* Doug, what the hell is going on?

My last story was on the political ad in the AFTRA First/USAN Chicago newsletter published under an AFTRA/SAG heading. A newsletter that promotes political candidates under the guise that AFTRA doesn't endorse them, but, but it then goes on to publish a list of AFL-CIO candidate endorsements. Ah, you get that, right? They don't endorse them, ah, they just promote them. Okay, now that we got that straight.

Well, this wasn’t the first time they had done this. Back in 2006 they endorsed candidates in the AFTRA/sag Magazine Playback igniting a firestorm of protest on the Membership First controlled SAG board when they discovered what had been done. Here is a photocopy of that ad.

The result of that ad and the response to it was a professed policy of SAG that it did not and would not endorse political candidates. And even though, SAG has recently announced its opposition to a California proposition, it stlll maintains, as you can see below, that it does not endorse political candidates.

Look, this whole SAG endorsement thing is a slippery slop; especially, when it comes to stances on propositions that are not directly related to members work related issues. (Unlike Denver's Right to Work proposition.) But when you start endorsing Democratic candidates over Republican candidates you are no longer on a slippery slop you are on a quick skid to the bottom. The moment our union members begin to group together with Democrats against Republicans, it is all over. As most of you know, if you go fi-core, you pay dues, except for that part used for the union’s extracurricular political activity. Well, if you are of a particular party persuasion and you constantly see your dues money spent for an opposing party position, are you going to continue to let your dues money go toward supporting a political position you oppose? Ah, I don’t think so.

Now, in my last post on this subject, I left out something that I didn’t know at the time. And something the Ol’ Dog finds particularly disturbing--especially in light of the fact that our SAG policy is clear that SAG does not endorse political candidates—and that is the fact that SAG NED Doug Allen “okayed,” at least tacitly, the use of the AFTRA/AFL-CIO ad in the AFTRA/sag publication.

I contacted Pamm Fair, SAG’s Deputy National Executive Director.on this issue, and here is her response.

Arlin,

The information in the Chicago newsletter you are asking about is in reference to AFTRA’s portion of the newsletter in which it is clearly labeled as in keeping with only AFTRA’s policy to inform it’s members of labor’s candiates. Doug Allen and I agreed that we would not edit AFTRA columns in the joint newsletter, nor does AFTRA edit SAG articles.

If you are asking me about the AFTRA policy, that would be best directed to AFTRA. I can tell you that SAG does not have any policy or practice allowing us to inform members about labor friendly candidates, etc.
Pamm

Well, perhaps, SAG NED Doug Allen and Deputy National Executive Director can distinguish the difference between AFTRA’s portion of the publication and SAG’s portion, but I afraid that subtle distinction is going to go over the heads of us less sophisticated members. Especially when the newsletter has this logo.

Isn’t the idea that AFTRA and SAG are separate entity’s under the same publication, sort of like stopping at a motel called say “Doug and Kim’s Place” --and you get a room, and a hooker shows up at your door in the middle of the night, and you call the main office and complain to Doug, and he says, “Sorry about that but, but you’re in Kim’s part of the motel.” Look, bottom line, if that sort of stuff is going on in the place, it's a Whore House, and you can't say, but, but, we don't allow that in our part of the place.

And to be perfectly fair to Doug, he wasn't around in 2006 when the first ad appeared in the Chicago publication, so perhaps we can cut him a little slack on the matter, and hopeuflly there are those on the Hollywood Board who will set him straight--and we won't have to go through this again.

Look this sort of nonsense, and double talk, is just one more reason why SAG needs to sever all ties with AFTRA.

Speaking of nonsense: Listen to how an AFTRA Board Member out of New York justifies the hypocrisy of bypassing AFTRA’s policy against endorsing candidates.

Some history here.

At the most recent AFTRA National Convention, in Philadelphia, I raised the issue of the AFL-CIO endorsement list being published in the AFTRA-SAG Chicago magazine. My position was (and is) that any use of union facilities or money to support any candidate is inappropriate, regardless of that candidate's party or positions.

The representatives from the Chicago local explained that the Illinois AFL-CIO had been particularly helpful in advancing AFTRA and SAG legislative initiatives, and that because the unions do not endorse candidates, or make monetary contributions to candidates or to PACs, the publication was seen as one "small" thing the unions could do to repay the AFL-CIO for its help.

Recognizing that it would be a divisive floor fight that I might lose, I opted to negotiate the disclaimer language that was used in the publication this time - and the Chicago representatives agreed to it.

Quote:

AFTRA does not endorse any political candidates or parties. In an effort to elect officials who are dedicated to protecting workers’ rights, the Illinois AFL-CIO endorses the following candidates. This information from the AFL-CIO is offered as a tool to give AFTRA members a means of making their own judgments about the candidates. The union does not have a position on these candidates.

It wasn't everything I wanted, but it was, in my view, better than nothing.

Ah, so you see that’s how you doubletalk your way into justifying circumventing union rules against putting a political ad in your union publication. You do it by saying, “Hey we ain’t endorsing this slate of democratic candidates. No, not us! We have a policy against such actions. But, but…hey they did us a few favors, so it’s payback time, no matter how many of our fellow Republican members we may piss off!”

This kind of sh*t is why we have such apathy in our union now. There is no clear compass. Leaders say one thing then do another.

For instance, SAG leadership points out to us how AFTRA is screwing our members with their poaching of SAG’s contracts by offering producers inferior minimums and residual giveaways. And then what do they do, they join with AFTRA giving them in a fifty/fifty say in negotiation of the commercial contract in which SAG has 97 percent of the contracts. When was the last time you worked an AFTRA TV on- camera or voice over commercial? Like Never?

Yet, everyone who has ever been involved in these negotiations knows that AFTRA’s 13 negotiators will vote in lockstep with SAG’s NY and the branches 6 negotiators, and, they will decide what contracts Hollywood’s SAG members will work under for the next three years, even though the majority of those commercials will be done right here in Hollywood.

Yes, it’s all a charade, to convince us that everything is hunky dory--and until SAG’s leadership starts being completely straight with members, and stops being intimidated by AFTRA’s predatory leadership, it is only going to get worse.

I said that SAG’s Leadership is being intimidated by AFTRA’s predatory leadership. Ask, any of SAG’s board members why we have to negotiate with AFTRA, even though they have such a miniscule stake in the outcome, and they’ll explain, "Well, because if we don’t, they lowball our contracts."

Hello? What difference does it make if they lowball them from the inside or the outside, members are still going to be stuck with whatever the JPC employers want to give us.

To all by brother and sister members who are Republicans, I know how pissed you are about this political ad crap, because I have heard from several of you. But, you aren’t alone. I can tell you that I have heard from several (Membership First) Democrats on the Hollywood board, who are just as pissed, because they realize that these sort of biased political actions can only harm our great guild in the long run.

Now, if we can just convince SAG NED Doug Allen, President Alan Rosenberg, and the USAN Branch members in Chicago, that political side-taking will only hurt us all, perhaps we can end this divisive political positioning.

As for AFTRA’s current leadership changing, forget it. It has been demonstrated time and again that they are Charter Members of AFL-CIO John Sweeny’s Obedient Subjects’ Club--who will do whatever Sir John ordains.