TO MELISSA GILBERT FROM VALERIE HARPER
The Starmaker
Dear Melissa,
I'd like to know how long you plan on remaining silent. Though you have
made
comments about the election to reporters, you have failed to speak to
the
membership of the union in response to this question:
Why do you think it is a good idea for advertising agencies to own
between 10%
and 49% of our talent agents?
Perhaps you remain silent and perhaps you ignored my request for a
debate because
you know that your position on the agent negotiations is indefensible.
You know that
actors aren't stupid. You know that they understand that financial
interests shared
between ad agencies and talent agencies is an obvious
conflict-of-interest.
Do you really think that actors can be so easily duped and, if not, why
are you
wasting tens of thousands of dollars of our dues money in legal fees,
cutting a deal for
something that you know will NEVER be approved by the Guild's
membership?
Did you read the legal opinion issued today from the California State
Senate? Even if
you managed to get this bad deal past the membership, the Labor
Commissioner will
windup determining that it's against the law. Again, you're wasting tens
of thousands
of dollars for nothing.
I have one more question I'd like you to answer:
WHO is really speaking FOR you?
Mike Farrell would like us to believe that he's speaking for you in his
shameful
e-mail.
SAG has informed the membership, though, that the "Mike Farrell" email
was
actually paid for by Amy Aquino.
So now we have Melissa Gilbert speaking through Mike Farrell, but in
reality it's just
Amy Aquino wearing a "Mike-mask?"
The membership knows chicanery and "sleight-of-hand" when they see it.
Stop hiding, Melissa. Let the members of our Guild decide who should be
the next
President based on the issues.
Sincerely yours,
Valerie Harper
Risaroo
This email message is not an official communication of the Screen Actors
Guild and has not been transmitted at Guild expense. The Guild is
required by federal law to provide candidates with the opportunity to
send you e-mail messages. The following has been prepared by the
candidate(s) and is not endorsed or reviewed by the Guild in any manner.
The candidate(s) have not been provided with your e-mail address. The
messages are being transmitted by an independent electronic communications
firm.
Dear Fellow SAG Members:
In the last couple of weeks, I've been called everything in the book and
others have been slandered for speaking in support of me. I've been doing
my job as President and spending countless hours in the critical ATA
negotiations, and for that, I'm accused of "hiding" and criticized for not
campaigning. It seems no matter what I do, I can't win (pun intended).
People's ears are ringing already and we don't need any more mudslinging,
so let me just say I HAVE been campaigning for your vote--and campaigning
hard. I've been doing it by working to fulfill the promises I made when
I ran last fall. In that campaign, I made clear in my platform statement,
on my website, and in messages to the membership how I stood on the issues
facing us as performers. You know where I stand. It's what I've been
doing since you elected me that's important. Here's a brief rundown on
three of the most critical issues:
--Union Activism--
With attacks increasing on organized labor everywhere, solidarity with
other unions is more critical than ever. In the last three months, I've
made good headway strengthening SAG's damaged ties with other labor unions
and entertainment professional associations. After being nominated by
AFTRA President John Connolly, I was unanimously elected a Vice President
of the AFL-CIO. My serving with John Sweeney on the AFL-CIO Executive
Council gives SAG a great opportunity to bolster its strength by working
hand-in-hand with our union brothers and sisters. I assure you, this
opportunity will be seized.
--Runaway--
I've been working with Governor Gray Davis and others to help design a
California tax incentive program to help curtail runaway production, which
will serve as a template for our state-by-state efforts. I believe that
effort, in conjunction with pending federal legislation, is the best way
to bring production back to the U.S. I do not support the imposition of
tariffs because it's self-destructive. If we taxed film and TV product
from Canada, you can bet they'd do the same to us. As would other
countries. And since we export far more product than we import, we'd be
the losers in any tariff war.
--Talent Agency Negotiations--
Much misinformation has been spread on this issue and I can't respond
because of a confidentiality agreement in the negotiations, but let me
make a few things clear. I am not going to let our agents become producers.
I am not in favor of advertising agencies owning our agents' businesses.
What I do favor is preserving an agency franchise agreement, something that
has served the membership well for over 60 years. My objective, as a member
of the negotiating committee, is to get the best deal possible for the
membership. IF a deal is reached, it'll be up to the membership to decide
whether to accept or reject it. I'm just trying to give you that option.
As you can well imagine, the disruption caused by throwing out last
fall's election has not helped us on any of these issues. To be
successful as a union, SAG needs to project an image of strength and
unity. Right now, we're projecting chaos and disarray. So in addition
to costing lots of money, this rerun is destroying our image and
diminishing our effectiveness.
If there's a new campaign issue worth debating, a vital issue that's
arisen since the fall election, it's the rerun itself. Is it truly
necessary? Is there a reason for it so compelling it justifies everything
it's costing the Guild? Valerie and her running mates, Kent McCord and
Elliot Gould, helped to force this rerun on us, so clearly they think so.
I don't. Neither do Amy Aquino and Kevin Kilner.
As you know, the decision to overturn the election was made by a five-
member elections committee. Both the makeup of that committee and the
rationale it offered for throwing out last fall's election make it clear
that not only was the decision unjustified, it was also probably
politically motivated. That's a deeply disturbing idea, but it's the
only conclusion I can draw from the facts. Consider them yourself:
* Every member of the committee was a Valerie Harper supporter. That's
a plain fact, not an opinion. Every one of them had PUBLICLY endorsed
Valerie's campaign.
* One of the two "problems" with last fall's election that the committee
ruled was so serious as to justify overturning it was the absence of
signature lines on some ballot envelopes. Well, take a look at the ballot
envelope you just received for the rerun election. On it, it says: "You are
not required to sign this return envelope for your vote to be counted."
That's right, ballots DO NOT HAVE TO BE SIGNED--and never have. It may
have been a minor technical violation that some ballots didn't have
signature lines; but really, cause to throw out an election? Have they
never heard the term, "No harm, no foul?"
* The only other justification given by the committee for rerunning the
election was that the deadline for the return of ballots in New York was
different from LA's. What they didn't tell you is that's the way it's been
for over a decade--and no one has ever found reason to complain before.
