Saturday, March 13, 2010

SAG Approves Joint Bargaining with AFTRA

The Screen Actors Guild national board this morning approved an agreement to hold joint negotiations with AFTRA with the studio alliance (AMPTP) later this year, for 45 days starting on October 1. That was the date for SAG and the AMPTP to begin early negotiations. Now it will be SAG and AFTRA jointly meeting with the AMPTP. The vote was expected, and was by a strong margin: 78% to 22%, according to a SAG spokeswoman.

This is good news for the industry, and dramatically reduces the possibility of further labor disturbance in the upcoming negotiating cycle. AFTRA’s national board approved joint bargaining three weeks ago, on February 27, so all that remains is presumably finalizing the text of the joint bargaining agreement and then signing on the dotted line.

AFTRA and the AMPTP had no comment.

A Membership First crowd of demonstrators outside the SAG meeting was minimal – about 20 to 25 people by reports from non-MF sources. Emails to MF were not immediately returned.

26 comments:

  1. 85 pilots to AFTRA, despite a producer-friendly regime at SAG. A 180 degree turnaround, despite SAG's previous dominance of TV jurisdiction. No outcry from the SAG boardroom over the complete loss of TV, the SAG actors bread and butter - nothing from Ken Howard, Amy Aquino or David White. Only Anne-Marie Johnson, the hold-over from the Membership-FIRST sentiment, who put it in black and white in the SAG Call-Sheet to all SAG members, that TV is being completely lost and SAG appears to be doing nothing about it. No surprise there, "moderate" leaders have been quoted publicly saying their plan was to "weaken SAG to facilitate merger with AFTRA."

    The problem is, merger is a long, long way off, and if it ever does come to a vote of both SAG and AFTRA again, chances are it will be voted down. It's been 70 years AFTRA has been desperately trying to get what SAG has, with SAG fending off this unrequited zombie since Jimmy Cagney ran the Guild. A long process of review (again...), a long series of actuarial studies (again...), and if any member of the P&H trustees says no because they don't think it will be wise for the plan at SAG, the whole thing dies.

    What's happening, is collusion, plain and simple. That's why the SAG government, save Anne-Marie Johnson, is not saying a word, while AFTRA raids SAG territory with impunity.

    SAG government is also consciously not telling SAG membership it is their right under federal law to choose which union they wish to represent them in these new pilots.

    That is a clear violation of their obligation to protect the best interests of SAG actors.

    And, finally, if a referendum were put out today, asking actors if they wished to be solely represented by SAG or AFTRA, estimates are it would come back in the high 80th to 90th percentile for SAG.

    So why isn't Ken Howard, President of SAG, putting out a referendum asking what the members he represents want?

    And why isn't SAG petitioning the NLRB to uphold it's jurisdiction over TV, except that "done in a live manner?"

    Are ANY of these new AFTRA pilots "live" TV?

    Nope. This is a wholesale hostile takeover, by electoral end-around - the NY and Regional divisions, linking up with a small portion of the Hollywood division, UFS, to outvote, on the national board, THE final arbiter of all SAG policy, what the overwhelming majority of actors want, both SAG's and AFTRA's (almost ALL AFTRA actors are also SAG actors - but AFTRA REFUSES to make that information public) - they want to be represented by ONE UNION FOR ACTOR'S:

    THE SCREEN ACTORS GUILD.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Mulhern, how was that little teeny "rallie" today? Huh?
    No support at all from the membership for you MembershipFizzlers.

    Try another union, pal. SAG's done with you.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You whine and whine WHYYYY?

    Because we want SAG to
    M E R G E W I T H A F T R A

    That's why nobody cares what a handful of tired, 1960's nut brains shout about in the streets. You look like a bunch of losers which is what you are.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh, please, Jonathan - another endless rant by Matt Mulhern listing fibs!

    Let's take just one for a moment.

    "...if any member of the P&H trustees says no because they don't think it will be wise for the plan at SAG, the whole thing dies..."

    Not true, and not even close to true. Fact is - whatever the P&H trustees have to say has no bearing whatsoever on the effective merging of SAG and AFTRA.

    Merger could take place with both unions' pension plans shored up and protected (just as the federal government would demand). A third plan could even be brought into existence. Or not. There's lots of ways to do it.

