August 31, 2008 by Editor.

SAG Interactive negotiating committee chair Michael Bell sent out a strangely worded e-mail alert which he said is not officially sanctioned by the union, but making the rounds nonetheless. Bell says “It has come to the attention of the S.A.G. Interactive Committee, that AFTRA is about to negotiate the Interactive contract without the participation of S.A.G.”

Well, for the moment let’s forget that Bell apparently doesn’t realize there are two interactive contracts, not one. Interactive is one of the areas jointly bargained (at least last time around) under the terms of the Phase 1 to Merger Agreement that AFTRA “suspended” earlier this year after Membership First raiding on AFTRA shows.

But perhaps Bell has also forgotten that AFTRA generally tries to negotiate raises for its members, rather than leaving contracts open indefinitely. This one expires in December.

AFTRA hasn’t actually announced that it’s moving ahead on interactive, but is expected some time right after Labor Day to announce its plans for the process AFTRA calls W&W, which is known as W&WC in SAG. That’s the process by which member input is sought to formulate bargaining proposals, and is first step in negotiating a new contract.

Bell is visibly upset that he and his SAG committee might be left out of the AFTRA process. With Membership First and the SAG bureaucracy tripping all over itself trying to figure out what to do about the stalled TV-Theatrical contract and the almost three years overdue Commercials Contract, SAG has made no visible moves to start its own W&WC on the much smaller Interactive contract.

In his message, Bell asks that members demand that AFTRA bargain the new Interactive deal jointly with SAG. Echoing the rhetoric used in the run up to the raids that led to the breakdown of Phase 1, Bell also blames AFTRA for the terms of the expired Interactive deal, saying AFTRA members of the joint bargaining committee didn’t support SAG’s demands for residuals for interactive games - but ignoring the fact that SAG’s committee was divided on the question, and that, three years ago, the only members in favor of holding out for some form of residual payment were from SAG Hollywood.

AFTRA and SAG seem to be moving towards joint bargaining on the Commercials Contract, so it’s possible that a similar joint negotiation could be held on Interactive, however, Bell’s relations with AFTRA are on the same general level as those of the Allens and the rest of the Membership First leadership, so putting this part of Humpty Dumpty back together again isn’t assured, and won’t be easy.

–

A reader pointed out

Just for the record…

Interactive has never been a Phase One agreement. The whole concept of interactive gaming came along some 15 or 20 years after Phase One had been adopted, and was never moved into the Phase One barrel. The contract was originally an AFTRA contract, that was later promulgated by SAG. Until 3 years ago, the contract was negotiated by AFTRA staff with the two biggest producers. Progress was monitored by members, but members were not “at the table.” Those producers happened to be located in San Francisco. SAG then adopted whatever terms AFTRA negotiated. Three years ago was the first face to face negotiation with members directly involved. At the end of the negotiation, the AFTRA committee voted up the contract, and sent it to the National Board to begin the ratification process. SAG drug its heels and stamped and kicked and held its breath, but eventually approved the same contract. That contract resulted in a 32% increase in rates.

–

In a press release at the time AFTRA ratified the 2005 agreement, AFTRA announced:

By the way, as usual, Membership First’s mouthpiece Nikki Finke ran with the AFTRA-bashing Bell e-mail, apparently without bothering to do any fact checking.

Posted in Interactive, SAG-AFTRA | Print | 24 Comments »

August 31, 2008 by Editor.

We’ve already posted our interpretation of entertainment lawyer Jonathan Handel’s live interviews last week with Membership First leaders David Joliffe and Anne-Marie Johnson, and with Unite for Strength’s Ned Vaughn. Now Handel has posted his own reactions.

Handel called Membership First a continuing disappointment, writing “they have no answer, other than to simply wish AFTRA away and declare that SAG is the actors union. Spending Labor Day at the beach is a fine thing, but sticking one’s head in the sand isn’t so effective.” But he also found Unite for Strength’s leader “vague” and “not the breath of fresh air that I’d been hoping for.”

