Actors’ Group Sues Equity to Block Union Theater Plan

A group of 15 members of Actors’ Equity Assn. asked a federal judge on Tuesday to turn aside a controversial union plan that radically alters the way small theaters in Los Angeles operate. The actors, all members of the union, filed a lawsuit seeking to block the planned Oct. 3 implementation of the much debated Actors’ 99-Seat Theatre Plan that, among other provisions, calls for fixed compensation for actors.

The group filed a lawsuit Tuesday in United States District Court in Los Angeles against Equity, its Western Advisory Board and certain employees and officers of the Los Angeles office.

They claim in their lawsuit that the defendants discriminated against the plaintiffs’ rights to union democracy and breached their fiduciary duties under federal law when they mailed out a referendum last March 21 seeking membership approval of the new plan.

The lawsuit challenges the process by which the union conducted the referendum. It seeks an injunction from federal Judge Terry Hatter setting aside the referendum and declaring that the defendants violated federal law.

The plaintiffs are also seeking a permanent injunction ordering the union to abide by earlier membership resolutions that required it to conduct good faith meetings with all interested parties in order to devise a new plan for Waiver theater.

Failing that, the plaintiffs want a fair and open rerun of the referendum, with plenty of advance notice to the membership, and are asking for nominal damages to cover their personal costs in challenging the referendum. They are asking for no punitive damages.

Efforts to reach union officials Tuesday for comments on the suit were unsuccessful.

This lawsuit had been anticipated since July 28, when the union’s governing council in New York voted unanimously to uphold the new plan and dismiss the charges brought against the union and its Western Advisory Board.

Jerome F. Birn, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs on a pro bono basis, stated that “the focus of this lawsuit is union democracy and fair process, whether AEA members have democratic rights as required by federal law or whether union officials can ignore their own rules.”

According to the plaintiffs, Judge Hatter is expected to consider the motion for a temporary restraining order within a few days and, after that, will rule on the legality of the referendum at a preliminary injunction hearing to be scheduled within the next few weeks.