SAG Film / Taft Hartley

[Holosynthetic]

I want to throw an idea out there thats been tumbling in my mind ever since I put the quarter in. If I make a film a SAG production, I as the producer/director put myself, a non-union actor as the principle role, does this offer me the possibility to taft-hartley myself into the union? Allowing myself to bypass having to do extra work on three SAG productions. Thoughts?

[Paris Remillard]

As a SAG actor myself, I believe that you have to give the union a convincing reason why you want to use a non-union actor over all of the other available union actors out there. If they buy it, then they have to give you permission to do so. At least that's what I was told back in the day. If it's a role that you wrote for yourself and are producing yourself, that might be reason enough. You'd have to call the union to find out for sure though. I'm sure they'd give you all the info you need.

SAGIndie http://www.sagindie.org/ is probably a good place to start. They have downloadable contracts, info, and other resources. The FAQ page(under About ) has some good info. I know from just looking there myself that some of the very low-budget agreements don't require all union actors, but non-union actors can't join SAG by working under these contracts. So, it looks like you'd have to have a decent budget or produce your film under a higher budget contract to waive yourself in...if they'd agree to it. I'm just rambling now. Call them.

[Joel Kaye]

Are you trying to get into SAG so you can audition for other SAG things or get an agent?

Since SAG covers film I'm not sure they have jurisdiction over RED. I don't think AFTRA does either... they are tape. So... unless those two have worked that out then I think you could hire SAG actors without being a signatory, but I doubt they'd ever tell you that.

[Holosynthetic]

I'm not in a rush to join SAG for film purposes, but in this day it seems most agents won't look at you if your not a part of the union.

[Thomas Mathai]

Are you trying to get into SAG so you can audition for other SAG things or get an agent?

Since SAG covers film I'm not sure they have jurisdiction over RED. I don't think AFTRA does either... they are tape. So... unless those two have worked that out then I think you could hire SAG actors without being a signatory, but I doubt they'd ever tell you that.

It doesn't matter if it's film or digital, it's about using SAG actors. If the actors you want are SAG, you have to deal with SAG.

[donatello b]

which SAG agreement would you use to make your project? ...
i believe the under $500k budgets you can mix SAG and non SAG persons = the non SAG persons will NOT get into SAG ...
took my son about 4 months to do the 3 SAG extra thing to get his SAG card - tip: always be polite to the AD's ....

[Tom Lowe]

While we're talking about SAG and mixing union and non-union, would it be possible to cast SAG union people in 2 of your 3 main leads, and have the third be non-union? I might need a younger actor, but I don't want to deal with all of SAG's BS regarding child actors. It would be the SAG Ultra Low contract at a $200k budget.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

That's a good question there Tom... I suppose that could even fall under various state by state laws too. While the SAG might want to keep all actors on the project as union, would it even be legal for them to dictate such? Some states (Colorado as an example) has various legislation that specifically prohibits labor uniions from doing just that. It keeps labor unions from pressuring employers to hire all union employees and allows for hiring of both union and non-union employees or employees from multiple union affiliations if an employer so chooses. While not specifically targeted at the Actors Guild or even the performing arts, it still should apply... Wheather we're talking actors, truck drivers or plumbers. OTOH, union workers tend to look out for one another. You may find that SAG or union talent may be unwilling to show up for the job if they find out non-union talent is also being used. And there's nothing to stop them from doing just that other than if they sign a legal contract saying they will show up and perform. But then again, I've never used SAG talent so I'm merely speculating as to how the SAG actors would view a mixed SAG/union and non-union cast.

[Tom Lowe]

I know you can mix union and non-union on an SAG Ultra-Low set. You can have one SAG actor, Brad Pitt if you can get him, and all the others non-union, as long as you pay Pitt 100 bucks a day and meet certain work-hour rules, etc.

I'm not sure about being able to work with child actors outside of the SAG rules, which are very stringent. You often hear the words "SAG will shut you down" whenever dealing with them. If they find anything wrong with your shoot they could pull their actors, in theory.

[Thomas Mathai]

I'm sure there are state laws that are just as strict dealing with child actors.

