Digital Media Law

SAG President’s Anti-SAG Suit Continues

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 06:35:00 +0000

For those who like keeping up with legal dockets, SAG a few days ago filed its Respondent’s Brief in the appeals court case that stems from the lawsuit filed by SAG president Alan Rosenberg and three other Membership First hardliners (1st VP Anne-Marie Johnson and board members Diane Ladd and Kent McCord) against their own union.

Rosenberg et al will shortly file another brief, then (as I’ve previously outlined) there may be oral argument and then there will ultimately be a decision. But that’s just on the appeal. The case also proceeds in the lower court as well, and will probably continue to do so regardless of the outcome in the appellate court. Not that there’s any good reason for this case to continue in either court . . .

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about entertainment law and digital media law. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

Film on the Downswing

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 02:17:00 +0000

Factoid: Kodak gets 70% of its revenue today from digital products, and an outgoing Kodak exec says that the company plans to stay in the film business “as far into the future as possible,” which isn’t exactly a ringing endorsement of analog formats. This all is courtesy of an AP story in the NY Times on the discontinuation of Kodachrome (yes, the story mentions the Paul Simon song), which also points out that Kodak has introduced new still and motion picture stocks in the last few years.

———————

WGA Candidates for President and Board Announced

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:58:00 +0000

SAG’s upcoming elections have been getting some attention, but the WGA West is having an election this summer as well. The ballots go out sometime in late July or August, and are apparently due back September 17. Current WGA West president Patric Verrone is running for one of the open board seats, but not for president (I believe there are term limits). Instead, the candidates for president are John Wells and Elias Davis. For more details, see the press release below.

———————

WGA press release:

WRITERS GUILD OF AMERICA, WEST ANNOUNCES CANDIDATES FOR 2009 OFFICERS AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS ELECTION

LOS ANGELES – The Writers Guild of America, West’s Nominating Committee has announced its initial list of candidates for the 2009 WGAW Officers and Board of Directors election. The officer candidates are as follows: President – John Wells, Elias Davis; Vice President – Tom Schulman, Howard Michael Gould; Secretary-Treasurer – Christopher Keyser, David N. Weiss.

There are 16 candidates nominated to run for eight open seats on the WGAW’s Board of

Directors, as follows: Luvh Rakhe, Linda Burstyn, Mick Betancourt, Jan Oxenberg, Howard A. Rodman (inc.), Patric M. Verrone, Dan Wilcox (inc.), Eric Wallace, Jed Weintrob, Chip Johannessen, Andrea King, Steven Schwartz, Jeff Lowell, Billy Ray, Carleton Eastlake, David Wyatt. [The list is in random order. “inc.” means incumbent.]

In addition to the candidates selected by the WGAW Nominating Committee, eligible members may also be nominated by petition. Members seeking nomination for the office of President, Vice President, or Secretary-Treasurer must obtain 50 member signatures in support of their petitions. Members seeking nomination for the Board of Directors must obtain 25 member signatures in support of their petitions. The deadline for submitting signed petitions to the WGAW is Thursday, July 23, by 5:30 p.m. Members may submit online nomination petitions by visiting the members-only section of the WGAW’s website at: www.wga.org.

The WGAW will host its annual “Candidates Night” town-hall election forum for Guild members to meet and pose questions to their prospective Officer and BOD candidates on Wednesday, September 2, at WGAW headquarters in Los Angeles.

Guild members will receive candidate and non-candidate statements and rebuttal statements, if any, with their ballots prior to the election. Members may mail additional campaign materials at their own expense. Members may vote by mail or in person at the WGAW’s annual membership meeting on Thursday, September 17. Ballots will be counted on Friday, September 18.

LA Goatherd Wanted

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:55:00 +0000

Sometimes going off-topic can't be resisted. I live in Laurel Canyon, which as LA residents know is in the middle of the city yet is a still-rustic hilly area from the 1920's that even has a few dirt roads remaining. The ethos still has echoes of the 60's and 70's (can an ethos have echoes?).

Usually the echoes are faint, but not always. Here's an email I received today:

We live in laurel canyon and have two mini-mancha dairy goats. Currently I am milking one doe and will start milking the other in a few months when her kids are big enough to wean. We have more milk and cheese than we can consume. I'm hoping that there is someone in the neighborhood who would be interested in some fresh goat milk or cheese in exchange for doing some goat chores. Can you send this request out for me please?

Who'd have thought? And, by the way, if anyone does want to do some goat chores (whatever that may entail) in return for milk or cheese, let me know and I'll pass your info on.

WGA Institutes Qualified Voting

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 06:32:00 +0000

The WGA membership has approved new rules limiting members’ eligibility to vote on strike authorization and ratification of the feature-primetime contract: members now have to have earnings of $30,000 under a WGA agreement during the six years preceding the vote or 15 or more qualified years as a pension plan participant, Variety reports.

The change passed by a margin of 96% to 4%, with turnout a low 15%. This level of support, and lack of angst as signaled by the low turnout, contrast with the reaction within SAG when a “qualified voting” or “affected voting” system having income requirements was proposed in that union. Of course, a higher percentage of SAG actors would have been disqualified since more than 2/3’s of SAG members earn little or money from the TV/theatrical contracts in any given year, even when residuals are included in the calculation.

———————

Independent New Media Productions

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:06:00 +0000

There are casting notices out there for SAG new media productions under the “SAG New Media Contract.” A few notes may help clarify what these are, and help performers enforce a few of their rights.

First, this is not the new media sideletter recently negotiated with the AMPTP (major studios) as part of the theatrical contract. Rather, it’s a new media contract (the SAG New Media Agreement) that’s been available to independent producers for a number of years—that is, producers who are not signatories to the theatrical and/or TV agreements. So, disagreements that a performer may have with this agreement simply don’t relate to the compromises in the new TV/theatrical deal.

Second, under sec. 3 of the SAG New Media Agreement, wages are freely bargained by the employer and the performer.

Third, performers should recognize that independent producers are unlikely to make much, if any, money on these productions. Even the studios are shutting down their new media production entities (Stage 9, 60 Frames). And CPMs (advertising rates) for new media are at about $10 rather than $40-$50 (TV) or more, and with viewership on new media much less as well. These two factors, as well as the difficulty of finding any new media distribution at all, mean that independent producers will generally receive very little income from their new media efforts.

Fourth, it’s reasonable for performers to negotiate for back end (a piece of the producer’s gross or net revenues), so that if the producer does make money, so will the performer.

