In This Section
|
« WGA Post-Strike Watch: News About Returning Shows
SAG Preps for Big Talks, But Not Ruling Out a Strike
First it was the writers, then the directors. Now it's coming up on the actors' turn for contract negotations before theirs expires June 30. With the five-letter S-word hovering on the periphery, it seems that union leadership are taking every step they can to start talking ASAP — but they're not making any promises that they won't strike.
In a letter to members Wednesday, SAG chiefs Alan Rosenberg and Doug Allen promised that they would begin talks with the AMPTP as soon as their information-gathering is complete on March 31. In recent weeks, they've asked members to submit wages and workflow feedback in an effort to prep for the big table.
That said, they then noted that there were some things left to be desired for actors in the DGA's and WGA's new contracts. Promising to start negotiations "as soon as possible," they added this caveat: "But not before we finish our member-driven W&W process and not until we are in a position to finish what we start [sic]."
While it's clear that SAG's focus right now is on research and preparation for serious sit-downs, it also seems that no one's ready to rule out a strike. As things unfold in early spring, my guess is that the tenor and direction of things will become clear, as the rest of Hollywood looks on. — Anna Dimond
|
|
|
|
Feb 28, 2008 2:55 PM
|
If they need to strike, they should strike.
An empty threat, or an unwillingness to strike gives them zero bargaining power.
|
|
Feb 28, 2008 3:29 PM
|
|
Given the fact that the membership is pressuring SAG leadership to begin negotations sooner than March 31st,I'm wondering if there is real support for a strike. After this last strike by WGA,I'm not so sure actors want to put Hollywood through that again unless it's absolutely necessary.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 10:36 AM
|
|
The film actors are essentially on strike now as no new films will be started until an agreement is made. No studio is going to begin a multimillion dollar production that could be shutdown before its completed. How much "information" do they need. It seems obvious that they want a pay increase for the lower scale and increase in residuals and internet jurisdiction and payments for that as well. The delay in bargaining is only going to extend the unemployment of a lot of the below the line people for another 4 months.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 11:02 AM
|
You are wrong, BrianCR, the film actors are not on strike now... they aren't making any decisions not to work. They are on LOCKOUT, because the studios are refusing to go ahead with production. They are still working under the same contract they had when they were being worked while the writers were on strike. Nothing will change about their availability for work until after June.
What the studios are doing is trying to force them to take a bad deal by starving them out, while they are still available to work, so that they are in no position to negotiate for themselves when they can actually go on strike. I take it that you approve of this tactic of the studios -- since you are now making the same untruths about actors that you did about writers.
And if you want to talk about the below the line people still not working, DIRECT YOUR TALK TO THE STUDIOS... FOR IT IS THE COMPANIES WHO ARE KEEPING THEM OUT OF WORK... NOT THE ACTORS OR WRITERS.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 3:44 PM
|
I am sorry they are not officially on strike but again I try to give the business side of the argument. I presume that most big productions take several months from actual filming to post production work that would take them beyond the strike date. Since the actors would be needed at some point after the strike date to complete the film ADR and re-shoots happen all the time and a 200 million dollar production would be sitting there with no way to finish it. What person in their right mind is going to spend that kind of money if they believe that it won't be completed and ready to go. Also since the last strike went for 100 days whose to say the actors might stay out as long or longer. The studios are in business to make movies so the public can watch and pay for them not to just spend money with no regards to their shareholders who invest their money.
You seem to be either unaware or don't believe or care that the Moguls have to answer to their boards or shareholders who don't want to spend money with no product coming out. If I were on one of the boards I would have told them not to start any productions that could not be completed before the end of June period. Its also likely that they couldn't get completion insurance for the projects either because of the most recent strike. The economy is not as robust and insurance companies aren't going to just be handing out money just for fun.
