AFTRA Approves Contract With Producers

Jul 8, 2008  •  Post A Comment

Members of the American Federation of Television & Radio Artists have voted to approve a proposed contract with producers.
A little more than 62% of members voted “yes” on the deal.
In an unusual display of inter-union bickering, the Screen Actors Guild had been urging AFTRA members to reject the contract between their guild and the Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers. SAG mounted an expensive lobbying campaign to get out its message.
Much attention will be paid to how the vote broke down. Before the vote was announced, conventional wisdom held that overwhelming approval could take away SAG’s leverage in its own talks with the AMPTP. Likewise, a more narrow vote could embolden SAG leadership to fight on.
While a clear majority of AFTRA members voted to approve, SAG’s campaign seemed to have an impact. Similiar deals with writers and directors were approved by more substantial margins.
The AMPTP last week made what it called a “last, best and final offer” to SAG. The actors’ guild said Tuesday that it will deliver its response to that offer on Thursday.


  1. SAG needs to take its ball and bat and go home.
    It would be misguided stubborness for them to take this any further-they clearly stand alone now.
    Any notion that a slightly larger AFTRA minority percentage that voted against their deal than those that voted against DGA and WGA contracts would “embolden” the leadership of SAG to keep on fighting is ludicrous.
    With all due respect, I disagree with the author’s (Mr. Adalian’s) statement above to that effect.
    I have little confidence in SAG’s judgment, but even Hillary Clinton dropped her fight when it was clear she had lost. I think SAG’s leadership will do the same.

  2. Guess a majority of AFTRAns felt that due to the current economy, it’s better to keep the work pipeline open and let the future take care of itself. Of course this also means more work for non-union folks (good for them, they get opportunities with possibly lower pay and no-residuals). I suppose we’ll have the same contentiousness in 3 years when the “sunset clause” goes into effect. And we’ll have a rerun of the same issues.
    Oh well…stay tuned.

  3. I understand everyones need to be paid fairly for their work, but when the actors GREED starts to hurt every household then some of these OVERPAID SAG actors need a reality check. They want more money for residuals on cable and “on-line”. Who really pays for this??? Well it is the citizens of this country who get their TV. movies and internet from cable companies. As these residuals are ncreased, the media that pays them charges the cable companies more for the product, then the cable compaies pass it along to the customers. Cable, and satelittle, customers are the ones who really foot the bill, not the producers. Do you really think it is fair to a blue collar worker who makes 30-40 grand a year to have to pay 10-15 dollars to go to a movie, or have his or her cable or satellite bill go up 6-10% a year because of residuals? Let’s face it, the ecomony is going into the crapper but these over paid, “prima donna” SAG represntratives could care less about John Q Public, the people who really pay foir their services. Think about it!
    No one deserves to earn a million dollars an episode for a TV show or twenty million to star in a movie, and then get rsiduals on top of that! Granted not all members of SAG work everyday or make the million dollars an episode or twenty million a movie, but except for their inflated egos, do they really need that much money?
    Don’t be so greedy. Then maybe more people can afford to go to a movie, or watch movies on the On-Demand cable channels without having to give up things like food or heat or medications, or rent
    If you get a RESONABLE offer, which apparently AFTRA and the WGA did, take it! Help save the economy of the nation , and its blue collar orkers.

  4. I still find it amazing that the whole issue of residuals is even addressed. I can’t think of any other hired emloyee, artist or not, that continues to get paid long after the job is done. How great it would be for the rest of use if we could continue to get paid for everything we have ever produced for an employer. If an artist sells a painting, does he get paid everytime it is viewed after the sale? Does a drug company scientist get paid for every pill that is sold after he develops a new treatment? You have people that will do anything to become and actor, so why do they get away with it? This whole concept needs to be scrapped.

  5. I am glad AFTRA voted to accept. SAG, are you listening?
    Residuals Spred The Wealth, as I have written before…yes, they are important, yes everytime something gets sold in Film & TV the $’s should be passed on…that’s the way it works.
    What is important now is that Tinseltown keep working!
    Peter Bright

Your Comment

Email (will not be published)