Fifth, when the producer offers to compensate you only in the form of “credit and meals,” or “credit, meals and tape,” that’s illegal. They have to pay you the greater of California minimum wage (if the production is in California) and federal minimum wage. California’s is higher—$8/hr.

Overtime requirements are more complicated. See complex discussion of exemptions and exceptions (also here) regarding overtime for actors. Also, for workers with less than 160 hours of “employment in occupations in which they have no previous similar or related experience,” the producer can pay 85% of minimum wage. (I don’t know if acting classes count toward the 160 hours, since they’re not employment.)

In any case, if the producer doesn’t pay you the required minimum, you can file a wage claim with the state. You can also call SAG. Although they don’t enforce the minimum wage laws, they may call the producer and suggest that he follow the law.

Sixth, SAG does enforce terms of an agreement between the performer and the producer. So, rather than relying simply on the minimum wage law, it would be a good idea for the performer to include an explicit wage in the SAG new media deal memo with the producer (or a rider), even if the wage is just $8 per hour. SAG would then enforce the agreed wages, meaning that the performer wouldn’t have to rely on the vagaries of the state.

Original made for new media productions are still experimental, and the difficult reality for performers and other talent and workers, above and below the line, as well as their representatives, is that compensation is dramatically lower than in TV and theatrical, just as the revenue for producers is. However, that doesn’t mean that performers shouldn’t insist on some minimums, and hopefully the above suggestions are helpful.

Note: This blog post is intended as general information, not specific legal advice. Check with a lawyer about your particular situation if you want definitive advice.

———————

SAG Lawsuit Still Grinds On; Court Denies SAG’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 23:47:00 +0000

As I previously reported, SAG’s counsel in late May filed a motion to dismiss the appeal by SAG president Alan Rosenberg and three other Membership First hardliners (1st VP Anne-Marie Johnson and board members Diane Ladd and Kent McCord) of a Superior Court order that denied their application for a temporary restraining order. On June 5—just days before the new TV/theatrical contracts were ratified—Rosenberg et al. filed a brief opposing the motion to dismiss.

Unfortunately, the Court of Appeals on June 9 issued a one-sentence order denying the motion to dismiss, presumably meaning that the appeal is too complex to be decided without oral argument (or, at least, full briefing). So, the appeal grinds on. Rosenberg et al. previously filed their brief in the appeal. SAG’s responsive brief is due July 1. Thereafter, Rosenberg et al. get to file a reply brief, and then there will probably be oral argument at some point. Within 90 days after the oral argument, the court will issue its ruling.

In other words, the appeal will probably drag on until sometime in November unless Rosenberg et al. are persuaded to drop it. Meanwhile, the suit itself proceeds in the trial court as well. Confused as to how a case can proceed in two courts at once? Well, it happens, and the legal fees aren’t cheap. All of this sounds like a campaign issue that Unite for Strength will probably raise—why reelect a president who persists in suing his own union? UPDATE: Indeed, as SAGWatch points out, by continuing to pursue their lawsuit, Rosenberg et al. are reneging on a promise Anne-Marie Johnson publicly made to withdraw the suit if the TV/theatrical contracts were approved.

———————

Union-Focused Journalist Departs to Academia

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 23:26:00 +0000

Andrew Salomon, the National News Editor of Back Stage and author of the magazine’s Espresso blog, is leaving his job effective July 31. He’s joining the faculty of SUNY Purchase (Purchase College at the State University of New York) as a tenure-track assistant professor of journalism.

Andrew is one of a small corps of journalists whose beats include entertainment labor. He reports with intelligence and humor, and his coverage and camaraderie will be missed. He's a friend, and I wish him all the best.

———————

SAG Resolution Resolves Little for Film Business

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 01:16:00 +0000

With the SAG contract ratified, will the film business finally get back to normal?

Unfortunately, no. Although we'll see a brief spike in production, the business we once knew may never reappear, for a host of reasons. . . . to read more, see my piece in Variety

———————

Trademark Protection and Facebook User Names

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:17:00 +0000

Trademark protection just got a slightly more complicated, but in a good way. Starting now, there’s a new step that trademark holders or their attorneys should take to protect their trademarks or service marks.

You probably already know that registering domain names corresponding to your marks gives you important practical protection. Now Facebook has entered the equation. Starting this Friday, June 12, users will be able to register a Facebook user name on a first-come, first-served basis at http://www.facebook.com/username/. It’s about time—the old format for accessing someone’s profile included a string of random digits. My old Facebook URL looks like this: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=551052414. My new one will be nicer.

Competing social networking sites, such as LinkedIn and MySpace, have had plain-language user names for a while now. But the new Facebook scheme has something built in that the other sites apparently don’t: a mechanism for trademark protection. That’s welcome news for rights-holders. Here’s how it works.

At http://www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=username_rights, there’s a “Preventing the Registration of a Username” form for entering your company name, title, email, trademark, and registration number. (Oddly, there’s no place to enter your own name.) As that last data item suggests, only registered marks are eligible, although I’d recommend that holders of trademark applications in process simply enter the application number instead. Filling in the form will prevent someone else from using your trademark as a user name.

What happens if an infringer registers your trademark before you fill out the form? In that case, fill out Facebook’s “Notice of Intellectual Property Infringement (Non-Copyright Claim)” at http://www.facebook.com/copyright.php?noncopyright_notice=1 and hopefully the matter will be taken care of. Facebook doesn’t describe the procedure it follows for these forms.

Finally, what if someone maliciously fills out the “Preventing the Registration of a Username” form and blocks you from using your own mark as a user name? Facebook’s FAQ (at http://www.facebook.com/help.php?page=899) doesn’t address that, but I’d suggest filling out the Notice of Intellectual Property Infringement (Non-Copyright Claim) form and providing as many details as known.

———————

SAG TV/Theatrical Contract Ratified Overwhelmingly, 78%-22%

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 01:01:00 +0000

In a stunning defeat for the hardline Membership First faction, SAG's TV/theatrical contract passed overwhelmingly, by a 78%-22% margin (almost 4 to 1), those numbers according to the guild. Variety first reported the story, prior to the guild's announcement, with a 1% difference in the numbers.

Significantly, even in the faction's stronghold, the Hollywood division, the vote was an enormous 71% to 29% in favor, or almost 3 to 1. In NY, it was 86% to 14%, and in the regions it was 89% to 11%. There was a large turnout—35% of eligible members voted, far above the typical 20%-25%. The ballots went out to 110,000 paid-up members.

