As my headline indicated, actors are beginning to recoil to the rogue actions of AFTRA against them, selling out their right to consent on clips, and low-balling SAG Contracts and taking away their residuals to put money in AFTRA’s coffers.
This article from Backstage pretty well says it all, ah, even so, ah, the Ol’ Dog will add a pertinent comments. 
--
Analysis
Rank and File Actors Speak About SAG, AFTRA
May 15, 2008
By Lauren Horwitch
On May 6, the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers ceased negotiations on a new film and TV contract with the Screen Actors Guild and then started talks May 7 with the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists.
People inside and outside the entertainment industry have known this moment would come since at least March 29, when AFTRA announced it was suspending its participation in Phase One, the joint negotiating agreement the two labor groups have had since 1981. However, it hardly comes as a shock that the unions are separated: They have been warring for some time. Among the many charges leveled, SAG accuses AFTRA of poaching its turf in basic cable, while AFTRA asserts that SAG is too strident in its negotiating posture and too eager to strike.
We’re all well aware now of AFTRA’s posture when it comes to negotiating and, ah, it includes a bar of soap.
The two sides agree on one thing: Each contends it has the best interests of its rank-and-file members at heart. During his 2005 election campaign, SAG president Alan Rosenberg repeatedly used the term middle-class actor to define the majority of SAG members facing economic uncertainty -- a constituency he considers his peers.
A few days before opening talks with the AMPTP April 15, Rosenberg wrote in a message to members, "We are facing the demise of middle-class actors. We now have to work more just to make what we earned a few years ago.... We have to negotiate fair payments for all new media formats to help us expand opportunities for middle-class actors to get more work, just as the employers are expanding their opportunities to earn even more revenue.... The future of professional acting depends on it."
Since AFTRA opted to exit Phase One, Rosenberg has continually criticized it for lacking concern for its members. "AFTRA's refusal now to bargain together with us and their last-second abandonment of the joint process is calculated, cynical, and may serve the interests of their institution but not its members," he said in his March 29 response to AFTRA's action. That day, AFTRA national president Roberta Reardon insisted her union decided to negotiate separately to better serve the members. "AFTRA's leadership believes that our union must devote its energies first and foremost to working on behalf of performers and not waste any more time assessing whether our partner is being honest with us," Reardon wrote in a statement. "We are now prepared to move forward and negotiate a strong contract for our members as soon as possible."
'A Band of Rogues'
It's difficult to determine objectively what SAG and AFTRA members want: The majority don't participate in union elections. Less than a quarter of SAG's 120,000 eligible members voted in the September 2007 presidential election, in which Rosenberg was re-elected by a small margin. In the last membership vote -- a referendum to increase dues in February 2007 -- only 27 percent of the guild's approximately 114,000 paid-up members cast ballots. In September 2006, just 21 percent of SAG and AFTRA members who received ballots returned them in a member vote to extend the unions' joint Commercials Contract. An AFTRA representative said the union does not release the number of ballots received in elections.
Why in the world won’t AFTRA release the number of members who vote in an election, but then they won’t let the general membership see their cable contracts either. You get the idea that the leadership is hiding something. Maybe, its because a union that boosts a membership of 72,000 members, only received a total of 2,078 valid ballots in the 2007 Hollywood .election? You think? The Ol’ Dog is currently trying to find out how many AFTRA members voted on the Network Code. You know the one that they validate by saying it got a 93% approval rate. Ah, okay, 93% of how many members voting? I’ll get out those numbers when I get them, ah, that is if I can get them.
In an effort to get a reading on the rank and file, however, Back Stage asked actors who do not hold positions within the unions what they think of the SAG and AFTRA negotiations thus far and what they want the unions to accomplish in these talks. Twenty responded, representing a mix of SAG, AFTRA, and dual cardholders, as well as nonunion actors. We found that while these actors may not vote in union elections, they are nonetheless passionate about what is occurring in the guild and AFTRA.
Overwhelmingly, the actors expressed exasperation about AFTRA's decision to exit Phase One. The majority agreed with Rosenberg's assessment of AFTRA as an institution more interested in accumulating power than in serving its members' best interests. The actors called AFTRA's decision "disastrous" and an attempt to "stab SAG in the back." One actor, who spoke with Back Stage on condition of anonymity, called AFTRA "a band of rogues that want to undercut SAG and do what's best for AFTRA, not what's best for actors."
Jason Frazier, a dual cardholder in Los Angeles, wrote, "I'm upset with AFTRA because I feel that not only was their decision to terminate the SAG collective bargaining agreement done in haste, but it's apparent that AFTRA contracts grossly undercut SAG's.... AFTRA is so concerned with organizing that I think their interests lie more with just making producers happy than having their actors' best interests at heart."
Another actor who spoke on condition of anonymity wrote, "It seems to me that AFTRA is so eager to get into the driver's seat that it is disregarding both the final destination and the wishes of its thousands of passengers, most of whom also carry SAG cards."
Some actors said the current situation could have been avoided if the unions had merged. SAG and AFTRA leaders attempted to merge the unions in 1999 and in 2003; both times the memberships voted by a small margin to remain separate. "I was terribly disappointed when AFTRA and SAG didn't merge," a current AFTRA member wrote to Back Stage. "I wish it would completely fold and all of the responsibilities be moved over to SAG."
The truth is that all actors are already under one roof, SAG's. Unfortunately, they are being forced, more and more lately, to go under AFTRA's roof because of that unions undercutting of SAG contracts! And they will continue to have to do so, until SAG asserts TOTAL RULE ONE, and takes back our jurisdictional turf. One mandated by a federal referendum, and codified by a charter of the jurisdictional arm of the AFL-CIO, the 4A’s!( SAG’s Charter states that it has jurisdiction over all shows, except those done in the manner of a LIVE BROADCAST.)