    But the trustees? They have nothing to do with merger.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I refer you to the Mercer Report.It put the nail in the coffin of merger 2003. What the trustees say doesn't matter?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Right now, nothing seems to matter. Facts, logic, reasoning – nothing. It takes brute force, as in out-voting the opposition. Then, when you get power, you put your boot on the throat of the political opposition and you end them.

    Everything else is bullshit. These people: Ken Howard, Amy Aquino, David White, all the moderate members of the national board and their sympathizers, want to end SAG. They’re a union-busting disgrace.

    The theory is the AMPTP gave all the pilots this year to AFTRA because they are worried about the seemingly endless volatility in the SAG boardroom.

    Bullshit.

    They awarded all the pilots to AFTRA to help SAG sell merger. It’s called collusion.

    Why would they penalize the new producer-friendly SAG government, which got rid of the “hard-liners?” You’d figure they’d reward them for their efforts.

    This is collusion to create a producer-friendly union through merger. Period.

    Look, nobody likes labor unrest. Nobody. But when the producers announce in the NY Times, as they did in July of ‘07 they want to “end residuals,” you better put your flack vest on, cause there goes 1/3rd to 1/2 your income each year (or more).

    Yesterday’s NY Times announced the FCC is pushing to wire the entire country, rural areas, everywhere, with high speed broadband, which they think is the communication delivery system of… now, not the future. They are proposing pushing for a roll-back of some of the Broadcast spectrum, a roll-back of phone companies as providers, and the transition to production of TV’s with set top boxes where the consumer can watch anything on either the web, or broadcast, their choice.

    Guess who gets screwed when the consumer opts for the web?

    So, for those of us who were simply standing on the tracks, watching the new media train coming at us a hundred miles and hour, and saying “gee, I think we should make sure we’re protected in our next contract,” now, the FCC is going to get that train up to two hundred miles an hour, and, thanks to the “moderates,” we are naked.

    We are stuck with fixed-rates in new media, not the percentage of total gross revenue in new media we needed, little or no residuals, we’ve lost clip consent, product placement protections, force majeure, we’re losing residuals, now we’ve lost all the new pilots to AFTRA, and ALL this has been on the current “moderate” SAG administrations watch. They agreed to these terms and they have lost the TV jurisdiction totally to AFTRA this year, the SAG actors bread and butter. They can no longer blame Membership First. It’s on them. Id’ give them an F so far.

    So I ask all the SAG members out there – wouldn’t you like to see Ken Howard send out a referendum asking US what WE want?

    How about WE get to determine whether we want to be represented by SAG or AFTRA, thus ending all this talk of merger and all this “divide for weakness” bullshit that’s been KILLING the SAG middle class actor for the past two years?

    One union for actors? Seems logical to me. But NOT an AFTRA-centric merged one, for all the reasons listed by the posters above. Because, as we all know – AFTRA SUCKS.

    Wake up SAG membership. Roberta Reardon, Kim Roberts- Hedgepath, Ken Howard, Amy Aquino and David White are AMPTP ass-lickers, who are selling you down the river.

    It’s up to you. What can you do? vote these union-busting motherfuckers out, at least the SAG ones, The AFTRA producer-whores are hard-wired in for as long as they keep breathing.

    The ship is sinking SAG members. Wake the fuck up. You have to FIGHT for you RIGHTS.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "I refer you to the Mercer Report.It put the nail in the coffin of merger 2003. What the trustees say doesn't matter?"

    You have not even read the Mercer Report,
    so how would you get such a notion?
    That's okay - I'll tell you.
    Your Membership First friends make that claim
    and have fed it to you, Matt.
    And it is a false claim.

    Only ONE Producer trustee leaked a negative memo.
    Period.
    Membership First bowed down to that producer.
    The Mercer Report DID NOT condemn merger.

    At any rate - that was then and this is now.
    The merger plan will be more thorough
    and will be ready for the false propaganda
    sent out to illegally obtained MF email lists.

    Look - I think it's great that you think your lies are true.
    I wouldn't have it any other way.
    If you think I will attempt
    to thoroughly educate you beforehand
    you have another think coming.
    Enjoy your state of ignorance.
    We're all better off with you on the side you say you're on.

