Here’s what I know:

The AMPTP says they can’t make any money on so called NEW MEDIA (internet delivery of new product) if they pay actors what they pay for Network TV or Cable TV, especially the residuals that actors earn for reruns.

Really? Want to see some recent residuals I got for Cable TV usage?:

CPT Holdings, Inc. 12.19.2008 $29.60 Net Amount: 19.93
Payor: CPT Holdings, Inc.

Columbia Tristar Television, Inc. 12.18.2008 $14.65 Net Amount: 9.87
Payor: Columbia Tristar Television, Inc.

Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. 12.04.2008 $72.59 Net Amount: 48.89
Payor: Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.

These residual payments may make me blush, but it’s not from embarrassment of being over paid. These are the kind of residuals that come from taking the AMPTP at their word.

Apparently that cable TV ‘experiment’ has worked out pretty well for 20+ years but the actors have never able to significantly improve on the deal we cut with the AMPTP when the pleading from the producers was ‘don’t kill this infant technology’.

Regardless of the opinion of how SAG negotiations were handled by the now defunct team of Rosenberg and Allen, hardly anyone I’ve spoken with or read has offered the opinion that the AMPTP offer to SAG is a good deal for actors. Good? It’s not even a reasonable deal.

Universally it seems it is understood that the deal that AFTRA and WGA signed are not ones that the guilds can be happy with or proud of. Yet SAG, because of an inexplicable lack of communication skills among other reasons, has let itself and ‘the actors’ become the punching bag for the rest of the industry. Gotta hand it to AMPTP for looking like the guys in the white hats. Unlike the guilds, the producers have played their hand beautifully.

If actors give up the contracted guarantee of residual income from television and films because they are now distributed (streamed or downloaded) via the internet, then frankly I’m left to ponder: WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF MEMBERSHIP IN SAG?

Actors by and large simply do not work enough, even at current rates, to make a living in the profession without residual income. Even WITH residual income most actors don’t make a real living from SAG wages. Why do I continue to turn down non union work when the new contract gives producers the okay to produce non union?

Once again we’re told to accept this deal now and we’ll ‘revisit’ the issues when the technology is more mature. Uh. Sure.

Well now it seems that the IATSE folks (from whom SAG has received little public support as our own contract woes have dragged on and on) are having their own issues with their leadership and with the AMPTP.

Nikke Finke’s site has a very good piece today about the IATSE contract situation.

Here is a section of the post on today’s DHD website:

… the IATSE/AMPTP Memo Of Agreement which opponents are calling “the worst concessionary contract” that the Hollywood locals have ever seen. As one activist in the International Cinematographers Guild emailed his IATSE Local 600 members: “So far as I’m concerned, the MOA gives away employment opportunities in New Media, guts our health plan, and gives no security to those who work on a day to day, or part-time, basis. This contract gives away every reason I can think of for belonging to a union. On top of that, it sews up ‘jurisdiction’ over the Internet which means that no group can create an alternative union that might fight for realistic wages and reasonable terms and conditions of employment.”

Substitute “SAG” for “IATSE” and it just sounds like more of the same from the AMPTP. So now, IATSE members who face loss of insurance benefits and loss of a livable wage from NEW MEDIA, how does it feel to be in the position SAG members have been in for the past 8 months? It’s not that easy to ‘just accept the deal’ is it?

A couple of pull quotes from the comments on Finke’s site:

…The New Media contract issues should be a bigger focus for all IATSE members. You might have your 300 or 400 hours to get your teeth cleaned every six months but you won’t be making enough on a “Web Episode” with no real guide lines on rates or staff requirements to make your house or rent payments.

New Media is the future. It should be made under the Basic Hollywood Agreement…

…And I hope that all members can read here, the Facebook site, or 400hours.com to see that anyone who votes in favor of this contract is voting himself, or herself, out of union protection in new media, voting themselves out of a share of future earnings, and possibly voting themselves out of their health care.

