Membership First, Facing Absentee Problem, Decides it Likes Written Assents After all
We’re hearing that the same group that brought you the Gang of Four lawsuit, insisting that written assents were completely illegal, last night decided to use a written assent to fill the vacancy on the Hollywood Board resulting from the Seymour Cassel ouster. Since Membership First still has a majority on the Hollywood board, the only plausible reason for use of an assent is that several MF board members just didn’t show up, and that had the vote been taken in the room, the outcome would have been that Unite for Strength picked up the vacant seat.
When asked during her unsuccessful campaign for the SAG Presidency, about her lawsuit against SAG challenging the use of an assent, Anne-Marie Johnson, the current Hollywood Board leader and SAG First VP, said, “I and others could not sit still and let democracy and our union trampled upon because of a flaw in our own constitution.”
We haven’t heard whether she still thinks it’s trampling on democracy, now that her side is doing it. If the assent is successful, and we expect that it will be, Jeff Austin, who placed well out of the money in the election, would become a board member.
And I hope this is used for SAG’s benefit in the GO4 lawsuit when it finally gets in front of the bench.
According to its Constitution, it is my understanding, that Jeff Austin may be filling a, vacated, NATIONAL board seat until the next SAG election.
ra
Why wasn’t the vote taken in the room? If there were enough people to make it a legal meeting, why wasn’t it done then?
The email poll was challenged as being unconstitutional(or in violation of the Hollywood rules of procedure, I can’t remember which) as it was done without consulting with the board replacement committee, and has been referred to legal counsel. It seems that AMJ made the determination that it could be done all by her oneses, based on some confidential, highly top secret information about Jeff Austin’s involvement in some super sensitive operations of our Guild that the membership is not privy to.(yes, dripping with sarcasm). Nothing against Mr. Austin personally, but the reasoning smacks of making an end run around the will of the membership as MF desperately tries to hold on to the room. Surprise. Surprise. Kent McCord was very upset about this, as was Alan Rosenberg, who used it as a diatribe to point out what written assent will get you(I had two responses — at least he’s consistent, and give it a rest, will ya?). He likes to call his comrades progressives, though I think obstructionist is a better description. They both blamed politics for holding up the business of the Guild. I think they need to purchase a mirror.
You’ve failed to understand the basic distinction between the uses of the assents here. The first one was illegally used to permit the exercise of the will of the majority, and thus democracy was trampled by letting the majority have its way. This time, the assent was used to AVOID the probable exercise of the will of the majority, and democracy was preserved by not letting the probable majority vote at all.
And of course, showing the world how an assent is properly used, this time they circulated it beforehand to every member of the Hollywood Board, right?
(sarc font off)
Y’know what Emerson said about consistency and “little minds”! If it isn’t on the clubhouse wall at M1st World Headquarters it oughta be.
But yeah, this has week-old fish stink on it.
As I understand their legal argument in the Go4 case, it is based on corporation law for board of directors of a California corporation. I’m not sure it would apply, as a legal arguement, to Hollywood board anyway –unless Hollywood Division is a corporation as well. Is it?
So for nitpicking legality purposes, perhaps not inconsistent. . .until you start beating your chest about “democracy” being the real value you’re trying to maintain (as AMJ did), and then you’re just on your own to try to explain away the difference!
Alan Rosenberg wouldn’t recognize “democracy” if it jumped up and bit him in his withered ass!
Screen Actors Guild is a corporation. Incorporated in 1933 under the California Corporation Code as a 501(C3)not for profit Corporation and as such is the only legal entity of SAG. All of the other branches, and divisions are mere extensions of the Corporation. Created by the Corporation, they can be shut down at any time by the Corporation with or without reason given.
–
Mod. Comment: SAG is most definitely NOT a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt charitable organization, nor is it eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions in accordance with Internal Revenue Code section 170.
Please return to the background holding area. We’ll call you when we need you.
OOHHH TERRENCE We’re shakin’ in our boots. PLEASE GOD NOOOO…. Fact is that the MF Cultershysters got caught using The Dark and Evil WRITTEN ASSENT for their own purposes…oooohhhh haaaa haaa eeeeee
Please Terrence, get real.
Are you suggesting that the Hollywood nut jobs would or could just beem out the regional branches and the NY Branch without recourse?
If by any scope of reality, if that is what you are hinting at, I hope to Christ you have a caring family member to take you post haste to a facility.
Lord, Marisa, LET ‘em ‘beam out’ SAG Branches in all areas but LA.
Without Branches, the SAG work in those areas is lost, and all work outside of LA goes off card/AFTRA. Thus, SAG becomes a ’boutique Guild,’ the ‘LA social club for has beens/wanna be’s’ that the MF miscreants have been fighting for, and diligently.
