SAG Rejects "Final" Offer

LOS ANGELES — The Screen Actors Guild board of directors on Saturday rejected the "last, best and final offer" by Hollywood producers for a new contract.

The contract was rejected by 73 percent of SAG's board members, spokeswoman Pamela Greenwalt said in a statement.

SAG called the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers' demand for the contract to run for three years instead of two, "regressive and damaging."

Producers insist the three-year contract would start when it is ratified, instead of when the last one expired, which would mean SAG would not be able to join with the writers' and directors' guilds to increase their bargaining power when their contracts expire in 2011.

A statement released by the producers alliance said its offer was strong and fair and it had always sought a three-year deal, just as it had negotiated with other guilds and unions.

"We simply cannot offer SAG a better deal than the rest of the industry achieved under far better economic conditions than those now confronting our industry," the statement said.

AMPTP spokesman Jesse Hiestand declined to comment beyond what was in the statement.

Greenwalt declined to comment when asked what the next step in negotiations would be.

SAG is the last holdout among several unions that have agreed to long-term contracts. The guild has opposed the producers' previous offer, saying it failed to guarantee guild coverage in productions made for the Internet and failed to make residual payments on made-for-Internet content that is rerun online, among other issues.

Comments

[Dannydel]

Takes guts...or something, to stand up for your principles, when you know that it could mean an even worse year ahead than last year, during the writers strike. And with SAG members and staff, seemingly split on a bi-coastal basis, it would take a supreme optimist to think the 'Biz' is going to have a decent year anytime soon.

[daedelus]

SAG has been stalling since last June, and now they want their contract to be retroactive. Bold.

[tashmoo2]

ACTORS and PRODUCERS: Please come to an agreement so we can all go back to work. It's beginning to seem greedy and selfish. Just cut a deal already, this defacto strike is killing everybody.

[sisterdebmac]

Precisely. Regular working stiffs are getting stiffed. Stop the grandstanding. It has gone on far too long.

[HoldenLitgo]

Yeah, let's stiff the regular working stiff actors so regular working stiffs can avoid getting stiffed.

[JoeBlough]

Once an agreement is reached, will entertainment get better?

[The Ghost]

Time for SAG to turn to WGA producers and wipe the AMPTP off the face of the earth.

[HoldenLitgo]

As much as I hate to see it happen, SAG's rejection sounds more than fair to me as a member. The AMPTP seeks to eliminate what they fear most; collective bargaining. It's a worker's right. It's a human right. It trumps the economy.

[rphillips4165]

Keep thinking it trumps the economy. More and more movie theaters are closing down because people aren't going. Fewer and few kids watch tv because of its boring content. So that means in the future fewer shows will be produced. Meaning fewer and fewer actors and crew will be hired. When is the rest of the world going to get it. This is a depression not a recession. We are going to have a lot of people without a home or food. How many of them are going to be actors and crew?

[HoldenLitgo]

The depression or recession notwithstanding, this is a labor dispute. No more or less important or earth shaking than any other labor dispute in our history of organized labor. To make more of it than that is foolish. Worker's rights are at stake, nothing more.

[The Ghost]

Theater attendance is up. You are talking out of your butt.

[Martee]

Even if that were true -- why would accepting a bad deal change any of that. Will people rush out to movie theatres and tune in bad TV shows if actors are being paid unfairly? The two don't seem connected at all.

[alreadyfamous]

i agree

[alreadyfamous]

I agree.

[thatone]

Yes.