Something else not mentioned is that the total number of ballots received in
those extra days in NY was less than my margin of victory. So even if every
one of those ballots was presumed to be for me and thrown out, I still would
have won the election.
Not surprisingly, the Department of Labor is now investigating the rerun
decision. It is powerless, however, to act quickly enough to stop it. So
PLEASE vote. Indeed, it's more important to vote now than ever before.
The political gamesmanship you're watching turn your union into a public
laughingstock will destroy SAG unless it's stopped now. And the only way
to stop it is for the membership to raise its voice and say "NO" by voting
decisively to reject candidates who play politics at your expense.
Please mark your ballots for Melissa Gilbert, AMY AQUINO and KEVIN KILNER,
and let's put SAG back to work for performers.
Vote louder.
Respectfully yours,
Melissa Gilbert
PS -- Because not all SAG members are on the list to which this letter is
being sent, please forward to anyone you think might be interested.
For further information, go to http://www.unitedscreenactors.com
The Starmaker
"In Her Own Words?" give me a break!
Does anyone *really* believe that this is "Gilbert In Her Own Words"?
Does anyone really believe that Lisa Risaroo believes that this is
"Gilbert In Her Own Words"??
I don't think Lisa Risaroo would ever come here and say she really
believes that this is "Gilbert In Her Own Words"!
The Starmaker
The Starmaker
>
> A LETTER TO MELISSA GILBERT FROM VALERIE HARPER
>
> Dear Melissa,
>
> I'd like to know how long you plan on remaining silent.
Give her a break Harper, *they* are trying to come up with something
"In Her Own Words."
The Starmaker
>
> A LETTER TO MELISSA GILBERT FROM VALERIE HARPER
>
> Dear Melissa,
>
> I'd like to know how long you plan on remaining silent.
Until march 9th.
> Perhaps you remain silent and perhaps you ignored my request for a
> debate because
> you know that your position on the agent negotiations is indefensible.
Translation: "You're afraid I'm going to kick your ass!!!!"
> You know that
> actors aren't stupid.
That is not what everybody is saying behind actors backs.
> You know that they understand that financial
> interests shared
> between ad agencies and talent agencies is an obvious
> conflict-of-interest.
No they don't know that, and I don't think they even care.
>
> Do you really think that actors can be so easily duped and, if not, why
> are you
> wasting tens of thousands of dollars of our dues money in legal fees,
> cutting a deal for
> something that you know will NEVER be approved by the Guild's
> membership?
Wasting tens of thousands of dollars of dues is what a union's purpose
is for. It's called funneling. It doesn't matter if it is approved
or not, what matters is that the money is funneled.
>
> Did you read the legal opinion issued today from the California State
> Senate?
Are you kidding? Read?? Was it in GoodHouse Keeping Magazine? Or Cosmo?
> Even if
> you managed to get this bad deal past the membership, the Labor
> Commissioner will
> windup determining that it's against the law. Again, you're wasting tens
> of thousands
> of dollars for nothing.
The people who get the money don't consider it a waste. Follow the
money.
>
> I have one more question I'd like you to answer:
>
> WHO is really speaking FOR you?
and doing her writing FOR her!!!
>
> Mike Farrell would like us to believe that he's speaking for you in his
> shameful
> e-mail.
That slug! (I gotta look up that word in the dictionary)
>
> SAG has informed the membership, though, that the "Mike Farrell" email
> was
> actually paid for by Amy Aquino.
Aquino? What kind of name is that?
>
> So now we have Melissa Gilbert speaking through Mike Farrell, but in
> reality it's just
> Amy Aquino wearing a "Mike-mask?"
Where can I buy one?
>
> The membership knows chicanery and "sleight-of-hand" when they see it.
Chicanery? Where do these people find these words?
>
> Stop hiding, Melissa. Let the members of our Guild decide who should be
> the next
> President based on the issues.
Since when was it up to the members to decide?
This is a re-run election because it was never up to the members
to decide. I hope somebody is watching the people who will be
'counting' the votes because it's the counters...not the members
that decide. A re-run does not guarantee a honest election.
>
> Sincerely yours,
>
> Valerie Harper
>
> http://www.actorsmovingforward.org
All I wanna know is who is hotter in bed, Melissa or Valerie?
The Starmaker
The Starmaker
> > * One of the two "problems" with last fall's election that the committee
> > ruled was so serious as to justify overturning it was the absence of
> > signature lines on some ballot envelopes. Well, take a look at the ballot
> > envelope you just received for the rerun election. On it, it says: "You are
> > not required to sign this return envelope for your vote to be counted."
I see they have already managed to continue to not have signatures just
so
they can insert fake ballots. First time they removed the signature
line, now
this time the signature line is in but now they are telling you *not* to
sign it.
These SAG people make me sick. I think I'm going to throw up! Those SAG
people hate honest elections, don't they.
SAG/NY's rules of procedure for
elections states on page 17, section 4 (a), "Members are required to
sign the outer envelope in which the second envelope marked 'ballot' is
enclosed..." Section 4 (b) states, "If no signature appears on the
outer
envelope, the ballot will be considered void and the envelope will not
be opened."
The Starmaker
I don't have time for this now, I gotta go dancing...I'll send it to the
Hollywood Reporter on Monday.
Risaroo
I titled that post/reply in that way purposefully because I KNOW that
Melissa wrote it. Just as I am eerily certain that Harper is (this time
around) writing HER own stuff (thankfully for all of us - she's off the hook
with rage and misinformation and it shows).
And must you reply to every single thread - even your own - over and over
again? For the love of bandwidth, collect your thoughts and express them in
one go.
So boring to see your handle on screen every other post.
Lisa
The Starmaker
>
> So boring to see your handle on screen every other post.
>
> Lisa
well if your union didn't imtimidate actors with threats of
expulsion there would be more posts from other actors, but the reality
is Lisa, is that actors are *not* allowed to voice their opinion.
That is the reason why I exist.
The Starmaker
So if you feel that it's boring to see my handle on screen every other
post
it's because Lisa, i'm the only one in the world that says,
"Fuck you" to your union!
You lisa, I would always love, ...your union, i would always hate. I
would
never confuse one with the other.
The Starmaker
>
> Hector --
>
> I titled that post/reply in that way purposefully because I KNOW that
> Melissa wrote it.