This contract, in conjunction with the contracts of the last twenty years, takes a gigantic step forward in dismantling our union and union protections. VOTE NO. VOTE “AGAINST RATIFICATION”.

Furthermore, now I hope all my brothers and sisters in IA can see how foolish it is to not support our sister guilds of WGA, DGA, and SAG…

Why The Smoke & Mirrors, SAG & AMPTP?

I don’t see why the SAG National Majority and their pals, the Big Media labor lawyers, are needing to waste more than an hour in talks since all they’re doing is Xeroxing AFTRA’s TV/Theatrical Contract. These past two days have consisted of nothing more than playing at negotiations. Sure, feature players will be thrown a few bones regarding French hours and force majeure and other stuff the AMPTP was going to back off anyway. Heck, the plan by the AMPTP all along was to make a big show of only giving in to the so-called “moderates” once they came into power in order to make them look all that much better compared to the “militants”? Nice to know that the SAG National Majority is following the AMPTP’s script to perfection. So color me unimpressed when this deal is reached lickety split. And the heavy-lifting residuals issues really necessary to the continued financial security of SAG and its members will be left off the table.

Read all the DHD Coverage here

SAGWatch BLOG

From Digital Media Law:

SAG and the AMPTP ended their second day of talks at about 10:00 p.m. this evening (Weds.), but will resume tomorrow at 1:00 p.m. for a third, previously unannounced day of talks, said a source close to the negotiations. No other info was available on the progress of negotiations, but this is obviously a hopeful sign in a situation that’s been largely devoid of them until the last 30 days.

Negotiations had resumed Tuesday, accompanied by dueling protests, one from an organization of below-the-liners calling itself Back to Work, organized largely by camera operators Jon Philion and Andrew Rowlands and cinematographers Ed Gutentag and Bruce McCleery, and the other from Membership First. BtW was urging a deal, while MF was protesting the likelihood that the talks would result in what they consider an unacceptable deal. There were about 100 protesters in all, reports Variety.

Dear Member,

On October 19, your National Board voted by 97% – 3% to send out a strike authorization ballot to members if mediation in the TV/Theatrical contract failed. We made a determined effort to mediate the contract negotiations but could not reach agreement in the face of the AMPTP’s refusal to compromise. After mediation failed, a number of national board members publicly repudiated the board’s almost unanimous decision to ask the members to authorize the board to decide whether, and if so when, to call a strike. Although I believe giving the National Board the authorization to determine whether to call a strike is our best strategy, that strategy has been severely compromised by the division of a now deeply and publicly split National Board leadership. President Rosenberg and I called a special meeting of the National Board to attempt to resolve those differences. That board meeting ended with no action after two days and twenty four hours of continuous executive session. During the hours of that executive session, I proposed a compromise to move Screen Actors Guild forward. Because my subsequent letter to the board describing my proposal has been made public, I wanted you to hear from me what I proposed. If the National Board does not adopt this compromise, or otherwise change the decision the board made in October, the strike authorization referendum will be conducted, with ballots sent to every eligible member for a vote.

Please read my letter to the National Board. I encourage you to communicate with your elected leadership and me your views on this subject.

In unity,
Doug Allen National Executive Director & Chief Negotiator

Doug Allen’s Letter to the National Board of Directors January 14, 2009

Dear SAG National Board Members and Alternates,

Because the executive session of our recent extraordinary National Board meeting occurred without my presence in the room, I want to directly communicate several points to all board members and alternates.

I began and ended my report to the National Board on January 12 by stating that I have followed and always will follow the directives of the National Board expressed by a unanimous or majority vote. Under my leadership all SAG staff has complied and will comply with those directives as well. I also said that I am by SAG constitution and by employment contract accountable to the board for my performance.

I welcome your review of that performance and respectfully request only that, in the interest of fairness, such review include the opportunity for me to discuss with the board any comments, questions or issues you wish to raise, not in lieu of executive session discussion, but prior to such discussion.

