SAG Strike Authorization Vote Shifts Into Gear

SAG sent a long email to its members yesterday urging its members to vote yes on strike authorization ballots to be sent out in December. The email was largely in the form of a Q&A explaining the union leadership's argument that a strike authorization is a necessary negotiating tool. An exact date for mailing out the ballots wasn't specified, but as I've previously blogged, I expect them to go out soon, so that the approximately 4 week process will conclude, and results will be in hand, before the Golden Globes (January 11).

UPDATE: Because a lot of members of the general public read these posts, I want to add something in fairness to SAG not everyone knows: the changes SAG is seeking will not make a difference to rich actors. They are a very small percentage of the union, and negotiate their own deals with fees well above the union minimums. Rather, SAG's concerns are middle-class actors for whom these issues may make a difference some day (SAG says the issues make a difference today, but I suspect that's overstated). I'm against a strike for various reasons which I've previously blogged about, but the issue of wealthy actors isn't among them, because it's a non-issue.

Follow Jonathan Handel on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jhandel

Comments

[ndem]

Advice to SAG...the WGA signed something that is already being ignored by the studios, producers...be very very careful...residuals on the internet are the way of the future and you must lock down a good deal now...remember what happened in the past during strikes...REALITY TV! No writers No actors...they try to think about how to make a profit without you!!!!!

Stand up to them!

[BillSeward]

1. phasing out of residuals
2. loss of clip consent
3. product placement
4. force majeure

Those are the biggies. It's an un-signable contract. Any hope of the producers coming back to the table to renegotiate in three years is naive. Precedent shows that. VHS/DVD. Cable residuals, 22 and 20 years old, respectively. Horrible deals, promises of renegotiation. Never happened. Once they establish a business model for new media with nonunion talent, and phase out residuals through new media language in this contract, there's no going back. Be wise. Research the issues. Listen to your leadership. And remember: the producers ARE our adversaries - that's the way it is at the negotiating table. They want us cheap, AFTRA gives it to them. SAG stands up for its members. The blame for the fall-out on the town from a strike needs to be placed at the foot of those responsible - the AMPTP.

[sjones66]

As a SAG member, I understand the new media issues and agree that it needs to be renegotiated. But, NOT right now if it means a strike. Shutting down production would harm our brothers and sisters in below-the-line unions, as well as the numerous post and general production support work. With the economy teetering on the brink of a depression, shutting down such a large business could be disastrous. The studios treat these negotiations like crap, and I don't agree with their desperate urge to starve the workers while they rake in the big bucks.

But I'll be voting no on a strike. It's not fair to the other workers who depend upon production and who have supported us in the past.

[MarkBrandon]

Here, here! SAG is my mother union and I will champion a "no" vote. For once, I'd like to see us stop treating producers as adversaries.

[heywhat]

What a pleasure to read a comment that address the BTL unions (and refers to them as brothers and sisters) as well as the people in other areas of prodution.

[heywhat]

make that "addresses) and bravo to the comment on the comment as well - there are many fine and honest producers who do their best to treat writers, actors and others as people not just the means to a financial end.

[Michale32086]

Grrrrr

What's the SAG's complaints??

Not paid enough???

Guess it's reruns for us again...

Michale.....