It's an amazing end to an almost 12 month stalemate, and calls into question the faction's ability to make any headway in the upcoming SAG board elections. On the contrary, the results suggest that the moderate Unite for Strength faction should make significant gains. That's because only Membership First will be defending seats in Hollywood, whereas no moderates or independents are up for reelection. Thus, the moderates can only gain, at least in Hollywood. In NY and the regions, Membership First has little support, so, there again, the moderates should prevail.

Another question is the SAG presidency, which is up this year as well. According to Variety, incumbent president Alan Rosenberg announced today that he'll seek a third term. Given the membership's overwhelming rejection of his vote No position, that may be an uphill climb, especially if the moderates/independents put forward a high-profile candidate, such as James Cromwell, who has been rumored to be considering a run.

Below are press releases from SAG, AFTRA and the AMPTP.

———————

Subscribe to my blog (jhandel.com) for more about SAG, or digital media law generally. Go to the blog itself to subscribe via RSS or email. Or, follow me on Twitter, friend me on Facebook, or subscribe to my Huffington Post articles. If you work in tech, check out my new book How to Write LOIs and Term Sheets.

———————

SAG Press Release

Screen Actors Guild Members Overwhelmingly Ratify TV/Theatrical Agreements

Los Angeles, (June 9, 2009) – Screen Actors Guild announced today that members have voted overwhelmingly to approve its TV/Theatrical contracts by a vote of 78 percent to 22 percent.

The two-year successor agreement covers film and digital television programs, motion pictures and new media productions. The pact becomes effective at 12:01 a.m. June 10, 2009 and expires June 30, 2011.

The contracts provide more than $105 million in wages, increased pension contributions, and other gains and establishes a template for SAG coverage of new media formats.

Approximately 110,000 SAG members received ballots of which 35.26 percent returned them – a return that is above average compared with typical referenda on Screen Actors Guild contracts. Integrity Voting Systems of Everett, WA, provided election services and tonight certified the final vote tally upon completion of the tabulation.

The vote count in the Hollywood Division was 70.70 percent to 29.30 percent in favor. In the New York Division, the vote count was 85.74 percent to 14.26 percent in favor. And in the Regional Branch Division, the vote count was 89.06 percent to 10.94 percent in favor.

Screen Actors Guild President Alan Rosenberg said, "The membership has spoken and has decided to work under the terms of this contract that many of us, who have been involved in these negotiations from the beginning, believe to be devastatingly unsatisfactory. Tomorrow morning I will be contacting the elected leadership of the other talent unions with the hope of beginning a series of pre-negotiation summit meetings in preparation for 2011. I call upon all SAG members to begin to ready themselves for the battle ahead,” Rosenberg added.

Screen Actors Guild Interim National Executive Director David White said, “This decisive vote gets our members back to work with immediate pay raises and puts SAG in a strong position for the future. Preparation for the next round of negotiations begins now. Our members can expect more positive changes in the coming months as we organize new work opportunities, repair and reinvigorate our relationships with our sister unions and industry partners, and continue to improve the Guild’s operations.”

Screen Actors Guild Chief Negotiator John McGuire said, "I want to thank the SAG members and staff who dedicated their time to the negotiations process. We emerged with a solid deal that the members have now voted up. The negotiating team worked tirelessly, building on the work of the first negotiating committee, to deliver these improvements to members.”

Screen Actors Guild began talks with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers on April 15, 2008. Guild Chief Negotiator John McGuire, Interim National Executive Director David White, and Deputy National Executive Director for Contracts Ray Rodriguez, working with a 10-person negotiating task force comprised of Screen Actors Guild board members and officers representing the three divisions, reached the tentative agreement on April 16, 2009 after 12 months of periodic negotiations with the motion picture studios and television networks.

For further information on the new contract, including the full text and a summary of the agreement, click here.

ACTORS RESPOND TO CONTRACT RATIFICATION

Tony Shalhoub, actor

“This is a great decision for SAG and I’m so appreciative of everything the new leadership is doing to put the Guild back on track. They’ve obviously got the right ideas for making SAG stronger.”

Stephen Collins, actor

"This contract passed because members knew it was time to take advantage of the gains our negotiators won and get back to work. On top of that, they understood that risking our ability to negotiate alongside AFTRA and the other unions in the 2011 negotiations would have been a huge mistake. It's a great day for SAG."

Sam Freed, actor, 2nd National Vice President

“This decision by the membership marks the end of a very long process. We can now move forward with a new sense of certainty.”

Sue-Anne Morrow, actor, National Board Member representing New York

"This is a good deal with good gains. SAG's members clearly agree. It's about time we got a raise. I'm so pleased that SAG's members exercised their right to be heard and said 'Yes!'."

Mike Hodge, actor, National Board Member representing New York

“I am extremely pleased that we have finally come to the close of a long, unproductive period. I am hopeful that we can heal our wounds and really start the work to become a unified, national union.”

Nancy Duerr, actor, National Board Member representing SAG Florida Branch

"This is a victory for SAG performers across our region. Stalled and delayed productions can now get underway, boosting our local economies. This contract not only puts more money in members' pockets, it preserves the high standards of working conditions our members have come to expect."

Todd Hissong, actor, Chicago Branch President, National Board Member

"By passing this referendum, Chicago members have sent a clear message that we want to get back to work. Screen Actors Guild members across the country have yet again demonstrated our grasp of the issues, the importance of unionism, and our need to stand together with our sister unions to make deals that benefit us all.”

David Hartley-Margolin, Colorado actor, SAG 3rd Vice President

“The membership always has the last word when it comes to contract matters. They have spoken. Their endorsement of the deal with the AMPTP ends the uncertainty that has been hovering over us and allows Screen Actors Guild and the industry to move forward together.”

———————

AFTRA Press Release

AFTRA President Roberta Reardon Applauds SAG Contract Ratification

Los Angeles, CA (June 9, 2009)--In a statement released today, Roberta Reardon, National President of the American Federation of television and Radio Artists (AFTRA), praised the announcement by Screen Actors Guild regarding ratification by SAG members of a new two-year successor agreement to the SAG Basic Agreement and SAG Television Agreement saying:

"On behalf of the more than 70,000 members of AFTRA, I congratulate the members of Screen Actors Guild on their successful ratification of a new television and theatrical agreement. We're pleased that SAG members will now enjoy improved wages and working conditions, and we applaud their efforts to negotiate a solid new agreement."

