Negotiations Watch: Will This Lead to a Strike Authorization Vote
The Allens apparently recognize that they’re running out of bullets. Tonight they released a statement saying they’re “disappointed” that the AMPTP rejected their “reasonable request” to return to the bargaining table, and saying the Negotiating Committee will meet later this week to discuss the rejection – which really can’t be much of a surpise.The Negotiating Committee, which is still overwhelmingly Membership First, will likely request that the National Board authorize a strike authorization vote. The new National Board meets in two weeks – and, of course, Membership First no longer has a majority there.The strike authorization requires a 75% margin of those voting to pass – but only a majority of the National Board to send it out. Getting the 50% may be tough, but do-able. But 75% looks like a long shot right now.The Allens seem to be banking on some negative reaction to the studios refusing to go back to the table, even after the Allens hinted they’d back off a few more demands. The studios seem to be banking on everyone getting that “last, best and final” means what it says.Fasten your seatbelts. Here we go again…By the way, Andrew Salomon at BlogStage seems to see it the same way…and adds some interesting, if anonymous, quotes about the plan.
“Several more steps would have to happen before a work stoppage would take effect, but one national board member said the fact that guild leaders would consider a strike while the national economy is foundering shows the desperate shape they are in after four and a half months of negotiations, which have yet to produce a deal.“The only people that seem to be oblivious to the condition of the United States of America right now and the financial situation that we’re in are Doug Allen, Alan Rosenberg, and Membership First,†said the source. “The idea that we would be going on strike now is absurd in Fellini proportions.â€Â
“The idea that we would be going on strike now is absurd in Fellini proportions.â€
The Allens are banking on some negative reaction because the studios are refusing to go back to the table? This surprises who exactly?
Strike? Now? Riiiight. You’ll have to pry my SAG card from my cold, dead fingers before I’d vote for a strike.
Maybe not Fellini, but how about Ionesco-like proportions? Termite Terrace-like proportions? Biblical-god-like-curb your enthusiasm-like proportions…
Here’s a surprise I’d like: That the Allens pack it in. Put themselves out of our misery. Just leave the keys by the front table, and don’t show up tomorrow morning, and let others get the job done. It’s that simple. Nobody gets their hair mussed, and in a day or two, nobody will remember the Allens, the this union can work to get itself back on track.
The last meeting with the AMPTP was in mid-July. it’s now the beginning of October.
What have these guys been doing for the last 2-1/2 months?
And don’t tell me about “informal discussions.”
To wait until this late date to start down this particular path … what are they doing?
Let’s say they vote to request a strike authorization. Now they put the new board in a real pickle. It cries out as a stunt by Membership First to hamstring the new board majority from taking a fresh look at the issues.
And if the strike authorization ballot goes out, it puts members in an awful bind. Normally you want to support the efforts of the negotiating committee, and give them the tool of a strike authorization. But this committee is too eerily reminiscent of the 2000 Commercials committee. Wait — it’s the same people! And what we know from that history is that they will call a strike, and they will stay out forever, until the membership’s own pain forces them to go back and get the same deal that was available all along.
So, here’s my thinking. MF’s favorite slogan is to tell people to vote “no” on whatever is put before them — the 2002 Talent Agent agreement, the 2003 SAG-AFTRA consolidation, the 2004 Film/TV agreement, the 2005 Interactive contract, the 2008 AFTRA Exhibit A deal. So let’s take them at their word, and vote “no” on the strike authorization. See how they feel being on the receiving end for a change. “Send them back to the table,” so to speak.
I hate to be saying this. It is crazy to cut the negotiating committee off at the knees by withholding strike authorization. But these are unusual circumstances, with a committee that seems to have lost touch with reality.
How about this: Send out a referendum on whether to appoint a new negotiation committee. I’d vote for that.
VG
Jonathan Handel views a Negotiating Committee vote for strike authorization as a “preemptive strike”:
http://digitalmedialaw.blogspot.com/2008/10/sag-apparently-seeking-strike.html
VG
G.O.R.M. – Ya got my vote on that.
It’s a lose – lose – lose situation. The referendum will get passed because MF holds 9 of the 14 votes on the Neg Com.
Here are the options – which would you choose?
