SAG vs. AFTRA

[Blaine]

Blaine

The Global Rule is a SAG rule. It is something members agree with...BUT that does not mean it can be enforced if it breaks an actual law. That's the point I am making...like in my state, SAG actors always say "Oh I can't do nonunion, it is against the rules". Those are SAG rules ...that in fact, by enforcing in this state ARE against the law.

So even if the Global Rule has specifics, it cannot legally be enforced if those rules in fact break laws in other countries. The Union could say "you agreed not to do that" BUT if the country has a law that the union is breaking by enforcing the union Global rule...any lawsuit or threat made by the union won't hold up court. In fact, if they try to throw out a member in that type of case...they are not allowed and can be fined by the Feds.

Not disagreeing at all.

The rules apply only to its own members because they have agreed to abide by them. If a person joins SAG, they agree to adhere to Rule One, which states that SAG members will not work for non-signatory producers.

Joining SAG in a right-to-work state is something that has to be addressed by the actor and how it will or won't affect his/her career.

To quote:

85% of FULL members make below POVERTY level income off of Union bookings each year.
85% of members pay so the top 8% can get their pension and the management can get a salary.
85% of members NEVER earn enough to get the lowest level of insurance from the union.

 

[Michele Seidman]

Joining SAG in a right-to-work state is something that has to be addressed by the actor and how it will or won't affect his/her career.

Exactly!

 

[Sumfun]

Please help me to understand the law better. I thought that right to work laws state that an employer may hire anybody he wants to regardless of union affiliation. The employer also cannot discriminate against a job applicant because of his union affiliation or lack thereof.

But how does this relate to SAG actors being able to take non-union jobs? Do the laws also state that unions cannot force their members to take non-union jobs?

I am asking because I live in a right to work state, and I would like to know if I can hire SAG actors for my non-signatory productions. Also, what recourse does SAG have against a member who works on a non-union job?

 

[otter1]

Sumfun,

The Moderator, answers all your questions on the first page of this thread.

BTW, I did not attack anybody, in any of my comments. It would be cowardly to attack while remaining anonymous.

I just wrote the facts.

 

[Sumfun]

Ah, financial core. Thank you.

Also, could you please clarify for me where SAG and AFTRA have their jurisdictions? My understanding is that SAG covers theatrical motion pictures, and TV programs and commercials shot on film. AFTRA covers videotaped and live TV programs, and commercials shot on video. Is this correct?

 

[Doc Bernard]

I would say that is not entirely true, Sumfun. ER has been digital for some time now, (shot on Reds), and it was SAG.

The series is now over, but the lines between the the two entities, SAG and AFTRA, are so blurred now, its crazy. But that's a subject for a different day.

 

[Doc Bernard]

Also, what recourse does SAG have against a member who works on a non-union job?

Suspension or revocation of membership. Remember, SAG can do this, even in a "Right to Work" state. SAG is not the employer, they are just a union. What jobs or roles you take are completely up to you. If a SAG actor wants to work non-union, they can, but then they will have to deal with the possibility of losing their membership in SAG, if they are not FC.

Employers in those states are not supposed to favor only members of a union or non-union people. But it is done. That's why there are auditions, and it is acceptable to ask if someone has union affiliations or not at the audition/interview. If they hear something that they don't like, you don't get the role/contract because "you weren't right for the part". They don't have be precise on the reasons.

 

[Sumfun]

Thanks, guys.

 

[Michele Seidman]

What jobs or roles you take are completely up to you. If a SAG actor wants to work non-union, they can, but then they will have to deal with the possibility of losing their membership in SAG, if they are not FC.

By law...the Guild cannot kick out a member for doing non-union in a Right to Work State. They will threaten it but technically it is not legal for them to file suit or actually boot a member for working non-union in a RTW state. Most actors can't afford a lawyer but any such case against an actor in an RTW state will not hold up in court BECAUSE it violates Federal Laws that protect individual state laws.

Employers in those states are not supposed to favor only members of a union or non-union people. But it is done. That's why there are auditions, and it is acceptable to ask if someone has union affiliations or not at the audition/interview. If they hear something that they don't like, you don't get the role/contract because "you weren't right for the part". They don't have be precise on the reasons.

