SAG Board Urges Members to Back Deal

Screen Actors Guild directors late Monday night recommended that their 98,000 members approve a proposal that would allow limited investments by advertising firms and production companies in talent agencies.

The critical 57-44 vote to recommend the deal came after an often heated debate lasting more than 10 hours over a new “franchise agreement” negotiated last month between SAG and two groups, the Assn. of Talent Agents and the National Assn. of Talent Representatives.

Agents who represent SAG members must abide by the franchise agreement, which was first forged in 1939 to protect actors from unscrupulous agents.

The most controversial part of the three-year agreement would permit investments of up to 10% initially and as much as 20% eventually in agencies by some companies involved in production.

Agents asked SAG for that right, arguing that current rules hinder their ability to attract investment capital and create business ventures.

But some actors, including such prominent stars as Richard Dreyfuss, argue that any change in the rules creates potential conflicts of interest, because agents might end up representing actors in projects in which they have a financial interest.

The agreement package also contains a number of sweeteners for SAG, including proposals that would help bolster its ailing health and pension funds and another that would set up a fund to pay actors when agents fail or misappropriate money.

The agreement also would enlist agents in the campaign by actors to stem runaway production to foreign countries.

The new rules were a campaign issue in SAG’s presidential election, which was decided Saturday when Melissa Gilbert, a proponent of the new arrangement with agents, defeated Valerie Harper, who campaigned against it.

The referendum will be mailed to members April 3, with a return date of April 18. Gilbert said the referendum would “allow each member to have a voice in this important decision.”