    ReplyDelete
  8. One trustee with the courage to state the obvious is all it took, and all it will take. The trustee said the SAG P&H program would end up subsidizing the AFTRA program, thus leading to a diminution of benefits for SAG pensioners and a possible downgrade of benefits for SAG health plan participants. And he was right. And merger failed. Again.

    Your current government (they sure aren't mine) are accomplishing NOTHING for the SAG actor. They can't - it goes against their core mission - "keep SAG weak to facilitate merger."

    You are doomed simply because the time-line will catch up with you. SAG membership will not tolerate SAG inaction and weakness. They want results. NOW.

    ALL Pilots being lost to AFTRA on YOUR watch? That's INFINITELY worse than any delays or inaction by the previous administration. No attempt to counter that loss, or even speak out against it? Treason. Period.

    Time is your enemy. You are getting nowhere NEAR merger for 2 years, minimum, and by then, you will have lost the majority, and then we will END YOU.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Ah - the violence -
    "we will END YOU."
    "Treason!"
    "You are doomed."
    Tell us all, honestly - what are your medications?

    Really, Matt, what's the point?
    We know that you are angry
    and we understand that no one wants to be around that.
    What's the point, lad?
    Feeling alone and want some company?
    Then stop "setting the door on fire"
    and "surrounding the city."
    You might find some friends.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This is what someone I know wrote on another blog. I've updated SAG's premiums. I don't know if the AFTRA premiums reflect the recent 5% increase, imposed by the AFTRA plan or not.

    Formerly AFTRA's plan was twice what SAG costs, IF YOU WERE SINGLE. Many, many, times more than what SAG is a quarter if you’re married.

    SAG :
    249.00 per quarter PLAN I, up from 150.00 in January

    294.00 per quarter PLAN II, up from 195.00 in January

    375.00 per quarter PLAN II Age/Service* 375.00, up from 195.00 in January

    *This premium applies to participants who qualify at the lower earnings amount because they are at least age 40 and have at least 10 years of Earned Eligibility.

    I

    AFTRA : Family Health Plan premium

    330.00 per quarter SINGLE EARNING BETWEEN 10-30,000.00

    551.00 per quarter ACTOR AND SPOUSE
    551.00 per quarter ACTOR AND CHILD
    603.00 per quarter ACTOR, SPOUSE AND CHILD

    2008 Buy-Up Rates

    If you only qualify for Individual coverage under the AFTRA Health Plan, you may choose to “buy up” to Family coverage by paying an additional premium amount each quarter.

    Active Coverage
    From Individual to Family Coverage (Quarterly Cost)

    Member Only Buy Up TOTAL COST: ( if you didn’t earn 30,000.00 to cover your family )

    315.00 ACTOR + 1,361 = 1,676 TOTAL FOR ACTOR AND SPOUSE

    315.00 ACTOR + 2,593.00 =2,908.00 TOTAL FOR ACTOR,SPOUSE AND CHILD

    SO SAG INSURANCE = BETTER AND LESS EXPENSIVE:

    $600.00 – $800.00 PER YEAR

    AFTRA INSURANCE:

    $ 1,320.00 – 11,632.00 PER YEAR

    You could earn as little as $10,000 – $30,000.00 a year and easily pay almost half of that ( if not all of that ) for AFTRA health care.

    But SAG wouldn't end up "subsidizing AFTRA's P&H plan" as the trustee said in 2003.

    Yeah, right.

    "it's about strength in numbers!"

    Not these numbers, that's for damn sure.

    Can we please get these people the fuck out of our boardroom? I'm asking nicely.

    ReplyDelete
  11. If that's how you ask "nicely,"
    I can tell you that you are in for it, Matt.
    Big time.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 1. " "moderate" leaders have been quoted publicly saying their plan was to "weaken SAG to facilitate merger with AFTRA.""

    No one ever said this, let alone "publicly."

    2. "if any member of the P&H trustees says no because they don't think it will be wise for the plan at SAG, the whole thing dies."

    A complete fabrication.

    3. "SAG government is also consciously not telling SAG membership it is their right under federal law to choose which union they wish to represent them in these new pilots.

    That is a clear violation of their obligation to protect the best interests of SAG actors."

    SAG is not violating any obligation here because there is nothing to tell SAG members because there is no "right under Federal to choose" union representation on an pilot-by-pilot basis.