———————

AMPTP Press Release

Statement by the AMPTP

The ratification vote by SAG members is good news for the entertainment industry. This concludes a two-year negotiating process that has resulted in agreements with all major Hollywood Guilds and Unions. We look forward to working with SAG members - and with everyone else in our industry - to emerge from today's significant economic challenges with a strong and growing business.

TV Series Pickups Favor AFTRA 5 to 1

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 10:37:00 +0000

Several months ago, we learned that pilot season this year was 94% AFTRA (or 87% by some calculations), a complete 180 from its usual 90% SAG. That didn’t look good for SAG, but a few Membership First hardliners urged us to wait and see how the all-important series pickups turned out.

Not so well, we now know—at least, not so well from a SAG perspective. The AP is reporting that 25 out of 30 shows picked up by broadcast networks this spring were AFTRA and just five were SAG. That’s about 83% AFTRA to 17% SAG—not much better for SAG than the pilot numbers. In contrast, last year’s figures, according to the AP, were 3 AFTRA and 19 SAG, i.e., 14% AFTRA and 86% SAG. In other words, a complete 180.

———————

More Bull in China’s Shop

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 09:25:00 +0000

There’s more from the country that’s bent Google and Microsoft to its will, forcing them to help censor the Internet, and that even apparently got Yahoo to provide information that led to the torture and imprisonment of dissidents. This time, not satisfied with censoring those services (and YouTube, Twitter and Flickr as well), and perhaps frustrated at the imperfect filtering provided by the nationwide system referred to as “the Great Firewall of China,” the Chinese government is requiring all PC’s sold in that country to come with filtering software, called “Green Dam Youth Escort.” The rule takes effect in three weeks, though how it could possibly be implemented so soon is unclear.

The Chinese claim the software is just intended to block pornography, notwithstanding that the name itself sounds like a child prostitution service. “Green Dam” is apparently is the Chinese term for porn-free web surfing, but “Youth Escort” has a dubious ring. In any case, the claimed limited scope seems unlikely, given China’s approach to information freedom, which is generally to eliminate it everywhere except in the Special Administrative Regions, i.e., Hong Kong and Macau.

The story was first reported by the Wall Street Journal (and a follow up) and appears in the New York Times as well.

———————

Uneasy Lies the Head that Wears the Crown: Why Content’s Kingdom is Slipping Away

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 07:37:00 +0000

Content and technology are locked in a struggle whose outcome may determine the future of the entertainment industry. The problem is this: Content is becoming a commodity. In contrast, although distribution used to be the exclusive province of Hollywood—movie theaters, television networks, home video, among others—this is no longer true. Instead, new distribution technologies have arisen, and the ascendancy of those technologies has come at the expense of content.

To learn more, check out my law review article on this subject, called Uneasy Lies the Head that Wears the Crown: Why Content’s Kingdom is Slipping Away.

———————

JLH on UCLA Panel re Labor

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 21:26:00 +0000

Next Sat., June 13, I'll be on a labor panel at the UCLA Altered States Media Conference, sponsored by the UCLA Producers Program and the UCLA Festival for New Creative Works.

Here's the panel:

10:15 AM - 11:30: Studio and Labor Relations in 2015
Moderator: Arnold Peter (Partner, Raskin Peter LLP)

* Mike Farrell (Actor, M*A*S*H, Providence)
* Jonathan Handel (Attorney, TroyGould Attorneys)
* Patric Verrone (President, Writers Guild of America, West)
* Sallie Weaver (Founder, Entertainment Labor Consulting, Inc.)

Conference price ranges from $80 (guild members or out of school 5 years or less), $125 (general admissions), $175 (MCLE legal education credit), and $25 (student).

The conference description is below. For more info, click here.

The UCLA School of Theater, Film and Television, one of the premier film schools and research universities in the nation, will host the first-ever Altered States Media Conference. This one-day conference will bring together leading media creators, scholars, and industry practitioners to discuss the future and evolution of media arts, technology, scholarship, and commerce.

As digital technology becomes more pervasive, companies from all arenas of the entertainment industry are embracing a culture of convergence. Technology is connecting the disparate aspects of our lives and altering the way we communicate with each other. But are we laying a sufficient foundation for a sound, economically and artistically sustainable future? Or are we simply providing stop-gap solutions with a bigger battle looming on the horizon? Are we moving in the right direction?

———————

SAGWatch: SAG at a Crossroads

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 18:48:00 +0000

Worth a read over at SAGWatch.

Three Membership First Candidates Elected to AFTRA Boards

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 06:37:00 +0000

The AFTRA Los Angeles results are in. Many candidates were reelected, but new winners include two Membership First leaders—SAG 1^st VP Anne-Marie Johnson (AFTRA national board) and former SAG Hollywood Board member David Jolliffe (AFTRA Los Angeles local board)—as well as Membership First member Alan Ruck (AFTRA national board). They join several MF stalwarts already on the national board (not sure about the LA local board).

Johnson and Jolliffe bring a particularly interesting dynamic to the AFTRA boards. Johnson, for instance, in a recent video described running for the AFTRA board as “really distasteful for me” and accused AFTRA of leech[ing] off of [SAG].” Jolliffe, for his part, told me in an interview last summer that SAG was the “one union for actors.” These remarks certainly make one skeptical of their intentions as they join the AFTRA boards.

I'm told by a source that even with these new board members, Membership First still controls less than 10% of the votes on AFTRA’s national board. They now have 7 seats (out of 73 total on the board) – Frances Fischer, Sumi Haru, Jane Austin, Jeff Austin, Anne-Marie Johnson, Alan Ruck, and Bonnie Bartlett.

3,262 valid ballots were received in the election, which was for LA only. I’m not sure what percentage turnout that represents, but I’m asking AFTRA. However, given that the union has 70,000 members nationwide, I’m guessing that this turnout is probably on the order of 10%.

In any case, the small number of ballots makes it impossible, in my view, to extrapolate from these results and make predictions about the upcoming SAG elections (July through September), let alone the contract ratification vote (ballots due in by mail next Tuesday, so there’s only a day or so left to send in ballots).

Below is the AFTRA press release with complete information on the election.

———————

Election Results for Los Angeles Officers, Los Angeles and National Board

Members, and Convention Delegates

AFTRA LA President Ron Morgan Reelected

LOS ANGELES, CA (June 3, 2009)---The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists announced today election results for the AFTRA Los Angeles Local.

