Jump to content



Photo

NO SAG STRIKE! Petition


  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Simon Jayes

Simon Jayes

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 57 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 26 November 2008 - 09:57 AM

Hi Everyone,

Here's a link to an online petition to SAG to ask them NOT to strike. I doubt it will do anything, but there are 11,000+ signatures so far.........

NO SAG STRIKE! Petition
  • 0

#2 Jess Haas SOC

Jess Haas SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1145 posts
  • Culver City, CA

Posted 26 November 2008 - 11:54 AM

I understand why them striking is problematic, but aren't there some good reasons why they want to strike? If they decide to strike wouldn't supporting them be more likely to end things quicker then if we weeken their position?

~Jess
  • 0

#3 RonBaldwin

RonBaldwin

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2351 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 26 November 2008 - 12:41 PM

I understand why them striking is problematic, but aren't there some good reasons why they want to strike? If they decide to strike wouldn't supporting them be more likely to end things quicker then if we weeken their position?

~Jess


it's a pity that sag would never feel the same about us.
  • 0

#4 Jess Haas SOC

Jess Haas SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1145 posts
  • Culver City, CA

Posted 26 November 2008 - 01:07 PM

Well to be honest I haven't seen any reason for them to as I haven't seen a whole lot of support from us.

This idea that we shouldn't support them because they wouldn't support us is extremely counterproductive. Weakening any of the unions strengthens the postion of the AMPTP and as a result weakens all of the unions ours included. Give a little support and you might be surprised at how much we get back when we need it. There were a number of actors showing support for the writers during their strike and honestly i would expect the same if IATSE were to strike. If everyone sits around saying Im not going to suport them because they wouldn't support me nothing will change. If we start supporting each other regardless things could be very different.

All of the bickering and lack of support between the unions just gives the AMPTP the strength the make rediculous demands and stretch out these battles like they have been. With some unity and support things could be resolved much quicker.

~Jess
  • 0

#5 Jess Haas SOC

Jess Haas SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1145 posts
  • Culver City, CA

Posted 26 November 2008 - 01:17 PM

I just want to clear one thing up. The current vote is not a vote to strike it is a vote to give SAG leadership the ability to strike if it comes to that. The idea is that once that is on the table they will have a lot more negotiating power which hopefully will help to clear up this mess.

~Jess
  • 0

#6 RonBaldwin

RonBaldwin

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 2351 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 26 November 2008 - 01:37 PM

I hope it helps. Sorry to be so "glass half empty" (I'm usually not) but the fact that they've stretched this bs out over such a long period of time for no apparent reason accomplishing nothing shows that they are either inept or don't give a shiite about anyone but themselves.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't support them because they don't support us -- you are right in saying how counterproductive that is. But unfortunately it's the truth...we crew are a minor annoyance to sag, dga, wga, and the prods. Any one of them would cross our lines in a heartbeat to get to work. The actors supported the wga because they write all their lines (and many of them happened to be co-producers on the shows they were working on...hmmm). I'm guessing the only time you'd see an actor on the line with the IA is if Entertainment Tonight was there...or maybe if Julia Roberts was there with Danny Motor?

rb
  • 0

#7 Kris Torch Wilson

Kris Torch Wilson

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 184 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 26 November 2008 - 03:24 PM

Didn't lose much work during the writer's fiasco did you Jess. If these greedy bastards go out, we will see a major disaster here in Los Angeles. They need to accept the offer agreed to by AFTRA and return to waiting tables so those of us that make the bulk of our income from THIS business can continue to do so.

Kris Still Bitter Wilson
  • 0

#8 Jess Haas SOC

Jess Haas SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1145 posts
  • Culver City, CA

Posted 26 November 2008 - 07:15 PM

Actually I lost a lot of work because of the writer's strike.

I haven't looked at the recent contract possibilities so if someone wants to show me some examples of how SAG is being unreasonable I will gladly listen. From what I have heard the whole reason that they are asking for a strike authorization is that AMPTP is refusing to even meet with SAG to discuss the contract further. Hopefully a strike authorization will get them to agree to meet again so they can decide on a new contract.

