The Latest from SAG’s Moderate Contingent
Posted by Craig Mazin on 19 Jan 2009 at 12:21 am | Tagged as: WGA Issues
I received this mass email about a half an hour ago.
A MESSAGE TO SAG MEMBERS FROM THE NATIONAL BOARD MAJORITY Unite for Strength and Board Members from Hollywood, New York and the Regional Branches*
As you’re undoubtedly aware, Screen Actors Guild is currently beset by a crippling leadership crisis. With the TV/Theatrical contract having expired nearly 7 months ago, negotiations at a standstill, and our negotiators’ strategy hinging on a strike authorization vote for which there is clearly insufficient support, we called for a special National Board meeting to consider a new approach. At that meeting, held Jan.12-13, we attempted to postpone the strike authorization vote, replace Executive Director and Chief Negotiator Doug Allen and the negotiating committee, and direct a newly appointed negotiator to restart talks immediately. Despite strong support for these steps from a clear majority of the National Board, President Alan Rosenberg and Mr. Allen’s other board supporters stood squarely in the way of our implementing them. For 28 hours straight, they used filibusters and other parliamentary games to run out the clock on the meeting and prevent a vote from ever taking place.
The next day Mr. Allen proposed a new plan to shelve the strike authorization, go back to the table to see if “producers would improve their offer” and then send out that offer for ratification with no board recommendation to members, only pro and con statements. It is noteworthy that when faced with a call for his removal, Mr. Allen suddenly saw fit to suspend the strike authorization that has been the cornerstone of his strategy, and indeed the topic of a 12-page promotional newsletter delivered to Hollywood members just days ago. But unlike the plan we were obstructed from putting into place at the meeting, his is not a serious effort to get a better deal. SAG has never sent members a contract that our National Board didn’t recommend ratifying. We shouldn’t start now.
We firmly believe that SAG needs a change of course and a new captain. Mr. Allen has held fast to a failed strategy for over half a year, even as members have lost nearly $50 million from working under an expired contract. In addition, under Mr. Allen’s tenure, numerous other expired agreements have languished without renegotiation, SAG’s strategic relations with its sister union AFTRA have been badly undermined, and partisan tensions within the Guild have grown steadily worse.
With new direction, we can turn this around and put Screen Actors Guild back on the right track. We will work to quickly send members a TV/Theatrical contract that carries a positive recommendation from the National Board. We will also focus on successfully negotiating the Commercial agreement and other remaining contracts. We will rebuild vital relationships throughout the entertainment industry, and bring much needed stability back to the Guild. We are now planning concrete steps to achieve this and will keep you updated as events warrant.
*In the interest of compliance with the AFTRA-SAG non-disparagement agreement under the AFL-CIO, Members of SAG’s National Board majority who are also AFTRA officers or board members wish to officially record themselves as abstaining from this statement.
Replacing Allen and the negotiating committee is one thing. Taking steps to prevent Rosenberg from undermining the work of the new negotiating committee is entirely something else. Are there strategies and tactics that the board majority can use to accomplish that?
I assume this is why the directors have decided they must sack Allen altogether rather than merely taking him off the job of being chief negotiator without removing him from being National Executive Director. They must figure that there are too many opportunities for mischief given Allen’s obvious allegiance to the Membership First faction in general and to Rosenberg in particular.
This actually echoes the situation in the four years prior to 2005, when Melissa Gilbert was president of SAG and Bob Pisano was executive director. Gilbert and her board allies held power by only the thinnest of voting margins. The Hollywood members (Membership First, in other words) loathed her and loathed Pisano because they perceived both as being too pliant in dealings with studios, advertisers, and other employers. But as long as Pisano played ball with Gilbert, things ran noisily along, as the membership at large supported her.
There will be a huge vacuum with Allen gone, and I don’t know what the directors who sent this message plan to do in order to fill this vacuum. Something must be done, however; merely removing Allen will create even greater chaos (not to mention Rosenberg’s “f***ing civil war”).
