Sign up for First Take, our daily insider email
Complete Awards Season Coverage

Howard's Election Brings SAG/AFTRA Merge Closer

Howard's Election Brings SAG/AFTRA Merge Closer

Says the first item on his agenda will be to meet with leaders of other guilds, notably AFTRA's Reardon.

EMAIL
PRINT

Keywords

Slideshow

Results from Thursday's Screen Actors Guild elections put the moderate Unite for Strength coalition of the Guild in a dominant position, with Ken Howard winning the presidency, the party winning overall and Amy Aquino taking over as secretary treasurer.

Howard captured 12,895 votes, 47 percent of the 27,295 valid ballots casts.

 

Rival Membership First candidate Anne-Marie Johnson garnered 8,906 votes. Independent candidate Seymour Cassel had 4,838 votes.

In addition to capturing four more national board seats and 17 of the 21 Hollywood-division board seats that were up for grabs, the moderates also dominated the New York division races, with Mike Hodge winning the regional presidency and his coalition sweeping all 13 board seats that were up.

"Our whole team won today," Hodge told TheWrap. "We understand that we have a mandate."

For his part, Howard worked to strike a cooperative tone for a Guild that has been badly fractured of late and at odds with other organizations, including AFTRA and the DGA.

"This is not the kind of result that anyone should refer to as a referendum," he said. "My main issue we have is to arrive at some sort of unity within the Screen Actors Guild."

 

Howard said the first item on his agenda will be to meet with leaders of the other entertainment guilds, notably AFTRA president Roberta Rearson.

"We need to start talking about ways in which we can publicly display unity," he said.

 

Thursday’s SAG election -- which pitted the pragmatist Howard against the less moderate Johnson, as well as independents Cassel and Asmar Muhammad -- will go a long way toward determining whether the traditionally go-it-alone labor union will finally merge with the more heterogeneously structured AFTRA.
  
With clout for the 76-year-old SAG weakened by a $4 million deficit and internal infighting -- punctuated by the United for Strength-led overthrow of guild chief negotiator Doug Allen in January -- both Howard and Johnson had stated that is the right time for a merger with the smaller AFTRA (70,000 members compared to SAG’s 125,000), given that more landmark new media negotiations with the producers union are coming up in 2011.
 
Johnson’s Membership First coalition, however has only been interested in a merger that involves the 44,000 or so members the two guilds have in common.
 

Two times in recent years, SAG membership voting has put a stop to advanced efforts made to put the two guilds together. Both times, SAG’s base of primarily film and TV actors voted to keep AFTRA’s more diverse constituency of newscasters, radio deejays, recording engineers and other non-thespian members out of their union.
 
Ballots were mailed to 99,485 paid-up SAG members on Aug. 25, and 27,295 were tabulated Thursday, for a return of 27 percent.The National Board members elected  will assume office on Sept. 25 for terms of three years.

 
1 | 2
Next

Comments

What's the deal with the VP position at SAG? Someone told me that Ann Marie Johnson was the first VP they've had - is that true? Will there not be a vice president going forward?

I can't say I'm pleased with the SAG election results, nor can I say I'm particularly surprised.

And I'm still tired of characterizing Unite for Strength as "moderates" and Membership First as something other than "moderates". How about calling U4S "corporate appeasers" and M1st "unapologetic unionists"???

IMHO, here are the reasons Ken Howard won:

1. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

2. Membership First made a tactical error in opposing merger - they should have come out in favor of a properly-structured merger leading to a new union structured more like SAG than AFTRA (Matt Mulhern's got a point about this).

3. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

4. Seymour Cassel was a spoiler - there's no guarantee that everyone who voted for him would have voted for Anne-Marie Johnson, but clearly, it would have been a much closer race without him there.

5. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

6. Howard's misstep on the Emmy stage notwithstanding, he was smart enough, or at least well-counseled enough, to not speak off the cuff or outside of a strictly-controlled setting (you know, like softball interviews with the Trades) and read off the teleprompters for the nice Youtube video.

7. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

8. Ned Vaughn watched The Manchurian Candidate (both versions) multiple times and took really good notes.

9. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

10. Howard and Unite for Strength did a fantastic job ducking all of the serious issues by focusing on merger as a panacea, and by keeping online communication with actors one-way with closed comments sections on both their website and their Youtube videos.

11. Well, I think I may already have mentioned Tom Hanks.

As for the next couple of years, Matt Mulhern (in the DHD comments section for this story) offers a far better assessment than I could. I would add that with the Obama administration coming down squarely in favor of Net Neutrality, the door remains open to independent producers - no-budget types as well as the Mark Cubans - to bypass Hollywood's traditional gatekeepers, produce scripted entertainment and deliver it right to our Internet-connected big screens. The no-budget types may be less relevant to the unions, but for the higher-budget productions, not everything over the next couple of years is necessarily bad news for union actors.

All things considered, we'd still be better off with more aggressive leadership. All we can do now is be vigilant and keep shining a light.

Comments

What's the deal with the VP position at SAG? Someone told me that Ann Marie Johnson was the first VP they've had - is that true? Will there not be a vice president going forward?

I can't say I'm pleased with the SAG election results, nor can I say I'm particularly surprised.

And I'm still tired of characterizing Unite for Strength as "moderates" and Membership First as something other than "moderates". How about calling U4S "corporate appeasers" and M1st "unapologetic unionists"???

IMHO, here are the reasons Ken Howard won:

1. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

2. Membership First made a tactical error in opposing merger - they should have come out in favor of a properly-structured merger leading to a new union structured more like SAG than AFTRA (Matt Mulhern's got a point about this).

3. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

4. Seymour Cassel was a spoiler - there's no guarantee that everyone who voted for him would have voted for Anne-Marie Johnson, but clearly, it would have been a much closer race without him there.

5. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

6. Howard's misstep on the Emmy stage notwithstanding, he was smart enough, or at least well-counseled enough, to not speak off the cuff or outside of a strictly-controlled setting (you know, like softball interviews with the Trades) and read off the teleprompters for the nice Youtube video.

7. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

8. Ned Vaughn watched The Manchurian Candidate (both versions) multiple times and took really good notes.

9. Tom Hanks endorsed him.

10. Howard and Unite for Strength did a fantastic job ducking all of the serious issues by focusing on merger as a panacea, and by keeping online communication with actors one-way with closed comments sections on both their website and their Youtube videos.

11. Well, I think I may already have mentioned Tom Hanks.

As for the next couple of years, Matt Mulhern (in the DHD comments section for this story) offers a far better assessment than I could. I would add that with the Obama administration coming down squarely in favor of Net Neutrality, the door remains open to independent producers - no-budget types as well as the Mark Cubans - to bypass Hollywood's traditional gatekeepers, produce scripted entertainment and deliver it right to our Internet-connected big screens. The no-budget types may be less relevant to the unions, but for the higher-budget productions, not everything over the next couple of years is necessarily bad news for union actors.

All things considered, we'd still be better off with more aggressive leadership. All we can do now is be vigilant and keep shining a light.