How would you know something like that? Were you there when she typed
it? Were
you watching over her shoulder? Did she televised her writing it? Did
she
video taped it and send it to you? How could you possibly say "I
KNOW"???
> Just as I am eerily certain that Harper is (this time
> around) writing HER own stuff (thankfully for all of us - she's off the hook
> with rage and misinformation and it shows).
You sound like you are voting for Harper, that's errie.
Besides what difference does it make who wrote it, even the US president
has speech writers. But for you to post the Subject Heading: IN Her Own
Words
just dumbfounds me.
>
> And must you reply to every single thread
I do not reply to every single thread. Now you are sounding like a girl.
Must you always this, must you always that.
Thank God I'm happily unmarried!
> - even your own - over and over
> again?
Honey, when I reply to my own threads, they are not replies.
I do not always post to get a response from others, I post because
it is a form of Broadcasting to me, and the replies are a continuations
of
that Broadcast. It's The Starmaker Show!
> For the love of bandwidth, collect your thoughts and express them in
> one go.
Is this some kind of union constitution rule or something?
Now we got the Thought Police here! It's just like that SAG mentally,
you are not allowed to Think your own way. I see commies everywhere!
>
> So boring to see your handle on screen every other post.
Only boring people get bored.
>
> Lisa
Maybe you need to go to a another newsgroup like
alt.unions.misc
alt.unions.moderated
alt.unions.wheres.hoffa
alt.unions.ballot.stuffing
alt.unions.free.gotti
alt.unions.lets.raise.those.members.dues.again
alt.unions.funnels.
The Starmaker
> Dear Fellow SAG Members:
>
> * One of the two "problems" with last fall's election that the committee
> ruled was so serious as to justify overturning it was the absence of
> signature lines on some ballot envelopes.
> Well, take a look at the ballot
> envelope you just received for the rerun election. On it, it says: "You are
> not required to sign this return envelope for your vote to be counted."
> That's right, ballots DO NOT HAVE TO BE SIGNED--and never have.
This paragraph points out how they intend to fix the election.
By sending emails out to SAG members and trying to influence them not
to sign the ballots so that when thousands of ballots show up
without signatures they can then mixed them up with their fixed unsigned
ballots (mob guys are too lazy to fake thousands of signatures)then they
can claim that the members Knew that they weren't required to sign so
that
there is no question of counting ballots without signatures.
These SAG people are sooo bent on winning this election for Gilbert.
They must either hate Harper or are afraid of her. They refuse to have
an honest election. There is no way they can win with an honest
election.
Besides it's not in their heart to be honest.
First they figured out to print 24,000 ballots without signatures lines.
That didn't work, so now they printed the signatures lines but they
inserted next to the signature line
"You are not required to sign this return envelope for your vote to be
counted."
They would do *anything* just so that there are no signatures!
Is this an honest election?
The Starmaker
SAG/NY's rules of procedure for
elections states on page 17, section 4 (a), "Members are required to
sign the outer envelope in which the second envelope marked 'ballot' is
enclosed..." Section 4 (b) states, "If no signature appears on the
outer envelope, the ballot will be considered void and the envelope
will not
be opened."
Have the rules of procedure been changed?
Do I sign it or do I not sign it, I'm confused.
I wanna do the right thing but the rules tell me one thing
and the envelope tells me the opposite.
Someone help me, I'm going crazy, I'm going out of my mind.
These SAG people are crazymakers.
Maybe the SAG people are trying to "sabotage" the election.
The Starmaker
notice a lot of similarities.
Same kind of writing style that is like a fingerprint of a person.
AMY AQUINO uses dashes alot, for example:
So I asked for--and was denied--a basic
world -- we
SIGNED--and never
and also she uses CAPS alot. It's also interesting that when she
writes her own name, she capped it! See below last sentence:
"mark your ballots for Melissa Gilbert, AMY AQUINO"
Now why would Melissa use uppers and lowers with her own name but
Capitalize AMY AQUINO name? Answer: Amy wrote this letter.
http://www.unitedscreenactors.com/amyaquino.shtml
Risaroo
an actor . . . BUT:
The reason for the conflicting language on the ballot envelope is that we
have to satisfy BOTH the NY Rules of Procedure (until they get changed) AND
Federal Labor Law. And it's lunacy like this that will prevent anyone from
making any kind of beef about the signature line at all.
In essence - "It's here (to satisfy our own outdated rules and to keep
people from finding loopholes to overturn the thing again and cost us even
MORE money) but you do not have to sign it for your vote to count according
to US law. Your choice."
And as for your AMY/Melissa theory, you're mistaken. But I have come to
expect that. Ya know -- I use a lot of dashes, too. But I didn't write it,
either. And Melissa is a pretty headstrong lady -- she doesn't like people
speaking for her when she has something to say.
Lisa
Risaroo
"The Starmaker" <hld...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3C7016...@ix.netcom.com...
>It's The Starmaker Show!
Now I remember why I stopped visiting here before.
Later,
Lisa
The Starmaker
>
> Not that I need to explain this to you, Hector - you're not a member or even
> an actor . . .
I'm so lucky.
> BUT:
>
> The reason for the conflicting language on the ballot envelope is that we
> have to satisfy BOTH the NY Rules of Procedure (until they get changed) AND
> Federal Labor Law. And it's lunacy like this that will prevent anyone from
> making any kind of beef about the signature line at all.
that remains to be seen.
>
> In essence - "It's here (to satisfy our own outdated rules
Outdated? Is that some *new* lingo you guys got at SAG? If the rule
interferes with *your* agenda, it's outdated.
I think you're outdated. Your marriage vows are outdated. The ten
commandents
are outdated. I'm not going to open the door for any woman anymore,
that's outdated.
You chicks are going to have to open your own doors, you got two hands!
> and to keep
> people from finding loopholes to overturn the thing again and cost us even
> MORE money) but you do not have to sign it for your vote to count according
> to US law.
Printing 42,000 ballots without signature lines was not a loophole, it
was illegal. But youuu SAG people are living in a sea of denial.
Even if the election commitee was to throw out the challengers, there
would still be a re-run. The Labor Department would've interceeded and
the election commitee decions would've been invalidated. So the
election committe had no choice but to re-run the election themselves.