Actor Ron Morgan was re-elected President of AFTRA Los Angeles and will begin his new two-year term as Local President on July 1; he ran unopposed in his bid for reelection. Mr. Morgan was also elected to the AFTRA National Board of Directors for a four-year term; he also serves as a National Vice President of the union.

Also uncontested in their reelection for two-year terms as officers for AFTRA Los Angeles were First Vice President Susan Boyd Joyce, a singer; actor Gabrielle Carteris, Second Vice President; Third Vice President Bobbie Bates, a dancer; Fourth VP Jason George, an actor; Recording Secretary Patrika Darbo, an actor; and actor Jay Gerber continues as Treasurer.

Reelected to three-year terms on the Los Angeles Local Board of Directors were actors David Bowe, Raza Burgee, Andrew Caple-Shaw, Gabrielle Carteris, Bob Joles, Kate Linder, and Paul Napier; announcer Mike Sakellarides; dancer Galen Hooks; broadcaster Pepe Barreto; and singers Susan Boyd Joyce and Dick Wells. Incoming Los Angeles Local Board members include actors David Andriole, Mimi Cozzens, David Jolliffe, Marcia Strassman; and announcer Chuck Southcott.

AFTRA National Board members from the Los Angeles Local reelected to four-year terms include actors Gabrielle Carteris, Jay Gerber, Ron Morgan, and Paul Petersen; dancer Bobbie Bates; and singers Susan Boyd Joyce and Sally Stevens. Newly-elected to the AFTRA National Board are actors Anne-Marie Johnson, D. W. Moffett, Jason Priestley, and Alan Ruck.

One-hundred-and-ninety-eight (198) Los Angeles Delegates to AFTRA's 62nd National Convention were also elected. The National Convention will be held August 6 - 8 in Chicago, Illinois.

There are 73 seats total on the new AFTRA National Board, which will be officially seated following AFTRA's National Convention on August 9 in Chicago, Illinois. The AFTRA Los Angeles Local will be assigned 26 seats on the new National Board; 13 were up for election, 11 were open seats and two seats were assigned to the Announcer category and the Newsperson category, respectively.

All AFTRA Los Angeles Local officer and board terms begin July 1. The AFTRA National Board terms begin at the conclusion of this summer's National Convention.

A total of 3,262 valid ballots were received in the AFTRA Los Angeles election.

Interview with Anne-Marie Johnson

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 01:33:00 +0000

Andrew Salomon over at Back Stage magazine's Blog Stage has an excellent and revealing interview with SAG 1st VP Anne-Marie Johnson.

Report on SAG NY Town Hall Meeting

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:22:00 +0000

SAG held a town hall meeting in NY last night to provide information re the TV/theatrical contract. It comes a bit late in the process, since the ballots are due back in the mail by next Tuesday, June 9. That means that the last day to reliably mail the ballots is probably Friday, or even Thursday, depending on your faith in the USPS and its vagaries. It also means that we have probably seen the end of the multitude of pro and con videos deployed on the SAG website, Membership First website, and YouTube.

Variety reports the turnout was slim—about 100 actors. SAGWatch infers, accurately I think, that most people have already voted and would have little reason to attend an informational meeting at this point.

The Variety report notes that attendees included SAG interim NED David White, President Alan Rosenberg, MF-ers 1^st VP Anne-Marie Johnson and Scott Wilson, while supporters of the deal included Dan Lauria, Dylan Baker, SAG 2nd VP Sam Freed and board members Ralph Byers, Paul Christie, Rebecca Damon, Mike Hodge and Kevin Scullin.

A source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, tells me that the MF folks (perhaps 15-20 people) were rowdy, booing people and apparently having their cell phones call en masse to disrupt the meeting.

However, the most interesting thing the source told me is that after the meeting the source spoke individually with Alan Rosenberg and asked whether he would attempt to have SAG reimburse him for his legal fees incurred in the lawsuit he, Johnson, Diane Ladd and Kent McCord files against SAG itself, a suit that has received denials in both the trial and appellate courts but nonetheless continues at both levels.

What’s interesting Rosenberg’s response, as reported by the source: “I don’t have any legal fees. It’s pro bono.” This is a problem—if true, it would explain in part why Rosenberg and his co-plaintiffs continue the futile and disruptive suit against SAG, which is burning up the union’s money at a that the guild has ben left with a $6 million deficit by MF. It’s also a small benefit, in that the plaintiffs will have no legal fees to extract from SAG if they were to recover control of the national board.

I emailed Rosenberg requesting comment on the source’s report and his assistant replied that his response was as follows: “This is a private matter and I don’t want to speak about it publicly”. “I have no further comment”.

———————

Kathy Joosten Responds to Martin Sheen

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 01:23:00 +0000

An excellent video by Kathy Joosten (vote Yes on the SAG contract) responding to the recent video by Martin Sheen and friends (vote No).

SAG Files Motion to Dismiss Rosenberg Appeal

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Sun, 24 May 2009 07:06:00 +0000

As you'll recall, several months ago, SAG president Alan Rosenberg and three other hardliners (1st VP Anne-Marie Johnson and board members Diane Ladd and Kent McCord) sued their own union, seeking to enjoin negotiations and reverse personnel and procedural changes that they correctly anticipated would pave the way for a deal on terms the hardliners are pledged to oppose. Although their requests were denied by both the trial and appeals courts, the lawsuit nonetheless continues in both of those forums (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC406900 and Second Appellate District 2d Civil No. B214056).

Several days ago, SAG filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, on the grounds that the appeal is moot. You can read the motion here. Even if the court grants the motion, which it ought to, and may well, Rosenberg et al might choose to appeal to the State Supreme Court. They won't get any traction if they do, but regardless of whether or not they do, the lower court case will continue for at least the next few months, and there will be further opportunities to appeal.

So, SAG's legal fees will continue to mount, courtesy of the union's own president and 1st VP. Summer is fire season in Southern California, but it's usually the hillsides that are at risk. This time, though, a bit of SAG's treasury is burning as well.

———————

SAG-AFTRA Ratify Advertising Agreement; SAG Townhall Features Fireworks

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Fri, 22 May 2009 17:36:00 +0000

SAG and AFTRA announced yesterday that their combined paid-up membership, about 132,000 members, overwhelmingly ratified the contracts between the unions and the advertising industry. The result was expected, as there was no organized opposition. About 28% returned their ballots, about typical. Of those voting, about 94% voted yes. The deals expire March 31, 2012.

