Connect the Dots: Fear of Competition, SAG Members Lose Health Insurance
by Orson BeanThe Screen Actors Guild just announced that a whole lot of its members will soon be without health insurance. That’s because the union has lost most of its clout and income. Now, you don’t become an actor because security is high on your wish list. If that’s what you want, go to work for the post office (where one of your fellow workers may shoot you). But we used to have a pretty good union with pretty good benefits. What happened?
Fifty four years ago, I was elected first vice president of the New York local of the television actors union which came to be known as AFTRA. My fellow board members and I fought hard to convince members to merge with the Screen Actors Guild. Double the size of the union, double the bargaining power! But some of the members resisted, afraid that the number of actors competing with them for jobs would multiply. (Virtually all work produced for television was live and did not involve film and therefore SAG. Why let all those west coast people in on a good thing!)
As time went by, things shifted, more and more shows began to be produced on film and SAG became dominant. Now, it was the film actors turn to fear competition. Why let that little TV union in on a good thing. There’s almost no live TV left, these guys are nothing but news-casters and talk show hosts. Every attempt at merger has failed because a vocal frightened minority in first one union and then the other fought tooth and nail against it on the grounds that there would be more actors competing against them for jobs. These actors are, I think, insecure in their talent so, naturally, scared of competition.
Recently, something unforeseen happened. The technology of video- tape became so improved that it began to compete in quality with that of film. TV sitcoms and dramas could now be shot under the aegis of the smaller union, AFTRA. Because it was smaller and weaker, it had had to settle for less pay and fewer benefits for its members. There was lots of money to be saved by producers. They could hire the same actors under AFTRA for whom they would have had to pay more under SAG.
Frightened little people, over the years, have scuttled chance after chance to have performers represented by one large, powerful union. Now any chance at merger is probably gone forever. When I was a kid, FDR on the radio said, “We have nothing to fear but fear itself”. We should be afraid of fear, or at least of acting out of it. That always wreaks havoc and now we actors are paying for it.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
62 Comments
Not to worry. Obama care will take care of these folks.
A bailout is in the works from you poor actors.Most of you support Obama he wont let you fall you help him too much.
This fits very nicely into the false utopia set up by progressives. Without exception every union has been set up as a pyramid scheme, dependent on the ones that follow too keep the cradle to grave promise that was made at it’s beginning. Now the pyramids have inverted and are precariously resting on their apex, and will soon collapse, potentially leaving millions of poor souls with nothing. This is where statist Washington comes in to save the day…ouch! The entire house of cards unions, Social Security, Medicare, and on and on, is near collapse, when it does, we all know who’s to blame.
Insightful essay. When you're trying to help people, warn people, educate people, "I told you so" is not satisfying. (As a mom, I learned that long ago.)
I think what has hurt SAG are two things: movie viewership and rentals are down and advances in digital technology have made it easier for smaller, leaner Hollywood outsiders to "get into the act" (for instance, CGI has made large numbers of extras unnecessary for crowd scenes). As Mr. Bean noted, acting is already a pretty insecure form of employment. Hollywood SAG members are experiencing the same recession-induced problems as the rest of private-sector workers in this country. Fewer working actors mean less union dues to finance benefits like health-insurance and pensions.
Perhaps Congress will let the SAG members sign up for the Royal Congressional healthcare plan. Imagine Washington and Hollywood finally coming together! Our best and brightest from both coasts coming together to make the world a better place. Yeah!
Mr. Bean writes a good article.
Some years ago, I had the misfortune of HAVING to get a work permit, and SAG card, to do some movie work. Even someone as lowly as a horse wrangler, had to be UNION. It was the most distasteful thing I ever did. I didn't last long.
I had a similar experiance, years back. I was doing some pyrotecnic effects for an independent movie.
Hoillywood celebrities need extensive mental health coverage.
Wait a Union that is looking out for it's bottom line and executive committee? and not the workers? The devil you say!