All through the last strike you complained that the scum companies wouldn't talk. But now that companies are asking to talk now so that they can get the town back to work without any further strikes. I only suggested that SAG either enter into some informal discussions which they may be or get on with the talks sooner rather than later. Since several high profile actors also would like to see the talks begin as well why don't you attack them too.
|
|
Feb 29, 2008 8:46 PM
|
Brian,
I know everything you are saying. You seem to miss the point that I don't have to try to imagine what it is like to be a businessman in this industry. I work in this industry -- I know how it works a helluva lot better than you do.
But you seem to miss the point that all of this is orchestration by the studios. None of this would have happened if they had offered a decent deal to the writers three months ago.
Their mind set is to give everybody who works for them peanuts so that they can keep collecting their $27 million dollar bonuses. Just think how far that $100,000 a month times 2 companies would have gone if the studios paid that out in the writers contract rather than those PR firms hired to shill and lie to the public?
The only reason the AMPTP wants the actors to talk now is so they can get the actors to take the same deal that the writers and directors took... you don't think for a minute that they are seriously thinking of negotiating with them? They are using the fact that everybody is strike weary and hurting to try to force their will on the third union -- the biggest of them all -- and people like you are doing your best to help them... for equally selfish reasons.
Of course, they don't want to start projects they can't complete before the deadline, but they had no compunction about throwing everybody out of work for three months before and they would happily grind everything to a halt in June if they felt it was to their advantage to do so.
But they'd rather keep everybody out of work now, so they can force the pressure on the actors to take whatever crappy deal they offer them.
When people like you talk about the actors being a problem and that they should go talk to the AMPTP now, what you are really telling them to do is to go capitulate and take whatever crumbs the studios want to offer them because you don't give a s**t about anybody or anything but watching your favorite shows.
As for the big name actors who are undercutting their union... plenty of people are telling them that they shouldn't be doing what they are doing... at least not publicly. But they are more management than union actors anyway. You don't think they need to worry about contracts, do you? Contracts set up minimums the studios have to pay, not maximums. The Tom Hanks and George Clooneys of the world are going to get their $20 million dollar salaries, their back end deals, their special benefits, heck they probably even negotiate better deals for themselves on DVDs just because the studio execs will lay on the floor and lick their boots to get them in their movies. Union contracts protect all of the other actors that play all the other people in their movies who can't negotiate even fair deals on their own let alone the kind of deal A-list clout can. I'm not sure why they are doing what they are doing, but they are not helping anybody at this point but their studio masters, because if they don't wait until the membership has a chance to speak about what it wants or doesn't want to do, the only contract points they'll be discussing is what the studios want.
Of course, since you are on the side of business, uber alles and regardless of what kind of ethics are involved, you probably like that. I don't want to see another strike. I want us all back to work. I want me to be back to work. But I'm not willing to cut off fellow workers at the knees just so the AMPTP studio heads and a bunch of corporate lawyers can get their million dollar bonuses.
I'm not sure they will strike, but I'm not going to tell them to go lick the boots of the AMPTP so I can watch my Boston Legal and Lost. And the quickest way to insure that there is a long protracted strike is to make the AMPTP feel like they have all the cards on their side so they don't have to negotiate even a penny out of their pockets.
I'm sorry, as far as I'm concerned, there's something wrong with your humanity if you can side with the guys who make $27 million in one year as a salary with bonuses over someone who's fighting to raise 4 cents to 8 cents after 20 years of non-adjustment.
|
|
Mar 1, 2008 5:52 AM
|
Brian,
I'm curious... you make a big deal about what you would want the studios to do here if you were a shareholder, so, I'm curious how you would react.
I interviewed an actor before the WGA strike was settled and when we were discussing the strike, he laid things out this way:
If a DVD cost $15, $9 goes to the studio, $5 to the retailer, and the final $1 is distributed among writers, actors, directors, and health & pension for crew and whomever else gets caught under this umbrella. We already know that manufacturing DVDs cost less than a dollar, the production costs of the content are already taken of, and studios are even starting to piggyback P&A onto that done for theatrical/TV release dates (why things are coming out so quickly) to cut costs there. So you as a stockholder can't see your way to up that dollar by pennies when you are getting your chunk of the $9, to pay off the people who actually create your investment? -- after all, you who put your money into getting it made contribute nothing towards whether you are going to sell 10 units or a million units... as a shareholder in a major corporation, you may not even be someone who actually watches or buys the product yourself... hence not even contributing anything towards the numbers yourself.