As we did, Handel noted a lack of definitive answers from all the candidates. But Handel, in our view, strays from logic when he writes about his concerns regarding any plan to merge SAG and AFTRA.

“Any unification is going to have to give the former AFTRA board some kind of equal say in policies and decisions, yet SAG will probably insist on proportionate representation, which would swamp AFTRA. Why would AFTRA accept this – and why would SAG accept the alternative?”

That’s not the concern we’d expect from AFTRA, and certainly wasn’t the issue in 2003, the last time a merger plan was formulated. We’d expect AFTRA’s leadership to continue to worry about the stability of the Hollywood branch and its political leadership.

Right now the one thing AFTRA has going for it is that its membership and leadership - even in Hollywood - are focused on the things we think are most important for a union, keeping members working and consistently improving wages and working conditions. The union has consistently chosen solid gains over pie in the sky demands, and its members’ earnings depend upon that kind of pragmatic leadership continuing.

We’d note that SAG’s membership and leadership outside of Hollywood seems to mirror AFTRA’s businesslike approach. Only in Hollywood does the political landscape cycle between the two opposites.

If SAG can demonstrate that it is ready to keep its focus on the possible, and not let the perfect become the killer of the good, and can do it over more than just a single election cycle, then we’d think AFTRA’s leadership would once again begin to trust enough to work together with the new and improved SAG.

But we wouldn’t expect any quick moves, even if Unite for Strength sweeps the current elections.

A postscript: Handel says he’ll have interviews with some independent candidates for the SAG boards this week. Election results are to be announced September 19.

Posted in SAG Politics, SAG-AFTRA | Print | 2 Comments »

August 30, 2008 by admin.

It struck us, as we were reviewing the Allens Labor Day message, presumably drafted by the new SAG crisis communications consultant Sitrick & Co., that there was something a bit off about the message. Then we thought back to last week’s candidate interviews, and in particular to Membership First leader Anne-Marie Johnson’s statements to Jonathan Handel.

Here’s what the Allens/Sitrick said:

“Screen Actors Guild stands up to the studios and networks to fight for what’s fair for actors.”

Then there’s Anne-Marie, to Jonathan Handel:

“Fair is irrelevant. There is nothing fair in this business. It’s not about fair. It’s about being a participant. Fair and respect are words you need to leave at home.”

We know, we know…it’s all positively unfair…

Posted in SAG Politics | Print | 11 Comments »

August 30, 2008 by WW.

The Allens have sent out their first salvo on the strike referendum trial balloon in the form of a Labor Day message. Stretching the limits of propriety during an election campaign, the message, we’re sure, wasn’t *really* intended to push people to responding one way or another on the election.

It offers another glimpse into the mindset of the Membership First group. “Standing up to the studios” and “fighting for what’s fair” are the key phrase, not “getting the best possible contract…”

 –

August 29, 2008

Dear Screen Actors Guild Member:

As Labor Day approaches, please take a moment to consider the extraordinary contributions of the founders of our Guild who, 75 years ago, put courage and conviction to the test in creating this union. Standing up to studios has never been easy. For our founders in 1933, it was really tough, but strength, unity and commitment to the goal won out and Screen Actors Guild was incorporated June 30, 1933.

Within only a few years, Screen Actors Guild had secured its first contract and nearly a century of protections for union actors. While much has changed over the years, some things remain the same: Screen Actors Guild is a powerful voice for working actors and Screen Actors Guild stands up to the studios and networks to fight for what’s fair for actors.

This is what Labor Day commemorates — the dedication, commitment and tremendous courage of labor unions and union members throughout history. It is a tribute to our first president, Ralph Morgan and to other guild leaders like former president James Cagney and board member Humphrey Bogart, but Labor Day is also a tribute to you. It is a day set aside to honor all unions, but for us, it is an opportunity to honor SAG and the 120,000 members who reside within it.

Our efforts to reach agreement with industry representatives continue and SAG’s negotiators want to hear from you about your thoughts on the TV/Theatrical contract negotiations and Screen Actors Guild’s bargaining priorities. You will be receiving an important publication from SAG over the next several days. This Special Bulletin was mailed to all members across the country this week. The publication contains comprehensive information about our negotiations. Please look for your copy to arrive in your mailbox in the next several days.

