Here is a collection of short essays by members who intend to vote no.
The views in these writings do not necessarily reflect the views of the website administrator or any one who appears elsewhere on the site. This is an opportunity for expressions of unedited thoughts from members. Please come back often as more op-eds are being added.
SARAH ANN MASSE
My name is Sarah Ann Masse. As an actor, sexual violence survivor, and proud SAG-Aftra member, I'm voting no on the new proposed contract.
I have spent years advocating for the safety and protection of my fellow actors and for the advancement of those from marginalized groups within our industry. Our union is supposed to fight for the same things. Unfortunately, our proposed contract is sorely lacking in the protections that members require when it comes to nudity and intimate scenes.
In a post #metoo world, where women and men like me have sacrificed so much to ensure better safety exists moving forward, these safety measures must also be ensured by our contracts. But when it comes to our new agreement, these protections do not exist.
Meanwhile, our sister union ACTRA, has negotiated new protections for their members such as ensuring intimacy coordinators on set. We deserve those same protections from our union.
I am voting no to empower our union to go back to the table and get the kinds of protections we require. When we empower our union to work for us, by telling them when they've fallen short, they can strengthen our agreements and protect us.
KAZZ LEWSADER
For me, personally, I'm concerned that new technology isn't being considered. I understand you can't negotiate something you don't know about. However, there should be a provision to return to the table during the term with special polling of the members to require a certain number of ayes. Even now, there's nothing addressing SVODs.
For my brothers and sisters, I'm appalled in this "Me Too" era there are no protections for background nudity. A "closed set" alone isn't good enough. I'm also concerned about diminishing returns effect on residuals. Finally, overtime and time and a half should be uniform for all actors. In solidarity, Kazz Lewsader
MARIE FINK
Every three years we negotiate our contracts anticipating and hoping that maybe this year, our needs, not even our wants, just our needs will be met. Every three years I am disappointed and with this proposed contract, I am now insulted by what has been given away and gaining so little in return.
I serve on the National Board because I want to help change this, to help save our livelihood and enable us to have a sustainable career in this business that we love, and give so much to. The rate at which our contracts are declining is not allowing us the security we need to be protected at work, to be paid fairly for our value, and to have a pension we can live on. These are our basic needs and there is no reason not to have them.
Tough, savvy negotiators know that there has never been a better time than now, when everyone is stuck at home and out of work, to harness our collective strength, stand up, vote NO, and send our negotiators back to that table to fight for what we need.
15-year SAG-AFTRA stuntwoman National Board Member Los Angeles Local Board Member
ERIN MARIE DURCAN
I joined our Union two years ago to forward my career.
This proposed contract ignores those, like me, who earn less than $35,000/year and who will now find it harder than ever to make a living if more restrictive limits on guest spots and background spots go into effect.
Our global pandemic has called a halt on virtually all new production. Residual payments—a hard fought and won revenue stream established decades ago—have become even more vital for our members who struggle to put food on their table, keep a roof over their head, and maintain their pension and healthcare coverage.
My biggest concern is safety on the set. All of our members deserve more and better protections. For Stunt Performers: where are their safety improvements, or their schedule breaks for features? New Media shows with no 12-hour turnaround--really?
I thought that the whole point of joining any union—SAG-AFTRA especially—was to keep their members safe on the job.
Please vote no, send our negotiators back to the table and bring back a robust contract that truly represents the will of working performers.
#VoteNO
TREVOR BRUNSINK
If in 2018 over 33% of working SAG members worked “background” in some form, then why in Year 2 of this new proposed contact do BG benefit by only 0.2%?
Compare this proposed contract’s 2.5%-3% annual pay increase to California’s 8.2% rent control (5% + varying 3.2% CPI). I will not lock us into 3 more years of being 3x behind rising rent costs by voting yes.
Good news: A No-Vote does not mean a strike; it means a renegotiation.
When I am told by leadership HOW to vote, I wonder: Why won’t they empower the membership with the pro/con contract facts, or trust the membership to make an educated decision? I am done with their dishonesty, political bigotry, and bullying.