It is unfortunate that the important matters contained in the National Board meeting agenda were not accomplished at the meeting January 12 and 13. I know that opinions vary sharply on why that happened. From my perspective, to the extent AMPTP positions or actions are the problem, the solution cannot be determined by how intensely you fight among yourselves.

Regarding the TV/Theatrical negotiations, and the sharply divided opinions on the board about how to proceed, I offered the following suggestion to a cross section of Guild leaders during the period of the executive session. I asked that they discuss the suggestion with other board members in attendance. I proposed that the strike authorization referendum be suspended and that management’s offer be put to the membership in a ratification vote. I also proposed that, before that membership ratification vote, we meet immediately with the AMPTP to determine to what extent, if any, they are willing to improve their last offer, to maximize its chances for ratification. I further proposed that the offer then be sent to the members with Pro and Con statements from National Board members and that otherwise the Guild would remain neutral during any member debate regarding ratification. This process will give Screen Actors Guild members the opportunity to formally express themselves on the bargaining issues.

This suggestion was communicated to some, but not all board members in attendance, and apparently was rejected by some who heard it, at least in part, because they believe I could not be “trusted” to implement it. Since I am the one proposing it and since I have never acted contrary to the directives of the National Board, that is not a reasonable objection. In any case, if it is the decision of the National Board to proceed as I have proposed, I assure you that the staff and I will carry out your decision faithfully and diligently.

I will convene an Officers’ call this week to discuss this suggestion and how it might be considered and implemented. I encourage all board members to discuss these issues with the Guild officers or with me in advance of the call.

There are no more important issues before us than the conclusion of the TV/Theatrical Contract negotiations and the initiation of the Commercial Contract negotiations. Super-heated rhetoric through the press will not contribute to our success on behalf of the members. Working together to resolve your differences will.

Doug Allen

Accept a truly lousy contract now and hope to undo the damage in three years? Or reject the contract and take a strike authorization vote?

What happens if the guild does take that strike authorization vote and it is defeated? What happens if it passes? Do we really want to strike at a time when the national economy and millions of families are in financial distress?

Do we really believe that SAG, WGA and AFTRA will come together in three years as a group, united in a way that they have not been during this round of contract negotiations?

What is the best hope for the non-star actors who rely on contracted minimums and residuals to pay their bills and try to support their families?

Today, Nikki Finke of Deadline Hollywood Daily has posted a proposal to SAG. Below is an excerpt. I suggest you go to DHD and read the whole proposal and then read all of the comments.

The decision by SAG president Alan Rosenberg and executive director and chief negotiator Doug Allen to delay the Strike Authorization Ballot originally scheduled to start January 3rd should be recognized as the smart move to make now when SAG’s solidarity is splitting down the middle. It is a mature recognition that both sides on this issue raise valid points and deserve to be heard before anything with the word “strike” on it is considered by members.The “Yes” camp believes that actors will be stuck with what is inarguably a lousy deal undermining residuals not just for the next three years but perhaps forever given Big Media’s historical refusal to contractually revisit new technologies. The “No” camp thinks that a Strike Authorization will inevitably lead to an ill-timed strike in this economic recession and that SAG should join the other Hollywood guilds in 3 years to try to negotiate better terms with the AMPTP.So what was supposed to be a January 24th weekend National Board meeting has now been moved up to January 12th and 13th. It’ll constitute one of the two plenary face-to-face confabs held each year. The NY Division and the Regional Divisions should have no trouble traveling to the Hollywood division’s backyard with so much advance notice. The point of this decision to delay is to ensure a fair airing of all views. (It even takes into account the “No” vote petition supposedly signed by “well-known” actors even though the list includes no mechanism for verifying the names posted on it.)

I believe that SAG now has a unique opportunity to bypass a strike authorization altogether and place itself in an even stronger negotiating position by following a third and less risky course of action: to vote on the AMPTP’s June 30th contract proposal.

