Did AFTRA screw SAG? Did SAG screw itself? Not that it matters

Late last year, when the writers' strike against the Hollywood studios had just started, I was talking on the record with my friend and WGA member Mark Evanier, of the amazing blog, and this veteran of at least five WGA work stoppages explained to me the labor chess played so expertly by AMPTP, the negotiating arm of the moguls.

As Mark saw it, first what the AMPTP would do is negotiate with the directors' guild, the richest and least strike-prone of the industry unions. Was there a sticking point that year? If the answer was "no," then the DGA and AMPTP would quickly sign a new long-term agreement and the other unions would, more or less, fall in line behind that example. OK — but what if DGA really wanted something not currently in their agreement? This is the interesting part: More often than not, in Mark's view, the DGA would ask for something that benefited the directors but not the actors or writers so much. In exchange, the AMPTP would demand a concession that wasn't really a concession for the DGA but could be used to extract real money from the other unions. For instance, the DGA once restructured the work week in a way that barely affected directors (who are 24/7 when helming a project anyway) but greatly reduced overtime pay for a certain class of extras once the AMPTP signed a new deal with AFTRA based on the irresistible logic that "hey, the directors thought it was a fair deal — what's your problem?"

If you're a director reading this, and Mark's view of the world is not yours, sorry. My point is the mindset that it has engendered in most people who carry union cards in Hollywood, namely the writers and actors. Mark thought that sooner or later, the same thing would happen with the writers' strike. Somehow, some way, the AMPTP would figure out how, as Mark put it, "to use DGA to screw the other unions." To the surprise of many (not least the moguls), though, that didn't happen. The AMPTP's bad faith and mulish refusal to negotiate what should've been deal points in the 1990s turned all of Hollywood against them.

I had a talk last night with Jonathan Handel, the entertainment attorney and prolific blogger who cut his teeth at the WGA during the round-robin negotiations of old. Jonathan has made it clear that when it comes to the current deal — essentially one that DGA made, playing the good cop to WGA's bad cop — he thinks SAG needs to take the deal and move on.

"What SAG wanted to do was not unreasonable," Handel said — but he added that if SAG really wanted to lay the groundwork for challenging the moguls, they needed to start "years ago." Instead, as Nikki Finke has reported, a top SAG official more or less dropped the bomb on his counterpart at the studios by telling him that the the union had issues that were not covered by the WGA deal.

Talks stalled. And then, the AMPTP called up AFTRA and put them on the clock. Voila, the weaker sister agreed to the deal on the table, essentially the WGA deal for actors. Finally, the moguls in were the driver's seat, the position that a lot of people, including Mark, assumed it would eventually take over in its talks with the writers. (Then there was Michael Cieply, who lived in a parallel world where the studios were all-powerful, all-knowing, all-wise — gods, really, but with summer getaways when Olympus got a little steamy.)

If this labor action drags on, we can talk about deal points. Handel, for once, thinks that is a distinct possibility. For one thing, there is no deadline to meet like there was when the cancellation of the Oscars loomed large over the WGA strike. (Then as now, it seems, Tom Hanks was actually the one in the driver's seat.) For another, TV shows can limp along for quite some time using AFTRA crews. The CW's "90210" spinoff, for example, is an AFTRA show and is proceeding apace. SAG shops could vote to switch to AFTRA, but Handel, who would know, says that would take months. And anyway, if rank and file of SAG are that disgusted with their leadership, would SAG chief Allan Rosenberg sort of pick up on that? He's married to Marg Helgenberger, fergodsake.

Nothing's really going to happen for another week, when we learn if AFTRA's 44,000 members have voted to take the deal on the table or reject it in solidarity with SAG. For now, all we can really do is sit back and admire Nick Counter, the AMPTP's longtime negotiator, who was all but x-actoed out of the picture last March when the writers finally did their deal with the studios. At the end of his illustrious career, he finds himself preparing to take one last victory lap after all.

"SAG really put itself in its position by letting AFTRA negotiate," said Handel. "AMPTP effectively played the unions off each other. It was a two way street fight here that the studios were able to execute and (was) very adroitly done."

Comments

[Angie]

I take this negotiation as proof that the actors are just the sort of dumb puppets I thought they were. And greedy and shady, to boot. First off, they're asking for things no other union, not even the WGA at their bossiest, asked for. And secondly, they are schmucks for trying to ruin AFTRA's deal with the studios - they have no business meddling. Not even their own union members approve of their actions.

They sucked monkey butt at negotiating, and they are sore losers. I don't feel sorry for them. Actors are overpaid. And if you're an actor who is out of work, don't whine to me - find another job like the rest of the world does.

[Viewer]

Yes she's right support!

[Gusar]

Angie, are you crazy? You want the studio CEOs like Jeff Zucker and Les Moonves (who already receives $37 million/year) to get all the money? They are the greedy bastards, not the actors. When I buy DVDs it is the actors and writers I wish to primarily support. Not Les Moonves and his 40-years younger wife.

Yeah, SAG could have handled things better. But they are not unreasonable in what they want.