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

THIS IS AN ALERT TO ALL SCREEN ACTORS GUILD MEMBERS

It is imperative to your well being that you read the TV/THEATRICAL NEGOTIATING UPDATE that was recently mailed to you by Screen Actors Guild and check the box showing support for Doug Allen, Alan Rosenberg and the Negotiating Committee, giving them the authority and ability to go in and negotiate a better deal for you.

We, the membership, need to understand the full impact and ramification of demands being made by the AMPTP and, in particular, the two issues listed below.

Thousand of members will be denied health coverage, pension benefits and residuals.

Free Streaming/Move Over
Streaming network television shows on the internet. There are very important elements of streaming that should be understood.

The AMPTP demands:
· 17 days free streaming for current shows
· 24 days free streaming for new shows, followed by:
· Two consecutive 6-month ‘spurts’ for a payment of 3% of Total Applicable Minimum
· Guest star $85.00
· Day Player $22.77

Why is this a problem? It will not be supplemental income, but replacement income. As free streaming depletes the value of reruns, the first and second rerun residuals will be lost.

· Guest Star “top-of-show” (approximately $6,500), loses 60% of income

1st rerun residual $3,290 – lost
2nd rerun residual $3,290 – lost

· Day Player, scale (approximately $759), loses two-thirds of income

1st rerun residual $759 – lost
2nd rerun residual $759 – lost
In aggregate this represents a potential of 100-200 million dollars.
This lost income will have a profound impact on individual members’ Pension & Health Plans.

Day Player:
· Currently needs about nine days work with 1st and 2nd rerun residuals.
· Without rerun residuals, will need about 27 days work, an almost impossible number of days to reach

Guest Star:
· Currently needs about two guest roles with 1st and 2nd rerun residuals
· Without rerun residuals will need over 3 guest starring roles to qualify

Thousands of members that now qualify will find themselves without health coverage, pension benefits and residuals, turning our union into an elitist union representing only those temporarily the most successful.

Clips:
· Producers may use clips for promotional purposes without consent or payment
· For any other purpose, consent is required and negotiable… but cannot be negotiated at time of original employment

This preserves the principle that your work can only be used in and for the film on which you are engaged, allowing you and your heirs to retain control of your name, voice and likeness.

AS A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT, in order to build a new industry based on clips, the AMPTP is demanding:
· we give up consent and negotiation;
· allow them to mix and mash clips: “mashing” – putting together 2 or more clips from different sources, creating a new product. we will have no control over how clips are mixed or mashed, leaving the door open for a total perversion of our creative work.
• For a payment of:
· under 2 minutes – $25.00
· under 4 minutes – $75.00
· over 4 minutes – $22.77

You need to clearly understand that you will be denied employment if you do not accept these nominal payments and give up your right of consent.

It is critical that you be informed and weigh in on these two issues and the others outlined in the TV/Theatrical Negotiating Update. Our membership, the public and members of the industry at large should understand we are fighting for the basic bread and butter issues of pension benefits, health coverage, the protection of our work and the opportunity to make a living in our chosen careers.

This should be considered supplemental to the TV/Theatrical Negotiating Update which you have just received from the Guild.

Fraternally
Ed Asner
Tom Bower
David Clennon
Rob Schneider

1 The Dark Knight (2008) $75.6M $314M
2 Step Brothers (2008) $30M $30M
3 Mamma Mia! (2008) $17.9M $62.7M
4 The X-Files: I Want to Believe (2008) $10.2M $10.2M
5 Journey to the Center of the Earth (2008) $9.41M $60.2M
6 Hancock (2008) $8.2M $206M
7 WALL·E (2008) $6.35M $195M
8 Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008) $4.93M $65.9M
9 Space Chimps (2008) $4.38M $16M
10 Wanted (2008) $2.73M $129M

It is a core principle of Screen Actors Guild –That no non-union work shall be authorized to be done under any Screen Actors Guild agreement and;

That all work under a Screen Actors Guild contract, regardless of budget level, shall receive fair compensation when reused.

Passed unanimously 68-0.This resolution represents guidance from the National Board of Directors to the National Negotiating Committee. It reaffirmed the importance of these issues in these negotiations.“For some time, we have been telling the industry how important it is for all new media productions under our contract to be done union and how important residuals for made-for new media programming are when programs are re-run on new media,” said SAG National Executive Director and Chief Negotiator Doug Allen.

“I am very pleased that our National Board today unanimously confirmed these essential principles in support of our National Negotiating Committee,” Allen added.

AMPTP RESPONSE:

“The continued refusal of SAG’s negotiators to accept AMPTP’s final offer means that actors will continue to work indefinitely under the expired contract – an old contract that contains none of the $250 million in additional compensation provided by AMPTP’s final offer, and an old contract that provides none of the new media rights and residuals that other Hollywood Guild members have now been enjoying for months. SAG has permitted non-union Internet production under its contract since 2001. AMPTP has offered to extend SAG jurisdiction to original new media production, including low-budget programs that employ a single “covered actor.” The AMPTP’s final offer also guarantees residuals when original new media productions are reused and terms to increase pay and residuals if the program is eventually exhibited in traditional media. None of these rights and residuals exists under the contract that expired on June 30th.”

There is extensive coverage of the DARK KNIGHT box office saga at DEADLINE HOLLYWOOD DAILY.

“If you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. Rather than fight its fans, Lionsgate has made a deal with YouTube aimed at satisfying — and monetizing — the people who post clips of its films, like “Dirty Dancing,” which receive millions of views.

…”Jordan Hoffner, YouTube’s head of premium content partnerships, said his company is in talks to strike similar arrangements with other studios.