It is hard to give a crap. Actors, like the rest of us should and could plan their lives and their retirements. If they don't, then they will reap the rewards of what they didn't sow.
Unions can kiss my fanny. They need to go away.
Actors are in general an ignorant libtard group
A bunch of undereducated dupes
No matter what the subject they are an authority
Truth? Does not matter, not a priority
There is nothing too low to which they will stoop.
Those Hollywood types sure are different, eh?
Everybody wants to rub shoulders with and be with a real Cowboy, just like they always want to rub up against a Military man. You know the syndrome. Why, because we are real. Warts, and all. In addition to horse wrangling, it was our job to keep the "stars" from falling off their horses and getting killed. The insurance company loved us.
In my opinion movie viewership is down because movies these days are pure trash. And another reason is that going to a movie theatre is expensive and frustrating as people don't seem to have any common courtesy any longer. I haven't been to a theatre in five years and don't plan on returning unless they start playing old classics like Gone With the Wind.
The Hollywood Elite!
In their narrow, little world they only associate with other self-important, Hollywood snobs. They spew their anti-American venom to the unwashed while they flaunt their moral depravity and mental illnesses in front of the World. They preach "tolerance" but they are not satisfied with tolerance, They want full acceptance of their sick lifestyles. In reality, they act the part of heroes while they surrounding themselves with adoring, weak minded worshipers who will never tell them the truth.
FIND ANY ANTI-AMERICAN, ANTI-FAMILY, ANTI-CHRISTIAN, OBSCENE, DEPRAVED CAUSE, AND HOLLYWOOD WILL SUPPLY SCORES OF THESE MOST VACUOUS, VULGAR, PREENING EGOTISTS ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH SUPPORTING IT.
Hollywood's Push to Normalize Sex With Children… http://usataxpayer.org/htm/vids.asp?A=71609707
House Bill HR4530 Will Promote Perversion in Grade School… http://usataxpayer.org/?0092081630
Thanks for the article, I learned something. Now, the actors, tactically may have failed to strengthen their bargaining position, but I am not a big fan of collective bargining in the first place. Were these actors in demand and providing services that were worth a lot of money, they would command salary and benefits in the first place. This is of course true with stars. If you have a extra or character actor where there are 10 other people desparate to get the same part, they are on the wrong side of the supply and demand curve, and need to accept that if they want more compensation, they need to develop skills that are in short supply.
I don't really care if producers make money or not, but as a matter of principle I am against unions. Also, as some of the comments have indicated, actors seem to for the most part be conservative hating marxists, and its hard to feel such a group has an entitlement to more compensation–unless you are a member of that group.
The thing that I keep hearing is Rothbard explaining how raising minimum wage causes unemployment. Unions of course have an objective of raising wage above the actual value of the work, so they cause unemployment among their ranks as well as encourage society to develop substitutes.
The whole home improvement industry came about because trade unions got wages to the point where people were willing to buy the parts and struggle through the home project. Personally I hate plumbing work and sweating pipes at home, but no matter how awful the project, I never reach a point where I am willing to pay a plumber north of $300 dollars to do it. This is the principle of substitution. And if a union gets a lock on the entire united states, things go overseas.
I knew a guy who worked at a large company that produced muzak-like material in the 60s and 70s. His job was to fly to eastern block countries and hire orchestras to play music that he recorded. The american orchestral unions had priced themselves out of work. They raised wages yet reduced the overall compensation of their workers.
I'm with you there! Why pay $10 or more to watch some piece of crap while some rude nitwit (usually, some trashy adolescent female) two rows down is TALKING ON HER CELL PHONE! I don't even have cable – I check out movies free of charge from my local public library.
Oh yeah brother! I’ve been in the room when the decision was made to move business overseas. Business people are not stupid, push to hard, get greedy, and say bye-bye to industry.
That, they are….