Think about it, because I suspect this issue is more important to the actors than it was to the writers or the directors.
|
|
Mar 1, 2008 4:03 PM
|
gollsunshine:
You absolutely confuse me. On one hand the studios walk out of talks with the WGA and you are mad. Next they come to an agreement with the DGA and you are madder still. Next they talk with the WGA and come to an agreement and I guess you are still mad and voted against it. Now the Machiavellian studios are trying to talk to SAG early to avoid a strike and you are even madder still. I can only conclude that you want to bankrupt the studios and put them out of business for good. This would be your ultimate high as you could get the government to take over the industry and pay everyone the same amount regardless of quality or effort, kind of like the Post Office.
The DVD thing really bothers you and I can see why. But you are assuming that every DVD sells 10 million and that costs are a dollar or less based on what. I can buy cheap blanks at the store but I hope that they are using higher quality stuff for the DVD's I purchase. Also I am cheap and I wait to buy my DVD's when they are at least 50% off or more for the most part. Now sure the studios get their money first but at some point the retailers are going to want a price break. If the studios get 9 and the retailer 5 and I wait till the sale then the retailer gets 2.50. In some cases retailers might get some of that back from the studio but I don't know. If not then the retailers will order less product thereby reducing the profits. Now as for the studio piggybacking release dates an DVD releases that is an economic decision based on the fact that people are not going to theaters much anymore. I for one am one of those who go to maybe six movies a year depending on the year. So to maximize their advertising dollar I would assume that the evil moguls decided that they could advertise the movies theatrical run along with a DVD release especially for films they are sure won't attract a large movie audience.
My stockholder reference was specifically for the studios not beginning productions between now and July because of the potential strike. Now just because Iger or the other guys have 27 mill sitting around doesn't mean they can just spend money on projects that might not be completed. Now if you have 200 million invested in a picture that may not be completed by the end of June would you feel safe that your investment might be lost.
Now as to the actors being the problem I am not saying that but I do wonder why talking early is bad. I can only reason that the leadership wants to wait until the middle of June before they start talking so that the deadline would force the studios to give in to any demands they make. That is a good strategy if you want to continue the work disruptions through June. That does not harm the studios because they will not be spending that extra cash for another 3 months. The only one hurt by it are actors not employed for movies that would have been in production. All the varied workers involved in those productions including writers who won't be needed until the productions are filming and all the ancillary people from caterers to construction. Again the studios save money if no one is working. Now talking early is not capitulation if you are offered a bad deal say no and force the studios to keep talking until an acceptable deal is done.
Finally I appreciate your going after the A list actors who get the good deals but that is what success brings doesn't it. There are many writer-producers who get good deals too based on their success. If you were to write a fantastic screenplay of teleplay that made millions for a studio wouldn't they come back to you with a big offer for your next project that increased both your prestige and power in the industry. Once you got that recognition would you not want to keep going as long as you could. You have said that writer are often out of work so you have to get what you can sooner rather than later. The same for the actors who have only a few years to make the big money before they get too old or the public tires of them and they end up doing cameos in independent films.
|
|
Mar 1, 2008 4:49 PM
|
Brian,
There is no problem with anybody talking early, except that SAG has said that it is in the middle of finding out what the members want. Simple as that. There are something like 120,000 of them so it's a big deal. Anybody, including you, who demands they talk before they know what they are talking about, is trying to force them to take a deal not of their making. And they are involved in informal talks, so that's all they need to do. The reality is that people like you don't listen when someone says hey, it's a bad deal, we don't want it... you bitch and moan, because all you hear is, the studios saying, hey, we offered a deal... and you don't bloody care what kind of deal they make as long as they make them and let you get on with seeing your programs.