As you may have heard or read, the Bulletin also includes a post card with which to mail back your response to the material presented. When your Bulletin arrives, please read it carefully and send back your completed response card. Your input is valuable and welcome.

Also, remember that the SAG.org website is undergoing some major programming enhancements and will be unavailable for most of the weekend. This code enhancement will improve the speed and reliability of our web communications and most members will experience an improvement in site performance and functionality.

We hope you enjoy the holiday and the last, long summer weekend. Make sure you read your Bulletin when it arrives and send us your thoughts on the perforated post card you will find in your publication.

Happy Labor Day.

In strength and unity,
Alan Rosenberg
President

Connie Stevens
Secretary Treasurer

Doug Allen
National Executive Director and Chief Negotiator

Posted in SAG Politics, Exhibit A - TV Theatrical | Print | 17 Comments »

August 29, 2008 by admin.

Unite for Strength leader Ned Vaughn provided a sharp substantive as well as stylistic contrast from his Membership First opponents, as Vaughn led off a series of interviews hosted this week by entertainment lawyer Jonathan Handel. Rather than offer specific differences on current negotiating positions, Vaughn said his group believes if it unseats six to seven Membership First National Directors, Unite for Strength will increase bargaining power by moving to represent “all the faces and voices that fill our employers screens.”

Vaughn took a far less dogmatic and far more pragmatic approach to the various issues facing SAG, though he offered few specifics on how Unite for Strength would achieve its goals. he answered several questions by saying that he couldn’t be specific because he doesn’t have enough information on things ranging from the current posture of the TV-Theatrical negotiations to the willingness of NED Doug Allen to work with a new SAG board of directors that might not have Membership First in control.

Vaughn took a wait and see approach to questions ranging from whether Allen would be fired to how to increase leverage in current negotiations and to how a merged SAG and AFTRA would look and/or be organized. He did express dissatisfaction with Allen’s strategies and initiatives, but he reserved his specific criticism for Membership First, which he said is not doing a good job.

Where Membership First’s spokesmen expressed views that those outside its Hollywood actor ranks as ”hobbyists” or less important because the bulk of the work is in Hollywood, Vaughn said he’d like to see a union with all entertainment employees under its banner, including both above and below the line workers.

“We can take a cue from our employers,” he said, “you don’t see ABC Disney saying we don’t like Viacom because they sell billboards.” His position is a direct contrast with Membership First, which is pushing the talking point of all actors in one union, which union already exists, and is SAG.

Merger, Vaughn said, is his group’s #1 priority, far oustripping qualified voting, the issue that brought Unite for Strength together. “If you offer me a choice between merged union with no Qualitied Voting and two unions split with Qualified Voting, I’ll take merged union any day.”

When asked about his relationship with AFTRA’s NED Kim Hedgpeth and its president Roberta Reardon, Vaughn said he likes them and “looks forward to a chance to bring us together.”

Membership First has seized on one comment Vaughn made in the hour plus long interview, in which he said he didn’t care what the name of a merged union would be. Vaughns full comment on the subject was, “Uncle Joes Actors Union” would do for me! I say that somewhat kiddingly, listen, I value the history of SAG. It’s a union with a rich and storied history. It’s a great union that I’ve proud to be a member of, and it has served me very well. But what I care more about than SAG’s history is future of actors going forward. And the only way to protect it is to CREATE A NEW UNION, and again, I think the name matters very much less than the leverage of combining the two.”

Posted in SAG Politics, Exhibit A - TV Theatrical, SAG-AFTRA | Print | 6 Comments »

August 29, 2008 by admin.

Membership First’s representatives to the Handel interview series divided their time, and showed an interesting contrast in styles, while remaining true to the group’s hard line against the AMPTP, AFTRA and the rest of SAG. By contrast with David Joliffe’s low key sincerity, Johnson was glib, a deft politician turning aside difficult questions adroitly,  staying very much on the attack and remaining on message/talking points, even when challenged with precise followup questions.

