Actors' strike

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw the video with Mandy Moore who said she's received streaming residual checks for This Is Us for as little as $0.01.

Unreal!

Mandy Moore made 4.5 million per season for This is Us. More money than most human beings on this Earth will see in a lifetime of working. How much more do you think she deserves "up front" to make up for low residuals? It is hard to feel sorry for her. If she doesn't like the residual check, maybe she should find another career.

Point goes over head! If Many Moore, the star, is only making that, what do you think the lower billed actors are making? What you are doing is using an exception to prove a rule. Not cool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reality shows???

Bethenny Frankel posted on her Insta a rather compelling case for reality stars who get paid peanuts and don’t get residuals—noting reality shows became important during the last strike (in terms of generating new content).

She’s not wrong.

Previous strikes are what gave rise to the inane reality TV shows

And the people on them get paid to live their lives, not create any new, original content out of their brains like writers and actors must do to make their livings. I do admit, the lower-level reality participants (not Frankel!) get crappy pay--a few thousand for a season sometimes, not commensurate with the hours they spend on these shows...living their lives. But if they feel they deserve more pay, they should get organized and form their own union. End of story. They shouldn't be out there right now trying to ride the coattails of the actors' strike to make their own claims. What they do and what actors do, and the training and experience actors have to accrue to do their jobs well and stay employed, are not comparable at all.

That's a stretch. Some of the scenes in "non-scripted" reality shows may have a basis in reality, but they're recreations or producer prompted drama. They'll even do multiple takes. I'm not saying it's on par with scripted series, but production crews aren't going to waste their times following somebody living their typical lives. They're going in with a story already planned out.

That "story" still isn't a scripted plot involving their own creativity. They should unionize if they feel they're working in ways that deserve more compensation. But it's a bad look for them to try to use the actors' and writers' strikes to make points about their own pay. That muddies the waters because reality participants (even with multiple takes and an overarching direction mapped out) are not actors, writers or other "creatives." I'm not saying they don't put in lots of hours --they do. I'm not saying they're well paid--they truly aren't. But they are not creating anything, only moving around inside a structure producers build around them. They should define and work for their own improved contracts and work conditions, rather than talking as if they share the same concerns as actors--whose training, experience, efforts and end results are very different from reality participants'.

I agree this isn't a SAG-AFTRA issue, and if reality stars are serious about their own issues, they should form their own union. That industry could use some more oversight, especially with all the children who are being exploited. The Duggar kids weren't getting paid for their work, even when they became legal adults, and there are all the stories about Kate Gosselin syphoning off the top of her kid's trust funds to maintain her lifestyle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reality shows???

Bethenny Frankel posted on her Insta a rather compelling case for reality stars who get paid peanuts and don’t get residuals—noting reality shows became important during the last strike (in terms of generating new content).

She’s not wrong.

Previous strikes are what gave rise to the inane reality TV shows

And the people on them get paid to live their lives, not create any new, original content out of their brains like writers and actors must do to make their livings. I do admit, the lower-level reality participants (not Frankel!) get crappy pay--a few thousand for a season sometimes, not commensurate with the hours they spend on these shows...living their lives. But if they feel they deserve more pay, they should get organized and form their own union. End of story. They shouldn't be out there right now trying to ride the coattails of the actors' strike to make their own claims. What they do and what actors do, and the training and experience actors have to accrue to do their jobs well and stay employed, are not comparable at all.

That's a stretch. Some of the scenes in "non-scripted" reality shows may have a basis in reality, but they're recreations or producer prompted drama. They'll even do multiple takes. I'm not saying it's on par with scripted series, but production crews aren't going to waste their times following somebody living their typical lives. They're going in with a story already planned out.

That "story" still isn't a scripted plot involving their own creativity. They should unionize if they feel they're working in ways that deserve more compensation. But it's a bad look for them to try to use the actors' and writers' strikes to make points about their own pay. That muddies the waters because reality participants (even with multiple takes and an overarching direction mapped out) are not actors, writers or other "creatives." I'm not saying they don't put in lots of hours --they do. I'm not saying they're well paid--they truly aren't. But they are not creating anything, only moving around inside a structure producers build around them. They should define and work for their own improved contracts and work conditions, rather than talking as if they share the same concerns as actors--whose training, experience, efforts and end results are very different from reality participants'.

I agree this isn't a SAG-AFTRA issue, and if reality stars are serious about their own issues, they should form their own union. That industry could use some more oversight, especially with all the children who are being exploited. The Duggar kids weren't getting paid for their work, even when they became legal adults, and there are all the stories about Kate Gosselin syphoning off the top of her kid's trust funds to maintain her lifestyle.

