* Variety Magazine Source indicates AMPTP will agree to mediation. !!

As, I alluded to in an update on another post, The Special Bulletin regarding SAG's requesting a mediator, was very ambiguous, and tapped danced around the issue, giving neither "YES" or "NO" response.

The following article by Variety Reporter Dave McNary indciates that I might just have been correct in my analysis of the AMPTP Special Bulletin--and that they may indeed be tapping dancing around the issue until they decide what to do.

The Ol'Dog's analysis of the AMPTP Speical Bulletin following the Variety Story.

---

In a move to jumpstart stalled negotiations, the Screen Actors Guild has asked that a federal mediator join the talks — and has held off on sending out a strike authorization to members.

SAG made the announcement Sunday afternoon at the conclusion of the second day of its national board meeting in Los Angeles. The guild’s resolution to seek a mediator had passed with 97% support.

"We hope mediation will help move this process forward," said SAG president Alan Rosenberg in a statement. "This action by the board demonstrates our commitment to bargain with the strength of our unified membership behind us. Economic times are tough for all Americans, but we must take a stand for what is fair."

The Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers didn’t have a specific response Sunday to the notion of bringing in a mediator — indicating that the congloms will need to confer about the request before agreeing to participate in a new round of talks. But the org also warned SAG that it’s not going to revise the final offer it made in June.

"The AMPTP has successfully negotiated four major labor pacts with Hollywood guilds this year, and we would like to close a fifth with SAG," the group said. "That said, there is simply no justification for SAG to expect a deal that is in excess of what the other guilds negotiated in better economic times. No matter what SAG does — whether it be authorizing a strike or following a different approach — it will not change the harsh reality that currently confronts our industry."

One source close to the studios said he’s expecting the congloms will agree to participate in the mediation process in hopes that a deal can be hammered out. It’s expected that SAG will make an official request this week to the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to assign a mediator to the talks and request that the AMPTP participate.

SAG’s negotiating committee had recommended Oct. 1 that the national board seek a strike authorization of members, which would require a 75% approval to be implemented. The 71-member national board also decided over the weekend to go ahead with sending the strike authorization to members, but with the proviso that the negotiating committee would have to determine that mediation hasn’t worked.

"Our No. 1 goal remains securing a good contract without a strike," said SAG national exec director and chief negotiator Doug Allen. "I am pleased by the board’s strong show of support for the national negotiating committee and look forward to meeting with the federal mediator and the AMPTP committee as soon as possible."

Going with a mediator rather than sending out a strike authorization represents something of a more cautious step for SAG. The negotiating committee — dominated by the more assertive Membership First faction — had declared on Oct. 1, "A strike authorization vote of the membership is necessary to overcome the employers’ intransigence," but moderates on the board hadn’t come around to publicly supporting a strike authorization.

The weekend meeting was the first since the Membership First coalition — which came to power with Rosenberg in 2005 — lost its majority on the board in last month’s elections. A coalition of moderates, consisting of the New York and regional reps along with the upstart Unite for Strength faction, has a one-vote majority on the board.

Unite for Strength, with Amy Brenneman racking up the most votes in the election, had accused Membership First during the campaign of bungling the negotiations by alienating AFTRA.

That Ms. Brenneman accused Membership First of bungling the negotiations is rather ironic because when her and her group were asked to comment on specific proposals of the producers final offer, they claimed that they couldn't do so since they had not seen them and had not been inside the negotiating room. Hmmm...if they weren't in the negotiating room and had no idea of what the specific proposals were, how, then, could they accuse Membership First of bungling the negotiations?

Sunday’s decision to ask for a mediator also represents a policy reversal for Rosenberg, who repudiated a similar resolution in August when SAG’s New York Division board asked for a mediator to be brought into the talks. At the time, Rosenberg accused the New York leaders of playing politics, warned that such a move had not worked during the WGA negotiations and asserted that it could be counter-productive.

I was not aware of President Rosenberg’s accusation of NY’s board playing politics but, I do know that the New York Resolution made the following allegation:

In failing to bargain realistically with the AMPTP and remove unattainable items from the table, our negotiating team, controlled by the current Hollywood leadership, has pursued an agenda that has more to do with politics than with securing a beneficial contract and has betrayed the trust of the membership.

SAG has not met formally with the majors since July 16. The AMPTP made a final offer to SAG on June 30, the day the guild’s feature-primetime contract expired, and has warned that it may reduce the value of the deal if the economy worsens.

The congloms have asserted repeatedly they won’t sweeten the deal while SAG’s leaders have insisted that SAG has to achieve better terms in new media than in the final offer, which mirrors the WGA, DGA and AFTRA deals. Allen’s also contended that informal negotiations have been occurring in recent months — a claim that’s been denied explicitly by the congloms.

SAG also said Sunday it would add four more members to the 13-member negotiation committee — two from the Hollywood Division, one from the New York Division and one from the Regional Branch Division.

The USAN/UFS plan seems to be that Hollywood should add two USAN members to the Hollywood Negotiating team, while they could simply add two more of their party followers to their divisions' negotiation team members. Ah, not so quick guys! How about the Membership First Hollywood Controlled board makes one of their additions a UFS member, and the New York Controlled USAN board adds a non-USAN board member to their negotiating team...ah, say like Eric Bogosian? Hey, guys, fair is fair.

Despite 87% support from SAG members in a postcard poll for the position of holding out for a better deal, it’s unclear if members would support a strike authorization amid a souring economy and with memories of the WGA’s 100-day strike still fresh. Studios are planning to ramp up feature production early next year in the expectation that there won’t be a SAG strike at that point.

---

Here is the Ol' Dog's earlier response to the announcement on the AMPTP website.

Well, you have all read the resolution passed by the SAG Board on Sunday October 19, 2008. Which stated:

“In hopes of moving the Theatrical and TV negotiations forward, the National Board hereby takes the following actions:

The Board authorizes a referendum and accompanying educational information be sent to the members requesting their authorization for the National Board to call a strike in the Theatrical and TV Contract, at such time as the Negotiating Committee determines in its sole discretion that the mediation process has failed.”

Well, the AMPTP has posted the following “Breaking News” statement on their website.

Hmmmm…rather ambiguous, huh? The AMPTP posts the above statement, with no explanation or reference to SAG’s resolution. Instead they follow it with a September letter to SAG NED Doug Allen and President NED Alan.

I love the part about Other Means. Bless their little Whipsawing Hearts, they couldn’t even bring themselves to mention the “M” word…ah, mediator!

Now, let’s analyze this carefully written statement a little closer. First off, like I said, it isn’t really a response at all but a bit of rambling rhetoric, or what is know in the trade as vamping.

It starts with a little self-serving bragging, and ends with a dash of wishful thinking. And then avoids a direct YES or NO, and, instead, argues that there is no justification for SAG to expect a deal exceeding past negotiated deals in, ah, ah, better times. No, no NO nowhere in that sentence.

Then it, beats around the bush, with more ambiguity. Why, folks, no matter what SAG does—whether authorizing a strike, or following a “Different Approach,” (Oh go ahead, and say it guys a FEDERAL MEDIATOR…)it will not change the harsh reality that currently confronts our industry.

Hmmm, again…well, I don’t know about you, folks, but, but, that didn’t sound like a definite NO to the Ol’ Dog.

A little aside, to our old buddy Nick Counter. Ah, Nick, best you remember that Ol’ Showbiz adage “Never let them see you sweat!”