The news from the TV/theatrical side is nowhere near as placid. The ballots went out a few days ago—they’re due back June 9—and SAG’s conducting a series of town hall meetings across the country. The first was last night in Hollywood, and the fur flew. About 600 people attended according to a staff count; although the crowd was reportedly 70% composed of hardline Membership First partisans, they didn’t manage to fill the room. That’s a bit surprising. I’d expected an overflow crowd, given their (apparent?) strength in Hollywood.

What they slightly lacked in numbers, they made up in volume and conviction, according to sources inside the room. Fellow MF-ers like SAG President Alan Rosenberg were applauded for their statements against ratification, while pro-contract voices such as SAG interim National Executive Director David White were booed. The approximately three-hour confab kicked off with statements from the dais, and was mostly taken up by member questions and comments, which were described as overwhelmingly anti-ratification.

That dais, by the way, included SAG Secretary/Treasurer Connie Stevens, chief negotiator John McGuire, White, SAG 1^st VP Anne-Marie Johnson (who chaired the meeting), Unite for Strength leader Ned Vaughn, UFS-er Stacey Travis, Deputy NED Ray Rodriguez, and Rosenberg. General Counsel Duncan Crabtree-Ireland responded to questions from time to time.

According to Vaughn, Rosenberg was asked at the meeting what he proposed the union do if it voted down the deal. Rosenberg apparently replied that the union should get a strike authorization and then, if necessary, strike. How he expects to conjure up the necessary 75% vote for a strike authorization is unclear. In contrast to that high hurdle, it only takes 50% + 1 (a simple majority) to ratify the deal.

More colorful speakers at the meeting were Ed Asner and Seymour Cassel. Asner compared the contract’s effect on actors to “taking the Jews out and shooting them,” leading one audience member to comment that he hadn’t expected Holocaust metaphors at a SAG meeting. Well, why not? SAG politics seem to know no bounds.

Cassel, for his part, spotted former SAG president Melissa Gilbert, a moderate, and, standing at the mic, referred to her dismissively. Cassel later responded to one of David White's comments by saying “bullshit.” This was understandably too much for Johnson, as chair of the meeting, and she ordered Cassel to leave. Out in the hallway, Cassel told me that “I tend to speak my mind, perhaps too candidly.” That certainly seems true.

Another notable out in the hall was Nichelle Nichols, who played Uhura on the original Star Trek. We chatted briefly about the Star Trek movie, not SAG politics, let alone Trekian essays about SAG politics. There was also a Jack Nicholson lookalike, wearing a snappy suit, white shoes, and tinted eyeglasses. Maybe it was Jack Nicholson, but somehow I wouldn’t expect to see him aimlessly wandering the halls at a SAG meeting and using the hotel ATM.

David White chatted for a bit after the meeting, and explained the contrast between his reaction to the studios’ February offer (it “sucks,” he said at the time) and the current one (“a good deal with solid gains,” he told me yesterday, and, in the context of the economy and the dragged out negotiating process, even a “fantastic” one). The key difference is the contract expiration date, which in the current deal is synchronized with the WGA, AFTRA and DGA (mid-2011). In the February deal, it wasn’t, and the significance is that synchronicity allows at least some of the unions to make common cause and present a united front when the contract is up.

White previously predicted the deal would pass, so this time I asked whether he thought it would pass in Hollywood. (That’s not necessary for passage, but it would give some signal of a reduction in divisiveness within the union.) He predicted it would, citing the strong messages of support he was receiving from Hollywood members (though not at the meeting), but noting judiciously that “members will vote their conscience.”

Ned Vaughn also told me the deal would pass, both in Hollywood and nationally. He pointed to the importance of consolidating gains and negotiating in solidarity with other unions, especially AFTRA, in 2011. I asked if he thought SAG and AFTRA would be merged by 2011, and he replied that he “would love it if they were.”

A contrasting post-meeting voice was MF stalwart and SAG board member Clancy Brown, who explained his opposition to the deal in more measured terms than Asner and Cassel had used. He argued that “there’s a better deal out there to be had,” and cited “the paltry Internet move over residual” and the “larcenous” force majeure settlement as reasons.

The day before, I spoke with 2^nd VP Sam Freed, who is president of the New York board, and separately with board member Mike Pniewski of Atlanta, both supporters of ratification. The latter predicted the deal will pass, and commented that the guild “got the best deal we can.” He cited a variety of positive aspects of the deal, and underlined the need for “stability in the marketplace” for labor.

Freed pointed to the estimated $105 million value of the deal, and said it addresses “the plight of the middle class actor.” He emphasized that the level of concern MF expresses over new media was not supported by current figures: of $1.3 billion in SAG earnings in 2008, Freed told me only 0.05% came from new media. (That’s one-twentieth of one percent, not 5%.) Alluding to the opposition, he quipped “There’s a guy who would be complaining if it was raining vegetable soup and he only had a fork in his hand.”

In other union news, Variety reports that 85 year-old actor Theodore Bikel “has been re-elected to an 11th two-year term as president of the Associated Actors and Artistes of America.” The 4-A’s, as it’s known, is in turn a unit of the AFL-CIO. Its affiliates are AFTRA, SAG, Actors’ Equity and several smaller performers unions: American Guild of Musical Artists (AGMA), American Guild of Variety Artists (AGVA), and the Guild of Italian American Actors. AFTRA has a direct charter with the AFL-CIO, awarded last year. The other unions are chartered with the 4-A’s, as far as I know, and derive their AFL-CIO affiliation that way (as did AFTRA prior to 2008).

SAG Executive Director: TV/Theatrical Deal Will Pass

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Wed, 20 May 2009 12:59:00 +0000

The referendum on the proposed contract between SAG and the studios began yesterday, as ballot packets were mailed to about 110,000 paid up members of the Screen Actors Guild. The votes are due back June 9. Will the agreement be ratified? SAG President Alan Rosenberg claims there’s “a good chance” it won’t, but the guild’s interim National Executive Director David White says otherwise, predicting confidently that the deal will pass.

White’s comment came in a wide-ranging, one-on-one interview yesterday afternoon and into the evening. The conversation, which lasted about two hours, touched on topics ranging from the proposed deal, to SAG’s relationships with AFTRA, talent agents and the industry at large, to the question of expired contracts.