VG
How much longer until Rosenberg has to stand for re-election?
SAG has two directly elected officers: The President, and the Secretary-Treasurer. Both serve two-year terms, and those terms are up this fall. The official start date for new officers and directors is September 25, so the election is held in late August/early September. If Rosenberg should choose to run for a third term, which no one expects, he would run this summer for the fall election.
Elections for directors are held each year. Regular directors hold three-year terms, so elections for these seats are staggered on a 1/3-1/3-1/3 basis. The runners-up for the director positions serve as alternates on the national board, with one-year terms.
The regular directors and alternates are elected by Division (Hollywood, New York, and Regional Branch Division) and also comprise the directors for separate boards at the Division level. That’s how you hear about the New York board or the Hollywood board taking certain actions. Each Division appoints a Vice President (Hollywood = 1st Vice President, New York = 2nd Vice President, RBD = 3rd Vice President) who is the presiding officer for the Divisional boards and has certain responsibilities at the national level.
There’s more arcana but that’s the big picture.
So by the end of summer, you’ll have decided whether to continue Rosenberg’s policies at the executive officer level. How many of the directors coming up for election this year fall on the moderate side and how many on the militant side? (You always want to know whether you are defending more seats than the other side.)
Still, after this year’s elections, there will likely be enough militants on the board to continue their parliamentary shenanigans. Usually it only takes about a third of any parliamentary body to gum up the works, if they’re truly determined.
In the Hollywood Division, ten directors have terms that end this fall. Nine are formally affiliated with Membership First, and the tenth might as well be. It’s up to these people to decide whether to run again. But since there are other directors who have been on the board since the 1970s (!) a re-run is certainly a possibilty for at least some of these.
In addition, last fall’s election caused 13 incumbent Membership First directors to lose their seats (mostly as alternates to the national board, but regular members to the Hollywood board — see my post above). A number of these have been on the board more or less continuously since at least the late 90s, and indeed some of the ones who lost seats are on the Film/TV negotiating committee.
The question this fall will be whether the actions taken in the next few months cause the Membership First faction to mobilize even more, or whether the SAG membership will perceive that the moderates have rescued a desperate situation. Much will depend on the presidential candidates who emerge. Anne-Marie Johnson is widely regarded as the presumptive Membership First presidential candidate. No one yet knows who else may emerge as a competing candidate.
I hope Craig and Ted don’t mind having their board taken up by this discussion.
VG
A) We’re all in this together.
B) Without SAG actors available and ready to work, there’s a whole lot less work for WGA writers.
C) Trade unionism in the entertainment industry needs new models for its survival and growth in the present and future, so observing what does and doesn’t work in a sister union would seem to me to be a vital interest to everyone in the WGA.
The Membership First people (well, most of them) have now come out against strike authorization, blaming everyone else for the fact that it would surely fail. See:
Associated Press
Variety
Understatement of the year from Variety‘s Dave McNary: “the guild’s top leaders seem more in disarray than ever.”
VG
Bulletin:
It’s being reported here that the SAG board moderates have delivered a written assent document that
Removes Doug Allen as National Executive Director;
Engages David White as interim National Executive Director;
Names John McGuire as Chief Negotiator for all contracts, including the TV/Theatrical Contract currently in negotiation;
Replaces the TV/Theatrical Negotiating Committee with a Taskforce, which will represent the Board of Directors;
Directs that only interim NED David White, John McGuire, or their designee may communicate on behalf of Screen Actors Guild to other organizations, the general public, or the press;
Retains the law firm of Schwartz, Steinsapir, Dohrmann & Sommers LLP to advise the National Board and represent the Guild in negotiation of the terms of a written contract with David White;
In response to voting irregularities at the last Board meeting, instructs SAG staff to develop and implement a fraud-proof security system to regulate the use of the voting remotes used by Board members to cast their votes.
VG