SAG, AFTRA May Get Another ‘Take’

A failed proposal to consolidate unions representing actors, broadcasters and recording artists may not have seen its final cut.

A day after members of the Screen Actors Guild narrowly scuttled the idea of folding SAG and the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists into a new super-union, officials hinted that another effort may yet be made to marry the two groups.

The unions said 33,626, or 57.78% of the SAG members casting ballots, endorsed the combination; that was about 1,200 votes shy of the number needed to clear the 60% hurdle required by the union’s constitution.

By contrast, AFTRA members overwhelmingly approved it, with 27,553, or 75.88%, voting yes. Any consolidation would require the approval of both unions.

“We think it would be irresponsible to ignore the fact that 58% of SAG’s members and 76% of AFTRA’s member told us they want to pursue this,” AFTRA National Executive Director Greg Hessinger said Wednesday. “At the end of the day, the unions serve the member, and the members have a democratic voice -- they spoke very strongly in favor of consolidating these two unions.”

SAG, which represents actors in prime-time TV and feature films, and AFTRA, which represents such performers as actors in soap operas, TV and radio broadcasters, and recording artists, have discussed combining since the late 1930s. About 44,000 actors belong to both unions.

Four years ago, a similar proposal was approved by AFTRA but shot down by SAG members. At that time, fewer than half of SAG’s members wanted the deal.

Opponents of consolidation relished their victory, saying it underscored flaws in the plan as well as concerns over unanswered questions on such issues as health benefits and pensions. They also suggested that the unions should study an alternative in which SAG would represent all actors.

“They should propose absorbing actors into SAG and for AFTRA to be compensated in some manner,” said actor David Joliffe, one of the opposition leaders. “If they had done that, it would have been over.”

SAG and AFTRA directors tried to sell members with the argument that a combined union was needed to better bargain with today’s media giants. They also contended that costs could be saved by combining operations and that a merged union would end jurisdictional fights over who represents actors when TV shows are shot in digital format.

Other union leaders expressed dismay with the results, among them Thomas C. Short, president of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, which represents myriad workers employed on TV and film crews.

“The IATSE is very disappointed in the results of the recent SAG-AFTRA merger election,” Short said. “It is truly unfortunate that a simple majority cannot rule on a question that is this critical to the future of their union. Perhaps, in the future, the members of SAG should consider a more democratic approach.”

Actor and SAG Vice President Mike Farrell, who supported the plan, said that in any other election, 58% would be a clear victory, adding that the results show strong support for the current SAG regime led by actress Melissa Gilbert.

“This would normally be seen as a considerable triumph,” Farrell said. “Unfortunately, it doesn’t match the constitutional requirement of 60%.”

Both unions are expected to turn their attentions now to negotiating with advertisers on behalf of actors in commercials. The last time the two sides bargained in 2000, actors launched a bitter six-month strike that was Hollywood’s longest ever. That strike also caused a major rift inside SAG, which led in part to Gilbert’s moderate regime being swept into office last year.

SAG Chief Executive A. Robert Pisano said the timetable of talks was being worked out but should start after Labor Day. He said rising health-care costs were a key issue.

Ira Shepard, the chief negotiator for advertisers, said the rejection of the merger would have no effect on negotiations because historically SAG and AFTRA have jointly bargained the commercials contract. He added that because of that history, he didn’t believe a combined union would have made any difference at the negotiating table.