The pending deal was, of course, the most pressing issue. White heralded the proposed agreement as “a good deal with solid gains,” and added that “Within the context of negotiations [lasting] over a year and an economy changed radically since 2008, it’s a fantastic deal.”

Asked whether the new media provisions in the deal were everything he wanted, White said no, but expressed confidence that improvements could be achieved in the next round of negotiations, when new media business models will be better understood. (The proposed deal expires in mid-2011, as do the Directors Guild, Writers Guild and AFTRA deals.) He added, “Notwithstanding the rhetoric, there have been upgrades in some formulas in the past and we’ll see some in the future in new media.” Although White judiciously refrained from singling out any particular members or factions, the comment seemed clearly a response to Membership First hardliners, who have frequently pointed to the studios’ 25-year refusal to improve home video residuals as evidence that the new media deal will never improve.

White’s confidence in the possibility of future upgrades led me to pose a question actors ask from time to time: do the studios want to break the union? His answer turned on the intermittent nature of entertainment employment: “Employers have a natural incentive to want weaker bargaining partners, but employers also understand that if unions didn’t exist they’d have to invent them. Unions are the glue,” White added, that allows actors to receive compensation between gigs (i.e., in the form of residuals), that deal with healthcare costs, and with pursuing claims when workers are wronged. He added that having union contracts in place lowers transaction costs—that is, the existence of the union agreement makes it unnecessary for producers to repeatedly negotiate minimum terms with each individual actor.

In other words, as White said, “Employers need unions to serve as an intermediary to ensure a professional talent pool.” And what about those “weaker bargaining partners”? White, the guild’s former general counsel, put it this way: “Our job is to put ourselves in the strongest position with the most leverage possible for the next round [of negotiations]. This contract lays a good foundation.”

Will White be running SAG when that next round comes around? That’s the Board’s decision, of course, but I asked White if he intended to be a candidate for the permanent (i.e., non-interim) NED job. He diplomatically claimed not to have given much thought to the matter, but added that he considered the position a “great job,” albeit a hard one. He also said he was enjoying it, which might suggest a touch of insanity, were it not for the fact that White is not only smart—he’s a Stanford Law grad and a Rhodes Scholar—but is a well-centered and calming influence as well.

Probably key to that sense of calm is an inner optimism. When I asked whether fixing SAG was hopeless, White replied that it was anything but. Instead, he said, board members from various factions have “an appetite to find a way to work together.” In White’s view, the industry and general public see SAG through a prism of political divisiveness, and that prism is not reality.

At that, I demurred, and White did acknowledge that members of the board hadn’t yet found as much common ground as they need to. Helping make that happen is one of White’s roles: “My job is to be the keeper of the focus—remind folks about the need to interact with each other as part of the same team [and] help members rally together.”

It might help if SAG’s board were smaller. In my view, its unwieldy size—71 members—contributes to the guild’s difficulties, since trust and consensus are difficult to achieve in such a setting. White was diplomatic on this score, acknowledging that the board, which was once even larger, might want to revisit the question of size.

If SAG’s internal politics are contentious, so too is the guild’s relationship with AFTRA. White sees that changing: “We are now building on the positive aspects of our relationship with AFTRA, notwithstanding the actions of some individual members.” Whether those members might include those who passed a Hollywood board motion last week to raid AFTRA is a question I didn’t ask White to address.

Should the two unions merge? White replied that that was up to the national board and to the members at large of both unions. In any case, White emphasized the need to reduce competition between the unions in areas of overlapping jurisdiction: “We must not have a race to the bottom on rates and provisions that protect the members.” White indicated he was looking at the idea of a joint SAG-AFTRA committee to discuss jurisdictional issues.

Another tough area for SAG is its relationship with talent agents: SAG’s been without a “franchise agreement” with the agents association since 2002, while AFTRA, DGA and WGA all have such agreements in place. White indicated that at some point, the guild will revisit the issue of the franchise agreement, but that in the meantime “there’s a lot that can be done beyond the formal negotiations of the franchise agreement.”

Speaking of the industry in general, White identified one of his priorities as “reinvigorat[ing] relationships with industry partners.” He stressed that the guild “wants to be viewed as a partner with industry,” and acknowledged that it is “challenging to cultivate relationships,” which is putting it mildly, given the work of his predecessor.

So what next? SAG has a number of other expired agreements—smaller fry than the SAG-AFTRA commercials agreement (expected to be ratified when votes are tallied tomorrow night) and the pending TV/theatrical agreement, but nonetheless important to those who make their living from them. White expressed confidence that the guild will be able to close some of those deals this year.

Circling back, I saved the toughest question for last: what if the TV/theatrical agreement fails to pass? White paused, then gave an answer that once again reflected an underlying optimism: “We’re being bombarded with messages of thanks from members around the country, so I’m hopeful that we won’t have to address that situation.” He’s not the only one who's hopeful. We’ll know in a few weeks.

———————

SAG’s Strange Voyage

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Tue, 19 May 2009 19:32:00 +0000

Where did the Screen Actors Guild go? After months of news—a near daily barrage covered diligently by various journalists and citizen-journalists, including this author—the guild fell off the radar screen. It was as though 5757 Wilshire, SAG’s national headquarters, somehow disappeared into the black hole that features so prominently in (spoiler alert) the latest “Star Trek” movie.

The quiet was deceptive however. Last week, SAG’s Hollywood board, controlled by the hardline Membership First faction, passed a resolution establishing a task force “to explore the acquisition of actors of AFTRA.” That appears to violate an agreement between the two unions that prohibits disparagement and raiding. The AFL-CIO is currently investigating, and monetary fines are a possibility. The irony is that the guild, controlled (albeit narrowly) by a moderate majority (composed of the Hollywood-based Unite for Strength faction coupled with Hollywood independents and New York and regional members), could find itself punished because of the actions of the autonomous Hollywood Board, controlled by the hardliners. Unfortunately, SAG’s governance structure ensures that there will always be too many starship captains on the bridge at once.

Meanwhile, within SAG itself another battle is looming, and here again the phasers will not be set on stun. Tensions between the hardliners and the moderates rival those between the Federation and the Romulans, and are about to break out again into open war—this time, as the guild membership prepares to vote on the TV/theatrical contract, which was recently approved by the SAG negotiating task force and the guild’s national board. Ballots are being sent to the membership at large today, May 19.

