Studio concession to SAG comes with a hitch: Less back pay

For weeks, the major studios insisted they would never agree to a demand by Hollywood's biggest actors union to have its next contract expire at the same time as those of other talent guilds. 

Now, after back-channel talks between Screen Actors Guild leaders and top entertainment executives, the studios have conceded just that, lifting a stumbling block that broke off negotiations over a new contract in February.

Turns out, however, that the studios' offer comes with a big hitch that may not sit well with hundreds of actors who lost their jobs during the 100-day writers strike. In return for a two-year rather than a three-year contract term, the actors union would agree to settle so-called force majeure claims it filed last year seeking more than $10 million in pay.

After the writers strike ended in February 2008, SAG lodged claims against more than 80 shows on behalf of "series regulars" -- which encompass stars as well as those with a recurring role in a show -- who lost their jobs and wages during the writers walkout. The strike shut down popular series such as "Lost," "CSI" and "Ugly Betty."

SAG maintained that producers violated a force majeure clause in the union's contract that entitled actors to receive roughly 2-1/2 weeks' pay if they were suspended as a result of an "act of God," such as foul weather. The studios, however, balked at paying the claims and accused SAG of overreaching.

Studios want to impose a stricter interpretation of the force majeure clause and have offered to settle the outstanding claims for less than what the actors contend they are owed. How much less is unknown, however.

SAG interim Executive Director David White and Chief Negotiator John McGuire have indicated that they would accept the studios' demand as a necessary concession to preserve the larger goal of aligning the expiration of the actors contract with those of other guilds. They are especially keen to have SAG's contract expire at the same time as that of the smaller actors union, the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists, to gain maximum leverage at the bargaining table.

Expect fireworks from dissidents. The force majeure issue will almost certainly be seized on by White's opponents in the actors guild, who've vowed to campaign to defeat a contract they view as an inferior deal. The actors have been working without a contract for nine months. 

Nonetheless, the new SAG leaders, who were installed after the board fired former Chief Negotiator Doug Allen, retain the support of the board majority. And in the end, most members, weary of working without a contract and anxious about the deepening recession, are expected to support whatever contract their board recommends.

-- Richard Verrier

Comments

[TJ Spyke]

SAG should have sued the Writer's Guild, not the studios. It was the writers who went on strike, thus causing all the actors to lose out on pay they would have gotten. Thankfully the SAG interim president will not fight this.

[Ace]

No, no and more no. The contract term BS which the AMPTP dumped on the last contract "negotiation" is/was an attempt at doing just this: make SAG think it has to give up something to get that last stab in the eye taken away. The force majeure money WILL be paid - ALL of it.

No matter who sits on the SAG board, or their agenda, the membership remains the same, and the membership will do the voting, thankyouverymuch. That's the same membership which voted overwhelmingly against this (or a very similar) contract last year. Yes, SAG members are antsy to get things back on track, but we're not going to sacrifice our future(s) for some industry-spun "news", nor "claims" by management. The facts remain the same now as they did nine months ago.

In simple terms, the SAG membership will vote this contract offer - or any similar contract offer - DOWN by a large margin. (It only has to pass/fail by 51%.) Then where will the AMPTP be? Does anybody really believe that the previous 87% "no" voters will magically vote "yes"?

[nate]

Nobody mentions the thousands of crew members who were out of work because of the WGA strike. There's also no mention of the thousands of crew members currently out of work due to slow production. While the actors are currently working without contracts, there are few shows actually in production. Pilots for new TV shows, and feature film production have all been put on hold, because producers fear tooling up for new productions, with the actors working without contracts. They don't want to risk spend the money on a new show, only to have the actors walk out halfway through. Can I sue the WGA or SAG for the thousands of dollars of my lost wages? Of corse not, and SAG suing the WGA is a ridiculous notion. Greed is killing our industry, and the California economy, which relies heavily on the revenue it generates. Stop being greedy, let us below the line people go back to work.