It'll be interesting to see Jill Duggar's book and if it exposes TLC / Discovery for the crappy people that they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw the video with Mandy Moore who said she's received streaming residual checks for This Is Us for as little as $0.01.

Unreal!

Mandy Moore made 4.5 million per season for This is Us. More money than most human beings on this Earth will see in a lifetime of working. How much more do you think she deserves "up front" to make up for low residuals? It is hard to feel sorry for her. If she doesn't like the residual check, maybe she should find another career.

Point goes over head! If Many Moore, the star, is only making that, what do you think the lower billed actors are making? What you are doing is using an exception to prove a rule. Not cool.

+1

The PP who doesn't get that not everyone is paid at Mandy Moore level should see this post by an actress, Michelle Hurd, who is in steady work, but still cannot always meet the minimum annual income from acting she needs to qualify for work-based health insurance.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cu1mWUWNDlO/

She points out, for example, that for a guest shot in an episode, actors make between about $5,000 and $8,000, one time. So if she books three guest shots, three episodes, in a year, she appears to be doing well, but even at the top of that pay scale she would still fall just short of the $26k she has to earn by acting to get health insurance coverage through her work (via the union). The pay scale is not about her, her experience, etc. It's fixed by the studios and producers. (And I would add -- she'd need other sources of income because who lives on $24,000 a year anywhere, much less LA, NY or any large US city with TV and film production facilities?)

[Anonymous]

It looks like the trees were trimmed without a city permit. I see a big fine in Universal's future with Meijia as Auditor:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-07-18/sag-aftra-wga-nlrb-complaint-universal-pickets

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about reality shows???

Bethenny Frankel posted on her Insta a rather compelling case for reality stars who get paid peanuts and don’t get residuals—noting reality shows became important during the last strike (in terms of generating new content).

She’s not wrong.

Previous strikes are what gave rise to the inane reality TV shows

And the people on them get paid to live their lives, not create any new, original content out of their brains like writers and actors must do to make their livings. I do admit, the lower-level reality participants (not Frankel!) get crappy pay--a few thousand for a season sometimes, not commensurate with the hours they spend on these shows...living their lives. But if they feel they deserve more pay, they should get organized and form their own union. End of story. They shouldn't be out there right now trying to ride the coattails of the actors' strike to make their own claims. What they do and what actors do, and the training and experience actors have to accrue to do their jobs well and stay employed, are not comparable at all.

That's a stretch. Some of the scenes in "non-scripted" reality shows may have a basis in reality, but they're recreations or producer prompted drama. They'll even do multiple takes. I'm not saying it's on par with scripted series, but production crews aren't going to waste their times following somebody living their typical lives. They're going in with a story already planned out.

That "story" still isn't a scripted plot involving their own creativity. They should unionize if they feel they're working in ways that deserve more compensation. But it's a bad look for them to try to use the actors' and writers' strikes to make points about their own pay. That muddies the waters because reality participants (even with multiple takes and an overarching direction mapped out) are not actors, writers or other "creatives." I'm not saying they don't put in lots of hours --they do. I'm not saying they're well paid--they truly aren't. But they are not creating anything, only moving around inside a structure producers build around them. They should define and work for their own improved contracts and work conditions, rather than talking as if they share the same concerns as actors--whose training, experience, efforts and end results are very different from reality participants'.

I agree this isn't a SAG-AFTRA issue, and if reality stars are serious about their own issues, they should form their own union. That industry could use some more oversight, especially with all the children who are being exploited. The Duggar kids weren't getting paid for their work, even when they became legal adults, and there are all the stories about Kate Gosselin syphoning off the top of her kid's trust funds to maintain her lifestyle.

Agree that reality shows need more oversight for the minors. Hard to imagine these nonprofessionals unionizing, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the trees were trimmed without a city permit. I see a big fine in Universal's future with Meijia as Auditor:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-07-18/sag-aftra-wga-nlrb-complaint-universal-pickets

I hope the city nails Universal with a huge fine. The company is being incredibly spiteful, cutting back trees which had provided shade to picketers in intense heat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw the video with Mandy Moore who said she's received streaming residual checks for This Is Us for as little as $0.01.

Unreal!

Mandy Moore made 4.5 million per season for This is Us. More money than most human beings on this Earth will see in a lifetime of working. How much more do you think she deserves "up front" to make up for low residuals? It is hard to feel sorry for her. If she doesn't like the residual check, maybe she should find another career.

Point goes over head! If Many Moore, the star, is only making that, what do you think the lower billed actors are making? What you are doing is using an exception to prove a rule. Not cool.

