SAG Rejects latest (last?) contract offer from producers

[Swarles Barkley]

http://www.boston.com/ae/movies/art...ers_say_sag_rejects_contract_offer/?page=full

Is SAG really getting greedy here? (Any industry folks on the board? I'd love to hear your thoughts.) It seems to me that's likely to be the public perception if there's another work stoppage. SAG seems to be going after more than the WGA or AFTRA was seeking. Are increased shares of DVD profits really worthy of a work stoppage, given that it's probably a dying format anyway? Some of Doug Allen's (SAG's chief negotiator) comments in the article seem somewhat nonsensical, given earlier statements by Rosenberg that the driving force of the negotiations was to provide for the "rank and file" actors at the bottom of the wage scale.

The studios made their final offer last week, saying it provided $250 million in additional compensation over three years. The studios said they will not make any pay increases retroactive to July 1 if the deal is not ratified by Aug. 15.
Allen called the $250 million estimate "highly inflated," claiming that proposed raises to actors' minimum wages would not benefit the higher-paid actors.

The "higher-paid actors" probably don't need the money. Isn't the idea to help the "little guy"? If this is really SAG's position then I don't see much public support for them at all in the case of a strike.

Thoughts?

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I don't think SAG can get a strike vote. I don't know the merits of the deal - even if the actors are being greedy, it's a sure bet AMPTP is being greedy too - but if they don't have the ability to call a strike, it won't much impact any of us.

It seems that movie production is being impacted, but not TV. And TV is the medium that cannot afford any more delays. They need to use the fall season to try to rebuild from the damage the WGA strike did. Nobody should depend too much on the enduring popularity of the medium, especially for the younger demo the advertisers all love.

If this is really SAG's position then I don't see much public support for them at all in the case of a strike.

If in theory SAG could strike, but I don't see how, the public is probably divided among those who just want their shows back and those who are abandoning TV anyway, so I wouldn't be too sanguine about public support.

I don't know what the impact would be on movie production, or how long it would take for the de-facto lock-out to actually impact release dates for what, next summer?

 

[Dorian Thompson]

AFTRA ratified its deal. SAG has zero leverage. There won't be a strike.

 

[Top41]

From what I've heard, the sticking point is one that SAG is just not going to get (nor one they really should get) and that's for SAG members to have a say in how/where/when their image is distributed. Basically, for a show to air on the internet, all SAG actors in that show would have to give their okay, possibly every time it airs. That's just nuts--logistically impossible and way too difficult. I don't know if that's the sticking point, but if it is, they're going to have to give that one up.

From what I've heard around town, no one really believes SAG could get the votes required for a strike. Most actors in SAG are background actors or working/guest star level actors. Those guys don't want a strike.

Another strike would be devastating for the industry. The feeling around town is that it's not going to happen, but no one is 100% sure because you can't be. If the sides are starting to dig in their heels, that's obviously not a good sign. Still, the industry cannot afford another strike and everyone does know that. So I guess we'll see....

 

[Dorian Thompson]

I have a hard time believing they could get the 75 percent vote they needed to strike. There's an awful lot of television actors in SAG who don't want to be out of work--again.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The studios are basically preparing to lock them out.

 

[Dorian Thompson]

Shit. You cannot be serious.