That brand of thinking comes from the home office of “We’ll show YOU … screw US!”
V.
geo said:
“I’m not sure it would apply, as a legal arguement, to Hollywood board anyway –unless Hollywood Division is a corporation as well. Is it?”
It is. The Screen Actors Guild is a “Mutual Benefit” Nonprofit Corporation, in the State of California.
As a matter of corporation law, yes. The matter of SAG’s constitution is a different matter. The corporation is not the guild. The guild is not the corporation.
I don’t know, maybe it takes a database programmer to get the referential integrity and “normalization” involved here. It gets a bit hairy, I grant you (assuming I’ve finally grokked it).
Hypocrisy, thy name is Johnson.
VG
SAG is a 501(c)(5) tax-exempt labor organization. That classification is granted by the IRS and has no relation to it’s status as a corporation under California law. The fact that it was incorporated under California law does not give any member, faction, or local located in California any greater rights regarding formation or dissolution of the organization than any member, faction or local situated outside the state, despite Mr. Beasor’s wishes to the contrary.
The SAG Foundation IS a 501(c)(3) tax exempt charitable organization.
The branches and divisions do not exist at the whim of the “Corporation.” They were not “created by the corporation,” but were established as an integral part of the organization by the membership in Article VI of the Constitution. As such, they can only be terminated by Constitutional Amendment and not “shut down at any time by the Corporation,” whatever that is supposed to mean.
Generically, as a matter of corporation law I think it still unlikely that the national board could shut down the divisions/rbds without challenge under corporation law for the simple reason that even corporation law requires the corporation to follow its own bylaws! Presumably, the constitution of the labor union SAG is also filed as the bylaws of the California corporation also known as SAG. Tho there are public records on these things to check to see if it is so.
However, that still wouldn’t require the Hollywood board to follow California corporation law required of corporate boards as would be legally required of the national board. If Hollywood Division is not a corporation of its own, then there is only one “corporate board” of SAG, legally required to follow California corporation law, and that’s the national board.
But yeah, anyway you look at it, it’s a whole “are you kidding me?” situation from a practical PoV for M1st to claim consistency based on such distinctions. Only a Philadelphia lawyer (to reach for an old phrase) could do it with a straight face.
Evidently Membership First Hollywood Directors have been deliberately failing to notify the Replacement Committee (or anybody else) of their potential absences – in order to prevent UFS alternates from filling their seats. Failure to notify, however, creates an “unexcused absence.”
According to the SAG Constitution (Article V, Section K (3), if a Director is absent from three (3) consecutive meetings of the Board without excuse, the Division Board may declare that a permanent vacancy exists.
I’m sure our UFS friends are fully aware of this this, but it certainly wouldn’t hurt to drop a line to anyone you know, just sort of, you know, to remind them….
Marisa, you are a real scrapper for justice and integrity. I salute your ongoing efforts in defense of the NY Division and the Regional Branch Division (also known as the RBD, or “the Branches”)… especially as it is apparently so easy to shut us down, should “the Corporation” decide to do so. > snark off <
One of the strides the RBD has made as regards parity is that the name of our division is always capitalized now, whether it's the Regional Branch Division, the RBD, the Branches, or any individual Branch. This is now a part of the SAG style manual, we're happy to report, for all its publications.
A small step, we know, but it means a great deal.
Many would certainly prefer that our own self-esteem would allow the continued lower-casing of our status… but we will no more accept that now than the "ny division" would allow it.
Thought you and others might like to know, and thanks again.
Yours in the battle for upper-case respect for ALL divisions.
This is too much – they’re going to wish us away since we won’t let them make the rules. I have a better idea – MF’ers can get under the covers and pull the blanket up over your collective head…and, poof! – We all vanish!!
And as a side benefit, you get a good sniff of your own hypocritical arse.
MaryMac
Point taken, I was so angry at the mere suggestion that beasor (lower case intended) made that I just plain didn’t realize what I had done. It was a careless error. Sorry.
And you are so right about the caps. I will be more careful next time.
Vested, Wow what a great idea. I couldn’t agree more!
I have said on more than one occasion that the Hollywood div. can keep it’s own company as far as i’m concerned. That way, the NY and RBD’s could come together and merge with AFTRA.
Let them die on the vine out there in Hollwood where they lie cheat and steal at every turn. This latest is proof of that.
I’m sick and tired of having to endure the antics people like AMJ, Rosenberg, McCord, Ladd, et.al., have put us through.
Cut ‘em loose. Divorce. They deserve themselves.
Thanks, Marisa… I know you get it. Much appreciated. Keep it up!
Members need to take note of all these MF actions…and remember when it comes to election time….it’s the only time MF will lsiten to you – when you don’t vote for them