What if the US government in 2016 had used overwhelming propaganda telling us that we must “Vote Yes” for Trump, while preventing any pro-Hillary word from getting out? What if our government’s goal was to silence the minority, discrediting them as angry and inhibitors of progress? We have political parallels of this within our guild.
Please write national leadership, asking to stop wasting dues money on Yes-postcards which could bring staff back to work.
KEVIN CANNON
LISTEN
LEARN
VOTE
VOTE NO
SAG-AFTRA NY Delegate NATIONAL SPOKESPERSON VETERANS ADMINISTRATION
TALIN SCHELL
My name is Talin Schell. I’m a SAG-AFTRA actor. Additionally, I serve on the Young Performers Committee for our Union. I’ve been a member of SAG-AFTRA since I was 7 years old, and have
been acting for my whole life. As a 16 year old living in New York, I’ve had the opportunity to work on many film, television and commercial projects. Having spoken to many of my fellow Union members, I have a clear picture of what essential needs aren’t being met in our current contracts.
With each W&W I have attended, I have been confident that the concerns of my fellow child actors, and background performers across the board would be addressed in this new contract. Disappointingly, there is nothing in these 2020 contracts for child actors, minorities, like myself, and the background artists who make all of these productions possible.
I am asking you to vote no for SAG-AFTRA’s 2020 TV Film contract with the AMPTP, because until the voices of all members of this guild are heard, it will not be a true Union. We can do better for our membership, and show that SAG AFTRA respects every single one of us.
LOUIS HERTHUM
Why am I voting NO? Let me ask a question; do you sign contracts you haven’t read? I don’t. And they won’t show it to us. Instead, our money (6 figures) buys postcards telling us how to vote! They don’t even send the dissenting opinion so that we can make up our own minds! They want us to trust them.
The people in charge now are the same ones who brought us merger. They said we would be “Stronger.” We are not! We are now a union of actors, broadcasters (many who work off the card), dancers, singers, background performers, stunt performers, stand-in’s and this contract does not protect us all. Some are completely forgotten. One additional background position? Seriously? What did dancers gain? The protection against sexual harassment is a joke. You Ok with massive cuts in syndication residuals? Do you want to pay your own P&H contribution?
Pre-Paid residuals are robbing actors and greatly damaging the P&H plan. Hold periods for actors are grossly unfair. And that’s just the start.
The DGA & the WGA deals are better. We need to go back and get a better deal! Producers are not suffering. Our union members are! VOTE NO!
ARI BARKAN
I am voting NO because I do not think our Union has reached a point in their negotiations where we, as actors, can feel safe on set in a post-quarantine world. Get back to the drawing board, and come back with something we all can be proud of. One Union, strong.
NIK SHRINER
As a Los Angeles Local Delegate, I've voted NOT to approve this contract after seeing why the LA Local Board also voted NO. It's very clear to me that the majority of informed Union members also agree this deal isn't cutting the mustard around all residuals, fair wages for under 20 minute content, air travel, and stunt payments. A big red flag for me is that this contract was negotiated long before COVID hit and is not up to speed with current conditions.
The proposed contract also misses points that don't revolve around finance like reasonable boundaries for nudity and intimacy, that Canada got and has, and board representation for background performers. I want to see progress on the contracts I work. I’m tired of seeing myself and other actors get undercut and loop-holed out of sustainable living wages. I trust our negotiating committee to go back to get some blind spots sorted out and negotiate, not strike. We have time. SAG-AFTRA is one of the largest unions in the world and we don't have to settle for "whatever we can get." We have the power to let the system in place work for us, if we let it work.
RON OSTROW
Having been in "the room where it happened" I vote NO on the proposed 2020 TV/Theatrical contract: it fails to meet the crucial needs of our membership.
Background is the only segment of our membership whose job opportunities are contractually capped. Our union has failed to meaningfully increase Background caps ever since they were drastically reduced 28 years ago.