    4. "And, finally, if a referendum were put out today, asking actors if they wished to be solely represented by SAG or AFTRA, estimates are it would come back in the high 80th to 90th percentile for SAG.

    So why isn't Ken Howard, President of SAG, putting out a referendum asking what the members he represents want?"

    It's because Ken Howard is a lot smarter than you. He knows that such a beauty contest is totally worthless and a waste of time and money.


    5. "And why isn't SAG petitioning the NLRB to uphold it's jurisdiction over TV, except that "done in a live manner?""

    Because SAG is also smarter than you, and they know the authority of a 55 year old opinion is nothing when it has been amended and revised by practice since then.

    6. "electoral end-around - the NY and Regional divisions, linking up with a small portion of the Hollywood division,"

    So action by a majority is an "electoral end around." Wow.

    7. "overwhelming majority of actors want . . . to be represented by ONE UNION FOR ACTOR'S:
    THE SCREEN ACTORS GUILD."

    The last time merger was considered by the members of both unions, merger was supported by 58% of the combined membership, and a majority of BOTH unions considered individually. There's no evidence to suggest what you believe, and plenty of evidence that an even greater number support merger now (the continued election of pro-merger actors to the National Board, the loss of Board seats by anti-merger candidates, the large majorities ratifying both SAG's and AFTRA's Tv contracts the last time around, etc., etc., etc.)

    8. "I refer you to the Mercer Report.It put the nail in the coffin of merger 2003. What the trustees say doesn't matter?"

    The Mercer Report said no such thing. In fact, it found now structural or legal impediments to the merger of the funds, and that the only differences to be worked out were philosophical in nature.

    What I think you are referring to is what has become known as the "Kasdan memo," which was produced by a producer trustee and excepted as holy truth by those who opposed merger. Why producers can be otherwise evil all the time and yet be so right about this escapes me.

    9. "Why would they penalize the new producer-friendly SAG government, which got rid of the “hard-liners?” You’d figure they’d reward them for their efforts."

    You'd figure that if you weren't too bright. What producer in his right mind would put his finances into a production affiliated with a union that is just one horrible election cycle from returning power to the folks who think that the only legitimate negotiation tool is a strike?

    10. "But when the producers announce in the NY Times, as they did in July of ‘07 they want to “end residuals,” you better put your flack vest on, cause there goes 1/3rd to 1/2 your income each year (or more)."

    A. It was one producer, not a group of them, and he was speaking on his own behalf.
    B. The fact that he said it was nothing new. Producers have been saying the same thing for years.

    ReplyDelete
  13. 11. "Yesterday’s NY Times announced the FCC is pushing to wire the entire country...which they think is the communication delivery system of… now, not the future.

    A. It's a proposal for a ten year plan. It isn't here now, and passage is far from certain.

    12. "They are proposing pushing for a roll-back of some of the Broadcast spectrum,"

    Which is being resisted by the broadcast business.

    13. "a roll-back of phone companies as providers,"

    Nope.

    14. "and the transition to production of TV’s with set top boxes where the consumer can watch anything on either the web, or broadcast, their choice."

    Which boxes don't exist and haven't even been designed yet.


    15. "So, for those of us who were simply standing on the tracks, watching the new media train coming at us a hundred miles and hour, and saying “gee, I think we should make sure we’re protected in our next contract,” now, the FCC is going to get that train up to two hundred miles an hour, and, thanks to the “moderates,” we are naked.

    The train hasn't even been built yet. The train hasn't even been designed yet, and as for your powers of prediction, I remember when you predicted, based on inside information, that if the TV/Theatrical contract was ratified, there would be an immediate deluge of non-union made-for-new-media production from AMPTP members. How did that work out, Nostradamus?

    16. "We are stuck with fixed-rates in new media,"

    You're not "stuck" with anything. The interim agreement reached in the last contract is subject to a sunset clause.

    17. "So I ask all the SAG members out there – wouldn’t you like to see Ken Howard send out a referendum asking US what WE want?"

    Why would anyone want that, since the results don't matter?

    18. "How about WE get to determine whether we want to be represented by SAG or AFTRA, thus ending all this talk of merger and all this “divide for weakness” bullshit that’s been KILLING the SAG middle class actor for the past two years?"

