A-List Group Sign Petition Against January Strike Vote

E!:

While support for an actors' strike was already running thin thanks to the industry-wide burnout still being felt from the 100-day writers' strike in 2007-08, the current state of the nation's economy--not to mention the just-underway awards season--has Hollywood up in arms over what could be another potentially disastrous work stoppage.

A select group of A-listers is in favor of authorizing a strike, should SAG leadership choose to go that route, but nearly 150 big-deal actors have now gone ahead and publicized their avowed opposition to such a move.

George Clooney, Tom Hanks, Alec Baldwin, Cameron Diaz, Steve Carell, Jennifer Garner, Charlize Theron, Matt Damon, Morgan Freeman and Eva Longoria Parker are among the boldfaced names found on a petition that was sent to SAG national president Alan Rosenberg asking the board to cancel a strike-authorization vote scheduled for Jan. 2.

Read the whole story: E!

Comments

[protagonia]

A strike now could union-bust SAG altogether.

[protagonia]

This is not just about those in SAG, but all the other occupations that will be obliterated if there is another industry strike so close to the WGA strike, from which they are still recovering. The strike for SAG can come at a later point when things are more stable.

There must be time between the strikes or the effect could be union-busting and and lead to even greater disaster. The timing is as bad as it could be.

NO strike now.

Later.

[Clennon]

THE A-LIST HAS SPOKEN.

(The Elite vs. the Meat [rank-and-file])

NOW HEAR THIS:

All S.A.G. peasants and proles:

The Royalty and the Aristocracy have spoken. Read the word of your betters. READ AND HEED.

(1) These celebrities are smarter than you. They've been so much luckier than you, they MUST be smarter, too.

(2) These Royals and Aristocrats live on a higher moral plane than you do. Again, they've been so much luckier than you, they MUST be better human beings, too, with a finer sense of right and wrong.

(1) plus (2) means YOU MUST VOTE "NO STRIKE AUTHORIZATION."

We owe our allegiance to the Royalty -- Prince George Clooney et al -- and to the Aristocracy -- the Duchess Sally Field and her peers (including His Portliness Alec Bawldwyn). Allegiance means DO AS THEY TELL YOU. And be grateful they take the trouble to advise you!

These are important people, people!!! They want to work. Stars must work. And these people don't work for minimum. If there's a strike, they will lose more money in a week than you make in three years -- three GOOD years. Do you want these A-listers to suffer that way? Actors should be able to empathize with their betters. You might have to PLAY one of the nobility some day.

[protagonia]

Despite your satirical piece, clearly your emotions steer you poorly. The truth is that to strike now would spell catastrophe for many.

This is the wrong time to strike, as it will do immeasurable harm to those whose living depends on the continuance of the film and TV industries. Your hatred of the aforementioned "stars" would not have anything to do with their politics, would it? Of course not. You really care about the working families out there. Yeah right.

Nice try, Clennon.

[rightuseofwill]

STRIKE! STRIKE! Don't let the Banker buddies Media Mogles Win!!!!!!

[Housewife]

Yeah!. Down with mogles. Who cares if all the film production gets shipped out of California once the union is destroyed. We don't need the stupid film industry to fuel the world's 10th largest economy. Oh wait... apparently the California budget is heading toward a 31 billion dollar deficit with historic unemployment and home foreclosures. Gee. Maybe we need those jobs afterall. Maybe we should re-think? Nah! Actors are only interested in themselves. Who cares about Californians?

[LetMeUnderstandThis]

We'll see how this all falls into place, if they do chose to strike it will be just another thorn in the foot.

[texastrixie]

I am a big supporter of unions, and a big supporter of the strike as a bargaining tool. But now is not the time. Reality tv has taught us that the entertainment business can exist to some extent on projects that require no real writers, no actors, and even less support staff. Yes, people will lose out on having residuals, but really, how much residual could a regular actor get? Not the star, but the guy in the background of the bar who supports a wife and child on crowd scenes?

I would think there are for more acting jobs in commercials and on tv than in movies (simply because of the number of tv vs. movie gigs). With all the "real world" shows, it does not do anyone any good to be giving tv executives another reason to consider non-story based options. Exactly how many actors will the new, 5-night per wk - Jay Leno show employ?