They didn't want the Labor Dept. telling them to do a re-run.
But people like you who have their head in the sand only show
that which is left exposed.
> Your choice."
>
> And as for your AMY/Melissa theory, you're mistaken. But I have come to
> expect that. Ya know -- I use a lot of dashes, too. But I didn't write it,
> either. And Melissa is a pretty headstrong lady -- she doesn't like people
> speaking for her when she has something to say.
Does she like people telling her not to speak when she has something to
say?
The Starmaker
You don't know how to change channels. I bet the clock on your
VCR is blinking right now!
Risaroo
no laws were broken.
God, but it's frustrating when people who don't know what they are talking
about try to interpret things based on what they read in the paper (or
worse, what they hear on the wind).
I'm doing too much other junk to sit and indulge this crap, Hector.
Honestly - give it a rest.
Goodbye,
Lisa
The Starmaker
>
> Printing the ballot envelopes without the signature line was not "illegal" -
> no laws were broken.
No laws that you were aware of! The law that was broken was the Labor
Law that states a union must abide by it's own rules regarding Election
Labor laws. You cannot sign a signature line that is required to sign if
there is no signature line to sign!
>
> God, but it's frustrating when people who don't know what they are talking
> about try to interpret things based on what they read in the paper (or
> worse, what they hear on the wind).
I'm sorry you don't belong to the low IQ club I belong to.
>
> I'm doing too much other junk to sit and indulge this crap, Hector.
Other junk is correct!!!! Go do the dishes honey, I'm sure there must be
laundry in the hamper you have neglected to do.
How about cooking everyday instead of once a month!
You and Bloomingdales are going to have to get a trial seperation!!!
>
> Honestly - give it a rest.
A rest? I just go on and on and on. Dramaqueen calls me the Energizer
rabitt.
>
> Goodbye,
Good Riddance!!
I don't get this Lisa girl, I'm just warming up!! Have you seen my
latest post
entitled: SAG Out-Of-Business?
Don't get started on that, it's too much for you.
The Starmaker
> Honestly - give it a rest.
>
> Goodbye,
>
> Lisa
Give it a rest? You know what your problem is Lisa, the same with
all you SAG staff people, you don't care about actors. All you care
about
is union politics and office politics. You guys made a mistake, you
screw actors
in front of the whole world. And then you think you're going to get away
with it.
Well your thoughts are 'outdated'. SAG is not going to get off that
easy.
.............
Clooney Slams SAG
by Josh Grossberg
George Clooney is sticking up for the little guy.
The former ER hunk is whipping up a perfect storm against the Screen
Actors Guild after the union dumped a trio of unknown actors for
crossing the picket line during last year's strike against advertisers.
The big reason for Clooney's bagging on SAG: He says the union has a
double standard when it comes to laying down the law.
He points out that SAG reserved its harshest penalty for the trio--Gerry
Donato, Mario Barbieri Cecchini and Robert Kalomeer--by expelling them
for doing scab commercial work. However, Clooney points out that the
union meted out more lenient sentences to big-time celebs such as
Elizabeth Hurley, Tiger Woods and Shaquille O'Neal, who also failed to
honor the walkout.
"All of these people used poor judgment," Clooney writes in a letter to
the guild. "Three of them needed the money more than the other three. As
a union, you cannot enforce laws based on celebrity, and the punishment
must be uniform."
Hurley and Woods were slapped with $100,000 fines for filming spots
during the strike for Estée Lauder perfume and Buick, respectively,
while O'Neal's case didn't even make it before SAG's board, which only
censured the NBA star after he apologized for doing a Disneyland ad.
Donato, Cecchini and Kalomeer, on the other hand, were voted out of the
union on October 14 by SAG's governing board. Technically, the
expulsions do not prevent producers from hiring the three thespians, but
the guild strongly recommends producers don't.
......................................................................
The Starmaker
Your problem is you don't understand *my* motivation.
I'm a Starmaker. A starmaker makes sure an actor works.
Anything that gets in the way of an actor working becomes my problem.
And I specialize in getting rid of problems.
You want me to rest, apoligize to those three actors and reinstate them.
Drama Queen
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> The Starmaker
>
> Your problem is you don't understand *my* motivation.
> I'm a Starmaker. A starmaker makes sure an actor works.
> Anything that gets in the way of an actor working becomes my problem.
> And I specialize in getting rid of problems.
>
> You want me to rest, apoligize to those three actors and reinstate them.
Starmie, please recognize these expulsions took place under the auspices
of the Bill Daniel regime. You do remember bill daniels don't you, ...he
is an avid valerie harper supporter, infact he endorsed her candidacy
and her platform which vowed to maintain what Daniels and his bunch
started.
Drama Queen
I have to assume this means a vow to continue the expulsions of unknown
no name actors while tapping the wrists of celebrities.
The Starmaker
lines.
That didn't work, so now they printed the signatures lines but they
inserted next to the signature line
"You are not required to sign this return envelope for your vote to be
counted."
Even though you are not required by Federal Labor Laws to sign, you are
required to sign according to SAG's Rules of Procedure for Elections.
And the Labor Dept states that SAG must abide by it's own elections
rules.
SAG/NY's rules of procedure for
elections states on page 17, section 4 (a), "Members are required to
sign the outer envelope in which the second envelope marked 'ballot'
is
enclosed..." Section 4 (b) states, "If no signature appears on the
outer envelope, the ballot will be considered void and the envelope
will not
be opened."
Have the rules of procedure been changed?
The Answer is No. Section 4 (b) must be upheld in order for the re-run
election to be valid. SAG must abide by it's *own* Election Rules
according to the Labor Dept.
Now why would SAG *tamper* with the ballots by inserting
"You are not required to sign this return envelope for your vote to be
counted.",
for the same reason they purposely ommitted the signature lines in
the first election. THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO SIGN IT!
First they *tampered* with the ballot by removing the signature line,
now they again have *tampered* with the ballot by "lying" to members
that their signature is not required.
They still don't want you to sign it!! That's what it's all about.
So you know who is going to win, the one with the most unsigned ballots!
And you already know who is going to have the most unsigned ballots,
Melissa Gilbert.
From the very beginning, unsigned ballots is the key.
This time, this election will be "flooded" with *unsigned* ballots.