    The power to do that requires that you seek to decertify AFTRA according to the requirement of the NLRA. If that's what you want, go for it. Don't be terribly surprised if you start that march and find yourself at the head of the two dozen "protesters" who showed up outside the SAG plenary on Saturday.

    19. "The trustee said the SAG P&H program would end up subsidizing the AFTRA program, thus leading to a diminution of benefits for SAG pensioners and a possible downgrade of benefits for SAG health plan participants."

    He didn't say that. He said SAG members COULD end up subsidizing AFTRA members, depending on the plan finally adopted. Furthermore, he gave no evidence in support of the "Could." The memo was a transparent ploy to defeat merger, and it worked. As has been demonstrated so amply here, the distortions have become "fact."

    As for the number game on benefits, the charm of merger is that, as far as health plans go, you start from scratch. What SAG and AFTRA offer now have absolutely no impact on what a merged plan would provide. Given economies of scale on administration, a larger member base from which to negotiate deeper discounts from providers, and the elimination of overlapping coverage and the ability to count all earnings towards a single eligibility test, there's a lot of good reasons to believe that more people will be covered under a merged health plan than are covered by the seperate plans now, and that premiums, deductibles and co-pays would compare favorably to what is currently available.

    Both SAG and AFTRA plans are currently suffering from the effects of medical cost inflation and thin reserves as a result of the financial meltdown. I think that merger would give the smart people who run both funds the opportunity to move health care coverage in some new directions.

    ReplyDelete
  14. The executives stopped short of saying they would demand an immediate end to residual payments in the upcoming, probably difficult negotiations with writers, actors and directors. But they were emphatic in calling for the dismantling of a system under which specific payments are made when movies and shows are released on DVD, shown abroad or otherwise resold. Instead, they want to pool such revenue and recover their costs before sharing any of the profit with the talent.

    “There are no ancillary markets any more; it’s all one market,” said Barry Meyer, chief executive of Warner Brothers. “This is the time to do it.”

    The briefing at the headquarters of the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers, an industry bargaining group, was conducted by Mr. Meyer, Leslie Moonves, chief executive of CBS, and Anne Sweeney, president of the Walt Disney-ABC Television Group, along with the alliance’s president, J. Nicholas Counter. It was intended to set the stage for Monday’s opening of contract talks with the Writers Guild of America unions on both coasts."
    ____________________________

    And yes, ABSOLUTELY, an "electoral end-around." The head of the RBD HAS NO THEATRICAL CREDITS. This nut who will be brought up on charges from the Hawaii branch, Scott Rodgers, because of his outrageous, threatening behavior on Saturday - has NEVER done a TV or film job! NEVER! NY and the RBD are dominated by AFTRA members with SAG cards, who have FAR less interest in residuals, cause they rarely MAKE ANY, because so many of them DON'T WORK the TV/Theatrical contract, so, YES, an "electoral end-around."

    Apparently, Board Members (Scott Rodgers, Pam Reed, who tried to RUN Michelle Santopietro down in her CAR, after RAGING at her, spit flying, that she was "HANDING OUT FLYERS!!!!!!" (handing out flyers?) BECAUSE MEMBERSHIP FIRST PUT YOU UP TO THIS!!!!!!!" - they apparently can attack, verbally assault with tons of profanity, nearly physically assault and ALMOST run you down with their car if you disagree with their politics as a member. That's because the Probable Cause Committee is dominated by a bunch of Union-Busters who consider themselves vastly BETTER than the average rank and file member of this union.
    __________________________

    And finally, it "won't matter" if Ken Howard put out a referendum asking actors if they'd prefer SAG or AFTRA to represent them, the estimates being the results would come back in the high 80th% to the 90th% for SAG?

    What the living fuck are you talking about? How can it "not matter" or be "a beauty contest" if SAG members want to be represented by SAG, and not AFTRA by an OVERWHELMING MAJORITY?

    Sole representation by SAG takes care of ALL the "race to the bottom" problems (only AFTRA every time) and gets rid of AFTRA's producer-butt-boy legacy once and for all, because the people who actually
    work these contracts understand, through experience and precedent, SAG HAS to take a tough stance in negotiations. Look what the moderates have lost in less than a year!