The membership votes NO -
and now the LBO is a done deal (no other leverage or reason for the AMPTP to go back to the table, pass the K-Y, thank you MF…but MF will blame AFTRA, NY and RBD for their failure….and the LBO is not 100% of the AFTRA Deal
The membership says YES:
Doug waves his power at the AMPTP; they say so what? We dare to call the strike!
AMPTP could provoke one by then taking the LBO off the table.
The new National Board then has 2 choices: call the strike or not.
If they do, there will be a huge drain of members going FICORE. SAG is now on it’s death bed. If they do not, what is there to bring us back to the table? The Natl Board will be faced with no options but then to replace key players in negotiations inlcuding the lead,the chair, and some of the LA reps.
So now there is a new Neg Comm – which may intgriuge the AMPTP to come to the table. At that point it’s anybody’s game.
Ohter options: Bring in a Mediator…..or take some boulder off the table like New Media and DVD….and aspire to get 100% of the AFTRA deal.
It’s a tangled web these idiots wove. And no way out is a win-win…..we need to think long term for the strenght of SAG and position us for future negotiations, Thi one is deader than a doornail.
Why do you assume there will be a huge group going FICORE? Why bother, who’s going to catch you? There’ve always been scabs within our ranks. Mother Nature used to warn about a group she claimed producers called “the alternate talent pool” in LA – and it was comprised of surprising names doing vo and jingles underground, and that wasn’t during a strike, but normal times.
That was 20 years ago – nothing has changed. Thirty years ago I knew a singer who turned down 40K to do a car package for a big US car company, fly you to Austrailia for the sessions. Other US singers did it, and they were union members, selling out their union at 20 cents on the dollar.
We patrolled recording studios during strikes in the past, noting who went in and out. Of course with home studios, that’s harder. And then there are hidden studios in LA, like the complex inside the mountain up on Laurel Canyon. ( Ever been there? An old Nike base which you enter from certain houses into a dark, dank world of confusing corridors lit with extension cords and room after room with bandit studios – a real underground. A record producer showed it to me, we entered the old base through what looked like a closet door in some guys house.)
So unless your gig is on camera, they won’t bother with FICORE, and if you’re in a struck series, how would that help unless all the major characters did the same?
How to vote on a Strike Authorization referendum:
YES – and you will be voting for a strike, that’s for sure.
NO – and you will be voting for a new SAG chief negotiator, and that’s for sure
– and perhaps even for a new Negotiating Committee make-up and Chair.
Looks like an easy choice to me.
My understanding is that each Division appoints a portion of the Negotiating Committee. That would explain the statement that a 2/3 vote of the National Board is needed to override the choice made by a Division — that’s generally true for any Division appointments.
Now, presumably the Negotiating Committee members that were appointed by NY and RBD are accountable to those Divisions. We have heard that the Committee is generally unanimous on its decisions. (At least I believe we have heard that.) Does that mean, then, that NY and RBD are satisfied with what’s being done? Or is the Hollywood-appointed majority pressuring the others to vote unanimously as a show of resolve?
What would happen if it came to light that the Committee had voted for a strike, but only on party lines in a sharply divided decision?
VG
“NO – and you will be voting for a new SAG chief negotiator, and that’s for sure
- and perhaps even for a new Negotiating Committee make-up and Chair.”
This isn’t true. A failed SAV means SAG will be forced to take deal on the table.
If the information I have is correct, the strike authorization measure, if brought to a vote on the negotiating committee, will pass. Ballots can go out. The return, if negative, kills all talk of strike, the new majority on the national board decides what’s next. If the ballot comes back 75% positive, the national board then has to approve that vote by a simple majority. Only then does SAG have the power to strike.
Now the national board they will be presenting the yes vote to, if they get it, will have a one vote majority of UFS, so, one would assume, it won’t pass. However, defying the will of the membership should the national board turn down the strike, would provoke huge problems for the new 1 vote UFS majority. 75% is an overwhelming number. If that number comes back, that means SAG wants overwhelmingly, to give the negotiating committee the power to strike.
It will be interesting. And hopefully, quick.
VG: “We have heard that the Committee is generally unanimous on its decisions. (At least I believe we have heard that.) Does that mean, then, that NY and RBD are satisfied with what’s being done? Or is the Hollywood-appointed majority pressuring the others to vote unanimously as a show of resolve?”
