<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Let&#8217;s See if They Follow Through</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/</link>
	<description>We Support One Union for All Performers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 00:56:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart Creque</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9657</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart Creque</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 04:25:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9657</guid>
		<description>Marisa, I wonder if a petition is in order to ask the four plaintiffs to act for the good of the Guild and withdraw their lawsuit given that (a) they can&#039;t win it, (b) even if they did by some miracle win it, they wouldn&#039;t undo any of the actions they objected to, from the firing of Allen to the hiring of White to the ratification of the contract, and (c) every day the suit remains active, the Guild racks up more legal fees.

I can&#039;t see how they can publicly defend keeping the suit alive at this late date.  Of course, recognizing logic and reality is not really their strong suit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Marisa, I wonder if a petition is in order to ask the four plaintiffs to act for the good of the Guild and withdraw their lawsuit given that (a) they can&#8217;t win it, (b) even if they did by some miracle win it, they wouldn&#8217;t undo any of the actions they objected to, from the firing of Allen to the hiring of White to the ratification of the contract, and (c) every day the suit remains active, the Guild racks up more legal fees.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t see how they can publicly defend keeping the suit alive at this late date.  Of course, recognizing logic and reality is not really their strong suit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marisa redanty</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9646</link>
		<dc:creator>marisa redanty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2009 01:03:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9646</guid>
		<description>Thanks Stu for reprinting...it can be implied by her &quot;no&quot; as being an answer to the second part of the interviewers question.

I guess we as members have to request that they do drop it.  Maybe in letters to her, Alan, the other two and to the press.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Stu for reprinting&#8230;it can be implied by her &#8220;no&#8221; as being an answer to the second part of the interviewers question.</p>
<p>I guess we as members have to request that they do drop it.  Maybe in letters to her, Alan, the other two and to the press.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david cooper</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9535</link>
		<dc:creator>david cooper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:58:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9535</guid>
		<description>Probably, Fred - but given the quality of the singing, eternal vigilance is necessary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Probably, Fred &#8211; but given the quality of the singing, eternal vigilance is necessary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stuart Creque</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9490</link>
		<dc:creator>Stuart Creque</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:37:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9490</guid>
		<description>Marisa, I quoted the post at the top of this thread.  It refers to her THR interview, which includes this bit (notice she never says she&#039;ll drop the lawsuit):
&lt;blockquote&gt;THR: And you don&#039;t think there&#039;s any legitimacy to that claim when you&#039;re suing the guild?

Johnson: That lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with this ratification.

THR: Well, it&#039;s not completely tangential.

Johnson: Our lawsuit purely has to do with California law and how a board votes.

THR: Right. But that was a means to an end that played specifically into these contract negotiations, so it&#039;s not unrelated.

Johnson: But it would not have changed the outcome of the vote. It&#039;s how the vote was taken. That&#039;s our challenge. It wouldn&#039;t have changed the outcome, but it certainly would have legitimized the process.

THR: If the contract is passed by the membership, will you and Membership First move on to elections, or will you pursue further legal remedies?

Johnson: No, if the contract is ratified by the membership, the membership has finally spoken and we have to accept that and make sure that the membership is treated with respect and we continue our responsibilities as board members. And Membership First will begin the process of this upcoming election.&lt;/blockquote&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Marisa, I quoted the post at the top of this thread.  It refers to her THR interview, which includes this bit (notice she never says she&#8217;ll drop the lawsuit):</p>
<blockquote><p>THR: And you don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s any legitimacy to that claim when you&#8217;re suing the guild?</p>
<p>Johnson: That lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with this ratification.</p>
<p>THR: Well, it&#8217;s not completely tangential.</p>
<p>Johnson: Our lawsuit purely has to do with California law and how a board votes.</p>
<p>THR: Right. But that was a means to an end that played specifically into these contract negotiations, so it&#8217;s not unrelated.</p>
<p>Johnson: But it would not have changed the outcome of the vote. It&#8217;s how the vote was taken. That&#8217;s our challenge. It wouldn&#8217;t have changed the outcome, but it certainly would have legitimized the process.</p>
<p>THR: If the contract is passed by the membership, will you and Membership First move on to elections, or will you pursue further legal remedies?</p>
<p>Johnson: No, if the contract is ratified by the membership, the membership has finally spoken and we have to accept that and make sure that the membership is treated with respect and we continue our responsibilities as board members. And Membership First will begin the process of this upcoming election.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Fred W</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9487</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred W</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 22:07:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9487</guid>
		<description>David,

Back in the day when I worked political campaigns in the real world, we had a general rule of thumb; a major party line was worth 20% of the vote.  In the simplest of terms, this means that in a two party election, 40% of your voters don&#039;t care who is running, only what banner they&#039;re running under.  The standard joke was that a dead man could count on 20% of the vote if it got a party line, and I think that still applies, outside of Missouri, where they tend to actually elect dead candidates.