The question will be is, after all the votes are counted, and Melissa
is again relected, will *anyone* "challenge" the election on the grounds
that unsigned ballots are invalid?
SAG/NY's rules of procedure for
elections states on page 17, section 4 (a), "Members are required to
sign the outer envelope in which the second envelope marked 'ballot'
is
enclosed..." Section 4 (b) states, "If no signature appears on the
outer envelope, the ballot will be considered void and the envelope
will not be opened."
The SAG rules of procedures "have not changed", anybody who says,
writes, or
communicates to you otherwise is Lying. The second anyone just counts
one
vote that is unsigned, breaks the law.
SAG is soo confused, they don't know what's right or wrong anymore.
Did you see what Lisa Risaroo wrote:
"The reason for the conflicting language on the ballot envelope is that
we
have to satisfy BOTH the NY Rules of Procedure (until they get changed)
AND
Federal Labor Law. And it's lunacy like this that will prevent anyone
from
making any kind of beef about the signature line at all."
Lisa believes it's "lunacy" that will prevent anyone making a beef
about the signature.
In otherwords, she believes it's sooo crazy at SAG about the 'signature'
that no one will bother to bring it up.
Well I happen to believe there are still some people at SAG who will
think otherwise. People who are not caught up in the "lunacy".
The Starmaker
It's very differcult to tell the difference between a fake ballot
and a real ballot if there are no written signatures. It's also
very differcult to fake signatures on a ballot. You need a thousand
different color ink pens, and you need to forge signatures a thousand
different ways...you're just better off if you want to fix an election
to simply make sure signatures are not required regardless of rules
or procedures or bylaws. Either remove the signature line, and if that
doesn't work then simply tell them not to sign it. And if that doesn't
work just get a car and run over Valarie Harper with it!
Where's Hoffa?
--
Do you know why Hoffa is dead, because the mob didn't want him to
run again.
The Starmaker
I'm having differculty understanding what is SAG's problem.
Can somebody just tell whoever is messing around with the
ballots to keep their fucking hands off of it? Whoever it
is just beat their heads with a baseball bat! Just tell them
"Don't fuck around with the fuckin ballots or I'll beat the shit
out of you!"
Slap them a couple of times.
First they remove the sig line now they added 'don't sign it'.
Aren't they able just to leave it along?
Is it Sucke again?
You people at SAG are just a bunch of pussies because you let
anybody do anything that's wrong and you're afraid to stop them.
Kick some ass around there!
Who added that line to the ballot,
"You are not required to sign this return envelope for your vote to be
counted."
Who authorized it? Whose idea was it?
That persons ass should be kicked!
The Starmaker
wat a bunch of sissies!
The Starmaker
As for the lack of a signature line for SAG/NY ballots, Boggs said that
federal labor law doesn't require a signature line. "But labor law does
require a union to abide by its own rules, and its abundantly clear the
union didn't abide by its own rules," Boggs said. "The signature line is
required, and it's not there. People have told me for years they've
voided ballots that are unsigned. The union has to adhere to that. Labor
law requires elections be fair, and the restrictions on voting and the
time you have to vote be reasonable and applied uniformly; it was
clearly not applied uniformly."
Regarding a required ballot signature, SAG/NY's rules of procedure for
elections states on page 17, section 4 (a), "Members are required to
sign the outer envelope in which the second envelope marked 'ballot' is
enclosed..." Section 4 (b) states, "If no signature appears on the outer
envelope, the ballot will be considered void and the envelope will not
be opened."
The Starmaker
Now, you have a signature line but you got people telling you
you don't have to sign it. Yet, the rules require you to sign it,
otherwise your vote will be considered voided.
"labor law does
require a union to abide by its own rules"
I'll keep posting and re-posting this untill somebody gets it through
their head.
Or ask Boggs yourself: ge...@eugeneboggs.com
I find it interesting that SAG has this biggggg web page with phone
numbers and addresses for you to contact them, but no email adresses
for you to contact them by email. Why is that? Are they afraid of
actors.
Maybe they don't know how to use a computer yet. Even this Boggs guy
has web site without any contact information, ...not even a whois!
That's strange?
Screen Actors Guild Directory
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SAG NATIONAL OFFICE
and
HOLLYWOOD OFFICE
5757 Wilshire Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90036-3600
MAIN SWITCHBOARD: (323) 954-1600
FAX: (323) 549-6603
TTY/TTD: (323) 549-6648
NEW YORK SAG OFFICE
1515 Broadway, 44th Floor
New York, NY 10036
MAIN SWITCHBOARD (212) 944-1030
FAX: (212) 944-6774
TTY/TTD: (212) 944-6715 (FOR DEAF PERFORMERS ONLY)
Associate National Executive Director: John McGuire
New York Branch Executive Director: John Sucke
DEPARTMENTS:
CONTRACTS
Commercials/
Infomercials/Music Videos
(323) 549-6858
Industrial/Educational/Interactive
(323) 549-6858
Production Services
(Background Actors)
(323) 549-6811
Singers' Representatives
(323) 549-6864
Stunt and Safety Representative
(323) 549-6560
Television
(323) 549-6835
Theatrical Motion Pictures
(323) 549-6828
24-HOUR RECORDED INFORMATION
The following phone numbers can be called at any time for the latest
information on the listed SAG services.
Agents List
(323) 549-6733
Child Actor Hotline
(323) 549-6030
Events Hotline
549-6650
Film Society Hotline
(323) 549-6657
Casting Seminars & Showcases Info
(323) 549-6540
InfoCast Hotline
(323) 937-3441
Information on How to Join SAG
(323) 549-6772
To Change Address or Phone #
(323) 549-6776
SAG Jobs Hotline
(323) 549-6023
SAFETY HOTLINE - 24 hours
(323) 954-1600
OTHER SAG DEPARTMENTS
Actors to Locate
(Will provide the name of member's representative)
(323) 549-6737
Affirmative Action
(323) 549-6644
Agent Contracts
(323) 549-6745
Committee Office
(Provides committee meeting information and New Member Orientation
appointments)
(323) 549-6418
Communications
(323) 549-6654
Dues Information
(323) 549-6755
Emergency Fund
(Can provide emergency financial assistance to members meeting
eligibility requirements)
(323) 549-6773
Film Society
(323) 549-6658
Government Relations
(323) 549-6756
Legal Affairs
(323) 549-6627
Membership Services
(323) 549-6778
New Membership
(323) 549-6769
Reporting Sexual Harassment
(323) 549-6644
Residuals Payment Info Center
Outside 323 area code:
(323) 549-6505
(800) 205-7716
Signatory Records
(323) 549-6869
SAG Foundation & BOOKPALS
(323) 549-6709
Screen Actors Guild Awards
(323) 549-6707
PENSION AND HEALTH
Information for members on their pension and health coverage benefits or
treatment for health concerns
Bob Hope Health Center
335 N. LaBrea Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90036
(323) 634-3850
Motion Picture & Television Fund
(A 24-hour general information line.)