[Clayton Harper]

I'm think the kids have to follow the union rules if they work on a mixed contract which means no more than 8 hours including travel time and a break for schooling which is supposed to happen but never does.

[Paris Remillard]

< If the actors you want are SAG, you have to deal with SAG.>

That's not necessarily true. If a project doesn't fall under SAG's jurisdiction, then the actors can do whatever they want. I did a commercial for Chapelle's Show a couple of years ago, and for whatever reason, it didn't fall under the jurisdiction of any union. Maybe because it was only shown on Comedy Central to promote a Comedy Central Show. No SAG contract, No AFTRA contract, didn't matter if the actors were union or not, SAG actors could be in it without recourse. I honestly don't know what all of the rules are regarding that even though all of my income comes from working as an actor. If my agents book me on a job, then I assume it's okay for me to work on it. Probably not the best approach, but I'm an actor. We're lazy.

Also, something that even most SAG actors don't know about is becomming Financial Core, or FiCore. I won't really get into it as there are a lot of issues on both sides of the argument, but the basic idea is that by claiming FiCore, You're not technically in the union, but you are paying dues and your income contributes to P&H benefits. This allows an actor to work both union and non-union jobs. I personally think it's a bad idea, for a number of reasons that I won't go into here, but I have a few friends who are FiCore and are happy being so. The union doesn't like it so much though.

<Since SAG covers film I'm not sure they have jurisdiction over RED. I don't think AFTRA does either... they are tape. So... unless those two have worked that out>

I think SAG and AFTRA are always in the process of working out jurisdiction issues. These issues are a big reason why SAG and AFTRA have been trying to merge for several years. Some SAG "films" are shot digitally, some are shot on film. Some SAG TV shows are shot on film and some are shot digitally. Some TV shows are AFTRA, but I'm pretty sure that all of those are shot on tape. With Digital Cinema and the internet and all other emerging distribution models, the old AFTRA covers tape and SAG covers film capture don't really work so well anymore. Really, RED and some other D-Cinema cameras aren't even tape. So, It comes down to more than capture medium these days.

[Holosynthetic]

which SAG agreement would you use to make your project? ...
i believe the under $500k budgets you can mix SAG and non SAG persons = the non SAG persons will NOT get into SAG ...
took my son about 4 months to do the 3 SAG extra thing to get his SAG card - tip: always be polite to the AD's ....

Currently I use online sites to submit a headshot / resume and it works ~ok, but finding background work to get a SAG card seems impossible with it. I know of a site ExtrasAccess and even when I submit for that I never hear back, as a matter of fact I never hear back from any background work project I submit to, mostly low budget short films with a speaking role. Any advice you can give on this?

[Joel Kaye]

This allows an actor to work both union and non-union jobs. I personally think it's a bad idea

Probably depends on the State. In Arizona we are a right to work State. I've heard actors with a lot of experience here recommending staying out of SAG until you're ready to head to L.A. because so many productions are non-SAG.

As to tape vs. film etc. - that's kinda where my confusion is. If the actor's contract with SAG specifies a medium like film then I don't think the actor is breaking their SAG contract if they work on a non-film acting project.

The FiCore thing is interesting. There are actor's that swear that's the way to go. Again - in NY or LA it's possible it might be a bad idea due to local union "politics". Friends hire friends.

[Paris Remillard]

This is already the Off-Topic forum, so I guess I can go a bit off-topic in this thread. I was just looking at the SAG website as this thread has brought up a lot of questions, and this is one of the questions and SAGs response in the FAQ:

8. How do I become a performer?
Study with an established acting teacher

Perform in school plays or student films

Read books about acting

Develop another career to supplement your income


Doesn't give prospective performers a lot of confidence in the union or the viability of a career as an actor does it. Read some books, do some plays, and then do something else for real. Anyway, I just thought that was funny.

[donatello b]

i see rule 5 does say that persons ( non professionals ... it refers to SAG persons as professional) will NOT qualify for membership in SAG ..
... it does allow you to mix SAG and non SAG ...

http://www.sagindie.org/docs/sag-ultralowbudget-2005wm.pdf

[Joel Kaye]

Doesn't give prospective performers a lot of confidence in the union or the viability of a career as an actor does it.


