September 2, 2008 by admin.

For those of you who haven’t received it yet….here it is. Warning for those of you on dial up - this is a large file (6 mb).

Posted in SAG Politics, Exhibit A - TV Theatrical | Print | 11 Comments »

September 2, 2008 by admin.

AMPTP blasts SAG tactic

Dueling press releases issued by both sides

By DAVE McNARY

After taking a 10-day break from the SAG contract stalemate, the guild and the majors have gone back to the barricades.Hostilities have resumed with SAG’s leaders sending the 120,000 members a newsletter with returnable postcard in order to increase support for its tactic of holding out for a better deal. The Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers fired back Monday by accusing SAG of stalling to mask the lack of a coherent negotiating strategy.

SAG’s contract expired June 30 and actors continue to work under its terms. The two sides — which have not met since July 16 — issued dueling press releases Tuesday with SAG continuing to insist it deserves a better deal than the WGA, DGA and AFTRA and blasting the majors for their refusal to modify the new-media terms of the pact.

“The AMPTP previously suggested that we send their last offer to our members and now that we have done so they object,” SAG national exec director Doug Allen said in a statement. “It is understandable that the studios and networks are concerned about the members’ reaction to a proposal that contains incentives to produce non-union and no residuals for new media productions re-used by streaming on the Internet. It is appropriate that we inform our members and seek their input on these critical matters.”

The AMPTP shot back by deriding the SAG mailing as being untruthful and designed to give SAG negotiators only the answer they want to hear.“The two questions on the postcard ‘poll’ are written in a completely one-sided way, characterizing the June 30 final offer as unfair,” the companies said. “The 12 pages of material accompanying the postcard are just as one-sided and are filled with misrepresentations.”

And the two sides continued to disagree over the guild’s assertion in the newsletter that back-channel talks are ongoing. “You will no doubt read spin suggesting that there is dead silence between our sides but that is inaccurate,” the guild said.As it did twice during August, the AMPTP accused SAG of lying.“The facts are exactly the opposite,” the group said: “No informal negotiations regarding SAG’s TV/Theatrical contract have been going on, and for SAG’s negotiators to suggest otherwise is to intentionally mislead the membership.

AMPTP has made the new media template work for directors, writers and actors (in two separate AFTRA agreements), and all have now gone back to work. It’s long past time for SAG members to begin enjoying the higher wages, plan contributions, streaming and other new media residuals already being paid to other guild members.”

SAG’s national board spurned the AMPTP’s final offer on Aug. 21, although reps from New York and the regional branches abstained. It’s asked for members to return the postcards by Sept. 15, three days before its board election ends. Read the full article at:
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117991500.html

Posted in Exhibit A - TV Theatrical | Print | No Comments »

September 2, 2008 by WW.

We’ve received several e-mails questioning the use of a bar code on the postcards sent out by the Allens asking the simple question “Should our heroic negotiators strive to protect us all by staying the course and fighting for victory or should we sell our souls to the AMPTP and eat cat food for the rest of our lives?”

Here’s one of them:

“This postcard includes a unique barcode to ensure that only active members in good standing participated in this poll. The confidentiality of your response will be maintained.”

Really? So they will have a record of the way YOU voted. “Secret, schmecret. We have to know who’s against us.”

Somehow, we think they know already, but it’s a concern…

Posted in SAG Politics, Exhibit A - TV Theatrical | Print | 15 Comments »

September 2, 2008 by Editor.

For those of you who visit other blogs and BBS systems, it won’t be news to you - but Membership First has been on the attack against Steve Diamond, the Santa Clara Law professor who was a candidate for the NED position now held by Doug Allen. The attacks followed Diamond’s posts on his blog that have been quite critical of the faction in control of SAG.

We’ve often linked to Diamond and consider his analysis to be level headed and dispassionate about the strengths and weaknesses of the entertainment unions.One new post he made in response to some of the attacks struck us as particularly excellent in its analysis of the level of frustration among the membership about the defensive reaction of Membership First to any criticism of any kind - something we’ve also seen in some of the comments its defenders have put up on this system.

“It is interesting that Anne-Marie Johnson, in her interview with Jonathan Handel, now argues that what SAG needs is a membership education effort to build support for a possible strike.

That was what I said should have been the top priority of the Guild in July 2006. I said it because I argued that however “militant” or “tough” MF wanted to be there was no basis for that tough approach if the overwhelming majority of the membership is not supportive. And the only reason they would be supportive is if they understood and agreed with your argument about why the tough approach might be necessary.

That argument has to be, first and foremost, about why the industry functions the way it does and what can be done by a collective labor body like the Guild to confront it.

And I pointed out that the industry - through Nick Counter and others - had already begun their own education campaign aimed at dividing the SAG membership.

Instead of undertaking that analysis and education effort, MF decided to attack - not the employers - but other actors!

Why would they do that?

I believe it is because fundamentally they did not believe that SAG could make a serious dent in DVD revenue. In other words they did not believe in the collective power of the membership to change the most unfair aspects of revenue sharing in the industry.

While new media is, indeed, the wave of the future, I will venture now another “prediction”: even if SAG dropped all of its demand for any union coverage of new media and even if no SAG member received a dime of residuals from new media for a decade, they will still lose more money because of the unfair DVD revenue sharing model.

Yet, SAG has dropped DVDs as a serious demand, as did the WGA, AFTRA and the DGA (granted it may not be as important to the other guilds).

Why? No clear understanding about how to mobilize the membership and the other resources of the Guild to generate enough leverage to change the formula.

How then could MF cover its retreat? Shout to the high heavens about sub 15K per minute new media. Of course, it is preferable to have union coverage of all new media. Whether you can get it or not is another thing altogether.

Thus, fear about the power of the Guild, leads to doubt about strategy and that leads back to the kind of defensive behavior evidenced by Mr. Beasor. MF screams to the high heavens that they are “all for one and one for all” when it comes to affected or qualified voting, but let a single BG member come on this board and sincerely raise a reasonable argument about what? The need for an education campaign - an education campaign that even AMJ now argues is the crux of MF strategy - and he is shot down by an MF veteran.

This in a nutshell has been the problem for MF and unfortunately for SAG for a few years now - ironically, the group that advocates for “membership first” FEARS the actual membership!

After all, keep in mind what an education campaign - to be successful - would require: open engagement in discussion and argument with the membership and the leaders of the union. Those leaders must engage for many hours with thousands of members over a period of many months. They must listen as well as lecture. If it is not an open and engaged process it will not work. You not only need an argument, you need a process, a democratic and transparent process.

Only then can an education campaign generate an engaged, supportive membership that will back a leadership at the bargaining table and if necessary in a job action.

But MF does not have an argument, they do not have the confidence that they can really confront the industry, so they use the minimal control they have now over the internal bureaucracy of the union to cajole and exclude and, finally, attack other actors.

If MF wins the election and AMJ is serious about an education campaign then these are the issues MF will have to confront one way or another. If they lose that responsiblity will fall to the new leadership.”

Posted in SAG Politics | Print | 8 Comments »

September 2, 2008 by Editor.

SAG’s misfortunes are being discussed in all sorts of venues. The quote of the year, from the executive director of the Entertainment Law program at UCLA, David R. Ginsburg.

“Never interfere with your enemy if it’s destroying itself,” says Ginsburg.

http://www.cfo.com/article.cfm/11954860/c_11991481?f=home_magazine

Posted in SAG Politics, Exhibit A - TV Theatrical | Print | No Comments »