    Tiny fixed-rates in new media, essentially NO residuals in what will become the principal delivery system. With a sunset clause with no teeth because it has NO force of law, meaning the producers don't HAVE to change a thing!

    Clip consent? Gone.

    Product placement protections? Gone.

    Force Majeure? Gone.

    The ENTIRE TV pilot season? Lost to AFTRA - on YOUR boys and girls watch.

    These people are AWFUL stewards of the union, AWFUL negotiators, and
    Traitors. Period.

    AFTRA SUCKS. YOU SUCK. PERIOD. READ. GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

    NO MERGER. NOT NOW. NOT EVER.

    ONE UNION FOR ACTORS:

    The Screen Actors Guild

    ReplyDelete
  15. According to F.C.C. officials briefed on the plan, the commission’s recommendations will include a subsidy for Internet providers to wire rural parts of the country now without access, a controversial auction of some broadcast spectrum to free up space for wireless devices, and the development of a new universal set-top box that connects to the Internet and cable service."

    So, it looks to ME, like the previous administration at SAG HAD IT RIGHT - here comes the new-media express and YOUR feeble-minded MORON negotiators and, now, government, GAVE AWAY THE FARM.

    Hint: when the government TELLS you it is going to make high-speed cable THE dominant communication delivery system of the 21st century, you, as an industry (the ACTING industry) probably want to lock in protective contract provisions before it's TOO LATE YOU MORON.

    You might want to check what the piece actually says before mouthing off. This represents a MAJOR push by the government to wire the entire country with high-speed internet as the nations number one communications delivery system, it DOES indicate they will push to cut back on phone company delivery of net (did you READ the piece before you write brain-dead lies like "nope?")

    And it DOES SAY it represent a major push to add set-top boxes, which ALREADY EXIST as a regular feature of TV's, whereby the consumer can watch the net OR broadcast, and if they watch the net, the RIDICULOUSLY low fixed-rates YOU agreed to (the "moderates") will be a HUGE impediment for living wages and fair residuals for actors.
    _______________________________

    And, sorry, Dave Clennon QUOTES James Cromwell as SAYING, publicly, "the goal is to weaken SAG to facilitate merger." Gabrielle Carteris was overheard at a Hollywood Division meeting saying the EXACT SAME THING.

    _________________________

    NY Times, July 2007

    "Hollywood Executives Call for End to Residual Payments"

    (I see the word "several" and I count four. Do you think talking out your ass and just saying "only one" will... make this article go away?)

    By MICHAEL CIEPLY
    Published: July 11, 2007

    ENCINO, Calif., July 11 — In an unusually blunt session here today, several of Hollywood’s highest-ranking executives called for the end of the entertainment industry’s decades-old system of paying what are called residuals to writers, actors and directors for the re-use of movie and television programs after their initial showings.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Let's take a look at the actual wording, shall we?
    ____________________

    "Excerpt from Mercer Memo: 1. Based on the March 2003 Mercer Report, the Management Trustees have concluded that it is not in the best interests of Plan Participants to consolidate the SAG-Producers Pension and Health Plans with the AFTRA Health and Retirement Plans because it would result in a diminution in benefits and an increase in administration costs."

    "The question arises whether it is prudent for SAG Trustees to be considering a merger... with a health plan in worse financial shape than itself.It is important to note that there is no information contained in the Mercer Report which suggests that sufficient savings will result from a merger to improve, or even maintain status quo benefits for SAG (or even AFTRA) participants."

    "Kasdan's memo predicted that a consolidation of the guild's and AFTRA's benefits plans would ("WOULD" NOT "COULD")cause SAG participants to have to subsidize AFTRA's members. He also questioned whether a merger of the plans would benefit SAG pension-and-health members."
    ___________________________

    Jonathan Handel's blog is probably NOT the place to defend the "sunset clause" on new media, which Jonathan himself called " meaningless fig leaf."
    ________________________________

    NY Times, March 113th.

    "The blueprint reflects the government’s view that broadband Internet is becoming the common medium of the United States, gradually displacing the telephone and broadcast television industries. ("DISPLACING THE TELEPHONE AND BROADCAST TELEVISION INDUSTRIES" PHONE - "NOPE?" HELLO?) It also signals a shift at the F.C.C., which under the administration of President George W. Bush gained more attention for policing indecency on the television airwaves than for promoting Internet access.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hearsay. You can't go into a court and claim that "Dave Clennon" heard "James Cromwell" say jackshit.

