Vote Yes!

[Bob Bergen]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPXTBGxhH8M&feature=email

A group of the nation's hardest-working voice actors speak in unison, urging SAG & AFTRA members to vote YES for merger. Listen to performers you hear every day explain why two unions are half as powerful as one; how a single union will improve all members' working lives; and why your YES vote is so critical. Featuring Justin Barrett, Bob Bergen, Scott Brick, Townsend Coleman, Holter Graham, Will Lyman, Columbia McCaleb, Mary McDonald-Lewis, Sue-Anne Morrow, Candyce Milo, Bill Ratner, Scott Rummell, James Arnold Taylor, Monica Trombetta and Beau Weaver. Brought to you by VOICE ACTORS FOR ONE VOICE. More SAG-AFTRA merger info: www.sagaftra.org (http://www.sagaftra.org)

[Yonie]

While I hope this is good for the unions, it is also a bit soul-shattering, because this is going to make it a lot harder to enter the unions when that time comes.

[Bob Bergen]

Hi Yonie! Well, you do have a month to join AFTRA. If merger passes, and I hope it does, you'd be a full member of SAG-AFTRA. This window of opportunity is short and will not happen again. Post merger the new union will adopt SAG's current qualifications. Is this fair? Well, all of us who are SAG were not at one point in our career. There are currently over 120,000 members of SAG. All had to qualify. It's not impossible. But you also have to understand that VO is just a small portion of SAG membership. Besides theatrical acting there is also stunts, dance, singers, etc. All needing to qualify.

I can't tell anyone what to do with their career. It all just depends on where you want to go and what your goals are. And all have the choice to make of this business what they want. If it were me, I wouldn't hesitate to join AFTRA before the merger vote. My goals were always high. I had to join both unions and pay double dues. Joining AFTRA now at $1600 is far cheaper than the post merger initiation of $3000. Now, if (God forbid) merger fails, you'd still be a member of AFTRA. If being a union professional with the opportunity for pension and residuals is a goal then AFTRA is a necessity. But as you know, you don't need to be union if you intend on only working non union. I myself never wanted to. I was offered non union work when I started out. But I never wanted to associate myself with it. From day one I wanted to play with the big boys, and I knew I was only as good as the company I kept. I could pay my bills with a day job. I wanted the top agents to take notice, and I knew they wouldn't if I didn't rub elbows with the best of the best. B

[Yonie]

Bob, while I would join AFTRA if I had the money, for me there are a few obstacles I have to get over first:

1. I have to solve another visa that allows me to work in the U.S. because after April, my current one runs out.

2. I'm not ready for union work yet. After plugging away for a year, it's fairly obvious that no agent in L.A. is interested in my stuff, or my resume.

So essentially I'm in a Catch-22 at the moment, which is something that weighs heavily. Once I do eventually solve another visa, there's now an even bigger hurdle to get over, and I have yet to hear about a VO who has gone through Taft-Hartley.

[Bob Bergen]

Hey Yonie!

Well, I can't help ya with the visa. Wish I could. As for Taft-Hartley? That's how I got into SAG. That's how most of the working VO actors I know in animation got into SAG. I worked last week on a project where 3 of the 5 actors were TH'd. Happens every day.

Now, most agents in the larger markets won't rep you if you are non union. And a resume rarely gets one noticed. It's all about the talent on the demo. If you are union and have a brilliant demo every agent in LA will be interested. Now, agents in LA and NYC do prefer talent to live there. But when the demo is brilliant it's not unusual for the talent to get multiple offers from agents.

Good luck with the visa!! ;-)

[Bob Bergen]

Hey Yonie!

Well, I can't help ya with the visa. Wish I could. As for Taft-Hartley? That's how I got into SAG. That's how most of the working VO actors I know in animation got into SAG. I worked last week on a project where 3 of the 5 actors were TH'd. Happens every day.

Now, most agents in the larger markets won't rep you if you are non union. And a resume rarely gets one noticed. In fact, often if it's not loaded with national exposure it can hurt more than help when submitting to agents. It's all about the talent on the demo. Rather than a resume, it's often better to say in a cover letter, "Recent work includes..." etc. If you are union and have a brilliant demo every agent in LA will be interested. Now, agents in LA and NYC do prefer talent to live there. But when the demo is brilliant it's not unusual for the talent to get multiple offers from agents. Your demo is pretty darn good! Being union would help! Don't throw in any towels! You are too talented, and the journey is just beginning!

Good luck with the visa!! ;-)

[Yonie]

Cheers for the compliment, Bob.

I am solving it temporarily, by going back to school for a while. It's also an opportunity to get a bump in temporary income, through loans, grants, and stipends from my home country. Money means classes and another surge towards improvement. A- isn't good enough.

Good luck with the voting. I hear ballots should be out by now.