Technically, in an RTW state the production is NOT allowed to ask if anyone is a Guild actor or in a union or not. Most post it on their resume though so it becomes a moot point. Production can decide to hire you or not based on anything they darned well please. Crew almost always hires from their Unions rosters anyway...but they will hire some non-union day players here and there.

But you are right Doc...they don't have to give you any reason for hiring or not!

 

[Michele Seidman]

The beauty is that if they kick you out of SAG, they can't bar you from working in SAG productions, but they also can't collect any dues from you. So, it's actually better to get kicked out than it is to go FiCore.

But because of that, it's not very likely that they'd expel someone from the Union.

lol..i get your point but maybe it is just me..I think going FiCore is better because you DO help pay to keep the Guild going. Even if you don't agree with everything..you can go to a Union state and do union..to a RTW state and do non...BUT, you still pay dues to keep the administration going and help keep the Guild alive so it can protect talent.

As mentioned before..I really am pro-union. So...FiCore is the alternative to scabbing work and not helping keep the union alive in my book!

just MHO

 

[Sumfun]

By law...the Guild cannot kick out a member for doing non-union in a Right to Work State. They will threaten it but technically it is not legal for them to file suit or actually boot a member for working non-union in a RTW state. Most actors can't afford a lawyer but any such case against an actor in an RTW state will not hold up in court BECAUSE it violates Federal Laws that protect individual state laws.

Michele, can you please point me to some reference materials that back up this claim? I was under the impression that unions are private entities, and they can kick members out at their discretion.

 

[Sumfun]

The beauty is that if they kick you out of SAG, they can't bar you from working in SAG productions, but they also can't collect any dues from you. So, it's actually better to get kicked out than it is to go FiCore.

But because of that, it's not very likely that they'd expel someone from the Union.

Good point. So I guess in a right to work state, there's really no advantage in joining a union. In fact it's probably a disadvantage because you have to pay dues, and the production company has to pay additional fees to the union.

 

[Michele Seidman]

Michele, can you please point me to some reference materials that back up this claim? I was under the impression that unions are private entities, and they can kick members out at their discretion.

Sumfun

Even private companies are subject to State and Federal laws. Just because they are private does not mean they can ignore the law governing a state or municipality.

They can kick someone out but if by doing so, they have ignored a law in a certain area...the actor in question only needs to hire a lawyer and fight back or the Private entity will be subject to Federal and/or State fines if found guilty of breaking the law.

The fact is, more than 85% of actors make poverty wages from film and TV work and most cannot afford to hire a lawyer.

Michele

 

[Blaine]

Michele, can you please point me to some reference materials that back up this claim? I was under the impression that unions are private entities, and they can kick members out at their discretion.

It would appear that SAG can discipline its membership for working on a nonunion production even in a right to work state.

From http://www.nrtw.org/d/sag_aftra_strike.htm

SAG and AFTRA members may resign and declare "financial core
status" at any time in order to escape those unions' rules against
working for nonunion employers. To avoid discipline for working on a
nonunion production, an actor or actress must resign before beginning the
nonunion work.

And this:

Last Song could generate hundreds of jobs for the so-called "right-to-work" state from production crews to extras, plus generate revenue from catering, hotels, transportation and related expenses. In a right-to-work state, no union membership is required to work on film productions, so a greater number of certain positions can be filled from outside of unions, unlike in Hollywood. However, right-to-work does not include actors for studio product

from http://lafiga.firedoglake.com/2009/04/02/miley-cyrus-looking-at-right-to-work-states-for-new-movie/

 

[Michele Seidman]

Blaine

I am aware of the rules the Guild has and discipline they can carry out in a union state but they 'legally' cannot discipline in a RTW state if that actor/actress wants to pursue it in court because that discipline is in direct contradiction with Federal laws as they regard to RTW status.

When threatened with it, the actors almost never sue. In the rare cases they have...the guild has not won the case and had to revoke the discipline. That is what an Entertainment lawyer here in NC informed me of as did a major film accountant from California.

They both also said, due to actors not being able to afford lawyers, these things are seldom brought to court and no one hears about it...and few challenge it. The lawyer here also said that the Guild has so many lawyers on hand that it is easy to send out letters to the talent about the discipline that will scare them enough to not test it.

