Posted by Jack Shaw on May 04, 1998 at 13:02:25:
In Reply to: Re: Financial Core - The Real Poop posted by William Fowler on April 30, 1998 at 09:16:43:
"It only figures that the previous remarks were submitted anonimously. In point of fact, financial core was established following a lawsuit, AFTRA VS. Buckley in 1974-5, when William F. Buckley was doing his PBS show, Firing Line, non-union."
Please do not take offense, but in point of fact financial core was established by Communication Workers of America vs. Harry Beck. It was due to Beck's objection of CWA using his dues to support political candidates he did not favor. The court ruled that he could remain a dues paying non-member with no vote in the operation of the union. In return, CWA was to reduce his dues by the "core" percentage of what the CWA was using for support of political candidates.
"Financial core allows former full dues paying members to work on both sides of the fence."
This is true. But if every member was to declare dues paying non-member status, there would be no AFTRA or SAG. This would lead to no contracts or minimum rates for performers and we would all be working for a great deal less than we do now.
"The trade off is that financial core members can't run for union office, vote, attend union meetings or get union publications. However, "core" members can retain medical, dental and retirement benefits for past and future work performed under union contracts."
This rings of living off the work of others to me. Is it fair for non-members who don't care how SAG or AFTRA is run or contribute to their causes (not political) can benefit from benefits contrbuted to by the work of active members?
"There are a lot of poorly negotiated contracts that do not allow producers to work freely. Many contract stipulations are unfair to producers. Good producers have no problem paying a fair wage for work or providing decent working conditions, but many union provisions tie their hands creatively as well as with paperwork, parasitic middlemen and unnecessary expense. Because of technology we are able to provide services rapidly around the country, from state to state, as well as around the globe. Much of the union contract language is antiquated and does not take into account right to work states or effectively address some of the demands of business in the new technologies. There is also rampant age discrimination in radio and TV advertising which has tossed veteran performers out on their ear. The unions acknowledge this problem, but have done little more than pay lip service towards correcting it. The unions have no one to blame but themselves for the interest in Financial Core."
I would understand this better if you gave examples. Also, waivers to contract stipulations are negotiable in most cases.
"I have been a union member for over thirty years as well as National Board Director of Screen Actors Guild and I am now Financial Core."
How sad. You have removed yourself from ever being able to contribute to change. I am now a National Board member of the Guild and feel more dedicated to the members who elected me to the position than that.
"If you're not a celebrity or 18-30 years old and want to work in voiceover, Financial Core may afford you the opportunity to do so."
One can work non-union jobs to accomplish this rather than coat tail off the efforts of others.
"There are many SAG/AFTRA members who do non-union work and yet they will criticize Financial Core members. They are hypocrates."
I couldn't agree more. This is the cancer of SAG and AFTRA. I feel those wh declare dues paying non-member status are more honest with themselves and everyone else.
"The best thing to do is not to join a union until you have accrued enough non-union work to determine whether or not you may be competitive in the union work arena."
Again, I agree. Go for the experience then become the professional.
"However, one may have unique and singular reasons for becoming Financial Core, For me, it was a necessary and beneficial move. I would not have done it if the performer unions were more caring and effective in my right to work, addressing the practice of discrimination and enacting contract language that was more producer friendly."
Again, it would be much easier to understand if you gave specific examples. Just "not being able to work" or "the contracts were not user friendly" says nothing.
SAG and AFTRA are quite democratic. Contracts and benefits alike are determined by a majority rule. It appears to this observer that you could not sway the majority to your thinking so you quit.
From November last year through March of this year work was so bad for me, I considered dues paying non-member status. My wife was carrying the load of bill paying. But each time I thought of how it would affect my fellow members, the efforts I have made as an active member, and my chances of making a difference in how the organizations were run, I stopped.