A single background job in Los Angeles yields 5 times as much in revenue and benefits to our membership when compared to the AMPTP’s cost. Simply diverting $5 million of the existing monetary package towards background (5 LA spots, 1 NY spot in year one) will yield over $30 million in wages and benefits.
Currently, unlike in the Netflix agreement, scanning is uncovered work: no union protections govern the use of a member's image. Once you agree to it, the producers can use your scanned image however they choose, including in future productions. Your only right is to say no.
Our union failed to stand up for equality for Background in the new nudity provisions. Though Principals will be guaranteed 48-hours notice with details of nude, sexually explicit, or hyper-exposed work, Background is only promised a "best effort." Of course, if improperly noticed, Background has the right to say no on the set, but they risk being blamed, shamed, blackballed, and punished, unlike Principals, who have contractual protections —unconscionable in the Me Too Era.
JULIA SCHELL
Vote NO! My name is Julia Schell and I am a member of SAG-AFTRA, from New York. I have been told by many industry professionals that the most powerful thing we can do as an Actor is say “NO”, if the part is beneath us, or we do not like how we are being portrayed. So, I would like to tell you why I am saying and VOTING NO to the 2020 SAG-AFTRA TV/Theatrical contract that the heads of our Union have just negotiated for us.
This new contract is disrespectful to its members and is beneath us. As a Union Delegate, I served this Union by attending several W&W’s in NY and LA last Spring and fought for the rights of Child Performers of SAG-AFTRA, the Background Community, Day Players, Stand Ins, Photo Doubles, and Singers. Myself and other members also fought for provisions in the contract to STOP DISCRIMINATION and make getting cast more equitable for minority members.
None of these proposals made it into the 2020 TV/Film contract with the AMPTP. I was also told by top leaders of SAG-AFTRA that they would guarantee an intimacy coordinator on ALL sets for any scenes requiring nudity involving any Union actors, Principle or Background. This also was not achieved. Many things were in fact given away.
Now, we have minimal, firm protections against Sexual Harassment and no significant raises for our fellow actors. Residuals are vanishing! A living wage is becoming impossible as a member of SAG-AFTRA, especially for actors who do background work. In fact there are even 2 different rates for “featured work”, which the Union refuses to acknowledge and do something about. I thought this Union was supposed to be better and stronger when it merged. I would like to see the strength of 160,000 members. I would like to see the whole of this Union come together and fight for more, and go back to the table! We have more time because of this Pandemic now to make the contract right and fair for all of our members. We are worth it. We are SAG-AFTRA Julia Schell NY Delegate for SAG-AFTRA
TALIA K. DILLINGHAM
I dream of a career with sustainability, meaning a strong, well funded P&H. Caps should be increased as our wages increase, in an ideal world, a net gain of contributions by AMPTP rather than an “Optional Wage Diversion,” subject to “decoupling,” which is not helpful to individual working members, but rather the H&P plans themselves.
I don’t believe all possible options were exhausted in gaining HBSVOD residuals by giving up current syndication residual rates. This is not a net gain, it is an undercut to current members that hold contracts benefiting from the current syndication residual contract language. If syndication is dying out, I vote we let it happen naturally.
This contract neglects the idea of under 20min programming. We fell behind with streaming contracts by underestimating its, now seen, impact & success. Let’s learn from our mistakes and get ahead of the curve, in the event one may develop. A stronger union strategy would be to develop base minimums, now, for under 20min programming and refine language in future negotiations. Quibi has planted a seed and developed hype for the idea of shorter storytelling, let’s not underestimate another idea in programming presentation that may trend up.
OLGA WILHELMINE
Please join me: vote a very strong NO on this proposed TV/Theatrical contract.
Any decision that I make in our SAG-AFTRA National Board room is made to best represent the categories and member concerns of the New Orleans Local.
The New Orleans Local is comprised of an array of talent including Co-Stars, Stunts, Background, and many veteran actors who were brought into our union in the 2012 merger with AFTRA. The needs of this local are different from our larger sister locals as we are more specific to a few categories, whereas the larger locals have different demographics and categories.
