why do Actors belong to a union?

This has always perplexed me. I dont understand how actors could ever have been in the need to form a union.

anyone?
(FYI reason I bring it up is there ballots had to be in for counting today)

Cause without the union, your favorite tv show would be fully cast by people who had sex with the producers, instead of the one or two that currently are on tv per show ;-)

Benefits packages.....contractual protection.....I used to belong to ACTRA.....I was guaranteed certain rates and was glad for it.

i still dont understand why Actors need a union.

If you are a good enough actor... then demand what you want. If you are not, then please stop acting or do your own movies.

It's really there for the rest of the crew with the actors thrown in to increase clout.

The only reason the actors need it is to work.

I wonder why farmers need a union.

To put it simply, it's to remove the "fame" as being of value.

If you're a starting actor, and get a role on a show. A producer could tell you "hey...come on, say a few words, and go off...and this show is going to be such a hit...you'll be famous....and that's your pay".

You could take it, or leave it...but if you make the assumption that if you leave it you won't get hired to work for free...then that's the producer taking advantage of you.

And it dates back to when actors (even the big names) were actually employees of the studios. They were not signed to do "a picture", they were contracted as employees to do a certain number of pictures or shows, and paid a salary for doing so. Especially the "extras".

If you watch some movies from the 30's - 60's, you'll see some extras in the background who appear in hundreds of movies. They rarely (if ever) speak...but they keep working. And the unions were formed to make sure they got paid....because to start with, they weren't.

Because of the actor's union...if you got a roll in a movie being shot here in Winnipeg, and had enough words to speak in your roll...there's a minimum base salary they are REQUIRED to pay you. That's why when you hear about contests to win a "walk-on" roll...it's basically just that...you walk on, maybe say a sentence, and walk off. That's the roll...and no pay is required to be paid.

A friend of mine's daughter was cast in the dance flick shot here ("Shall We Dance" I think it was). She is a dance instructor at one of the local schools, and they hired her to act as one of the instructors in the movie (in the background), and perform some dancing during a couple of scenes. Her total working time was about 1 week, for which she was paid $14k.

Does this forum need a union?
(oh,oooh... zenzurship is lurking...)

My eldest son is a sound technician, and I believe that he is pretty happy with the set pay wages when he is involved with a movie. When he is kept for 12 or 15 hour days, his pay rate goes up . Without the union he could be there without any increase.
The number of movies being shot here is way down compared to last year!

"Without the union he could be there without any increase."
or quit

That's right....if you don't like working with unions, then you can always quit and go work somewhere else where you'll be happy...or start up your own company that's non union.

And on the flip side, if you don't mind working in a place that's unionized, you may stay and be happy too.

well in this case apparently all SAG employees have signed agreements saying that they wont work on NON SAG films.

and if they do they face fines or revocation of their membership. ( and considering membership costs up to $2600 ) that might be a bit of a problem for some of them.

See...ironically there...most of your "BIG" actors aren't SAG members (or they have special contracts).

Part of the reason SAG is pushing the fines these days, is because of the popularity of so many "Indie" films.

Most of them have smaller budgets and bigger profits because they don't submit to the unionized mentality.