What's needed is action

It's anybody's guess how SAG members would vote on a contract proposal whose details haven't been disclosed. But the current problems could become even more intractable if the membership voted against it. The studios have publicly committed to dropping some financial incentives and taking a tougher line against SAG if their offer isn't accepted by Aug. 15. But a "no" vote would force SAG's leadership to seek more concessions, even though few people believe the union membership would approve a strike (it takes a 75% vote to authorize one). The result would be an enduring rift, with some film productions postponed (because they can't afford to be interrupted by a work stoppage) while TV shoots continue as if all were well. That's not as bad as a full-blown strike. But it's still corrosive to the local economy.

Our hope is that simply setting a vote in motion will be enough to make the studios and the SAG leadership think more clearly about the trajectory they're on. SAG's negotiating team isn't yet ready to toe the line set by the other unions' deals, yet the studios don't want to move that line. The two sides need to step up the pace of talks and look for new ways to address the issues uniquely important to SAG's membership. And while they're at it, they should devise better assurances that the most contentious provisions will be fully renegotiated in the next contract, three years down the line. That would reduce the stakes for issues related to the Internet, which will be a major revenue source in the future but isn't one today.