The fact that people keep acting like the AMPTP is always in the right and that the unions are always being unreasonable bugs me, especially when they are union members. What did those large corporations ever do to gain so much trust?

~Jess
  • 0

#9 Robert Starling SOC

Robert Starling SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1134 posts
  • Las Vegas, NV

Posted 26 November 2008 - 07:23 PM

I just want to clear one thing up. The current vote is not a vote to strike it is a vote to give SAG leadership the ability to strike if it comes to that. The idea is that once that is on the table they will have a lot more negotiating power which hopefully will help to clear up this mess.


And.... as I understand it SAG leadership has not called for a vote up to now because they knew they didn't have the 75% membership support to sustain it and I doubt they do now either. I'm only guessing but I think they won't get the vote now but their leadership will now be able to blame it on the economy to save face.

There's too much face and "a$$" saving politics going on in this process!

Again, I'm only guessing but I think they'd have a lot more support from the rest of us rank and file brothers and sisters had all this moved on in a more business like manner with a sense of urgency that reflects their concern for EVERYONE else in the business.

Robert "Not as bitter as Kris... but getting there quickly" Starling
  • 0

#10 Jess Haas SOC

Jess Haas SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 1145 posts
  • Culver City, CA

Posted 26 November 2008 - 07:33 PM

I also doubt it will pass, which will probably help to end things in its own way. Hopefully this mess will be over soon either way.

~Jess
  • 0

#11 Brad Grimmett

Brad Grimmett

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 718 posts

Posted 26 November 2008 - 07:46 PM

The fact that people keep acting like the AMPTP is always in the right and that the unions are always being unreasonable bugs me, especially when they are union members. What did those large corporations ever do to gain so much trust?

~Jess

I won't speak for other people, but I believe a lot of them will agree with me on this. It's not that people think the AMPTP and the studios deserve trust, or that they're right that makes people want SAG to sign a deal. It's the fact that SAG isn't going to get what they want, and everyone knows it, so all they're doing is making things bad for themselves and for the rest of us by holding out for so long. If this had only gone on for a week or two, you wouldn't see so many people talking about it. But this has been going on for many months, with no signs of a resolution at any point. Who is that helping? In the meantime, production has slowed to a halt and many people are out of work due to the lack of new production because of the fear of a strike. SAG is wrong to have done this regardless of whether the producers are wrong or not.
  • 0

#12 Kris Torch Wilson

Kris Torch Wilson

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 184 posts
  • Los Angeles

Posted 27 November 2008 - 03:38 PM

Having 'rights' is one of the things that makes our society so great. The right to strike is one of those. But having that 'right' doesn't make it right. With every 'right' comes responsibility. One's responsibilities trump one's rights every time. In the current economic situation: the responsible course of action DEMANDS that unions accept deals that may not fulfill all their wants but insure the continuation of working. Does this give the advantage to Producers? Of course, but ownership MUST make money. The members of SAG have been offered a deal that will continue to pay them long after the calluses from their strenuous jobs have healed. The folks paying them( and us) will continue to make money. And that is in all of our best interests. The more they make the better. Socialism will never work in our industry. We must remain capitalist. Or go back to film school and live in our cars! Been there, don't want to go back.
Wine makes me ramble.

Happy Thanksgiving,
Kris
  • 0

#13 Michael Stumpf

Michael Stumpf

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 491 posts
  • U.S.

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:52 PM

What did those large corporations ever do to gain so much trust?

~Jess



Give you a job, that's what.

If Bill Gates offered you a job and it paid well, you were happy with it, and enjoyed your life from that income, and a few others that WORKED for Bill Gates (actors WORK FOR the studios) and on average they made the most of any of the other employees of Bill Gates (at least made the most for the least amount of "work") and they threatened to shut the business down for awhile affecting YOUR income, YOUR livelihood, and the economy of the city, county, state or even country YOU live in, wouldn't you feel like telling them, "if you don't like the amount of money Bill Gates is PAYING you to do YOUR job, then don't work for him, go start your own fuking business and pay yourself as much as YOU want."