I am pro-union and would rather do Fi-core than scab work...but those are the facts as they were explained to me.

PS...looks like we lost the Miley project to Georgia from what I heard the other day....sighhh. Well, at least it looks like East Bound and Down will be coming back and One Tree Hill too!

 

[Michele Seidman]

A few Financial Core Facts for review:

Legal Point:

In 1988, the Supreme Court again addressed the financial core issue in Communication Workers of America v. Beck. The question this time was whether an employee who is not a formal member in the sense above, but rather a financial core member, can be required to pay full union dues and fees, if those fees are used for purposes beyond collective bargaining, contract administration, or grievance adjustment (so-called collective bargaining activities). The court ruled in a 5 to 3 decision, with Justice William Brennan writing for the majority, that the financial core obligation does not include "the obligation to support union activities beyond those germane to collective bargaining, contract administration, and grievance adjustment."

Well Kept Sectret"
http://www.corlessproductions.com/financial_core.htm

[FONT=book antiqua,times new roman,times]Financial Core is a well kept secret in the industry. A SAG/AFTRA actor or any other union member for that manner may choose to go Financial Core for several reasons. One of them is to be able to work for less than union scale, or on non-union projects for deferred pay. Another reason is to work for higher than union scale and to be able to negotiate any salary they are able to. The benefit is that a Fi-Core actor has more choices.[/FONT]

Well known FiCore Member: [FONT=book antiqua,times new roman,times]Charleton Heston - Former SAG President and Financial Core Actor.

So you can't vote but you CAN hold an office!

[/FONT]"Financial Core is an individual liberty issue protected by the U.S. Supreme Court."

Also note SAGs wording:
Of course, the decision to resign is wholly yours. As a nonmember in a Right to Work state, you have the right to cut off all payments to the union, and you will not be subject to union rules and internal discipline. For example, nonmembers are not subject to union rules against working during a strike. If you are a union member, and you work during a strike, the union could potentially fine you and collect that fine in state court.

They say potentially for a reason...

And last but not least:

lhttp://www.bizparentz.org/thebizness/unionfinancialcore.html
"[FONT=arial, verdana, sans-serif]Based on the most current independent audit (fiscal year ending April, 2006), 96.05% of SAG fees/dues is related to representational activities. That is the amount that “Fee Paying Non-Members” (FPNMs for short) would be paying to SAG."

Notice...96%...so FiCore by some standards is weakening the Union BUT it is also paying to keep it running!!

Sorry...just had to make sure the facts are all out there.

I swear I am pro-union...but I also and pro-working and making more than poverty level wages.
[/FONT]

 

[filmman]

The main concern for me as an indie filmmaker is that I expect actors to be professional, and I've found that SAG actors are the only ones who are consistently professional.

So I'm casting FELLINI DIRECTS AGAIN! now and I've listed it as a NON-UNION project with Breakdown Express. I've been making movies for 40 years and I really resent the unionization of talent and the whole union system.

BUT, it's practically impossible to do professional movie work outside of the Hollywood unions; i.e., using non-union talent.

And even if it's possible to do professional work outside the Hollywood union system, it's practically impossible to exhibit or even sell the movies.

So it's Catch 22.

That's why I shoot by myself and use non-union actors only. I wish there was an Indie Union to protect me and other filmmakers and so we would have our own legitimacy as indie filmmakers to work and distribute our movies.

[By the way, vitamin c is a cancer preventive and cancer treatment. Use ascorbate, such as Calcium Ascorbate rather than Ascorbic Acid vitamin c. Ascorbate is hydroxide and won't upset the stomach and therefore mega doses can be used. Mega doses are what cure cancer. 10,000 to 20,000 milligrams (starting with 5 and increasing to 20) injected works the best. Reference work: Vitamin C & Cancer, Dr. Ewan Cameron and Dr. Linus Pauling. It's controversial but the book goes into details of hospital and clinical research. It's worth reading.]

Bob Dylan has a line that says something like this: to live outside the law, you must be honest. I prefer working outside the unions as a filmmaker because I believe unions kill talent. The Hollywood Studio System worked better. Actors were professional and the free enterprise system worked to produce wonderful entertainment. IMO, unionization started by actors (United Artists) is what destroyed the Studio System.