(800) 448-8844
Motion Picture Country Home
23888 Mulholland Drive
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
(818) 876-1888
SAG Pension & Health
3601 West Olive Ave.
Burbank, CA 91510-7830
(818) 954-9400
Santa Clarita Health Center
25775 McBean Parkway #100
Valencia, CA 91355
(805) 284-3100
Toluca Lake Health Center
4323 Riverside Drive
Burbank, CA 91505
(818) 556-2700
Westside Health Center
1950 Sawtelle Boulevard #130
Los Angeles, CA 90025
(310) 996-9355
Woodland Hills Health Center
23888 Mulholland Drive
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
(818) 876-1050
CHARITABLE & SUPPORT ORGANIZATIONS
Actors Fund of America
The entertainment industry's oldest charity. Provides counseling, case
managements and financial
assistance.
(323) 933-9244
Actors Work Program
For employment retraining, alternative career planning, assistance in
job-interview techniques and
resume writing.
(323) 939-1801
Career Transition for Dancers
Assists professional dancers at mid-career and career's end in finding
satisfying new employment and
careers.
(323) 549-6660
(800) 581-2833
Entertainment Industry Foundation
Raises money within the entertainment industry for distribution
throughout the Los Angeles area.
(818) 760-7722
SAG Foundation
The charitable, educational and humanitarian arm of the Screen Actors
Guild.
(323) 549-6708
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
These organizations offer performers a diverse range of support services
and activities
The Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences
(310) 247-3000
---Margaret Herrick Library at the AMPAS
(310) 247-3020
Academy of Television Arts & Sciences
(818) 754-2800
Actors Equity Association
(323) 634-1750
Actors Equity of Australia
(011) 61-2-318-2066
ACTRA/Canada
(416) 489-1311
AFTRA
(323) 634-8100 TTY-(323) 463-9264
AFTRA/SAG Credit Union
(323) 461-3041
AGVA
(818) 508-9984
Association of Talent Agents
(310) 274-0628
British Actors Equity
(011) 44-71-379-6000
Cannes Film Festival - American Pavilion
(310) 837-4500
Casting Society of America
(323) 463-1925
Cinema Glamour Shop
(Designer & vintage ware shop whose sales support the work of the Motion
Picture & Television Fund)
(323) 933-5289
Deaf Entertainment Foundation
(323) 782-1344 / TDD(323) 782-1797
Directors Guild of America
(310) 289-2000
IATSE
(818) 905-8999
Independent Feature Project (West)
(310) 475-4379
Museum of Television & Radio
(310) 786-1000
NABET
(818) 846-0490
Producers Guild of America
(310) 557-0807
Publicists Guild
(818) 905-1541
SAG/AFI Conservatory
(323) 856-7736
SAG Awards Show Office
(323) 549-6707
Samuel French Bookstore
Hollywood: (323) 876-0507
Studio City: (818) 762-0535
Sheraton Universal Hotel
(818) 980-1212
Theatre Authority West
(323) 462-5761
Writers Guild of America
(323) 951-4000
DEPARTMENTS:
AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
(212) 827-1433
AGENCY
944-6797
COMMERCIALS/claims
944-1030
COMMERCIALS/locations
827-1504
COMMITTEES
827-1448
EMERGENCY HOTLINE
517-0909
FAX (don't call)
944-6774
INDUSTRIALS
827-1432
INFORMATION HOTLINE
398-8532
PENSION & HEALTH
(located at 1500 Broadway)
382-1020
PRODUCTION/SIGNATORY
827-1470
PUBLIC RELATIONS
827-1536
RESEARCH (1500)
764-4959
SWITCHBOARD
944-1030
TELEVISION/THEATRICAL
827-1510
BRANCH OFFICES:
ARIZONA
1616 E. Indian School Road, Suite 330
Phoenix, AZ 85016
(602) 265-2712
FAX: (602) 264-7571
Executive Director: Don Livesay
BOSTON
11 Beacon Street, Room 515
Boston, MA 02108
(617) 742-2688
FAX: (617) 742-4904
Executive Director: Dona Sommers
CLEVELAND**
1030 Euclid Avenue, Suite #429
Cleveland, OH 44115
(216) 579-9305
FAX: (216) 781-2257
** Cleveland is an AFTRA Office which also handles SAG business for this
area.