I'd worked security for the production company before and seemed to know more then the effects guy at the time. I'd been offered a job as an extra, but my employer at the time wouldn't even let us get our pictures taken for obvious reasons.
Thats funny.
I have been in 48 states, and 46 countries, and don't have a damn picture to show for it. I do have an old flak jacket with some holes in it though.
I was just wondering last night where Mr. Bean had been hiding; nice to hear from you again!
There are a lot of pictures out there of my hand…..
Hell.
We probably got drunk somewhere together.
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help." — Ronald Reagan
Case in point, my state of Michigan.
If some one is going to hire an employee, they have to page wages, benefits, regulatory costs, etc. Add all that up and you get the real cost of hiring an employee. And its considerably more than they receive in pay.
The employee must generate enough wealth via productivity to cover that entire cost to simply break even. Since the employer needs to make a profit or else go bankrupt, the employee must generate not only their own cost, but a profit.
Artificially raise the cost of hiring an employee (raising minimum wage is but one way) and suddenly, the profit is gone and the employer is losing money.
The employer has three choices. Raise prices, there by risking losing customers. Fire the employee – either don't do the work, off shore it, or employ technology to replace the productivity, or else go bankrupt.
The people hit worst by this are those at the bottom rungs of the employment ladder. Those entering the work force (teens), those re-entering the work force (i.e. released convicts), and those with little to no marketable skills.
When the minimum wage goes up, those jobs are what go away, and they don't come back. So while raising it may not result in a wave of lay offs, what it does do is potential jobs to never be created in the first place.
Unions essentially do one thing, artificially create a shortage in the supply of labor, there by creating an artificial raise in wages.
Its a distortion of the free market, and some one is going to pay for it. And its usually We The People who get stuck with the bill.
That could well be in the realm of possiblity. I have, on occasion, done some executive protection for the oil industry.
Amen to that. Not a single program has even worked under their guidance, or should I say inept management.
Not to worry, I'm sure "Obama-care" w/ take care of everything!
no wonder…the kind of films they have been promoting….
The Hollywood Left is finally getting its long-overdue and well-deserved comeuppance.
EPIC FAIL
I feel for these poor actors, It just makes me want to start a charity to support them in their retirement. Oh wait a minute I will be supporting them with my tax dollars when the gvt. bails their union out. When these people were making money were their wages not better than the average citizen? If they had invested these wages for themselves instead of supporting a bloated, socialistic, union that promised to take care of them in their retirement, maybe they would not be crying for help now.
Barry & Co. give inept another whole new meaning.
Now they're not here to help. They're here to guide, nudge, push, and shove.
Without the health insurance perk there's no reason to join the union. Oh … wait … you are required to join the union if you want to work in entertainment.
We don't need more powerful unions, thank you. We need no unions.
AND we don't need government health care. We need tort reform, the ability to sell across state lines and the ability to form independent group insurance plans that aren't required to be tied to employment. Then everyone can insure themselves as they see fit.
Unions keep people from working plain and simple. They squash creativity and drive prices up so high that they funnel all money and opportunity into the hands of a very select few.
In short, unions are a detriment to the workers of any industry they touch.
Well, I for one am glad to see a little less union power regardless of the industry. Over time a union, regardless of the originating good intentions tends to stop truly representing it's members and starts to serve its' executive and whatever social and political goals it's (usually) liberal/left leadership desire. I'm a little confused at Mr. Beans comment "scuttled chance after chance to have performers represented by one large, powerful union" and his apparent wistful regret at this having not occured seems to put him at odds with his conservative outlook.
It seems from story that the membership of these two unions both showed the same greed and selfishness whenever one was in ascendence (while a vocal few can make a lot of noise when the time came for a vote the silent majority could have voted for inclusion). Frankly, I don't have a lot of sympathy for them.