    The obviously unstable Michele Santopietro can - if she actually is a SAG member - bring any other member up on charges about anything she pleases. If those charges are reliable is another story altogether. Lots of people like this harass other members by bringing specious charges. It might also interest Matt Mulhern to learn that the Probable Cause Committee is overwhelmingly populated with members of his own political party.

    All of the above facts he posts are false and all of the above cowardly allegations he makes are false.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Probable Cause is led by David Joliffe. EVERY OTHER MEMBER is a moderate.

    Michelle Santopietro is a SAG member - with MANY MORE CREDITS THAN YOU.

    She also holds a Masters Degree and knows EXACTLY what she is talking about.

    And, my guess is, she is going to be your WORST NIGHTMARE.

    Super-smart, super-informed, and super-determined.

    Good Luck.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Probable Cause is led by David Jolliffe ((get the dude's name right for a change) EVERY OTHER MEMBER is Membership First....

    Michelle Santopietro is the stupidest crank I have ever encountered.

    Hey Matt - ask her where in the SAG Constitution there is any mention of "behavior unbecoming a member." There is none. What a stupid bitch.

    Whatever she "holds" she holds between her legs and that is the only thing she knows about.

    The funny part is she is YOUR worst nightmare. Anything she touches will turn to massive shit.

    She is a batshit, around the curve, over the top, beyond the pale wacko.

    ReplyDelete
  20. You are a deeply disturbed individual.

    ReplyDelete
  21. If you want to read something written by a "deeply disturbed individual," I invite you to go read absolutely anything written by Michele Santopietro on the sagactor.com site. In fact, read anything she wrote on the Actors Access (showfax) site before she was banned from it for her foul and abusive behavior. Take your pick from any site she has ever written on, at random - you don't have to be choosy. She is, by far, the most deeply disturbed individual you will ever read on any of the actors' blogs. Except for Matt Mulhern, that is - or any of the multiple identities he has used when banned and removed, as he has been, many times, from every website he has ever posted on.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Over on Showfax, where Tom Ligon has been banned, as he has been on Sagactor, Showfax Bob made a good point - who cares? I would imagine the above post comes from Ligon, who posts here by name, until he goes mental and vicious, then he becomes anonymous. He and Redanty have been using multiple aliases and have been banned from multiple sites. Who cares? "Foul and abusive behavior?" I don't think profanity on blogs really qualifies, and, again, since there is so much hypocrisy and so much profanity from Ligon, Redanty, and the rest. As to actual behavior, the demonstration and other events have the moderate folks back-pedaling due to the craziness of some of their brethren nearly hitting people as they drove into the plenary last Saturday, whizzing past the 25 to 30 demonstrators who got up at 6 or 7am on a Saturday to drive down to 5757 to show their outrage over the loss of all pilots to AFTRA, among other things this administration is both doing and not doing, to further weaken SAG to facilitate merger with AFTRA. I believe actual behavior is relevant, and, assuming it goes both ways, I have witnessed enough crazy "behavior" by frothing-at-the-mouth "moderates" to convince me these people are truly unhinged. I'd also be interested to hear what Mr. Ligon thinks of the editor of his home ballpark, Sagwatch, suggesting merger is perhaps no longer the answer? A wise man, in this single instance, that David Browde. That must be a body-blow to the deranged faithful over at Sagwatch. I do believe Browde is finally coming to the conclusion there has to be another way, and he's right. SAG. All actors under one roof. It's what actors want, they've just never had the chance to vote for it. The only thing they've been able to vote for, as to the "one roof" option, is merger, and they've turned it down. Twice. Why not try sending out that vote? Would you like to be represented by one union - SAG or AFTRA? The result would be SAG by a huge margin. Problem solved. Or at least problems under one roof, instead of a house divided merging with a house who's only distinguishing feature is the ease with which they make things better for producers, at the expense of actors.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Who do you think you're fooling, Mulhern?

    ReplyDelete
  24. No one is fooling anyone. That's the point.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Thanks, Matt. Glad you see that.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Ass-ume at your own risk.

    ReplyDelete