CHICAGO
1 East Erie, Suite #650
Chicago, IL 60611
(312) 573-8081
FAX: (312) 573-0318
Executive Director: Eileen Willenborg
DALLAS
6060 N. Central Expressway
Suite 302, LB 604
(214) 363-8300
FAX: (214) 363-5386
Executive Director: Ken Freehill
DENVER*
950 South Cherry Street, Suite 502
Denver, CO 80246
(800) 527-7517 or (303) 757-6226
FAX: (303) 757-1769
Executive Director:
* Denver is a regional office which also covers New Mexico & Utah
DETROIT*
27770 Franklin Road
Southfield, MI 48034-2352
Phone: (248) 355-3105
FAX: (248) 355-2879
Executive Director: Barbara Honner
*Detroit is a joint AFTRA/SAG office
FLORIDA*
7300 North Kendall Drive, Suite #620
Miami, FL 33156-7840
(305) 670-7677
FAX: (305) 670-1813
Executive Director: Hollis Batchelor
Southeastern Regional Exec. Dir: Mel Karl
* Florida is the Southeasttern Regional office which also covers
Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi,
No. Carolina, So. Carolina, West Virginia, U.S.Virgin Is., Puerto Rico &
t Caribbean
FLORIDA (CENTRAL)
646 West Colonial Drive
Orlando, FL 32804-7342
(407) 649-3100
(407) 649-7222
David A. Fazekas
Central Florida Representative
GEORGIA
455 E. Paces Ferry Road NE, Suite 334
Atlanta, GA 30305
(404) 239-0131
FAX: (404) 239-0137
Executive Director: Melissa Goodman
HAWAII
949 Kapiolani Blvd., #105
Honolulu, HI 96814
(808) 596-0388
FAX: (808) 593-2636
Executive Director: Brenda Ching
HOUSTON
2400 Augusta Dr. #264
Houston, TX 77057
(713) 972-1806
FAX: (713) 780-0261
Executive Director: Jack Dunlop
NEVADA
3900 Paradise Road, Suite #162
Las Vegas, NV 89109
(702) 737-8818
FAX: (702) 737-8851
Executive Director: Bobbi Hughes
MINNEAPOLIS / ST.PAUL
708 North 1st Street, Suite #333
Minneapolis, MN 55401
(612) 371-9120
FAX: (612) 371-9119
Executive Director: Colleen Aho
NASHVILLE
P.O. Box 121087
Nashville, TN 37212
(615) 327-2944
FAX: (615) 329-2803
Executive Director: Randall Himes
NORTH CAROLINA
311 North Second Street, Suite 2
Wilmington, NC 28401
(910) 762-1889
FAX: (910) 762-0881
Executive Director: Julie Balter
OREGON
3030 S.W. Moody, Suite #104
Portland, OR 97201
(503) 279-9600
FAX: (503) 279-9603
Executive Director: Stuart Pemble-Belkin
PHILADELPHIA
230 South Broad Street, 10th floor
Philadelphia, PA 19102
(215) 545-3150
FAX: (215) 732-0086
Executive Director: John Kailin
PUERTO RICO
530 Ponce de Leon Avenue, Suite #312
San Juan, PR 00901
(787) 289-7832
FAX: (787) 289-8732
Executive Director: Jose Luis Rey
ST. LOUIS**
1310 Papin Street, Suite #1006
St. Louis, MO 63103
(314) 231-8410
FAX: (314) 231-8412
Executive Director: Jackie Dietrich
** St. Louis is an AFTRA Office which also handles SAG business for this
area.
SAN DIEGO
858-278-7695
FAX 858-278-2505
Executive Director: Tom Doyle
7867 Convoy Court, Suite #307
San Diego, CA 92111-1214
SAN FRANCISCO*
350 Sansome Street, Suite 900
San Francisco CA 94104
Phone: 415-391-7510
Fax: 415-391-1108
Executive Director: Frank DuCharme
*San Francisco is a joint AFTRA/SAG office
SEATTLE
Screen Actors Guild/Seattle
4000 Aurora Ave N. #102
Seattle, WA 98103
(206) 270-0493
FAX (206) 282-7073
Executive Director: Joan Kalhorn
WASHINGTON/BALTIMORE
4340 East West Highway - Suite 204
Bethesda, MD 20814
(301) 657-2560
FAX (301) 656-3615
Executive Director: Patricia O'Donnell
SAG Current National Officers
President
Melissa Gilbert
Recording Secretary
Elliott Gould
Treasurer
Kent McCord
National Vice Presidents:
1st V.P.
Mike Farrell (Hollywood)
2nd V.P.
Eileen Henry (N.Y.)
3rd V.P.
Tom LaGrua (Hollywood.)
4th V.P.
Paul Christie (N.Y.)
5th V.P.
Norm Woodel (Chicago)
6th V.P.
Ed Vasgersian (San Francisco)
7th V.P.
Laird Stuart (Florida)
8th V.P.
Cece DuBois (regional branches)
9th V.P.
Esai Morales (L.A.)
10th V.P.
Tony Roberts (N.Y.)
11th V.P.
Tess Harper (Hollywood.)
12th V.P.
Skip Hinnant (N.Y.)
All national officers are elected to two-year terms.
For technical questions or comments about the SAG web site, please
contact
webm...@sag.org
........................
You know what I notice? I notice that in Los Angeles most of their
phone numbers begin with the numbers 549
The Starmaker
> I find it interesting that SAG has this biggggg web page with phone
> numbers and addresses for you to contact them, but no email adresses
> for you to contact them by email. Why is that? Are they afraid of
> actors.
If you need to contact someone at SAG by email, you can try just
guessing what their email is.
All you need to do is use the standard system at most companies.
First intial and last name.
EXample:
John Doe at SAG will be jd...@sag.org
or
John Gotti would be jgo...@sag.org
or
Al Capone aca...@sag.org
but if you want to email the president of SAG
it might be
pres...@sag.org
The Starmaker
> It's very differcult to tell the difference between a fake ballot
> and a real ballot if there are no written signatures. It's also
> very differcult to fake signatures on a ballot. You need a thousand
> different color ink pens, and you need to forge signatures a thousand
> different ways...you're just better off if you want to fix an election
> to simply make sure signatures are not required regardless of rules
> or procedures or bylaws. Either remove the signature line, and if that
> doesn't work then simply tell them not to sign it. And if that doesn't
> work just get a car and run over Valarie Harper with it!
>
> Where's Hoffa?
>
> --
> Do you know why Hoffa is dead, because the mob didn't want him to
> run again.
After spending around ten years in jail, Hoffa wanted to go back
being a union boss. He went to those mob guys to get back his job.
They said no. The Mafia liked the guy they already had, he was
'easier to manipulate' than the strong-willed Hoffa.
The fact is the Mafia held its own private union election, and Hoffa was
voted a dead loser.
Melissa Gilbert is easy to manipulate. Valarie Harper is not
easy to manipulate, she has a strong will.
SAG has already had their own private union election, and Harper was
voted out.
They are not going to let Harper win this one, even if they have to
re-run
the election for years.
The Starmaker
She tricked me!
She removed the subject and replaced it with
the above subject. (if you click References, you'll see)
I gotta watch out for her!!
Trix are for Kids!
u gotta watch out for these Irish chicks!!
TKONKLE
TKONKLE
Gould
have been lying to you about advertising agencies buying your talent
agents, please look at today's Wall Street Journal. The article isn't
very long and, for your convenience, it is reprinted below.
