That I keep getting asked about, over and over. Because I'm like, a union rep.
"So is SAG going to vote for a strike? Put us out of work?"
For a long time I've thought Mr. Rosenberg and Mr. Allen over there in the thespians' jurisdiction had painted themselves into a dandy corner negotiation and job action-wise.
The economy's crashed.
Unemployment is soaring.
SAG membership has splintered.
And now they're trying to pull off a 75% "yes" vote for doing that job action, otherwise known as "strike" ...
Nice hat trick if you can pull it off, but for a while now I've been dubious about them pulling it off. Month by month, SAG's situation has been steadily unraveling. Craig Mazin at Artful Writer has come to the same general conclusion:
... In the span of just a few days, an open, sizeable and organized revolt [inside SAG] began. It started with letters from individual SAG members like Jason Alexander asking their fellow actors to vote “no” on the authorization vote. Then the New York SAG Board officially came out against the authorization.1 Alan called a compulsory national meeting to address this schism, then apparently realized he couldn’t actually compel that, and so he withdrew that meeting. This was followed by a statement against the authorization by 130 actors ...
This general disintegration has been fairly obvious for some time. These folks have minimal leverage, and there's not much they can do about that. They started de-leveraging when they cleverly refused to merge with AFTRA and control the entire acting work force ... and they've been cutting their own throats ever since. Which is a shame, because I'm not in favor of labor becoming less powerful.
But the reality is what it is. I don't like to bullshit myself. There's no upside to it.