Along the way, Johnson rewrote some history, putting words in the mouth of Actors Equity NED John Connolly that he certainly never uttered, such as a supposed statement that AFTRA, of which Connolly is the past president, “would do whatever it could to undercut SAG” in order to somehow punish SAG for defeating the 2003 merger.

Johnson went on to insist that the AMPTP has not made a “Last, Best and Final Offer” - a legal term that can lead to declaration of an impasse and imposing the terms of the LBFO. Instead, Johnson said, the AMPTP has only called its offer “final.”

It’s an interesting observation. The original offer, made June 30, was called “last, best and final” by the AMPTP . But that offer is no longer on their website, nor is their statement of that date. Since then, the AMPTP has repeatedly called the offer “final” but has not used the term “last, best and final.” Whether there’s a change or a difference has been a subject of some debate.

Johnson went further than Joliffe, who had refused to answer when asked if negotiations with the AMPTP are continuing (the AMPTP says they are not). Johnson said, “We are negotiating,” though she offered no backup or specifics.

She said she believes Membership First will eventually get a strike authorization vote, which requires 75% for passage, through “education and outreach.” So far no strike authorization vote has been requested, with the conventional wisdom being that the members wouldn’t give the authorization if the Membership First-led National Board or the Allens requested it.

Johnson, like Joliffe, made some mistakes in her effort to criticize the AFTRA Exhibit A deal, which Membership First tried unsuccessfully to defeat. She incorrectly said the AFTRA deal “left the stunt community out to dry” and was wrong in her claim that stunt pilots “are not recognized” in the Exhibit A deal. The deal does not cover stunt pilots in new media productions, but does not change the union coverage of stunt performers in any way, or the traditional coverage of off camera stunt pilots elsewhere.

When she got around to discussing the most organized group of opponents to Membership First, the Unite for Strength slate, she said “I question their motives,” and said her group is “more prepared” than Unite for Strength. “This is not the time to learn on the job,” she said. She also criticized Unite for Strength leader Ned Vaughn for saying he didn’t care whether the name SAG was continued or whether a merged SAG and AFTRA had an entirely different name.

In a particularly surprising comment, Johnson said, “We’re not in it for the money,” which, if true, would lead one to question many of the positions Membership First has taken. Her explanation was that the group is trying to protect what she called “the actor’s lifestyle.”

She called the WGA, DGA and AFTRA deals, “horrific for actors” and didn’t back away, even when confronted with the fact that the AFTRA Exhibit A deal was ratified with a 62% vote. “It’s better to have no deal than a bad deal,” she said.

Posted in SAG Politics, SAG-AFTRA | Print | 23 Comments »

August 29, 2008 by admin.

We got this note from Jonathan Handel, who earlier this week hosted the interviews of Unite for Strength leader Ned Vaughn and Membership First’s David Joliffe and Anne-Marie Johnson.

–

Due to the success of my live video interviews of SAG Board candidates from Membership First and Unite for Strength (available at http://digitalmedialaw.blogspot.com/2008/08/archive-video-of-interviews-with-sag.html ) — over 400 views — I’d like to invite any and all independent candidates to be interviewed live on streaming video as well.The candidates should go to http://digitalmedialaw.blogspot.com/2008/08/video-interview-update-call-to.html to arrange for an interview slot.

 —

We’ve posted our comments on Joliffe’s interview, and will be posting comments on Anne-Marie Johnson and Ned Vaughn’s statements some time tonight.

Results of the balloting are expected Sept. 19th.

Posted in SAG Politics | Print | 1 Comment »

August 29, 2008 by Editor.

We received an e-mail from an AFTRA Director and a Trustee of their Health & Retirement Fund, who says that one of Membership First’s favorite bloggers is up to her old tricks again, not posting comments that factually refute claims the faction is making.

The director said he sent a signed response to the Nikki Finke/DHD site after a claim posted on the site said:

“These UFS bozos are trying to sell us on the idea SAG should merge with a bankrupt desperate little union that doesn’t care AT ALL about the welfare of actors. They only care about the money we can contribute to prop up the failing non-actor pension plan they messed up with bad investments.