Therefore, I urge SAG to…

See the whole post and comments at Deadline Hollywood Daily

LOS ANGELES, DECEMBER 10, 2008 — Screen Actors Guild today announced that strike authorization ballots will be mailed to paid-up SAG members on Friday January 2, 2009, and will be tabulated on Friday, January 23. A yes vote by 75% of members voting is required to pass the measure, which would authorize SAG’s national board of directors to call a strike, if and when the board determines it is necessary.

Screen Actors Guild National President Alan Rosenberg said, ”SAG members understand that their futures as professional actors are at stake and I believe that SAG members will evaluate the AMPTP’s June 30 offer, and vote to send us back to the table with the threat of a strike. A yes vote sends a strong message that we are serious about fending off rollbacks and getting what is fair for actors in new media. I am encouraged by the response of the capacity crowd at our Los Angeles town hall meeting Monday night.”

”We want SAG members to have time to focus on this critical referendum, so we have decided to mail ballots the day after New Year’s. We will continue our comprehensive education campaign and urge our members to vote yes on the strike authorization. I am confident that members around the country will empower our negotiating team with the leverage and strength of unified Screen Actors Guild members. Our objective remains to get a deal that SAG members will ratify- not to go on strike,” said SAG National Executive Director and Chief Negotiator, Doug Allen.

Ballots will be tabulated at Integrity Voting Systems in Everett, Washington. Passage requires 75% yes vote from those voting.

The AMPTP Response:

It’s now official: SAG members are going to be asked to bail out a failed negotiating strategy by going on strike during one of the worst economic crises in history. We hope that working actors will study our contract offer carefully and come to the conclusion that no strike can solve the problems that have been created by SAG’s own failed negotiation strategy.

“While the date the arbitration was filed was not related to negotiations between SAG and the AMPTP, it is important to point out that the AMPTP apparently had no qualms about announcing its “deal” with the IATSE on the day prior to the mediation with SAG, obviously timed to impact on those discussions. The WGA, like everybody else in this industry, is extremely anxious about those negotiations and hopeful that the AMPTP will reach a fair and reasonable agreement with SAG quickly.”

First is SAGs official release following a full page ad the AMPTP published in the L.A. Times:

Los Angeles, CA (December 01, 2008) – Today’s open letter, full-page ad from the eight entertainment industry moguls is confirmation of their continued refusal to bargain with Screen Actors Guild. In an effort to push negotiations forward in the face of AMPTP stonewalling, we asked two of the CEO’s who signed this letter to get involved in the talks in September. They refused. We wish they had taken us up on our offer. It better serves the industry to negotiate than to buy and respond to $100,000 newspaper ads.

We are still waiting for the CEO’s or their AMPTP negotiators to make a good faith effort at bargaining with us. Agreements with other guilds and unions can’t dictate actors’ terms just because they are part of a pattern set by the DGA. Actors issues are different and must be heard and addressed.

We are still waiting for our turn. We want exactly what the DGA got – the chance to negotiate an agreement that addresses the needs of our members. No other guild or union can negotiate a pattern deal that fits the industry and SAG members, any more than ABC can negotiate license fees for NBC. No one has our proxy.

Our issues are different – not better, but different and we deserve to have our unique issues and very valid concerns resolved in negotiation. Agreeing to fairly negotiate the unique needs of actors would mean that the CEO’s are honorably engaging in the negotiations process rather than continuing to stonewall.

Our message to the CEOs is this, “Gentlemen, please understand, the pattern does not fit. Now that you have at least acknowledged our effort to achieve a fair contract for actors, perhaps you would be willing to sit down with our negotiating committee and resolve our issues?”

The AMPTP responded with this:

“SAG’s press release proves that SAG is now officially out of touch with reality. The Producers negotiated with SAG for 46 days – and over that entire time SAG failed to justify why it deserves a better deal than the six other agreements negotiated so far this year. On a day when the United States was officially declared to be in a recession, when Governor Schwarzenegger declared a fiscal emergency for California, and when the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 680 points, SAG continues to demand more and better than everyone else. Unfortunately, the chasm between reality and SAG seems to widen by the day.”