NY and the RBD are NOT “satisfied with what’s being done.” The pressure on each of them is tremendous. Screaming, threats, constant telephone calls. Breaches of confidentiality – telling chat boards, blogs, loudmouth politicos who voted how.
There is no resolution, we’re trapped because LA gets to name its committee section and we can’t fire them with the slight majority we have. They won’t support a mediator or outside negotiator, only a strike vote. Ok – let them have it. I’ll bet there’s no place for a minority report when they send out the package, altho I remember when it was so. Personally, I just won’t vote, stuck between the ghastly thought of undercutting your own team, and outside events that suggest there could hardly be a worse moment to strike. So I predict they’ll just get 75% of a small return and we’ll see if that impresses the aptly named Mr. Counter.
I have a question: Has “bloc voting” been enforced on the Neg Comm? Does anyone know? If the press spin is “A 100% YES vote on sending out the strike referendum,” that will pretty much answer my question, I guess. Because I cannot for the life of me see the RBD and NYD reps going for the strike authoriazation. They want a better contract just like we all do, but they’re not STUPID. The timing on this is mind boggling. Actually, when it comes to SAG, my mind stays pretty boggled lately.
I’m with VG: where the hell has the Neg Com been these last few months?
You know, like – hey, Allen – show us the dates/places/attendees at all these “back channel” and “informal” meetings you’ve been bragging about. What? No record of them? Then hell, no, the courts won’t count them when the AMPTP gets legal on us and brings charges against SAG for failing to negotiate in good faith. So the charges will STICK, you idiot. And SAG members will lose; meanwhile, you continue to take home a stout five figures a month for … what, exactly?
The MFs are no longer in control of the NB. So they’re now suddenly “back to the table?”
This is the slimiest of “Hail Mary” passes I’ve seen in awhile.
V.
And #11 Bil – the NY RBD – in spite of the threatening and imposing behavior, NY and RBD does not vote any way but their own minds. I do no think any NY will support the vote, nor the RBD – but that still gives LA/MF the majority vote. You can be certain that the vote for a Strike Authorization will not be unanimous.
The other questions on the issue – when will the referendum get mailed? (Bet it’s already at the printer waiting to be released)….when will the vote end and be counted (before or after the Plenary)….and then?
What is the plan to move with the vote – and what is the plan if the vote fails?
Tune in next week on As the Stomach Turns……
It’s very simple – if they pull off a strike authorization, they will have done it within the rules, fair and square. You can’t argue with that. And clearly, the 87% pro-strike poll vote now seems to be giving even the anti-MF voices on this blog pause. If they pull a strike authorization off, go to the AMPTP, say – give us what we want or we walk out, the AMPTP says go ahead, and walk, and SAG does strike, it will have to be acknowledged, however you feel about the usefulness of a strike, as pulling a rabbit out of a hat, politically speaking. I mean – talk about working the system to your advantage. MF feels they were put there to do a job the membership hired them to do, and one has to admire their tenacity. If UFS can’t stop them, it will be because they were outclassed politically: knowledge of the exact rules, knowing how to set up votes and when, understanding every single detail regarding how to get out of the corner everybody says you’re in. I mean, purely from an analytical point of view, you have to pause and marvel at their resiliency, even if you hate their guts. Stay tuned.
–
Ed. Comment – On one level, we’d agree. If they pull it off, they’ll have done it within the rules.
However, two issues remain, one of which is political and interesting, the other, important. The political issue: to get it through the national board, they’ll have to convince a majority to go along. That means winning at least two or three RBD or UFS votes. The important issue: at this pointl, how much good does anyone really think a strike authorization would be? Jonathan Handel certainly writes that it adds leverage. We’re not so sure.
Maybe six months ago…but now?
I think it’s the only card they’ve potentially had to play since day one. I think all the AFTRA alienation, the order in which SAG negotiated, the bullying charges against Allen and Rosenberg, the poll, pushed or not, the election, all the water under the MF bridge, all comes down to – strike. The AMPTP, in my opinion, was giving this deal to all the unions, no matter what. So, the real issue was, how long would it take, and how many procedural steps would they have to go through, and polls, and the election, any everything else along the long, long, way, to get to their one option – strike. If SAG wants the deal points they have had on the table for months, the only possible way they will get them – tomorrow, or 5 months ago, is and was, to strike. The AMPTP was never giving it otherwise. Why would they? They had a plan, early and consistently, to push all the creative unions into this non-union box in new media. They have succeeded with all but one. And if SAG folds, we’ll all have three years to see how bad we were taken. If it was as as bad as MF predicted, then, one would assume, all the unions will join and strike if the producers don’t cut out the non-union space.
