The Screen Actors Guild's position on whether actors can work on films and TV shows shot outside the United States in the event of a strike is raising more questions for talent agents than it's answering. SAG has told its franchised agents that in the event of a strike, actors can work on certain foreign productions but not on others. The Association of Talent Agents, however, is unclear about what the guild considers foreign.
The guild has told its franchised agents that SAG members can work on foreign films without violating Rule One-the guild's prohibition on working on struck or non-union productions-as long as the films are truly foreign. "We have received several inquiries regarding foreign productions and the enforcement of Rule One after the possible expiration of the TV/Theatrical Code on June 30, 2001," SAG said in a Feb. 9 bulletin to its franchised agents-a bulletin that has only now been made public.
"Although there are several complex scenarios to be evaluated, the SAG board of directors has clarified the following position: When a foreign producer is producing product in a foreign market and no financing has been provided nor distribution rights held by any U.S. entity, it shall not be considered a violation of Rule One for a member of the Screen Actors Guild who is also a foreign national to provide services to the producer after June 30, 2001.
"For example, it shall not be considered a violation of Rule One for a member of SAG who is also a member of British Actors Equity to provide services to the British Broadcasting Service for product shown exclusively on the BBC."
The ATA, however, has many questions about the guild's position that the guild, so far, has not answered. The ATA said agents need these questions answered so that they will know what projects their clients can be booked on outside the United States in the event of a strike.
In a Mar. 2 letter to SAG associate national executive director John McGuire, ATA executive director Karen Stuart said that the ATA has received "numerous calls from member agencies seeking clarification of points raised in the SAG bulletin. Please assist ATA by answering the following questions:
"What is the definition of a foreign producer?
"Does a foreign market include Canada?
"What is the definition of a U.S. entity? When do you look to see if financing has been provided or distribution rights held by a U.S. entity? Is it at the time the actor agrees to render services, at the time principal photography begins or some other time?
"What exactly is a foreign national? Does it include an actor that holds a foreign passport, one who resides abroad or both?
"What is SAG's position on a U.S. citizen who holds dual citizenship?
"Does this policy differ from the current Rule One policy enforcement?
"Does your example regarding British Actors Equity apply only to foreign nationals?
"How does SAG treat Sony/Japan and similar foreign-owned companies with U.S. operations under this policy?"
In her letter, Stuart also told McGuire that the "ATA, of course, fully supports SAG in its upcoming contract talks. ATA wants to understand SAG's position on this and all related issues to best serve our member agencies so they may in turn convey the accurate information to their SAG clients." A month later, after Stuart had not received any answers to her questions, she wrote a letter to Brian Walton, SAG's chief negotiator, asking him for clarification.
"As we have discussed, SAG sent the attached bulletin to all franchised agents two months ago," she told Walton in a letter dated Apr. 4. "The bulletin prompted numerous agents to call ATA seeking clarification, and in turn, ATA sent the attached series of questions to John McGuire over a month ago. John McGuire verbally responded by stating that SAG needed to revise the bulletin and would do so shortly. However, two months have passed, and neither ATA nor its members have received a revised bulletin or answers to the questions.
"It is imperative that agents and clients receive answers to our questions as soon as possible. The bulletin does not reflect SAG's current policy, thus any effort to comply requires an understanding of the new policy. Further, potential employment is influenced by the bulletin. Please help us understand SAG's position so we may convey accurate information to the clients."
SAG spokesman Greg Krizman said the guild's position on the question of actors working in foreign countries during a strike is perfectly clear. "Our members are not supposed to be working for a signatory company during a work stoppage-no matter where," he said.
Krizman also said that he expects the guild's Feb. 9 bulletin to be clarified "in the near future."
David Robb writes for The Hollywood Reporter.