SAG and WGA have never supported us. True it's not a reason for us to NOT support them.
But support means being reasonable in what your asking for.
In this economy, in this time, and based on what EVERYONE ELSE has gotten, what they are asking for is NOT reasonable.
Furthermore, if we supported them for EVERY thing they asked for every 3 years over the past 40 years and the future 40 years, rest assured SAG would NEVER support us for anything we ask for.

SAG's base rate of pay for a speaking actor went up to roughly $940 for 8 hours in this most recent year, up from around $840 for 8 hours over the following. That's about a 12% pay increase.
We are lucky to get 3% and most recently got .75 cents an hour increase...about 1.0-1.8% for most of the workers in our unions.

There is a time to be greedy and this isn't it. And even if it was, don't expect too much support for greed.
I personally am very happy with the living I make. I am also very supportive of the unions to get us fair and deserved pay and benefit increases. But if I wasn't happy with 12% pay increases and getting paid for years to come for working 1-2 hours and speaking a few words, I'd start my own studio, otherwise they are in NO position to be making demands for what THEY think they DESERVE from the people who hire them and pay them a VERY attractive wage for what they do already, especially at the cost of hurting tens of thousands other people who are happy to work for these companies and don't want to be out of jobs for months because of them.

Cheers.
  • 0

#14 Michael Stumpf

Michael Stumpf

    Advanced Member

  • Sustaining Members
  • 491 posts
  • U.S.

Posted 01 December 2008 - 08:57 PM

The fact that people keep acting like the AMPTP is always in the right and that the unions are always being unreasonable bugs me, especially when they are union members. What did those large corporations ever do to gain so much trust?

~Jess

I won't speak for other people, but I believe a lot of them will agree with me on this. It's not that people think the AMPTP and the studios deserve trust, or that they're right that makes people want SAG to sign a deal. It's the fact that SAG isn't going to get what they want, and everyone knows it, so all they're doing is making things bad for themselves and for the rest of us by holding out for so long. If this had only gone on for a week or two, you wouldn't see so many people talking about it. But this has been going on for many months, with no signs of a resolution at any point. Who is that helping? In the meantime, production has slowed to a halt and many people are out of work due to the lack of new production because of the fear of a strike. SAG is wrong to have done this regardless of whether the producers are wrong or not.



Agreed.
And hopefully SAG's "leadership" (that's about as accurate as describing GW Bush's Presidency as effective) will see the light soon, and then be replaced with real leaders.
However, to make matters worse, the word on the street (well set) is that these same SAG bafoons are going to propagandize the strike vote for a good month or more, asking their members to support it and then not even ask for the strike vote until after the New Year.
  • 0

#15 Alec Jarnagin SOC

Alec Jarnagin SOC

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 1800 posts
  • New York City, USA

Posted 01 December 2008 - 09:17 PM

Michael,

"they are in NO position to be making demands for what THEY think they DESERVE from the people who hire them and pay them a VERY attractive wage for what they do already"

Look, I'm not for a moment supporting a strike, etc. but I can't help but find the irony in the above statement. Don't we ridicule those Steadicam operators that work for scale - a sum of money that many people in this world think is a lot - while we hold out for "an VERY attractive wage?"

Sure, we sight the heavy loads we carry, career longevity, skill set, etc. but how is this different than how an actor sees its?????
Face it; we all want the largest piece of pie we can get and there is nothing wrong with that!

The actors should not strike because of how it will effect most of THEIR membership first & foremost. Then they should not strike because of the people that surround them and make them look good (i.e. us) and then finally they should not strike because of the damage to the economy on the whole. They should not NOT strike because of their current salaries or because anyone else may think they are overpaid.

PS - please don't swear on the Forum.
  • 0




Teradek

Paralinx LLC

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

GPI Pro Systems

Omnishot Systems

PLC - Bartech

PLC Electronics Solutions

Ritter Battery

SkyDreams

BOXX

Varizoom Follow Focus

Boland Communications

Wireless Video Systems

Engineered Cinema Solutions

IDX

rebotnix Technologies

Betz Tools for Stabilizers