SAG-AFTRA Info Meeting Set February 9

COMMENTS (18)

• I’d be able to learn a lot more if there were some speakers scheduled who opposed the merger. This look like a sales pitch meeting.

  Comment by M. — Thursday February 2, 2012 @ 11:16pm PST  Reply to this post

• Well this is already interesting. A proposed merger that does not include merging our health and pension? It does include a feasibility report on how we might merge our health and pension. How about we wait, and pay Roberta Reardon more of our dues money, so she can come up with a Merger Plan, not a report on the possibility of merging our health and pension? Once that happens, then we should vote. In the meantime, even if we merge, our earnings still won’t qualify us for one or the other of the pension and health plans. And why does merger mean giving up our individual voting rights? There is absolutely no reason or need for a convention that most of the membership will not be able to attend. It is a big waste of money in an age where people can vote on their computers at home…and the wording in the proposed constitution leaves most of the power in the hands of congress, oops, I mean the National Board, when it comes to delegates and elections. But the biggest question regarding this merger comes from the merger contract. It is vague and allows the “Initial Board” to pretty much do whatever they see fit for the “Initial period” which is also vague. It also has a clause that says if one of the Co-Presidents resigns, than the other one becomes president. SAG members elected Ken Howard, but when he resigns we’ll end up with Roberta Reardon who was elected at a convention and has never shown any interest in supporting SAG actors. These guys are pushing this merger on us, saying it will give us more bargaining power. True! A merger would do that, if both unions weren’t being run by self proclaimed moderates who got us the worst contract we’ve seen since I joined in 1989. They scared actors into voting for that contract and demonized the leadership that was in the middle of some of the toughest and most necessary negotiations we’ve ever seen, and then they tanked our residuals and our income. We need to merge. This is not the plan for merger. Get back to work and make this merger about the members. It’s not about your desire to have power, rub elbows with management or draw a paycheck from actors’ dues. It’s about the actors who used to be able to make their living in this career and have a desire to do that again…

  Comment by Mickey Maxwell — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 12:17am PST  Reply to this post

• M, there will definitely be people there opposed to the merger, but the majority will be for it, because the SAG-AFTRA merger makes sense for actors.

  I’m vested in both SAG & AFTRA pensions, but it would help me and all working actors if we could contribute to one single medical plan, making it easier to get coverage. And that can only happen after a merger.

  The merger itself is between the unions, not the medical plans, but once we merge, we can address the future. Reports say that when pension plans are combined after a union merger, the plans become stronger, with more benefits to members and lower premiums.

  The arguments I hear against merger are weak. But it does make sense to hear them.

  I’ll be at that meeting next Thursday at SAG-AFTRA. I look forward to a spirited, robust discussion of merger.

  Comment by Didgeredoo — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 12:39am PST  Reply to this post

  • Your response is appreciated – but I don’t agree with your reasoning. All the “…if…then…” aspects of it just sound like talking points, without detailed study to back them up. If we merge, then we can address the future? Why can’t the future be planned for prior to merger, so members can know the actual, planned repercussions of merger on health plans and pensions? And, while you seem to expect merging medical plans will make it easier for you, one union (AFTRA) has a notably inferior plan to the other’s (SAG). That doesn’t make it likely that SAG members will see the improvement you suggest. I, along with others, do not see why these issues can’t be ironed out prior to handing over our confidence, and our futures.

    Comment by M. — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 8:14am PST  Reply to this post

  • Wow Digeredoo you are so obviously pretending to be something/someone you’re not.

    If you actually and truthfully were vested in BOTH unions…then you would be scared sh%tless of this merger.

    No one is buying your lies. You’re a plant for those who want a merger.

    Take a hike. The only people who’s arguments are weak are pro-merger people. If you can’t tell us what will happen to our pensions and health plans…then don’t tell us to merge.

    And if you’re not a plant, then you’re not a well-read individual. I’d suggest you get your sh%t together before you lose both your pensions by voting yes.

    Unbelieveable…

    Comment by Robert — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 12:55pm PST  Reply to this post

• It’s absolutely insane to essentially sign a contract with a pro-merger vote BEFORE KNOWING THE DETAILS. Would you sign a mortgage without knowing what the terms were? Of course not! That would be the height of foolishness. So why risk your future as an actor by blindly giving the go-ahead for a merger?