“(The partnership) grew out of discussions about claiming — the process of getting content off YouTube,” Marvis said. “But if there’s an audience for our content, it was like, ‘Wait a minute. Let’s not put our heads in the sands here. Let’s give them what they want and get revenue from it.’”

Let’s not put our heads in the sand, indeed. For a group of people in the communication business, it seems to me that SAG has done a fairly poor job of informing the public of the moves being made by producers and studios on an almost daily basis that are directly related to the key issues in this contract negotiation.

Unfortunately, the horse is already out of the barn on this round of negotiations and it doesn’t appear likely that issues of clip use and residual income will be decided in a manner that will significantly benefit actors going forward. Based on prior experience, if we don’t ‘get it now’ we likely won’t be getting it at all.

The producers have, it appears, once again been successful in getting SAG to accept a contract that has terms that will make it very difficult for the average working actor to make a living….certainly not if he/she is counting on residual income streams.

It has become clear that this round of negotiations was seized by the AMPTP as the moment in time to roll back or even eliminate actors residual income streams as we have come to know them. We are at a time of changing technology that has opened the door to this move by producers.

Perhaps more of the Hollywood elite would object to the AMPTP tactics if we would refer to them as BIG MEDIA, BIG PRODUCER$, BIG ENTERTAINMENT or the BIG AMPTP, or BIG STUDIO$. It doesn’t have quite the ring of BIG OIL or BIG CORPORATIONS but somehow some of the same group of stars who constantly rail about BIG EVERYTHING don’t seem to see the studios and producers in the same light.

Could it be because many of these BIG STARS also have BIG FINANCIAL INTERESTS in BIG STUDIOS and BIG PRODUCTION COMPANIES? I guess not. These people have far too much integrity to do something only the Bushes and Cheneyes of the world would do. Right?

I’ll think about that when the next round of residual checks comes in and I deposit those checks for $10 and $20. I just don’t see how the producers can afford to pay those kind of prices for shows running on cable TV. I mean, nobody watches cable TV. Do they?

I’ll sure be glad when that infant technology grow$ up.

So, for what it’s worth, here are some terms that you’ll see often if you follow this saga:

Residuals – Also known as lifeblood to an actor. Future compensation that actors, writers and directors receive when their faces, voices, words and/or concepts are utilized to generate a continuing income stream for producers. The basic concept is that if my face/voice is being used to sell your soap for some period of time beyond the date that I filmed/taped your program (or commercial…but that’s a different contract), I should be compensated for that continuing contribution to the producer’s income. Because the actual number of work days for most creative types is limited, they rely on residuals as a significant portion of their total income. The fact that residual income has plummeted from traditional sources (TV reruns for example) has been a major issue in the current negotiations, particularly with regard to residual income from DVD sales and anticipated revenues from the internet and other new media outlets.

Final Offer – This is it. We have no more to give. What? You’ll accept what? Let us think about it and we’ll get back to you.

Last Best Final Offer – This is it. Really. We have no more to give. Seriously. Don’t bother making a counter proposal because we’re not going to consider it. You’ll accept what? Let us think about it and we’ll get back to you. (slight pause) We thought about it. No. Take it or leave it. And if you don’t take it we may have to declare an impasse.

Impasse – What happens when two sides in a contract dispute talk to each like to warring tribes that each speak a language the other doesn’t understand. While the pretense of negotiation is underway, the reality is that neither side has a position that is acceptable to the other. This phase usually begins at the very moment of expiration of an existing contract. Legally, if the producers declare that negotiations have stopped and the process is at an impasse, they can implement all or some of the terms of its final offer.

de facto impasse - A term created by producers and entertainment industry reporters to throw more cold water on the whole process of negotiation for a new collective bargaining agreement and scare everyone into believing that a strike is imminent.

Strike Authorization Vote – A tactic that, under the right circumstances can result in a last best final offer becoming a final offer and then a new round of talks. This tactic will only work if there is a reasonable expectation that the membership will actually authorize the strike action…which explains the lack of a strike authorization vote in the context of this present contract negotiation.

Strike – A lose, lose situation where both sides in a financial struggle agree to put themselves and countless innocent bystanders into a financial hole from which they may never recover.

de facto Strike – A term created by producers and entertainment industry reporters to throw more cold water on the whole process of negotiation for a new collective bargaining agreement.

Solidarity - An archaic notion that creative types including actors, writers and directors would stand together in negotiations with producers. This quaint notion was popular at an earlier time when the creative types understood that producers would pay them nothing if they could get the creatives to agree. The creatives found that by working together they could achieve more favorable wages and working conditions. Internal power struggles have supplanted solidarity in importance in the modern era.

Why even stay in SAG, then unless you’re planning on leaving the regional market for a market where SAG membership would be required ? I think it’s the right thing to do. Simple as that. If I take advantage of the contract benefits won on the backs of dues paying members, should I really get to enjoy those benefits and not pay any of the freight? Some can do that. I can’t.

I got a reminder of SAG benefits recently when I was contacted by a SAG rep out of L.A. telling me that she was winding up a claim for reuse of some footage of mine from an old film. The producers had sold the piece of film for use in a television program and that triggered an additional payment due the talent. I didn’t even know about the additional use. Fortunately for me SAG was on the case and I’ll get a little residual payment out of the deal. Over the years I have benefited from the contract terms SAG has won for me in our collective bargaining agreements. Now as we start to recoup and regroup from the recent writer’s strike, my hope is that the producers and SAG will sit down and get a deal hammered out before our contract expires. The writers have paved the way and the issues at stake are strike worthy. But now that the writers have forged an agreement, I think and hope that the producers and SAG will make short work of a new contract.