+1

The PP who doesn't get that not everyone is paid at Mandy Moore level should see this post by an actress, Michelle Hurd, who is in steady work, but still cannot always meet the minimum annual income from acting she needs to qualify for work-based health insurance.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cu1mWUWNDlO/

She points out, for example, that for a guest shot in an episode, actors make between about $5,000 and $8,000, one time. So if she books three guest shots, three episodes, in a year, she appears to be doing well, but even at the top of that pay scale she would still fall just short of the $26k she has to earn by acting to get health insurance coverage through her work (via the union). The pay scale is not about her, her experience, etc. It's fixed by the studios and producers. (And I would add -- she'd need other sources of income because who lives on $24,000 a year anywhere, much less LA, NY or any large US city with TV and film production facilities?)

NP and I agree with your overall point. I don’t personally see an issue with someone who does 3 episodes of a show a year making 15k. How long does it take to shoot an episode, 3 days? A week? So like 15 days of work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw the video with Mandy Moore who said she's received streaming residual checks for This Is Us for as little as $0.01.

Unreal!

Mandy Moore made 4.5 million per season for This is Us. More money than most human beings on this Earth will see in a lifetime of working. How much more do you think she deserves "up front" to make up for low residuals? It is hard to feel sorry for her. If she doesn't like the residual check, maybe she should find another career.

Point goes over head! If Many Moore, the star, is only making that, what do you think the lower billed actors are making? What you are doing is using an exception to prove a rule. Not cool.

+1

The PP who doesn't get that not everyone is paid at Mandy Moore level should see this post by an actress, Michelle Hurd, who is in steady work, but still cannot always meet the minimum annual income from acting she needs to qualify for work-based health insurance.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cu1mWUWNDlO/

She points out, for example, that for a guest shot in an episode, actors make between about $5,000 and $8,000, one time. So if she books three guest shots, three episodes, in a year, she appears to be doing well, but even at the top of that pay scale she would still fall just short of the $26k she has to earn by acting to get health insurance coverage through her work (via the union). The pay scale is not about her, her experience, etc. It's fixed by the studios and producers. (And I would add -- she'd need other sources of income because who lives on $24,000 a year anywhere, much less LA, NY or any large US city with TV and film production facilities?)

The point is not going over my head. Michelle Hurd is not working full time. By my calculations 3 guest episodes in a drama equals a little over 6 weeks of work (calculated in 40 hour work weeks). She can get health insurance through the national exchange. I’m trying to understand what YOU think Michelle Hurd should be paid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the trees were trimmed without a city permit. I see a big fine in Universal's future with Meijia as Auditor:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-07-18/sag-aftra-wga-nlrb-complaint-universal-pickets

I hope the city nails Universal with a huge fine. The company is being incredibly spiteful, cutting back trees which had provided shade to picketers in intense heat.

Universal claims the trees are trimmed annually this time of year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just saw the video with Mandy Moore who said she's received streaming residual checks for This Is Us for as little as $0.01.

Unreal!

Mandy Moore made 4.5 million per season for This is Us. More money than most human beings on this Earth will see in a lifetime of working. How much more do you think she deserves "up front" to make up for low residuals? It is hard to feel sorry for her. If she doesn't like the residual check, maybe she should find another career.

Point goes over head! If Many Moore, the star, is only making that, what do you think the lower billed actors are making? What you are doing is using an exception to prove a rule. Not cool.

+1

The PP who doesn't get that not everyone is paid at Mandy Moore level should see this post by an actress, Michelle Hurd, who is in steady work, but still cannot always meet the minimum annual income from acting she needs to qualify for work-based health insurance.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cu1mWUWNDlO/

She points out, for example, that for a guest shot in an episode, actors make between about $5,000 and $8,000, one time. So if she books three guest shots, three episodes, in a year, she appears to be doing well, but even at the top of that pay scale she would still fall just short of the $26k she has to earn by acting to get health insurance coverage through her work (via the union). The pay scale is not about her, her experience, etc. It's fixed by the studios and producers. (And I would add -- she'd need other sources of income because who lives on $24,000 a year anywhere, much less LA, NY or any large US city with TV and film production facilities?)

The point is not going over my head. Michelle Hurd is not working full time. By my calculations 3 guest episodes in a drama equals a little over 6 weeks of work (calculated in 40 hour work weeks). She can get health insurance through the national exchange. I’m trying to understand what YOU think Michelle Hurd should be paid.

How does their current health care work? Is it free if they make 26k a year? I worked for a Fortune 500 company and paid for health insurance since mid 1980’s.

26k is part time work. No company pays for healthcare for part time workers.

Kaley Cuoco described her work week on TBBT as follows: they get the script Tuesday night, the go in Wednesday and Thursday to rehearse/rewrites and record on Friday in front of an audience. So three days of work.