The stakes are high. Ratification will end an almost eleven month stalemate and restart studio theatrical production, which has been at a virtual standstill since the previous contract expired on June 30 last year. Rejection will plunge the union and the AMPTP—the alliance that represents studios and producers—back into stalemate, once again adrift in uncharted nebulas. Nonetheless, the hardliners have pledged to defeat the deal. Although they seem unlikely to succeed—a recent picnic/rally drew at most 70 attendees—they will drive the percentage of ratification down.

For almost two years, the hardliners have acted as though they come from another galaxy, or at least from Planet Claire, where (as the B-52’s explained) “no one has a head.” They started by trying to unilaterally reduce AFTRA’s power on the committee that for decades has jointly bargained the TV/theatrical contract. AFTRA ultimately responded by abandoning the joint arrangement, called Phase 1, and negotiating its own deal with the studios. The hardliners, who at the time controlled the guild, should have foreseen this result, and its effect, which was to reduce not AFTRA’s power but SAG’s.

Compounding this misstep, SAG delayed negotiating with the AMPTP until the contract was almost at the point of expiration. The studios’ response was unsurprising: they accelerated production, stockpiled films, then presented SAG with a take it or leave it offer whose terms mirrored that of the AFTRA deal and, in a key area, mirrored the terms of the Directors Guild and Writers Guild deals as well.

That key area, as even those on the dark side of the moon probably know, is new media. The deal terms in this area, from a union perspective, have gaps in jurisdiction and residuals structure. In this, the SAG hardliners make a significant point. But those gaps flow largely from the revenue-draining effect that new media is having on Hollywood. Technology is driving the perceived value of content towards zero, a matter I discuss in a just-published article in the Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law. That’s a pressure that both management and labor struggle to deal with.

Several additional factors helped make the search for better terms than three other unions a doomed mission to a dead planet. These were (1) the general uncertainty surrounding new media business models, (2) the economic fatigue suffered by actors and the rest of the industry in the wake of the 100 day writers strike, and (3) SAG’s lack of bargaining leverage, the latter a circumstance largely engineered by the hardliners themselves. (The recession, whose severity was at first unclear, only made things worse.) It’s as though the hardliners thought they could run at warp speed on cubic zirconia rather than dilithium crystals. Failure was not only an option, it was the predictable outcome.

What’s more, the stalemate itself led to further injury, of four varieties. First, it meant that SAG actors working in TV (a field in which production had continued) did so under the terms of the expired contract, meaning that they missed out on the 3.5% raise that AFTRA received on June 30 of last year by dint of its new deal. That’s amounted in aggregate to tens of millions of dollars foregone.

Second, it means that SAG will be behind AFTRA by 3.5% for at least the remainder of the new contract, because each union will continue to receive annual increases but SAG won’t get an extra bump to bring it to parity. Third, if SAG wants to catch up in the next round of negotiations, in 2011, it will need to trade off some other deal point that it might otherwise have gotten.

Fourth, the stalemate put into play the date that the new contract would expire, which is significant because it determines whether SAG’s deal will expire concurrently with those of the other guilds, allowing it to make common cause with them and increase the leverage of all four above-the-line unions (SAG, AFTRA, DGA and WGA) in the 2011 negotiations. SAG won that point, but at a cost of another two months of delay, from February (when the studios made an offer that would not expire concurrently) until April (when they made the offer that is now on the table). SAG was also forced to compromise pending claims for over $60 million dollars in force majeure payments—claims for actors’ wages lost due to the writers strike—but this may be less of a hit to the guild than it appears, since the contract language on the subject is at best ambiguous.

So where are we now? The ratification ballots are due back June 9, so we’ll know in less than a month whether the long stalemate is finally over. I anticipate ratification will be achieved, but with a percentage in the 60%-75% range, well below the over-90% that’s usually achieved when Hollywood union leadership recommends a contract. Meanwhile, the ballots for the SAG-AFTRA commercials contract with the advertising industry are out to the members, and are due back in two days, on May 21. That one will pass easily, as there’s no organized opposition.

Also of note: several months ago, SAG president Alan Rosenberg and three other hardliners (1st VP Anne-Marie Johnson and board members Diane Ladd and Kent McCord) sued their own union, seeking to enjoin negotiations and reverse personnel and procedural changes that they correctly anticipated would pave the way for a deal on terms the hardliners are pledged to oppose. Although their requests were denied by both the trial and appeals courts, the lawsuit nonetheless continues in both of those forums (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC406900 and Second Appellate District 2d Civil No. B214056).

Why don't the plaintiffs drop the debilitating two-track lawsuit, which flouts the concept of unity trumpeted by the hardliners when they were in power? Their motivation for proceeding in the face of near-certain defeat seems political at this point: dropping the suit would damage the hardliners’ campaign in this fall’s SAG elections, where the SAG presidency, and control of the board, are at stake. (Indeed, the political elbows are so sharp that several of the hardliners are also running in the now-in-progress AFTRA elections, seeking to undermine that union’s leverage from within.) Dismissing the suit would also doom the likely attempt the hardliners will make in the SAG boardroom to obtain reimbursement of their burgeoning legal fees. Meanwhile the guild is, of course, incurring significant fees of its own to defend itself and the forty-odd Board members also named as defendants.

Even assuming the TV/theatrical agreement is ratified, the guild has a long way to go before it’s back in our solar system. SAG’s been without a franchise agreement—the contract between the union and the talent agents—since 2002, and four other agreements are expired as well. The union is riven not only by factionalism but by economic and geographic divisions as well. New media issues will recur in 2011, which is just around the corner, and every three years thereafter, since technology continues to evolve faster than Hollywood can respond, let alone than union agreements can be renegotiated. The guild’s new leadership has made impressive progress in its few short months in office, but there are many light years yet to travel.

———————

SAG Hardliners' Picnic No Walk in the Park

jhandel@att.net (Jonathan Handel) — Mon, 18 May 2009 07:39:00 +0000

What if you held a picnic and nobody came? That’s almost where Membership First found itself yesterday. A beautiful day, a heavily promoted event, yet the SAG faction was only able to draw about 70 people to its Griffith Park / LA Zoo shindig, reports Variety.

SAG President Alan Rosenberg, who spoke at the picnic cum rally, predicted “a good chance” of defeat for the pending TV/theatrical deal, but that seems unlikely if MF can only attract a handful of members to an event in LA, considered the group’s stronghold. The ballots go out tomorrow (Tuesday the 19^th), with a June 9 return date, so we’ll know in a few weeks whether the MF tigers still roar or whether they’ve turned to paper.

———————