*Edit* Forgot to say that I do live in L.A.

[Dave_Wallace]

So Bob...I do have a question, if you don't mind. SAG and AFTRA have rather openly stated that they wish to fight the spread of non-union work. Even on the Merger FAQ at sagaftra.org, one of the statements they use is, "One union puts us in the best position to fight the spread of non-union work." Granted, I haven't been in this business nearly as long as you have--which is why I'm very curious about your perspective on this--but I don't immediately see how a merger would reduce non-union work, or help to convert it to union work. The non-union advocates that I have talked to have primarily pointed out two things...

Number 1: It is not practical for them, on a financial level, to hire union talent.

Number 2: The paperwork. To quote one person I worked with several months ago, "I'd much rather have an actor send me an invoice, me send them a check, and that be the end of it until our next job with them. I don't want to go through the mountain of contracts that the union would make me sign."

I think the SAG and AFTRA are great groups in that they fight for some great benefits for actors. However, it seems that more and more clients are finding their business models unappealing. Not just small-time clients, either. AFTRA filed a Do Not Work Notice for commercials produced by Nickelodeon in 2009.

So, how would a merger change that? From your perspective, why would a client want to hire a union talent nowadays, and how would a merger make hiring union talent more desirable? So my intentions are clear, I don't mean that in a cynical way. I'm legitimately curious. Like I said, I think SAG and AFTRA are great groups...but that's from my perspective, and I'm an actor. I see SAG and AFTRA as groups fighting for actors, but many clients see SAG and AFTRA as unnecessary annoyances clinging to a business model that they do not feel the need nor the desire to participate in.

[The Voice Chap]

Mr Paladin makes some good points. There's also another (unspoken and taboo) issue that I'm even hesitant to raise. What about the plethora of union actors who do non-union work? I'm not talking about Fi-Core members, I'm talking about union actors who speak out of both sides of their mouths.
They say they pro-union (and I'm sure they are) but they do a lot of non-union work. They don't do non-union on camera work as they know they would be noticed and punished. But they figure for VO that their voices can't be identified with 100% certainty so they simply do the non-union job with impunity. The amount of hypocrisy is quite astounding - I personally know dozens of actors who fall into this category.
Let it be known that I'm must-join for both and would love to save $1400 by joining AFTRA today. But my principles won't allow me to join and immediately go Fi-Core. Living in a smaller (though far from small) market, there simply isn't enough union work here for me to justify joining without going Fi-Core.
But please address the issue I raise above Bob - how will one union versus two prevent this hypocrisy that actually hurts me, the non-union actor?

[BlackLight]

So Bob...I do have a question, if you don't mind. SAG and AFTRA have rather openly stated that they wish to fight the spread of non-union work. Even on the Merger FAQ at sagaftra.org, one of the statements they use is, "One union puts us in the best position to fight the spread of non-union work." Granted, I haven't been in this business nearly as long as you have--which is why I'm very curious about your perspective on this--but I don't immediately see how a merger would reduce non-union work, or help to convert it to union work. The non-union advocates that I have talked to have primarily pointed out two things...

Number 1: It is not practical for them, on a financial level, to hire union talent.

Number 2: The paperwork. To quote one person I worked with several months ago, "I'd much rather have an actor send me an invoice, me send them a check, and that be the end of it until our next job with them. I don't want to go through the mountain of contracts that the union would make me sign."

I think the SAG and AFTRA are great groups in that they fight for some great benefits for actors. However, it seems that more and more clients are finding their business models unappealing. Not just small-time clients, either. AFTRA filed a Do Not Work Notice for commercials produced by Nickelodeon in 2009.

So, how would a merger change that? From your perspective, why would a client want to hire a union talent nowadays, and how would a merger make hiring union talent more desirable? So my intentions are clear, I don't mean that in a cynical way. I'm legitimately curious. Like I said, I think SAG and AFTRA are great groups...but that's from my perspective, and I'm an actor. I see SAG and AFTRA as groups fighting for actors, but many clients see SAG and AFTRA as unnecessary annoyances clinging to a business model that they do not feel the need nor the desire to participate in.

I agree insofar as that, on its face, I don't see how the merger would help fight the spread of N-U work. If anything, I think it might make it more prevalent. Before, with two unions in somewhat competition, producers could choose between the Unions depending on which offered them the more beneficial contract. Assuming it could get the terms it wanted, a project might've gone Union rather than Non-Union. Now, with a merged Union presenting a united front, that same Producer might not even bother seeing out a Union contract.

[Dave_Wallace]

I don't want to overload Bob with questions, but Dave Menashe's comments reminded me of another question that I asked a while ago (not to Bob, to be clear, but to a forum in which I didn't really get a response). Sometimes I wonder...how strict SAG is about Global Rule One (the rule that union members cannot work for non-union clients)? Sure, on the surface they portray it as an absolute rule where members face expulsion...but if that's the case, you'd think actors would be more secretive about it. Even on the Wikipedia page for SAG, it states that...