I'm not here to comment on deals made... but I see how people like you who have no real understanding of what's involved in this situation but open your mouths anyway, just because you are in some kind of hypothetical business mode, have clamored for the writers to take the DGA deal even though they told you it was a bad deal and yet you still insisted they take it -- putting undue pressure on them. My concern is that you are doing the same thing to the actors -- putting undue pressure on them to act against their interests. Instead of saying, hey, we'll leave you alone so you can figure things out as quickly as possible and get on with your talks, you're trying to pressure them into walking in unprepared so that the 'business' side you are so fond of can run right over them.
SAG hasn't indicated anything at all about delaying anything until June. It's people like you who are trying so hard to give the studios everything they want and the hell with anybody who actually has to work for them, that's putting these words in their mouths. Where do you get these ideas? Do you make them up, or does the AMPTP supply them to you?
Right now, SAG's top priority should be solving their differences with AFTRA so that they can present a united front, just like the studios are doing. Why don't you offer encouragement for that to happen?
By the way, the $27 million I mentioned was salary and bonuses for Bob Iger, not money lying around to be used. Learn to read more carefully.
The rest of your argument is ridiculous. From what I hear about the P&A from real sources who know what they are talking about, they are piggybacking to save the money on the DVD/video release not because they think the theater run is going to do badly, like you offered up.
And I was talking about one price of DVDs, as an example. If the price was $10 or $5 or $50, all that would change is the numbers, not what I was talking about. And if you need to be hand-walked through the obvious like that, it's a waste of my time to continue... you need a math teacher to help you.
|
|
Mar 1, 2008 8:18 PM
|
Look I could care less if they make a deal or not, early or not. For all I care they can go on strike until 2010 if that's want you all want. But the studios don't have to agree to a contract that they believe is bad for them either. The studio heads have to answer to their boards and shareholders as well which you seem to not believe.
Now if you don't like how much Iger or Moonves or any of the other guys get paid then buy stock in the companies and get them fired and take the job yourself.
I assume from your response that you were against both the DGA and WGA deals and wanted the strike to continue. I didn't pressure anyone to take a deal, but I have the right to express my opinion as you do. Since you seem to believe that everything is free and no cost to the studios based on your opinions I choose to take the opposite tact. There is no free lunch. Things cost money to produce including DVD's. You basically say that it only costs $1 for a DVD including the disc, case, artwork, marketing, packaging, manufacturing, and transportation. You say the production costs of the content were already paid for?. In what sense the studio paid say 200 million to make the movie sure that's a negative cost. If the movie makes less than 300 million box office it still looses money until DVD sales make positive money over the initial 300 million layout. Why don't you take and economics class instead of socialist math that says something is all paid for when it isn't. That's like a builder says the house is all paid for before it sells. No it's paid for when someone buys it and the bank says that the builders part is paid.
You were the one complaining that the studios were ceasing production or putting them on hold until the SAG contract was done. If you were them wouldn't you do the same thing. These companies are not able to put out endless sums of money. They do borrow a lot of money for productions and have to pay it back on time. Personally if I were in charge I would sell all the studio property in LA for a huge amount of money and close them all down and move production to Mexico. That is some prime real estate and they could build thousands of homes where the back lots are now and new business could use the soundstage areas after they were flattened. Then you could really be mad at them.
Didn't SAG and AFTRA agree to negotiate together. I read that at Deadline Hollywood so I presume that is true. Anyway I thought that getting the studios talking was the big obstacle and when they were begging to start the SAG talks I thought good its about time. SAG can do more than one thing at a time can't they. They can talk some and still get input from their members too as they maybe get through some of the issues that both sides can agree upon.
|
|
Mar 1, 2008 9:28 PM
|
|
Sorry about the SAG/AFTRA comment. Apparently today they either changed their minds or there was an erroneous posting yesterday about a deal to negotiate together.
|
|
Mar 1, 2008 10:34 PM
|
|
|
