The Hollywood Reporter
The story behind how Hollywood’s biggest union came to call their first strike in four decades is beginning to come into focus.
SAG-AFTRA’s decision Thursday to order a work stoppage of around 160,000 members — from Hollywood stars to background actors — made history, constituting the first double strike of both performers and scribes since 1960. The decision will further test an already hobbled industry that has been deprived of writers since the Writers Guild of America walked away from their own labor negotiations May 2. Beyond the entertainment business impact, the 100-day 2007-08 writers strike cost California’s economy an estimated $2.1 billion — and this double labor stoppage will doubtless multiply that sum.
In an interview as the smoke began to clear on Thursday, union president Fran Drescher and chief negotiator and national executive director Duncan Crabtree-Ireland discussed how they came to this point, and the stakes involved. Not long after a SAG-AFTRA press conference, the two discussed with The Hollywood Reporter the issues that the union and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers agreed on during negotiations, the topics that divided them and why Drescher believes “the whole world is looking at us right now.”
You both sent a video to SAG-AFTRA members in late June in which you said the negotiations had so far been “extremely productive.” What changed in the negotiating room between that time and now?
Fran Drescher: Well, a reality check because that was early on, and we thought we were making progress working on more peripheral issues. But as we tried to get more into the vortex of what our concerns are, that was when we started to get stonewalled. And we started to see that there was a strange resistance to accommodating our request to change the contract to accommodate the current business model, to honor the contributions of our members so that they’re making, not even what they made in 2020, but what they should be making for inflation today and for the next three years. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. But, you know, it became clear that there was a great deal of resistance and resentment, like we’re not entitled to get what our due is. Like, we’re not a major contributor to this industry. Like we’re sub- somehow and don’t matter. And there were statements that were made by the other side that we kept writing on whiteboards to remind us of who these people seem to be presenting themselves to be. And it’s not nice.
What do you feel are the biggest sticking points at this juncture? What are the issues that you’re still very far apart on with the AMPTP?
Drescher: I think that the whole world is looking at us right now, because human beings in all different walks of life are being replaced by robots. And what happens here, the eyes of the world and certainly labor in this country is looking at. It’s really important that we put barricades around artificial intelligence, because it’s going to put people out of work. It already is putting our members out of work and that is maniacal. What are you doing? Why do you want to do this? Because it’s a little cheaper or a little easier, but it’s unconscionable. If you do it at the expense of people’s livelihoods … Everybody deserves a right to work. I saw a little box running around Santa Monica delivering stuff and my heart broke because I thought, “That used to be a person on a bicycle who made money doing that.” Why put somebody out of work? What’s wrong with these people? It’s not normal.
Crabtree-Ireland: Yeah, to Fran’s point, I mean obviously artificial intelligence protections are an important issue that we’re still not in agreement on. Also, just basic minimum salary increases: Their proposal would have our members work in 2023 for less than they were making in real dollar terms in 2020, and that would continue to be the case through the entire term of the contract. That’s just not right. And it’s really outrageous that the companies expect our members to do that. In addition to that, as Fran talked about, there has been a sea change in the business model in the industry. We had a very reasonable proposal to address that by taking a small percentage of subscription revenue from streaming. The companies refused to engage on that, refused to discuss it over the entire course of the negotiations. For 35 days, no substantive discussion whatsoever, even though we told them it was a key priority. So there’s really not been the kind of engagement that you would expect from somebody who was trying to make a deal.
And where did you all come to an agreement, come to tentative agreements, with the AMPTP?
Crabtree-Ireland: I mean, there are a number of things that we agreed upon. One example [is] they agreed on our proposal to add Martin Luther King Day and Juneteenth as holidays in our contract. You know, Martin Luther King Day should have been a holiday a long time ago, and I’m glad they finally abandoned the resistance they’ve had to that proposal in the past. There are some other provisions that we have tentative agreements on that relate to aspects of certain proposals. For example, we have some tentative agreements on some aspects of self-tape casting and things like that. But there are big, important chunks of that where we don’t have agreement. Like, take for example, all the work we’ve done on our self-tape casting proposal — lots of progress there, except for the fact that they continue to insist that all of it has to basically be on an honor system. They insist on a provision that says it’s not subject to any grievance or arbitration, meaning there’s no way to enforce it, so agreeing to self-tape protections that are basically more like a wish and a hope than an actual promise. It really doesn’t do the trick.
Where did SAG give ground on the talks? Where did you say, “OK, we can compromise on this particular issue”?
Crabtree-Ireland: Well, we’ve withdrawn several of our proposals that they indicated a big resistance to. For example, we had a proposal to add additional compensation for theatrical rereleases where a theatrical motion picture, after its entire initial run is over, gets rereleased later on. That happens, that makes a lot of money, our members feel like if they’re someone in one of those projects, they should get some compensation for that. The studios flat-out refused and in the interest of trying to move things forward, we withdrew that proposal. That’s just one example of a number of proposals where we have moved in their direction. But frankly, those moves in their direction weren’t really appreciated or responded to in kind.
Drescher: And getting a 12-day extension is unprecedented in this union. We did it in good faith; they didn’t come back with anything. They duped us so that they can keep promoting their summer movies another 12 days. They went behind closed doors. They kept canceling our meetings with them. It was really very discouraging and disheartening.
Last question: A double strike in this industry will obviously have far-reaching impacts on many who work in the business, who are not a party to this contract negotiation. What message do you have for the people who are not members of SAG-AFTRA and who will be affected by the double strike?
Drescher: Believe me, that was why we did the extension. Because this weighs very heavy on us. We have compassion to everybody and we feel what this is going to do. Many Americans don’t have more than $500 saved. But how can we continue to move forward with a contract that is so dishonoring and so disrespectful? And that is not the direction that any labor [group] in this nation should be moving in. Somebody has to draw the line and get every other labor force behind us, and we’re the best, most likely suspects because we are high-profile people. We get people like you to talk about these grievances that are happening everywhere. We’re just the ones that you’ll talk to. And we are serving a purpose beyond our own interests. Because what happens here, what happens now, is going to have a reverberating effect. Its tentacles are going to reach all corners of the earth.
It’s very, very important. The digital age is cannibalizing us. It’s taking over in a way that doesn’t have the kind of thought or advanced thinking — nothing, it’s just out of control. And all they’re looking at is the prospect of money and their evaluations of the future of their business while they’re crying poverty now. And it’s like, nobody asked us if this was going to be OK. As we see every single show get reduced to maybe, you know, six episodes — that’s a season now? Excuse me, when I did The Nanny, we did 28 episodes when it was predicated off of eyeballs and ad dollars and longevity. Well, that ain’t the way it is anymore. A big hit is a limited series of maybe four years, most of them are three years if they’re successful, or they get pulled off in the first 10. And how do you make money doing that? How do you make a living doing that? Most of these people are journeymen actors, they’re hardworking people just trying to put food on the table, pay their mortgage, put their kids in school. It’s just crazy that they are so insensitive to the very people that they leverage their artistry. What are they without us?
Crabtree-Ireland: You mentioned the double strike thing. The last time there was a simultaneous strike of SAG or AFTRA and the Writers Guild was in 1960. That was the strike that resulted in the creation of the health plan, the pension plan and the establishment of residuals in a significant way. And so sometimes these kinds of strikes are necessary in order to defend the basic needs that our members have. And that’s why we’re there.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
Source: Hollywood Reporter