Jennifer Aniston described her work pretty much the same. They recorded Friday and sometimes could go until 3:00 in the morning. BUT EVERY FOURTH WEEK THEY HAD OFF. The writers of Friends even made more than the stars. Each star of Friends still make 20 million a year on residuals. No idea if this in the exception. I am curious what TBBT residuals are for each star.

It’s ridiculous what the big stars make. But it’s even more ridiculous what the studios are making. (The same could be said for sport teams and owners. But athletes do put their health on the line.) There’s definitely more money to be shared among the workers.

[Anonymous]

Personally, I would be fine if Hollywood decided to take a long long hiatus. And, yes especially the actors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the trees were trimmed without a city permit. I see a big fine in Universal's future with Meijia as Auditor:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-07-18/sag-aftra-wga-nlrb-complaint-universal-pickets

I hope the city nails Universal with a huge fine. The company is being incredibly spiteful, cutting back trees which had provided shade to picketers in intense heat.

Universal claims the trees are trimmed annually this time of year.

Already stories in the LA Times and other places noting that the city says Universal did not have the required city permits to do its own trimming of those trees. The trees are on city property; businesses can trim them but only with a city permit. Universal didn't have one. The timing is also terrible; article after article noting that these are ficus which should not be trimmed in July-Aug. heat; it damages the trees.

Let's not be naive about Universal's motivation here.

They also started their (already planned) construction project which shuts down a lot of sidewalk and access between gates; the LA police dept. has asked them to use barriers to create pedestrian lanes not only for the picketers but for everyone -- NO pedestrians can walk along a large swath of the road on that side. It's typical for a business to have to create a pedestrian walking lane when it does construction work that cuts off sidewalks. Wonder why Universal is balking, despite the LAPD wanting such lanes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the trees were trimmed without a city permit. I see a big fine in Universal's future with Meijia as Auditor:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-07-18/sag-aftra-wga-nlrb-complaint-universal-pickets

I hope the city nails Universal with a huge fine. The company is being incredibly spiteful, cutting back trees which had provided shade to picketers in intense heat.

Universal claims the trees are trimmed annually this time of year.

Already stories in the LA Times and other places noting that the city says Universal did not have the required city permits to do its own trimming of those trees. The trees are on city property; businesses can trim them but only with a city permit. Universal didn't have one. The timing is also terrible; article after article noting that these are ficus which should not be trimmed in July-Aug. heat; it damages the trees.

Let's not be naive about Universal's motivation here.

They also started their (already planned) construction project which shuts down a lot of sidewalk and access between gates; the LA police dept. has asked them to use barriers to create pedestrian lanes not only for the picketers but for everyone -- NO pedestrians can walk along a large swath of the road on that side. It's typical for a business to have to create a pedestrian walking lane when it does construction work that cuts off sidewalks. Wonder why Universal is balking, despite the LAPD wanting such lanes?

Well, Mejia hit them with the only fine he could and it was only $250 but it made NBCUniversal look really bad in the public's eye and it will go higher if they do it again:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/universal-studios-fined-insane-amount-over-tree-trimming-near-location-of-ongoing-strike/ar-AA1eesby

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It looks like the trees were trimmed without a city permit. I see a big fine in Universal's future with Meijia as Auditor:

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2023-07-18/sag-aftra-wga-nlrb-complaint-universal-pickets

I hope the city nails Universal with a huge fine. The company is being incredibly spiteful, cutting back trees which had provided shade to picketers in intense heat.

Universal claims the trees are trimmed annually this time of year.

Already stories in the LA Times and other places noting that the city says Universal did not have the required city permits to do its own trimming of those trees. The trees are on city property; businesses can trim them but only with a city permit. Universal didn't have one. The timing is also terrible; article after article noting that these are ficus which should not be trimmed in July-Aug. heat; it damages the trees.

Let's not be naive about Universal's motivation here.

They also started their (already planned) construction project which shuts down a lot of sidewalk and access between gates; the LA police dept. has asked them to use barriers to create pedestrian lanes not only for the picketers but for everyone -- NO pedestrians can walk along a large swath of the road on that side. It's typical for a business to have to create a pedestrian walking lane when it does construction work that cuts off sidewalks. Wonder why Universal is balking, despite the LAPD wanting such lanes?

Well, Mejia hit them with the only fine he could and it was only $250 but it made NBCUniversal look really bad in the public's eye and it will go higher if they do it again:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/universal-studios-fined-insane-amount-over-tree-trimming-near-location-of-ongoing-strike/ar-AA1eesby

Excellent. They deserve to be called out. Thanks for the article. I note that Universal claims it started putting up awnings and providing water for picketers as of this past week -- when the strikes began (with the WGA) at the very start of May....How thoughtful, I guess?
And still no pedestrian lanes.