  Comment by Don't throw away your future! — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 6:58am PST  Reply to this post

• Didgeredoo,

  Good for you that you are vested in both unions. Most members are not and thats because our earning are split between to health and pension plans. The only way we can be vested is if our earnings from both unions were combined so they could qualify for the health and pension plans. That is not in this merger. We asked for two major things with a merger. One: Maximum negotiating power. Two: Contributions to one Health and Pension plan so we can qualify. This merger is being pushed, on negotiating power alone, and you guys failed to come up with a passable merger plan. That’s not a weak argument, it’s a WEAK merger plan. You may be surprised at how important this is to us members and it is completely untrue to say “The merger itself is between the unions, not the medical plans”. Many people are going to vote no until the plan includes single union contributions to Health and Pension. The reports do not say “the plans become stronger, with more benefits to members and lower premiums.” They say it is possible that they could become stronger with more benefits and lower premiums. They also say it will be a very long and time consuming process “if” it can work at all. We all want merger. We thought that’s what you guys were working so diligently on. This merger plan is like when you really need a car to get to work and you spend all of your money on a broken car even though you’re not sure what’s wrong with it, but you just really want that car so you buy it anyway and agree to worry about what’s wrong with it later. Now you have the car, but you still can’t get to work. And why do broadcasters, who are members of SAG-AFTRA just like me, pay less dues? We’re both members of the same union, but they get to pay less than I do. Let me guess, they don’t want to act so there’s no need for them to be in an actors union. Well I never wanted to be a broadcaster, but here I am in a broadcaster’s union and I’m stuck paying more dues? This whole plan is Aftra heavy and you guys are pushing it like politicians, not like elected leaders who are supposed to be working for the members. Vague, short responses with the least information possible, except to say “the majority will be for it” and not address anything in my post sounds underhanded and weak.

  Comment by Mickey Maxwell — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 10:16am PST  Reply to this post

• As the history of HOLLYWOOD labor unions clearly shows, the merger of SAG and AFTRA will surely make it another studio controlled “union”, just like IATSE, the Teamsters, DGA and every one else.

  The fear tactic always works. If all the unions stuck together, supported each other, we would have the studios beat. Specially as they are making record profits!

  Comment by Graham Hill — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 2:03pm PST  Reply to this post

• Of course ALL AFTRA members are going to vote for the merger. Please tell me a good reason why SAG members should vote yes. I myself am both. Merging health plans doesn’t need an entire union merger. From a young adult actor working non-stop to further his career I can only look at this at one level; at least now there is somewhat of a gap between being able to book a job. Acting is one of the only professions where someone with no experience can take a job from a pro for various reasons. This merger just solidifies that. Lastly, why do I constantly now see big names taking under 5 guest star roles? Because there aren’t enough jobs to fulfill everyones pocket books, or dreams as it is. With this merger ANYONE can be SAG.

  Comment by Mark — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 2:45pm PST  Reply to this post

• Either you don’t know what you’re talking about, or you are a PROPAGANDIST AFTRA PLANT, TAKING SAG CONTRACTS HOSTAGE TO FORCE THIS MERGER AND GET SAG PENSIONS!!! You should be ashamed of yourself.

  Comment by nathaniel beal — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 4:01pm PST  Reply to this post

• SAG and AFTRA should have separate informational meetings with their memberships. The boards are treating the merger as a fait accompli. We are still two separate unions with both similar and dissimilar interests.

  Comment by James Tripp — Friday February 3, 2012 @ 11:51pm PST  Reply to this post

• Gents:

  It appears I’ve walked into a membershipfirst anti-merger strategy coven.

  Some things never change.

  Your anti-merger arguments are either:
  1) dim-witted
  or:
  2) purposely deceitful and rife with disinformation.

  Reading your posts is like reading the transcript of a conversation between Rick Santorum and Michelle Bachman.

  You appear to be somewhat aware of constitutional issues, addressing AFTRA’S Front of Book and Convention. So why the feigned ignorance about the clear legal separation between our unions and our health plans? They have separate federal charters, they are run by separate boards, operate at different locations with different sets of employees. SAG’s & AFTRA’s union boards are member-run. SAG’s & AFTRA’s health plan boards are run half by members and half by management.