"I think actors missed the boat when we had the chance to merge. We would have been in a more powerful position today," wrote John McCormick, a SAG and AFTRA member in L.A. "We're actors, and we should have one union for acting in front of a camera -- any camera."
The problem with merger, if you read the Phase One Agreement, is that it would have most likely turned SAG into a glorified version of AFTRA, which would have weakened actors control over their livelihood. Not to mention the fact, that it would have been detrimental to the SAG pension plan, and then there is that problem of all those broadcasters who would have continued to work non-union.
Although many actors had harsh words for AFTRA, some also criticized SAG for being too militant in the press and with producers in the boardroom. "SAG seems to be intent on shooting itself in the foot," wrote a SAG and AFTRA member of more than 30 years. "Their tough talk is resulting in a worse deal than they would have gotten if they had negotiated as partners with the studios instead of as cowboys.... SAG just may take the mantle of weakest theatrical union from the Writers Guild of America if it's not careful. The Directors Guild of America isn't smarter than SAG, just better organized."
If anyone thinks you get good results by being nice to our employers check that next residual check you get from one of AFTRA’s basic cable contracts…huh, you haven’t gotten one yet?
"Our current SAG officials have played right into the hands of AFTRA's officials by being harder-core than previously, and AFTRA is now hoping to gain leverage with the AMPTP," wrote a SAG member who requested not to be named. "It wouldn't surprise me if AFTRA and the AMPTP have been planning this for a while, knowing how hard-core SAG's reps were going to be this year. I wish all AFTRA-SAG actors would abandon AFTRA over this issue. But they won't."
I wouldn’t be so sure about that! Personally, I think if our union stands up for actors and stops AFTRA’s nefarious actions, SAG members will back them up. They are just waiting for our leaders to give them the word.
Not surprisingly, obtaining fair compensation for new-media work was a priority for actors. "The most important issues for me are establishing a legitimate foundation in new media, increasing cable rates, eliminating free exhibition windows; and this latest 'free clip use in perpetuity' has to be killed in its tracks," wrote SAG member Stephon Fuller of Los Angeles.
But is a new-media deal worth striking for? The SAG members we interviewed were split when asked whether they would vote in favor of strike authorization. "SAG is standing up for important key issues...and the producers' [resistance] to negotiate fairly on these matters certainly merits a strike," wrote Frazier. "Part of me thinks, 'Why do we want to go through another demoralizing, depressing strike right after getting out of the WGA mess?' But then another part of me says, 'We've been getting these emails from Alan Rosenberg talking about the importance of DVD residuals and getting new media organized, so...what is effective leadership if we don't truly stand up for what we as actors need?' "
That’s the whole point. Because of the whining in the press of a few of our high-profile members about our lack of resolve to face another strike, the Producers have felt empowered, and have, in turn, demanded more concessions from us than they got from the directors and writers. And unless we back our leadership with a strike authorization, they will be reduced from collective bargaining to collective begging. I don’t know about you, but when producers take that primetime show to the Internet for streaming, I would like to get more than what they are currently offering a measly $22.70 for the first year. Come on, how long before that Internet rerun will stream directly from your computer to your TV set. So, no more Network Reruns as we know them, but we’ll always have the $22.70 to pay those bills.
Some actors indicated they wouldn't grant authorization. "Now is not the time, and everybody knows it," wrote a SAG member, adding that SAG should accept the same new-media deal the DGA, WGA, and AFTRA have already accepted.
I really doubt that those who make such a statement actually realize how accepting the same deal will impact their working lives for years to come. I’ve heard those who have said, “We can always renegotiate the deal in 3 years!” I wonder how many of them were around decades ago when the formulas for VHS/DVDs and Cable were set. The former has not changed for around a quarter of a century and the later was not changed until we went on strike in 2007. Know one thing: Whatever you agree to now on the Internet, you will be stuck with for a long, long time.
Pamela Munro in Hollywood said a strike would be "another suicidal gesture on the part of SAG." She continued, "They are in a very weak position, which they refuse to acknowledge. The younger members don't seem to have any particular loyalty to the union or the union movement. Maybe that's wise on their part."
I really can’t buy that. The young members that I have talked to on sets are not only loyal SAG members who are proud to be part of our great guild, but they are fed up with AFTRA stabbing them in the back.
An anonymous SAG-AFTRA member based in New Jersey seemed to sum up the plight of disenfranchised SAG members: "We have just had to deal with a writers strike, and now we already have to deal with wondering if we will have an actors strike. How do people still have the time to go out and look for work when they have to deal with all this? Then you wonder why people don't come to the meetings or deal on a serious level with union business: They don't think it will do any good.... Please do not take your union members for granted; it may come back to bite you."
Right on, Brother/Sister 
Andrew Salomon contributed to this report.
Lauren Horwitch can be reached at lhorwitch@backstage.com.
---
Good article, fair and balanced. I wish we could see more of them in the press.
A.L. Miller SW Editor & Chief
I just checked, and we have had over a 152,000 turns of the Ol' Watchdogs Turnstile.
Thanks for your support, ah, well, hey that deserves a toast, "Here's to The Great Screen Actors Guild." 
| Home
| Contact
| Links
| Subscribe
| Classics
| Archive
| Search
| Watchdog Goodies
Actors recoil at AFTRA’s Rogue Behavior 
|