"For example, David Cross (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cross) did voices for the non-union cartoon Aqua Teen Hunger Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_Teen_Hunger_Force), under the pseudonym "Sir Willups Brightslymoore." He acknowledged that work in an interview with SuicideGirls (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuicideGirls). Such violations of Global Rule One have generally gone ignored by the Guild."

That's just one example. As a big fan of English anime dubs, I can also say with confidence that I've heard a ton of voices working under pseudonyms, many of whom have blatantly acknowledged it. I won't point them out because I don't want to cause any trouble for them...but this was confusing to me. Why does SAG selectively ignore certain cases of union workers doing non-union work?

[Bob Bergen]

ALL very good questions! Let me try to tackle em:

The non-union advocates that I have talked to have primarily pointed out two things...
Number 1: It is not practical for them, on a financial level, to hire union talent.

At times I'm sure this is true. In those cases these buyers have an abundant of non union talent who are happy to do the work at their prices. And that will always be the case whether we merge or not.

Number 2: The paperwork. To quote one person I worked with several months ago, "I'd much rather have an actor send me an invoice, me send them a check, and that be the end of it until our next job with them. I don't want to go through the mountain of contracts that the union would make me sign."

God, I so agree!! Which is why I as the co chair of the voiceover committees at both SAG and AFTRA (and with fingers crossed at the new SAG-AFTRA) have been working for the past year to streamline the process for both buyers and actors to turn non union work union. The unions are now (and it's long overdue, but they are on the same page now!) realizing that they need to make the hiring of union talent AND the process of turning a non union gig union as simple as it is to hire a non union talent. Just know that this is all in the works, and could NOT be possible without merger. Accomplishing this with one union is hard. Trying to get the other on board is harder. But with the combined unions into one entity it's far easier and moving along well. Stay tooned!

What about the plethora of union actors who do non-union work? I'm not talking about Fi-Core members, I'm talking about union actors who speak out of both sides of their mouths.

Another reality that will exist with or without merger. But the downside of those working off the card doesn't trump the necessity and huge gains that will be made by merging. You must understand that we are hoping to merge 2 unions that cover more than VO. VO is really the only area that working off the card is an issue. It's because you can be anonymous. It's hard to catch the actor in the act. But on camera? That's kinda hard to hide. As a board member of both unions I represent all performers. Although, you all know I loves you all most!!!!!!! ;-)

[Bob Bergen]

Missed this one:

Sometimes I wonder...how strict SAG is about Global Rule One (the rule that union members cannot work for non-union clients)? Sure, on the surface they portray it as an absolute rule where members face expulsion...but if that's the case, you'd think actors would be more secretive about it. Even on the Wikipedia page for SAG, it states that...

"For example, David Cross (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cross) did voices for the non-union cartoon Aqua Teen Hunger Force (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqua_Teen_Hunger_Force), under the pseudonym "Sir Willups Brightslymoore." He acknowledged that work in an interview with SuicideGirls (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SuicideGirls). Such violations of Global Rule One have generally gone ignored by the Guild."

That's just one example. As a big fan of English anime dubs, I can also say with confidence that I've heard a ton of voices working under pseudonyms, many of whom have blatantly acknowledged it. I won't point them out because I don't want to cause any trouble for them...but this was confusing to me. Why does SAG selectively ignore certain cases of union workers doing non-union work?

Well, they don't ignore. There are 120,000 plus members of SAG. The staff is under 300. There are a lot of issues on everyone's plate everyday. I will tell you that some will fall through the cracks. But the unions crack down hard. There was a time when the majority of members wouldn't work off the card or under a fake name because they knew the detrimental damage it was doing to their fellow actor and in the long run themselves as well. Enter the internet. This wonderful resource has handed VO on a silver modem to anyone anywhere. More out there are working in VO than every before. But fewer are able to make the kind of living all of us did and do. There was a time when all of us wanted a career. Now, folks just want to work. Any work. Hey, there's work for everyone. No matter where you want to take your career. But let's get back on topic. Merger is for the professional actor. Those who value pension, health benefits, and residuals. Merger can benefit the non union actor as well. With all of us in one union, we have more leverage when it comes to unionizing more work. Think about it: if even 25% of the non union auditions you see online every day all of the sudden went union, the benefits you'd gain would be huge. Will this happen? Impossible to predict. But merger WILL benefit the union actor. That is the main purpose to merge. And for those out there who one day want to work union, have access to national residual paying commercials, animated features and series work, you want merger! B

[Dave_Wallace]

A tad late, but for whatever it's worth, thanks for the time and effort you put into answering my questions (and the questions of others), Bob!