We have to get through the next few years intact. After that the Democrats will have passed card-check. It will be easier to get union membership up. Then we might start to have some real impact, like when most people in this country would not cross a picket line.

[rightuseofwill]

So, when will the time be?

[protagonia]

In another 3 years, when all the unions can go out at once. A D-Day, if you will.

[Social Construct]

I would like to somehow relate this to the sacrifices of earlier laborers making sacrifices, including placing their very lives in danger, to improve the conditions of their living and working conditions and that of their progency, but I cannot. I know too little about what SAG is seeking; from the top down or from the bottom up demands for people in the industry? Whatever the outcome, I place my support for all people to be able to bargain collectively. Lord knows that business has always grouped together for self interest in the form of associations, chambers of commerce, etc. in order to bargain and lobby for advantage. I do not comprehend that people laboring for corporations and businesses that are able to throw their combined might at influencing rules, laws and policies in their favor would not support the right for an equal ability to band together when bargaining in the name of labor.

[Social Construct]

Geez. Sorry for this poor writing. Too early, I guess. Hope any readers can discern my point through this maze.

[jaundicedview]

Good for these guys for calling against this disastrous strike! As a SAG member who makes his living in the movies, but not through acting, I can tell you that this strike would be a monumentally stupid and destructive move. Now is not the time, and the issues at stake are not as important as the homes that will be lost if a strike goes through.

Only a teensy tiny minority of SAG members actually make their living from Sag work and residuals. The rest, like me, make the mortgage payment some other way. Only a teeny tiny percentage of those in the movie and TV industries are members of SAG, the rest, most working without any promise of residuals, build paint and light the sets, dress the actors in beautiful clothes and makeup, or monster makeup, for that matter, record the sound, edith the sound, etc.

In other words, let's not bring down an entire industry that happens to be thriving in a time of economic hardship, for a tiny handful of people.

[rightuseofwill]

Again, when will it be time to have one? To make the point?

[jaundicedview]

When the potential losses do not outweigh the potential gains. When we're out of recession, when we're out of a forclosure crisis. The issues at dispute will benefit so few, yet the damage to the industry will harm SO MANY. Will the fat cats make out again? sure, they always do. But let's not step on a dollar to pick up a dime.

[protagonia]

3 years.

[SaucyB]

this is NOT a time for a strike, in fact it's not a time for raises either. some of us are laid off and you want to strike to get MORE???? wake up people!

[Samalabear]

This is not about millionaires against a strike. How can anybody say a strike is good right now? Think of the thousands of regular-wage people that work on movies. Think of their families and their homes. This strike is a bad idea. Television has not recovered, at least not the networks, from the writers' strike last year. When that strike finally ended the economy was heading into the major meltdown is it in today. Let's not add to the pain by putting more people out of work at this time. Next time you go to a movie pay attention to the credits -- after the actors these are the bread-and-butter jobs -- and there's a lot of them.

[Samalabear]

Yes, and as a result are dropping lots of acting gigs on the networks in favor of "cheap" shows like Leno five times a week, reality and game shows. They're not even waiting for any show to build an audience. If it's not an instant success it's outta there.

[hiprogloho]

Funny how the big stars who get all the work don't want the stoppage while journeymen limited by B status speak for the little guys. It's a lot like elitist politicos who approved the bailouts for Wall Street but not for automakers. Seems like the economic elitism in DC has also spread to Hollywood. For shame.

[jetbanana]

Baldwin, "A" list? Don't think so.

[GuidedByEwoks]

it says "Alec" not "Stephen."

[lioness39]

Thank goodness.

[jerrycurls]

Good.

At last someone is saying how stupid another Hollywood strike would be with our economy in the gutter.

[tlgeiger62]

Being someone with very little joy to go around this year between loss of employment, loss of medical insurance and no prospects for a job to support my family which includes my 9 yr old daughter, I would like to see the strike avoided.

I need a good laugh now and again and the shows on teevee and the movies give me a little bit of an escape.

PLEASE don't call this strike.