New York yells 'cut' on SAG strike vote

The campaign to oppose a strike authorization by members of the Screen Actors Guild got a boost today when members of the the New York Division Board of Directors issued a statement calling for their union to halt the upcoming referendum.

The New York board, which has 14 representatives on SAG's 71-member national board who have often clashed with the guild's leadership, demanded that the national board hold an emergency meeting to appoint a new negotiating task force to replace the current negotiating committee in order to jump- start contract talks with the studios that have stalled for months.

In October, the New York board members supported plans for a strike authorization if mediation failed. But they contend SAG leaders gave short shrift to mediation and that the worsening economy has now made that course of action unwise.

In its statement, the New York board said: "Negotiations failed. Then something else failed, too. The American economy. With that collapse, everything has changed. Our members and our industry are struggling through the worst economic crisis in memory. While issuing a strike authorization may have been a sensible strategy in October, we believe it is irresponsible to do so now."

Regional branches around the country, which often align with their counterparts in New York, were expected to issue similar statements opposing the strike authorization vote, guild insiders said.

The opposition underscores how deeply divided SAG is, making it tougher for union leaders to present a united front as they wage an "education campaign" to muster support for the strike authorization. Ballots will be sent out Jan. 2 and tabulated on Jan. 23, the day before the national board is scheduled to meet. A strike authorization requires 75% approval from voting members, with the board having ultimate say over whether a walkout would occur.

UPDATE: SAG President Alan Rosenberg said in a statement he was "shocked and troubled" by the New York Board's demand to cancel the strike authorization vote, noting the New York board previously supported the idea in October. But he agreed to their demand to schedule an emegency national board meeting, the purpose of which would be to discuss "the ramifications of this extraordinarily destructive and subversive action."

-- Richard Verrier

Comments

[Rocco]

Allen and Rosenberg must be smoking crack. They've backed their members into the corner. Don't let these 2 fools sell us all down the river. Please do the right thing and vote no. We'll get a new team and come back in 3 years and do a better job.

[gail]

I agree with the New York members on this issue. I think to have any talk of a strike
now is disgusting and selfish. It does not just affect the actors but also the below
the line workers who lost everything in the writers strike. It does not seem reasonable
to ask for strike in this economy. It is truly insane and Alan Rosenberg should be
ashamed of himself. He needs to be replaced. What kind of human being would ask
for a strike now and also right before Christmas. It is truly shameful.

[Tape Op]

When it comes to SAG striking, the only question I have left is: Wood or aluminum?

[unionunderground]

It's important to remember a few crucial facts. The actors that are speaking out most prominently to vote "no" on the strike are producers as well as actors. That is a simple conflict of interest. It is also a fact that in the last negotiations SAG took the "let's revisit this in three years" stance and were burned when production companies and networks began offering content online with no residuals for actors.

My only point is to make sure that union members understand that they have an obligation as members to read the facts carefully from their union board, not from the newspaper or the gossip blogs. The concept that the union is not operating on the members' behalf is just not true, please read the facts.

[Brett Schulte]

I think the previous commenters are missing the point. No one, least of all Alan Rosenberg, WANTS a strike, but by taking away that possibility there's zero chance of concession from the other side.

The issue of new media is a HUGE one, if a residual deal isn't struck now then in the coming months when more and more product is produced for streaming on devices like AppleTV and XBOX there will be zero residuals.

The WGA and DGA don't rely on residuals like we do, and AFTRA is just desperate to under cut SAG and get shows at any cost. The SAG fight is a valid one, even though we all agree the timing couldn't be worse the negotiating committee needs the real possibility of a strike to bring the producers back to the table.

[Chris U]

Rosenberg is a total fool. He's a failed actor who is relishing his lone moment in the sun. Every producer I know will never hire him again(with his career over, he has nothing to lose). It's sad that this fake bully is leading a bunch of desperate uninformed followers over the cliff. Cudos to NY for standing up to this bafoon. A strike now would be catastrophic, it makes no sense. Mr. Rosenberg own up to your foolishness and realize you've lost.

[SAG Member]

Thanks God for New York! Rosenberg wouldn't be happy til he'll crippled the union and handed all jobs over to AFTRA. Deal on the table is far from perfect but its only one we are gonna get. Next time we ALL need to jut time this up a little better. (Hear that WGA) all unions, all at once. This just aint our year.

[ananomys]

ananomys blaklisted sag entertainer

we need to get the residuals as actors,
plain and simple dvd is over its' is online