Sorry, but I have no sympathy for an actors' union. Once upon a time unions worked to ensure fair pay and hours for their workers. But today? Let's just say that when I hear the word 'union', all I see are SEIU thugs, bloated Teamster officials and corrupt GE union forcing innocent taxpayers to pay for their having destroyed a once prosperous company. Sorry, no sympathy there.
Of course. It's that evil Bush. Or maybe Reagan.
/s
Whatwhatwhatwhatwhat???
Making people join the Union in order to work is one of the things that has damaged Union membership over the years. Most people are averse to being told what to do and I am not going to join an organization that says they have to have a card to work.
The SAG isn't truly a Union anyway. They are independent contractors. My understanding there is actually a scale that states the minimum actors can make but there isn't a maximum. In a Union there would be. And in a Union seniority would determine who got the job.
The SAG is very much like the NFLPA and other sports "Unions" that you have to join in order to play a lot of the professional sports in this country. But they are not truly a Union.
Actually, most of them have been making modest wages on average. The fat pigs (er, stars) have been draining the coffers, leaving little money for the "little" people. And the unions have been sucking off what's left.
My impression, at least,as an outsider – but the part about the stars draining the coffers is certain.
Agreed … never thought I'd see aan argument for a MORE POWERFUL union on Breitbart.
While I am not for more powerful unions, Mr Bean does have a clear lesson for the union members: greed and cowardice, and looking out only for ol' number one as Woody would say, makes for weakness and failure. Maybe some of those actors will realize the mob (er union) really hasn't been serving them.
Let's just call it, a tax on the rich.
What about the coming of "synthetic" actors? You get your body scanned, along with your voice and some movement mapping, and then it's "have a nice day". They don't need you any more.
Horse wrangler? Was it Julia Roberts or Sarah Jessica Parker?
I'm hoping to end up with Sandra Bullock's 28 year old body and my 30 year old head. That's going to be awesome!
And the kicker is, actors could be working constantly, even making some money if the union weren't shoring up all the middle men and fat cats — obstructions to progress. As always workers are the flies stuck in the spider's web.
One of the things that always confused me about SAG and AFTRA, is the application of seniority rules. In most unions the jobs go to the senior-most union member regardless of merit. Maybe the technical jobs are awarded that way but what about the on-screen talent? Do they have a special dispensation in the bylaws to cicumvent seniority? Just wondering.
Lose the union! All they do is take your money, create a nightmare of paperwork and rules that potential employers cant navigate and tell union members they can't take work because it's not a union job. Hey SAG "were dying out here!" The only people the union protects is the union bosses. Union members are just feeding the ever growing beast at the top. I've been in the "biz" for 20 years behind the camera and have never seen the unions do anything but shut shows down and put people out of work.
Oh and by the way, not everyone in Hollywood is an Obama loving, leftist fool. Just the ones with a big mouth. The rest of us are afraid to say anything afraid we will lose our jobs.
So…if it's shot on film, it's produced under SAG, and if it's live or shot on video it's produced under AFTRA.
Does that mean that SAG really IS the Film Actor's Guild?
A POX ON…………… BOTH………….. UNIONS………………..
err………………….make that………………….
A POX ON…………………….. ALL…………………………………… UNIONS.
But, but, before obama I had real dollars. Now all I have are some pennies and a nickel or two. That must be the change he was talking about.
Ugh!
I'm sorry you're from Michigan.
Post Of The Day!
We're here for you!
There are way too many actors. I try to live a fairly isolated life in the mid-west but even I cannot avoid being acquainted with actors.
Mr Bean, the answer isn't a bigger better union. The answer is to dump the unions and introduced more competition. Unions are pointless anyway in the acting profession. There will always be someone who wants to be a 'star' and will behave like the scab and undermine union representation. Those types can be found all over the world. Best to look out for your own interests yourself, rather than let a union price you out of the market.
Collectivism of any type never ends well.
LOL actually I chose to live here… the west and north sides are beautiful if one can take the bitter winters. And real estate is cheap.
You must be logged in to post a comment.