And NEWS FLASH… the Trustees of SAG Pension plan (separate from the Guild) wouldn’t allow the failing AFTRA pension plan to merge with it in a million years - even if the two unions merged. We’d STILL end up having to pay into two pension plans”

The response that Finke refused to post didn’t get into politics, but was simply that

1. Even though it hasn’t raised dues (as SAG has) AFTRA isn’t bankrupt or even in financial difficulty, and
2. The AFTRA Pension Fund is far from failing, in fact having a higher funding percentage and a higher top pension payout than the SAG plan.

The post went on to note that both the union and the AFTRA Pension Fund are required to file detailed annual financial reports with the U.S. Department of Labor, which show the exact financial situation.

Membership First has made AFTRA bashing its campaign centerpiece, so, apparently the comment got rejected. The director says it’s the second time he’s had that experience - the first time following a note from Finke saying she’d post his response.

–Update– several hours after this item was posted, Finke posted the AFTRA director’s message.

Posted in SAG Politics, SAG-AFTRA | Print | 1 Comment »

August 29, 2008 by Editor.

“That’s a question that you’d have to ask either our president or our chief negotiator.” That was the response of David Joliffe in the recent webcast interview, when repeatedly asked if negotiations are continuing on the TV-Theatrical deal. The Allens have said negotiations are continuing. The AMPTP has said the Allens are making it up.

Joliffe, a key leader in the Membership First party, admitted that SAG continues to lose market share in television, even though he appeared to agree that as of today, the expired SAG TV-Theatrical contract carries lower rates than the AFTRA Exhibit A Contract. Membership First used its control of SAG in an unsuccesful effort to prevent ratification of Exhibit A.

In the interview, Joliffe spent far more time expounding on his group’s differences with AFTRA than discussing differences with the other factions of SAG. “We need to sit with AFTRA and work these things out,” Joliffe repeated frequently. But he offered no specifics on how any resolution could be accomplished, and admitted he didn’t know what percentage of AFTRA was broadcasters or recording artists (correct answers, 5% and 3%).

But, when pushed on the question, Joliffe appeared to call for the destruction of AFTRA. “I’m very clear on my position,” Joliffe said. “We have an actors union. It’s the Screen Actors Guild.”

When asked about the bitter divide between Hollywood and the NY/RBD portions of SAG, Joliffe said he had no easy answers. “I hope it’s repairable,” Joliffe said. “It’s not good that we have these misunderstandings.”

–

Some fact checking:

In the interview with Handel, Joliffe made several mistakes in describing the AFTRA Exhibit A deal. The most obvious was Joliffe’s claim that the contract changed the Taft-Hartley must join period from 30 days to 90 days. In fact, the 30 day period is federal law, and isn’t part of the contract at all.

His claims about residuals, if they weren’t flat out wrong, were misleading. Joliffe used the example of ER being moved to free to consumer new media to claim that actors residuals would be reduced by the DGA/WGA/AFTRA pattern deal (which he blamed on AFTRA). His statement was that instead of a capped 100% of original compensation residual, actors would receive a maximum of $22.70 under the AFTRA deal.

That turns out to be wrong. Before the deal, actors in ER would receive zero residuals on free to consumer new media. Joliffe, who hasn’t worked on camera in years may not realize that programs have been airing on free to consumer new media for years, and no one has been paid residuals for those airings.

After Joliffe, Handel interviewed Membership First incument Ann-Marie Johnson. We’ll post observations on that interview later.

Posted in SAG Politics, Exhibit A - TV Theatrical, SAG-AFTRA | Print | 40 Comments »

August 29, 2008 by Editor.

Lauren Horwitch has a funny post on Blogstage on her visit to Membership First’s Meet the Candidates event. If the number of attendees is accurate (about 30 is what has been reported) the faction is headed for its first major defeat.

But whether or not the dearth of attendees is an indicator, the Horwitch blog captures nicely the view most have of Membership First, and the reason for it.

Posted in SAG Politics | Print | 6 Comments »