If that formula applies to SAG, then MF has strayed pretty close to dead man status on a national basis.  They, like many an annoying rash, may never go away completely, but if Hollywood&#039;s numbers start to approach that National 20%, the overall union will be fine. You&#039;re right about the need for vigilance, but it shouldn&#039;t be a major job.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>David,</p>
<p>Back in the day when I worked political campaigns in the real world, we had a general rule of thumb; a major party line was worth 20% of the vote.  In the simplest of terms, this means that in a two party election, 40% of your voters don&#8217;t care who is running, only what banner they&#8217;re running under.  The standard joke was that a dead man could count on 20% of the vote if it got a party line, and I think that still applies, outside of Missouri, where they tend to actually elect dead candidates.</p>
<p>If that formula applies to SAG, then MF has strayed pretty close to dead man status on a national basis.  They, like many an annoying rash, may never go away completely, but if Hollywood&#8217;s numbers start to approach that National 20%, the overall union will be fine. You&#8217;re right about the need for vigilance, but it shouldn&#8217;t be a major job.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: marisa redanty</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9475</link>
		<dc:creator>marisa redanty</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:27:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9475</guid>
		<description>Stuart...do you have the date time and place where the original statement you quote (re legal suit being dropped) was made?

thanks

Marisa</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Stuart&#8230;do you have the date time and place where the original statement you quote (re legal suit being dropped) was made?</p>
<p>thanks</p>
<p>Marisa</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david cooper</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9453</link>
		<dc:creator>david cooper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:39:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9453</guid>
		<description>I think the 22% support the Poisonberg faction got is around the same percentage of American colonists who supported the Revolution.  It doesn&#039;t take a majority to set things ablaze.  If you take your eyes off this festering sore, you can be certain Poisonberg and his ilk will sing again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the 22% support the Poisonberg faction got is around the same percentage of American colonists who supported the Revolution.  It doesn&#8217;t take a majority to set things ablaze.  If you take your eyes off this festering sore, you can be certain Poisonberg and his ilk will sing again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil Hassman</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9452</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil Hassman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:26:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9452</guid>
		<description>BTW, gratefully there was breaking news and the walking-corpse-looking guy known as Alan Rosenberg was cut very short.

To his credit he did illuminate the audience that he couldn&#039;t speak for the guild, only himself, then Sam showed a clip of Assner lauding AR as a Hero and trashing Sally, Tom, Alec, et al.

No harm, no foul.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BTW, gratefully there was breaking news and the walking-corpse-looking guy known as Alan Rosenberg was cut very short.</p>
<p>To his credit he did illuminate the audience that he couldn&#8217;t speak for the guild, only himself, then Sam showed a clip of Assner lauding AR as a Hero and trashing Sally, Tom, Alec, et al.</p>
<p>No harm, no foul.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Neil Hassman</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9451</link>
		<dc:creator>Neil Hassman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 15:23:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9451</guid>
		<description>We&#039;re all still waiting for that promised &quot;Mea Culpa&quot;, VN. It&#039;s really easy...&quot;I was wrong&quot;...and considering the nearly 4 to 1 margin on a record turnout, pretty much required.

Have you spoken to Matt today? We&#039;re all waiting for his, too. ROFLMAO.

Until then, (your anti-semitism aside), you (and your Fizzler buds) are CLEARLY irrelevant.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We&#8217;re all still waiting for that promised &#8220;Mea Culpa&#8221;, VN. It&#8217;s really easy&#8230;&#8221;I was wrong&#8221;&#8230;and considering the nearly 4 to 1 margin on a record turnout, pretty much required.</p>
<p>Have you spoken to Matt today? We&#8217;re all waiting for his, too. ROFLMAO.</p>
<p>Until then, (your anti-semitism aside), you (and your Fizzler buds) are CLEARLY irrelevant.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: VoteNo</title>
		<link>http://www.sagwatch.net/2009/06/lets-see-if-they-follow-through/comment-page-1/#comment-9441</link>
		<dc:creator>VoteNo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:41:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sagwatch.net/?p=1913#comment-9441</guid>
		<description>Yeah, Sam, don&#039;t lose Hassman, you&#039;ll never work the Kibbitz room again.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, Sam, don&#8217;t lose Hassman, you&#8217;ll never work the Kibbitz room again.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