  You know that the unions must merge in order for us to be able to address this issue of combining the health plans. AFTRA can’t legally address SAG’s P&H plan, nor can SAG address AFTRA’s H&R plan. But SAG-AFTRA (the new merged union) can address both plans and can combine them, allowing actors to be credited for work under all current AFTRA & SAG contracts. Combined plans always do better than the original unmerged plans.

  To follow your logic in the posts above I’d have to conclude that in order to fly from New York to Los Angeles, you would have to walk there first and see if the tarmac at JFK was really tarmac and not muskeg, THEN walk back, board the plane, have a coupla’ beers, watch some old episodes of CSI, then land at LAX assuming the tarmac was still there and it was safe to land…even though you hate L.A. for reasons you don’t quite remember.

  If you really have well-thought-out arguments against the SAG-AFTRA merger, present them.

  But the posts above are is silly and transparent. Doug Allen and his destructive intra-union feud-bating are gone. And membership first was voted off the SAG Board because your behavior in the board room and on these blogs was reprehensible and destructive to both SAG & AFTRA. Thankfully now you have only a symbolic presence in Cagney and in the AFTRA board room.

  Don’t toy with what is true and important for actors: we need a merged union now which can combine the health plans.

  The vast majority of working actors are voting “Yes” on this merger.

  The remnants of a discredited political faction within the Guild – membershipfirst – well represented above with scurrilous disinformation – are voting “no.”

  If we get SAG-AFTRA will you launch another lawsuit? The 2010 membershipfirst-inspired lawsuit cost SAG members over $100,000 in legal fees. Will you send more emails to SAG staff warning them they they’ll lose their jobs in a merger? Will you send out more illegal emails to the membership from non-union email servers telling union members the merger will cause them to lose their vesting? This stuff is documented history, and a dark history at that. And it reminds me of the tactics of Ralph Reed, Karl Rove, and Republican PACs now making ads for Newt.

  Your brand of anti-merger politics & disinformation has been seen for what it is and has been discredited by the vast majority of the SAG & AFTRA membership.

  Actors are voting “Yes” on the SAG-AFTRA merger.

  Comment by Didgereedoo — Sunday February 5, 2012 @ 2:50am PST  Reply to this post

• Ned Vaughn or Didgereedoo,

  First, why don’t you put your name to your stance here? Is it more back room dealing that you don’t want to expose yourself? Here is the way we, who are not Membership First, but simply members see it. This deal is nothing more than a hyphen. You guys didn’t come up with a merger plan. You combined the two union names with a hyphen, kept all of the staff and board, did not come up with a plan to merge health and pension, created a system for voting for officers (convention) that has been used by corrupt unions since they began and is totally unnecessary, as there is no reason why the members shouldn’t each have a vote for every elected officer in SAG-AFTRA (which, by the way is how you became VP). STOP PLAYING POLITICS!!! We, the members want a merger deal. And by the way, the vast majority of non-working actors, who are still card carrying members, are voting NO. And there are a lot more of them, then there are actors who are currently working in our union. You guys failed! Stop shouting that we members are dim-witted and come up with a merger plan. We need to merge and we won’t simply give you the power to do whatever you ”See fit”. How about you see what is fit, present it to us, and then we put it to a vote. Or are you too “deceitful” for that? And yeah, I’m part of a “Super PAC”. That’s why my residual income from “24″ hasn’t even hit $30.00 thanks to the contract that your deceitful Unite for Strength urged us to vote for. You guys are no different than Membership First when it comes to pushing your agenda. Stop with the politics and come up with something the members can accept and live with… Oh and you never addressed the members’ dues money that was paid to Roberta Reardon for coming up with this not so well thought out merger plan.