That's why I don't use SAG actors or any crew members regardless whether they are union or not. I prefer working with SAG-eligible actors and I'm honest with them: you're only going to work with me until you join SAG. After that, good luck with your career.

 

[Michele Seidman]

Of course, if you are FiCore, there's a good chance your Union will call you a scab, and very possibly send out a widely circulated press release naming you by name and telling other members to keep you at "arm's length".

At least that's what happened in my Union (the WGA) when some soap opera writers went FiCore during the strike.

wow..that does not even sound legal. and if they are FiCore...then they are not scabs...scabs are those who take union and non-union IN a union state...at least the way I define it and view it.

and if Charlton Heston was FiCore AND once President of SAG...how can they call FiCore scabs? The logic does not add up on that for me.

The main concern for me as an indie filmmaker is that I expect actors to be professional, and I've found that SAG actors are the only ones who are consistently professional.

I prefer working with SAG-eligible actors and I'm honest with them: you're only going to work with me until you join SAG. After that, good luck with your career.

The first statement I take a little offense too. Because I train actors I can list a bunch who are not union and are always professionals...always on time..always hit their mark..always have lines down...and always deliver!

I do find it intriguing you say that at the start and then down below you say you prefer not to use Union talent...

can you explain this 'seeming' contradiction?

 

[filmman]

Life is full of contradictions. LOL But seriously, what I mean is that with non-union actors I may end up with good actors after diligent casting and LUCK and so I may end up making an artistically satisfying movie. Also there is little danger of getting black-balled by the unions.

What I hate about unionism is that there are always BLACK LISTS. And so I take my chances with non-union talent and avoid behind the camera intrigues by shooting alone.

I'd love to use well-trained non-union actors when trained by well-known or reputable teachers, such as Stella Adler, etc. I've run into them early on in my career as an indie filmmaker.

Since I'm planning to shoot in North Carolina one day, I may end up using some of the actors you trained even

I shoot no-budget movies, so I cannot use SAG talent with such movies, and I don't like the SAG indie contracts. I don't like the restrictions because I sometimes shoot for literally no money. That is I don't even drive to the location or shoot more than one or two hours, so actors come to the location, do a little work and go home. With digital, I use Zero money and the work itself serves as a little physical exercise, so it's even using up valuable energy.LOL

Sometimes it's necessary therefore to use only non-union talent. And I don't think it's right to use SAG talent in non-union movies, because I don't want the actors to get penalized and end up losing work and prestige as a result of working in non-union movies.

If I ever get to direct a financed feature film, I'll definitely do it SAG and shoot it in 35mm. For me a financed feature is one that rises above the $5,000 level. If someone invests $5,000 in one of my screenplays, I will shoot it as a SAG movie. I will have the producer sign a SAG Ultra Low Budget contract and I'll see to it that the movie plays for a week in a theater. I've found a theater that I can afford to rent for 7 days. And the movie will be eligible for the Academy Awards. So I may end up doing a SAG feature eventually. Right now I'm working with Zero budget and plan on shooting a feature length movie with my Sony HVR Z1U camera in HiDef 1080i 60i. and release it as a digital 2k movie for festivals internationally.

I didn't know you then, but my 35mm feature film BUTTERFLIES IN THE WIND premiered at the AVA GARDNER FILM FESTIVAL in 2007. I would have alerted you as you live in North Carolina. The movie actually played at the Ava Gardner Museum together with Hemingway's THE SUN ALSO RISES, and THE KILLERS, (both with Ava Gardner). That's why I have an Ava Gardner character in my new movie FELLINI DIRECTS AGAIN!

 

[Barry_Green]

Could be wrong here, but it's my understanding that if a show is SAG, a fi-core SAG ex-member is eligible to work on it and will receive the same terms as any other union member, meaning that the production is responsible for paying into the health & welfare plans.

Possible exception would be on the contracts that allow both union and non-union workers; on those shoots the fi-core member will probably not receive union-level wages nor will the production be obligated to pay into the pension & welfare funds for the non-union or fi-core workers.