guarantees our pensions to the tune of about 13 cents on the dollar, give or take.
All these pro-merger people come on these blogs and say,
“Stop worrying about your pension ! It’s guaranteed by the government !”
Yeah, for 13 cents on the dollar.
So, a fully vested SAG member who has maxed out on the pension and has to be rescued by ERISA
would now receive $12,480 per year as opposed to the $96,000 per year they were counting on.
Well, that’d be a bucket of cold water at 65 years old, wouldn’t it ?
And for all of the people who believe
this merger will solve all of their problems regarding qualifying for P & H . . .
if the trustees don’t merge the plans, well, they’re screwed.
How long will it take to create a new plan if one can or will be created ?
18 months ? 3 years ? 5 years ?
During that time these same people will see their earnings still divided between two plans,
and perhaps still not qualifying for benefits
But all of the senior staff will still be pulling down their nice six figure salaries
in this new, bloated, top-heavy bureaucracy .
So much much for stopping the duplication.
Staff will be fine.
The members, maybe not so much.
Nobody knows what will happen, or if they do know, they’re not talking.
So people have every right to be concerned about what will happen to their pensions.
All this new feasibility report really says is, that the plans can be merged
but the whole thing needs a great deal more study..
So, no, it’s not immediately apparent that this new union will remove the
obstacles to members for the opportunity to have a middle-class life.
It may, in fact, create new ones and cement old ones firmly in place.
One Union! One Voice! Sounds great as long as that union is S.A.G. and doesn’t have anything to do with AFTRA.
This merger is a hostile takeover of S.A.G. by AFTRA. And our leaders are going along with it!
VOTE NO ON THIS PIG OF A DEAL! Join our discussion/info group on Facebook called JUST SAY S.A.G.
S.A.G., there is NO SUBSTITUTE!
I absolutely agree with you Tom bowers. I read the complete agreement and saw so many generalization on the terms I still am going to vote no.
guild and union are NOT the same a union gets you work–Sag and aftra do not get you work being in the guild allows you to work
NOT UNTIL WE KNOW THE DETAILS OF WHAT IS HAPPENING TO OUR PENSIONS AND INSURANCE
I just read it.
If it looks like a pig, sounds like a pig and smells like a pig, then it must be a pig.
Just because the the plans can theoretically be merged doesn’t mean the trustees will.
They are under no obligation to do so.
If SAG-AFTRA decides to freeze those two plans and start a new one,
ownership is under no obligation to start a new plan.
In 1960 we had to give up all residuals to start the plan we have now.
Will the corporations say, “New plan ? Give up all residuals before 2012.” ?
They might.
If all new earnings get funneled into the new plan, how do the old plans get funded ?
If residuals are eliminated and all new earnings go to the new plan,
then there is no money for the old plans .
Is there ?
Somebody please tell me how this will be done.
Has this been planned for ?
And while a new plan in being set up,
members will likely see their earnings still split between the two old plans.
For how long ?
How long, in theory, would it take to set up a new plan ?
18 months ?
2 years ?
3 years ?
A big selling point of this merger is no more split earnings.
How long before that becomes a reality ?
Or does it happen at all ?
ERISA only insures our pensions to 13 cents on the dollar.
If SAG’s pension goes into the red zone and needs to be rescued by ERISA,
a retiree would see their $96,000 per year pension reduced to $12,480.
A thousand a month before taxes.
This merger is gambling with the members’ future security by not having
even a guesstimate of how the pension and health situation will shake out.
There is nothing about this plan that indicates the health of both plans will be ensured.
There is nothing to indicate that,
“the obstacles to members for the opportunity to have a middle-class life”,
as Anne Gartlan puts it, will be reduced or removed.
There are more indicators that suggest new obstacles will arise
and that the old obstacles may be cemented firmly in place.
There so are many unanswered questions,
so many giant “WHAT IFS”,
that the current leadership either cannot or will not address.
Why ?
All the feasibility report says is that the plans can be merged in theory,
and that the whole thing needs a great deal more study.
Well, then let’s have a proper study done.
Let’s come up with some contingency plans to cover our bases for all potential outcomes.
Do enough homework
so the membership can be given a reasonable expectation
of what their pension and health situation might be like under the new union.
We desperately need informed, in-depth analysis, the kind provided by Tom Bower, Alan Ruck and others. But it’s also good to have short-form (and accurate) sound bites. I’m copying these off of Trey King:
SAG GOOD. AFTRA BAD. SAG-AFTRA … VERY. VERY. BAD.
And
IT’S NOT A MERGER. IT’S A HOSTILE TAKE-OVER.
(And it’s a weird hostile take-over, because it’s [probably] going to happen with the collusion of the OFFICERS of the TARGETED company — SAG — over the heads of the ill-informed shareholders, us. Et cui bono? The 1% and their political flunkies. So I’d add . . .)
IT’S NOT A MERGER. IT’S A HOSTILE TAKEOVER, BY THE 1%.
99% — BEWARE.
(James Cromwell, December 2008: “We’re the one percent, David. We’re the ones who have the most to lose.”)
This Merger sure as hell smell’s like BAD CAT SHIT!! SAG and Aftra can’t just RAM this merger down are throats! I am vested with 14 years credits!! on my pension!! I can walk away…and still have something!! This is all about balancing the books!! of years of on the take from both unions!!