  Comment by Mickey Maxwell — Sunday February 5, 2012 @ 1:45pm PST  Reply to this post

• So much time and money has been spent trying to organize a merger over the years. I was really hoping they got it right this time, but, again, they fell short. I agree with most of M.M.’s comments. Additionally, I also believe the new starting annual dues figure is higher than it needs to be. While it’s certainly not a lot of money per se, it’s the principle. The annual dues should not have to be more than $140 – $150. I have no doubt there will be tons of wasted money spent to operate the merged unions. While I do not want to see people lose their jobs, it makes no sense at all that every employee of both SAG and AFTRA will be needed after a merger. I see the proposed merger as one huge administrative money pit – all at the expense of the members, who will have very little to say about anything. While the merger negotiators have certainly gotten much closer, I will have to vote NO this time.

  Comment by Average SAG Member — Monday February 6, 2012 @ 6:38am PST  Reply to this post

• Actors:

  Not Ned Vaughn, sorry. He doesn’t have time to joust like this. He’s busy talking to members one-to-one and in informational groups about the nuts and bolts of this practical merger plan.

  Your supposition that SAG-AFTRA will keep all staff employed is absurd disinformation.

  Read the merger docs. You’ll see that all staffing except the two co-execs is the purview of the co-execs themselves. The co-execs are hired by the SAG-AFTRA Board.

  And you act like you still don’t get that there can be no combining of health plans before a merger between the unions. Hello….?

  Read the merger plan and come up with a cogent, non-hysterical non-membershiplast spin, and I’ll take you out for surf’n'turf.

  Comment by Didgeredoo — Monday February 6, 2012 @ 9:45pm PST  Reply to this post

• Didg… From the Merger Agmt: XVII. Staff and Operations, A. Staff of Both Unions: On the Effective Date, all employees of AFTRA, the AFTRA Locals and SAG shall become employees of the Union under the terms of this Agreement and the terms established by the co-National Executive Directors consistent with this Agreement and with applicable law. — It specifically states ALL employees will be employees of the merged union. No place, no where, does any document say anything about removing duplicate or unnecessary positions, or even allowing for the evaluation of same. You are the one who is just making things up. No execs are under any obligation to streamline staffing, and there is no basis provided to assume they will, or will be expected to.

  Comment by Average SAG Member — Tuesday February 7, 2012 @ 6:46pm PST  Reply to this post

• S.A.G. = GOOD… AFTRA = BAD… SAG-AFTRA = VERY, VERY BAD! VOTE NO WHILE YOU STILL HAVE A VOTE!!!

  AGAINST THIS MERGER???

  JOIN US ON FACEBOOK AT JUST SAY S.A.G.! TOGETHER, S.A.G. MEMBERS CAN VOTE THIS DOWN AND PROTECT OUR PENSION AND HEALTH!!!

  Comment by Trey King/Actor/S.A.G. member — Wednesday February 8, 2012 @ 9:20pm PST  Reply to this post

• From STEPHAN TODD. RE: SAG AFTRA merger.

  As an actor, I had my doubts about this SAG / AFTRA merger, but I hoped for the best, however in the end my fears were confirmed as now it has been made harder for us struggling actors who have to go at it alone until some agent wants to represent you, which as any actor knows that it’s hard when you are non union. The catch is you have to be a union actor to have an agent! So it’s either do background work, which I have, but again you have to have 3 days on set to become SAG eligible, I myself have on numerous times only had 2 days of work on set. The other is that you have to have a major role in a “Big budget’ film to become SAG eligible as well, but again, how can you when you are non union? I was on “Must join” status with AFTRA, and my personal plan was to join AFTRA, which at the time cost $1663.00 to join, and being in a recession and unable to find work like everyone else, it became hard to save up the money needed to pay my dues! So I bided my time and was able to save up a little bit and work on obtaining the rest! I was going to join AFTRA, find an agent and do some higher paying work and later on become SAG eligible and then join SAG itself, since the film I did “The Last War Crime” was deemed to be “Ultra low budget” but at the same time was under SAG jurisdiction! So now that SAG and AFTRA have merged and that they are going under SAG rules of membership, I can pretty much kiss my career goodbye! What this all comes down to really is that the actors and other members of SAG and AFTRA thought nothing of us struggling actors with little or no money and only of themselves! So thank you so much for ending my dream and you can kiss my ass!

  STEPHAN TODD HOHLER/
  STEPHAN TODD

  Comment by STEPHAN TODD HOHLER / STEPHAN TODD — Thursday April 5, 2012 @ 11:58am PDT  Reply to this post