Call up your local SAG union and ask what percentage of members make enough money to qualify for insurance. I had an agent tell me you need to make $10k as an actor here to earn insurance here and almost no one makes it. I can't verify those numbers, but the point is probably accurate.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

I'm sure there are state laws that are just as strict dealing with child actors.

Yep. I would guess that this is all covered under most child labor laws. Additionally, as soon as you start having children at the "workplace" various expectations and requirements change. If it's something you will be doing regularly or for a significan't amount of time, it could mean higher insurance costs and additional information to report to various government agencies.

[Paris Remillard]

<I don't think the actor is breaking their SAG contract if they work on a non-film acting project. >

But then that comes down to the definition of a "film". It is the Screen Actors Guild. Not the Film Actors Guild. That's only in Team America. But SAG cover's more than just film projects in their bylaws. Here's what I could find on the website:

1. The Screen Actors Guild (SAG) has exclusive jurisdiction over Principal performers appearing in
feature motion pictures and in all other types of productions shot on film. In addition, SAG shares video
tape jurisdiction with AFTRA with respect to television programming, TV commercials and
industrial/educational programs. SAG also represents Extra Players in feature motion pictures, SAG
television programming, SAG non-broadcast films and commercials in certain areas.
2. The American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) has sole jurisdiction over
performers in live television, radio programs and radio commercials and musical recordings. In addition,
AFTRA shares video tape jurisdiction with the Screen Actors Guild with respect to television
programming, TV commercials and industrial/educational programs. With autonomous locals throughout
the country, AFTRA represents performer categories, such as: Actors, Announcers, Dancers, Disc
Jockeys, Newspersons, Singers, Specialty Acts, Sportscasters and Stuntpersons. AFTRA contracts also
cover Contract and Principal Players, "Under-5's" and Extras where applicable.

Since 1981,
many of the contracts which cover performers on television and in filmed and taped industrials have been
negotiated jointly by AFTRA and SAG under the "Phase One Agreement." Other contracts (including
Radio Commercials and Programming, Network Code, Phonograph Code, Feature Films, etc.) are
negotiated independently by either AFTRA or SAG. When a contract applies to both Unions (e.g. TV
Commercials, TV Programming, Industrials), the provisions are, for the most part, similar, if not identical.
Check with your nearest Union office if you are uncertain which Union is covering the work to be done.


<actors with a lot of experience here recommending staying out of SAG until you're ready to head to L.A. because so many productions are non-SAG.>

I used to live in MN and that was always the question. When to join. I was doing a lot of non-union commercials and industrials because that was mostly what was produced there. I decided to join SAG because I was going to move to L.A. Then I changed my mind about the move and I was kinda screwed because there was so little SAG work in MN.

In addition to the amount of union work produced in a given city, it also mainly comes down to when one is ready to compete in that market, I think. That was my primary question when joining each of the acting unions, SAG/AFTRA/AEA. Am I ready to compete with the other union talent for these jobs. Because if you join too soon, and can't compete, then you won't be able to work to get the experience that you need to compete. Then you're screwed. I know it kinda seems like a ridiculous obstacle, and like they make you jump through hoops to join some unions, but on the other side of that, it kinda does show a certain level of commitment to the given profession when you do so. Like be jumped into a gang.

So, back to the issue about agents, I think that is part of what they are looking at in terms of whether or not someone is SAG. Have they put in the effort and time and do they take this seriously as a profession. Also, in a town like L.A. where everyone is an "actor" it just gives them one more way to try to sift through all of the people who show up there everyday thinking that they're gonna be star, but have no experience or talent or real investment in the business. I'm not in any way saying that that is you, but it makes it that much harder for legitimate performers to get meetings because the filtering out system in L.A. is so deep.

[mavrix]

A scenario that I was faced with on a recent feature I produced was that SAG upgraded my contract from ultra-low budget to modified. I had already cast a lot of non-union actors to go along with the SAG actors. When they upgraded my contract it forced me to have to Taft-Hartley every non-union actor I had already cast which subsequently forced to me to have to renegotiate every one of their contracts, give them a pay bump and pay T/H fees. --

Needless to say, I had a lot of happy non-union actors who instantly became SAG eligible.