And finally. I’m not sure, but I’m fairly certain MF has a good shot at getting the few RBD and/or NY votes they’ll need to approve the strike with a simple majority on the national board. Let’s see.
“If it was as as bad as MF predicted, then, one would assume, all the unions will join and strike if the producers don’t cut out the non-union space.”
When? The contracts will expire at different times. SAG will be off by at least a year, unless it can somehow get its contract synchronized again with AFTRA’s, which expires at least in the same general ballpark as the writers. But one unfortunate outcome from this stalemate is that SAG’s renewal date keeps sliding farther and farther away from the other unions.
“And finally. I’m not sure, but I’m fairly certain MF has a good shot at getting the few RBD and/or NY votes they’ll need to approve the strike with a simple majority on the national board. Let’s see.”
You may be right. I don’t think the board vote is the big hurdle — it’s getting 75% of the membership to authorize the strike that will be a challenge. And I can foresee a lot of constituencies out there putting pressure on SAG members to vote “no.” Not to mention their own economic concerns. As Jonathan Handel observed, the strike would be over relatively speculative concerns about a nascent market that no one can really predict. People with long enough memories will recall that the same guy — David Jolliffe — was preaching all manner of doom in relation to the Internet when the Commercials strike was in progress. Virtually nothing that he told us turned out to be accurate. Is his crystal ball any better today?
Meanwhile, watch for the line to form in front of AFTRA with television producers signing up with the union that has a going contract with a no-strike clause in it. Duncan Crabtree-Ireland’s offhand comments two weeks ago about how it was no big deal to TV producers that SAG had no contract will prove to be pretty lame if it looks like SAG is preparing to strike.
VG
Jolliffe 2000, re commercials and Jolliffe 2008, re tv/theatrical new media, are two entirely different things. There is a very clear case to be made that new media needs to be addressed now, because now, as opposed to 2000, the reality is – it’s here. Move over is here, original content for AMPTP signatories is here, anything and everything available on-line is here, without actors getting paid. The new digital deal for theater projection is an indicator that the inevitable is here – they will begin sending films over the net to theaters, which will project them digitally. Any theater owner spending 10 cents on an upgrade or a new film projector is wasting his or her money – and they know it. Look, the new media news is not good – not under this contract. The question is simply – how bad will it be in the next three years, and despite the SAG contract lag, will the unions be able to get it together to speak with one voice in 2011? Anyone arguing that this is a good contract is seriously out of touch with the investments the AMPTP is making, and the projects they already are shooting, as well as what’s in the pipeline. I just think it should be acknowledged that for all the hue and cry over the last five months, SAG was getting nothing without a strike. Nothing meaningful anyway. They have one last bank shot to throw up – this strike authorization. And if it passes, which it just might, let’s be honest – none can predict, and the 87% looms large right now – if MF can just manage to get the damn thing out before they’re outflanked by UFS, we’ll all see if what Handel writes, and what I personally believe, is true – is it leverage that could force the producers’ hand? To scoff at the possibility that a strike could push the suits over the line is unwise.
Different Jolliffe? Did he get a brain transplant? Then he’s still a big problem and the day his shadow leaves the Guild for good will be one sunny day in Hollywood.
I just think that the Negotiating Committee is living in fantasy land. They seem to think that by sitting in a room and thinking great thoughts, and occasionally putting out “educational” missives to SAG members, they will rally the kind of support needed to pull together a show of strength in these negotiations. But a significant portion of the SAG membership has been alienated. No one can figure out what the hell the committee is doing, or why it seems to take months to do it.
Even if the strike authorization referendum squeaks past the National Board, and even if by some miracle it squeaks by the 75% member approval mark (probably in a low-turnout setting), a lot more is needed than pieces of paper. Nine members of the Negotiating Committee aren’t going to be enough to man the picket lines. And even if there are enough zealots to put up lines in L.A., what about the rest of the country?
It’s a textbook violation of the First Rule of Holes: When you find yourself in one, stop digging!
VG
The quicker Hollywood realizes that SAG is not the obstacle here, the quicker this town will get back to work.