Here we go again -- SAG asking for strike vote
by
Models look good on strikeNews just hit the wires this morning (5am, Saturday? huh?) that the federal mediator failed to settle the dispute between the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) and the Association of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), just like he failed with the WGA. I can't help but wonder if this has something to do President Bush, because we all know how virulently anti-labor Republicans are, and how willing the President has been to stuff federal agencies full of unqualified political appointees that will carry out his personal ideological agenda rather than doing the job these agencies were created for.
Remember when a 20-something political appointee with no background in earth sciences was caught censoring NASA reports on climate change to water them down, because Bush doesn't personally believe in global warming? Makes you wonder if these mediators even tried to settle these disputes or if they were content to just like the companies do whatever they felt like doing.
We remain committed to avoiding a strike but now more than ever we cannot allow our employers to experiment with our careers. The WGA has already learned that the new media terms they agreed to with the AMPTP are not being honored. We cannot allow our employers to undermine the futures of our members and their families.
SAG is going to reach out to its membership to "educate" them on the state of things, which is an obvious precursor to asking them for authorization to strike. The strike itself would come later after a vote by SAG brass, pretty much anytime after a successful authorization vote.
Unlike with the WGA strike, all television shows currently in production would shut down immediately. Based on what I know of things, you could see a handful -- maybe two or three -- new episodes after the strike is called based on how many episodes are in post production, or none at all. Any feature film that is shooting would shut down immediately since you can't shoot a movie without actors, not even purely animated features since voice actors would walk out, too.
DHD has the SAG and AMPTP statements but we already know the story, the AMPTP did to SAG what they did to the WGA, they held their breath and refused to bargain in good faith until a strike forced them to fold. The writers had the fortitude to hold out for three months and got basically everything they thought they could get in the end, but the production damage they did was maybe a third to half what SAG will do, and that was during a time when the economy as actually a heck of a lot better than it is today.
NBC for example could afford to sit on its rear knowing full well that GE could afford the losses even over an extended period of time because of how large and diverse it businesses are, but that's simply not the case anymore.
Even News Corp is laying people off.
So the main hangup is that SAG wasn't happy with the WGA deal and wanted to improve on it. The AMPTP doesn't want to do that because then they'd have to turn around and give the same, better deal, to the WGA and DGA, but SAG doesn't care about that because they have to look out for their own first and foremost. That their friends at the WGA would benefit from any improvements is a bonus to them, but not their first priority. The WGA deal secured jurisdiction for "new media" which means TV shows and movies broadcast online, including shorts (webisodes) and all-original content such as that, but they didn't get everything.
Residuals (roughly equivalent to royalties) were no where close to what they are for television, and a lot of writers weren't happy about that but were hopeful that those terms can be improved upon as the online market grows over time (even though they were in the exact same situation for home video residuals which now cover DVDs, as the AMPTP has refused to revisit those numbers and considers them permenantly off the table.) There's a two week window during which entire episodes of TV shows can be broadcast online for free where writers get absolutely nothing, and SAG doesn't just want that window narrowed, they want the thing sealed shut entirely.
And this isn't even addressing what SAG brought up in their statement and will certainly stress to their membership in the coming weeks, accusations that the studios and networks aren't even living up to their existing legal obligations under the WGA's new media provisions.
If they get what they want, then writers get it too, so it's obviously in the best interest of writers to return the support they got from SAG during their own strike. The WGA owes SAG big time and hopefully that debt can be repaid in a way that will strengthen their friendship even further, because ultimately that's universally bad for the AMPTP but great for union labor.
Further updates as they become available.
November 22, 2008 6:48 AM | Reply
Thank you for the heads up! I saw your Twitter about this article.
American employees have been getting the shaft for many, many years. I've put in my 50 years of working, I'm retired now. And things have improved in many ways since I began working -- but still, there is tremendous room for improvement.
Best wishes to SAG, WGA and the DGA!
Morjana
November 22, 2008 6:56 AM | Reply
Yeah about Twitter, I use TwitterFeed for this site so even though I post stuff on Twitter myself, I don't have to worry about announcing new posts or anything.
Very handy.
I'm glad you found this post useful, I guess you could consider it breaking since this just hit the wires about an hour ago. I've got a real love/hate thing with unions but in the case of the Hollywood talent guilds it's all love (except for the DGA) so I hope that SAG gets everything they want because they aren't asking for very much, and it's a small price to pay to keep a 120,000 person union happy.
Thanks for stopping by as always!
November 22, 2008 11:53 AM | Reply
November 22, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply
November 23, 2008 12:07 AM | Reply
November 23, 2008 4:20 AM | Reply
I'm not sure that I agree with how AFTRA and SAG handled each other this past year, but I'm not really up to speed on that so I have to be careful with my judgments here. AFTRA has been accused of undercutting SAG contracts for years and if that's true, I can certainly understand the hostility.
Any union that consistently undercuts another needs to burn (yes, I'm talking about you, DGA.)
Given that SAG is dedicated to representing actors, I don't find anything wrong with them moving into places where they don't have representation irregardless of what AFTRA is doing or has done. I think it's bad to have two unions representing the same people because it dilutes the power of both, and given the choice -- SAG being an actor-only outfit -- it only seems natural that SAG would want to take over in places that already have AFTRA representation because they believe that is what's best for actors.
If AFTRA can make a coherent argument as to why their lesser paying contracts are better, then let them fight it out I say, so long as one side wins out eventually.
And while I'm not oblivious to the economic challenges of the day, this strike and these new media issues are time sensitive and simply can't wait. The WGA waited on home video residuals for the benefit of the companies and the talent, a "wait and see" approach, and we all saw what happened.
Anyway, thanks for coming back to answer my question. I appreciate it.