I produce both union and non-union movies and there are trade-offs to both obviously. I certainly don't like dealing with all of the paperwork necessary for a SAG movie, but you do get the access to the actors. But I've had a lot of success getting really quality actors in non-unions that I've posted with Breakdowns as well. As a note to "Holo" -- I do use Actor's Access and cast significantly from it - but you have to realize that on average I get 6000 submissions per movie -- so unless your picture really stands-out for a given role, you probably won't be contacted.

[Paris Remillard]

<you need to make $10k as an actor here to earn insurance here and almost no one makes it. I can't verify those numbers, but the point is probably accurate.>

It's $13,790 or 74 days of Employment for plan II which isn't as good, and $28,120 for plan I. But, yeah, as you said, the point is very accurate. Trust me, I live it every day. It's just funny to me that they would put that on their website. At least they're honest and realistic, I suppose.

It makes me think of when I went to a Commercial Theatre Production workshop last year, and the lawyer who was explaining contracts and capitalization mentioned how the wording of contracts for theatre investors had changed over the years from, "there is a chance that investment will not be recouped" to " it is likely that investment will not be recouped". At least they're honest about the prospects up front.

Also, here's a link to SAG's child labor handbook for whomever was asking about child labor. It doesn't deal with individual states labor laws, but it should give an idea of what you'd have to do if the kid was SAG.

http://www.sag.org/sagWebApp/Content/Public/youngpersons.pdf

[Holosynthetic]

I don't like Actors Access because it charges $2 every time you submit for a role, that adds up after a while.

What do you look for most in a headshot while casting? I posted over at DVXuser with a newer headshot and they torn it to pieces saying it was horrible. I updated the colors a bit after getting some feedback and came up with:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a345/Holosynthetic/VatcherHS.jpg

Maybe you could give some feedback?

[Tom Lowe]

Lol, dude, this is a camera forum, not a beauty pageant.

The problem with going non-union is that like half of the actors in LA will simply not enter "non-union" as a checklist option when running searches on LAcasting, nowcasting, etc. So you just lost like half of your pool in one swoop.

I guess you could claim union, and then do your casting. If the non-union folks turn out to be as good as union, then you could decide at that point to go non-union.

BTW, I have heard it said, from actors, that one good reason a producer/director should go with SAG is because if one of your actors tries to bail on your movie before it's done, SAG can put pressure on them and make them report to set. In fact, I have seen this take place, and it saved the producer's ass, really. So it's a tradeoff.

I have also heard it said that you can make non-union actors sign a contract that will hold them accountable for a certain amount of money -- say, $20k -- if they bail on your movie and force a recasting and reshooting, though, I have no idea how this would hold up legally.

[Joel Kaye]

Maybe you could give some feedback?

You've got a great clean cut look but I'm not sure the leather jacket matches it. I think the general quality of the photo is fine though. It's as good or better than most headshots I saw on the last short I cast.

I see a little John Ritter in there.

[Jeff Kilgroe]

Maybe you could give some feedback?

Re: head shot. I'm no pro, but I would say that picture is just fine proivded you're not cutting off the top of your head like the pic shown here. Other than that, it all comes down to the look that directors/producers are after for their feature. If your pic looks like someone they can envision for the role, you should get the audition. But this isn't a beauty pageant here like Tom said.

[donatello b]

a long , long , very long time ago when i use to operate the video camera for casting sessions for hi end commercials ... as soon as the actor/actress took 3 steps into the room 90% of producer/director/casting agent already knew if the person would be a call back - then all that person had to do was be able to read the lines or if no dialogue just had to do as instructed ... most already know exactly what they are looking for ...
BUT at least 3-5 times a week somebody would walk in that was NOT what they were looking for and would knock them over and they would have long talks about the possibility of changing the "look" to fit that person !!! it was about 50/50 if they went with new look ...

[Holosynthetic]

I apologize for asking for feedback from people who look at these all the time, next time I'll remain on topic even in the off topic forum.