To sacrifice our syndication residuals, and to offer such weak protections against sexual harassment and on-set nudity/exposure, guts the possibility of offering basic—even decent— protections for our members, including background, and that is vile.
MAGGIE EGAN
Hi, I’m Maggie Egan. You probably don’t know me. But my union does. They’ve been serving me since 1979. As I worked they made sure I got health insurance and delivered me a monthly pension when I took an early retirement. My husband and I now have health insurance for the rest of our lives. I can’t tell you how much peace of mind this gives us. I’m so grateful.
I want YOU to reach this place of safety and security, too. The only way you can reach this goal is to make sure our very smart and very brave negotiators hear from you that you want to get more of the money that was left on the table. Your “future you” and your “future family” deserve this! But it’s not going to be possible if our residuals are cut. If you appear in an episode of a streaming TV show you will get paid for that first airing plus one rerun. Then there are no residuals after that!
So please take care of yourself. Value your contribution. Please vote NO and empower them to go back in and get you a decent living and honorable protections. Thanks, Maggie Egan
JOY BRIDENBAKER
Vote "NO" because we deserve better.
ELISA GABRIELLI
I’ve become increasingly disheartened with the inequities, lack of protections and gains in recent years with my Union; but nothing prepared me for this contract. This contract terrifies me!
Cutting 90% of residuals on future syndication, saying , “Syndication’s dying anyway, 50% in the last three years“, is absurd! That’s only 16.6 % less Syndication per year. Our Union’s response is to GUT 90% of any possible future earnings? Who does that benefit? Not Actors! We survive on our residuals!
Gifting producers .5% of our yearly wage increase? 75% of our P&H comes from this increase!
No P&H Contributions on work before 1998? Our work continues to earn them Advertising revenue . We’re no longer compensated? What?!
The disgraceful $.32 cable residual deal remains the same?!
Where was this information?!
This is OUR Union! I demand that Pro and Con reports be once again included in ALL ( dues funded! ) mailings/emails from our Union concerning Contracts being brought up for a vote. This lack of information is an unconscionable practice of current Leadership. We must have informed choice!
Now, celebrate the parts of the Contract that work, like Streaming gains, and go back to the table! Negotiate for your Members.
GAYE NELSON
I have been a Delegate to two conventions. I am Co-chair of the Los Angeles M.O.V.E Committee (Members Organizing Volunteer Efforts) and Chair of the Open Board Meeting Committee. I am deeply involved in union service.
I am voting No on the proposed contract. A No vote does not mean a strike. It means I want a better deal.
The wages and working conditions in our contracts have become weaker with each negotiation. We are shamed for asking for what we deserve. That is not right. It is enough for me to vote No that only 1 background slot was added in Year 2 and that almost nothing was done about sexual harassment protections. There are too many other reasons.
The year on my union card is 1955. I have been a member for 65 years, since I was 3 years old and I will be until my last breath.
I had a great career as a principal and now happily do background work. It’s all SAG-AFTRA work. Belonging to a union should mean more money and better working conditions in each contract, period. I’m voting No.
KEVIN MCCORKLE
I joined S.A.G. in 1982, a simpler time. Three Networks, a few “baby” cable channels MTV and TBS. Commercial residuals listed the Network, Show, Date and number of airings. TV/Film residuals were predictable and valuable.
In 1982 there was no internet, VHS was just beginning, no streaming or VOD. Every job I did had a shelf life. Now every job I have done is for sale with the click of a key. Millions of films, TV shows, commercials and new media projects can now be purchased.
Growth, expanding production, distribution and access to content should logically mean Actor’s salaries, residuals, and benefits increase now exactly the opposite is happening. As producers, studios and social media giants see their corporate footprint and profits increase actor’s guarantees have gone away replaced by “scale” payments for all but the fortunate few. Residuals that use to pay my bills won’t buy a fast food meal or a movie ticket now.
I won’t see “historic gains” in earnings, residuals or syndication fees from this contract. Before voting, please ask yourself: “Will this contract provide a living for my future as an Actor or force me to be a hopeful hobbyist, working a full-time job investing in my career and paying living expenses?”