Talent Firm Mulls Union With Madison Avenue
>
> By VANESSA O'CONNELL, ROBERT FRANK and JOHN LIPPMAN
> Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
>
> Madison Avenue and Wilshire Boulevard may soon intersect.
>
> Advertising agencies and talent agencies are considering each other
for
> possible combinations and cross-investments in anticipation of
revised
> rules that would open up Hollywood's talent brokers to new
investors.
The
> trade association that represents actors has long barred film and TV
> producers from owning stakes in talent agencies, and those rules
have
> covered ad agencies as well. Even though the revisions to the rules
aren't
> yet completed, three of the top five talent agencies are already
talking to
> investment bankers.
>
> Talent agency International Creative Management has retained
Rothschild
> Group and rival agency Endeavor is in formal talks with bankers to
discuss
> its long-term strategy, according to people close to the talks. One
> potential buyer or partner, these people said, could be an ad agency
> holding company. Industry leader William Morris Agency has also had
contact
> with bankers about a possible investment or partnership, these
people
said.
>
> All of the major holding companies that own advertising agencies
have
from
> time to time expressed interest in aligning themselves closely with
> Hollywood talent agencies. In Madison Avenue's view, there is
obvious
> appeal to having a stake in the talent business: the ability to tell
major
> clients that they could cut deals with up-and-coming celebrities
with
the
> cachet to transform an ordinary product into a household name.
>
> "Agencies want not only an inside track on key celebrities and key
> entertainment properties, but also first dibs on projects in the
works. And
> they want to be able to bring all of those advantages to their
clients,"
> says Philip B. Dusenberry, chairman of BBDO North America, a unit of
> Omnicom Group.
>
> None of the talent agencies are involved in formal talks with anyone
so
> far, and it is unclear whether any will land a deal. But the
possible
moves
> could usher in major changes to the close-knit and heretofore
closed-off
> world of Hollywood's talent agencies, which wield considerable clout
in the
> creation of TV shows and movies. All of the major agencies are
privately
> held, and their assets are difficult to calculate because so few
ever
> change hands. But some aspects of their business -- such as their
ability
> to "package" television shows and take a substantial stake in
profits --
> have real value. And top talent agents are expected to be more than
willing
> to cash in what had been illiquid ownership stakes.
>
> "The theory behind this is that you can operate your business more
> effectively," explains Jim Wiatt, president of William Morris. "We
want to
> expand into new businesses, and need the manpower to do it.
Everything
is
> capital-intensive."
>
> Controlling a stable of stars would bring the advertising agencies
closer
> to entertainment writers and producers, and that could enable major
clients
> to influence the development of new movies and TV shows. Omnicom has
been
> heading in this direction, recently covering part of the cost of
producing
> television specials, such as a recent music concert starring J.Lo,
the
pop
> vocalist Jennifer Lopez, and programs with the Dixie Chicks and the
> Backstreet Boys. In each case, it sold ad time in the shows directly
to
> some of its clients -- eliminating the network middleman.
>
> John Wren, Omnicom's chief executive has said that more such deals
are
a
> priority for the ad firm. He couldn't be reached for comment
Thursday.
Some
> say Omnicom would be the most likely buyer.
>
> David McMurry, an analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston in New York,
notes
> that only two players in the ad world -- Omnicom and its
London-based
rival
> WPP Group, the parent to Young & Rubicam -- have the financial
wherewithal
> to purchase one of the big five talent agencies. Some of Omnicom's
clients
> include PepsiCo, McDonald's and Visa.
>
> WPP Group's chief executive Martin Sorrell declined to comment on
any
> potential acquisition plans, though he said the advertising agencies
played
> an important role in bringing corporations new ideas for
entertainment
> ventures that highlight their brands. "You don't want to bring
marketers
> prepackaged ideas" from Hollywood or elsewhere. "You want to develop
a
> customized approach that works for the client." Among WPP's major
clients
> are Ford Motor Co. and International Business Machines Corp.
>
> Owning a talent agency would also play into a major Madison Avenue
trend.
> Ad agencies are diversifying into a host of different marketing and
> ancillary services to bring in new sources of revenue at a time when
the
> traditional advertising business is in sharp decline.
>
> "The people running the agencies are thinking about them for the
first
time
> as businesses, developing strategies for growth and liquidity," said
Joseph
> Ravitch, a senior media banker at Goldman Sachs.
>
> Talent agencies, for their part, say they need new investors with
capital
> to help them compete in an era of consolidation and vertical
integration in
> the entertainment and media industries. For example, Mr. Wiatt of
William
> Morris said his talent agency helped arrange the financing of 18
movies
> last year, and would like to do more. But, he says, "we're not
interested
> in becoming producers, or being acquired by a studio."
>
> By that he means movie or television studios. The fear among actors
has
> been that if talent agents become affiliated with producers of TV
shows,
> then the agents will be biased in the project toward which they
steer
their
> clients. Ad agencies are involved in production in the sense that
they
> commission TV commercials.
>
> The Screen Actors Guild and the Association of Talent Agents have
been
> negotiating since early this year to reach a new "master franchise
> agreement" between the two trade associations. Although a new
agreement
> hasn't been concluded, many observers expect the new rules to loosen
> restrictions that have until now, barred combinations between talent
> agencies and producers.
>
> Despite weeks of negotiations, there still isn't a new contract,
although
> many observers think the new rules will reflect a loosening of
restrictions
> that have been in place for decades.
VOTE FOR VALERIE, KENT AND ELLIOTT
KeLL
tko...@aol.com (TKONKLE) wrote:
:Where WAS Melissa during our longest strike in history? Anyone?
Certainly not in NY or LA...
--
KellyL, AFTRA/Actor/Director
"I think if there is a God it's very important
that he has a sense of humour - otherwise you
are in for a very miserable afterlife." Rory Bremner
The Starmaker
>
> Where WAS Melissa during our longest strike in history? Anyone?
How about asking her.
KeLL
The Starmaker <hld...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
:TKONKLE wrote:
:>
:> Where WAS Melissa during our longest strike in history? Anyone?
:
:
:How about asking her.
sweet, she (Melissa Gilbert) stated that she had more important things
to attend to than the Union during the Strike.