Hollywood Is Going on a Dual Strike for the First Time Since 1960. You Won’t Believe Who Led the Last One.
Ironically, you have Ronald Reagan to thank for SAG-AFTRA actors’ welfare.
BY NADIRA GOFFE
Ironically, you have Ronald Reagan to thank for SAG-AFTRA actors’ welfare.
BY NADIRA GOFFE
SLATE
JULY 14, 2023
Photo illustration by Slate. Photos by Archive Photos/Getty Images, Chris Delmas/AFP via Getty Images, and Getty Images Plus.
On Thursday, the Screen Actors Guild, or SAG-AFTRA, announced that it would join its sister union, the Writers Guild of America—who have already been on the picket line for more than 10 weeks—in a full-out strike. This news, which is the result of weeks of attempted bargaining with streaming services for better residual payments and protections against prospects like outsourcing work to artificial intelligence, marks the first time both unions have struck simultaneously since 1960. The last time both unions went on strike, SAG in particular was led by an unlikely familiar figure: Ronald Reagan.
On Thursday, the Screen Actors Guild, or SAG-AFTRA, announced that it would join its sister union, the Writers Guild of America—who have already been on the picket line for more than 10 weeks—in a full-out strike. This news, which is the result of weeks of attempted bargaining with streaming services for better residual payments and protections against prospects like outsourcing work to artificial intelligence, marks the first time both unions have struck simultaneously since 1960. The last time both unions went on strike, SAG in particular was led by an unlikely familiar figure: Ronald Reagan.
Writer, actor, and comedian Wayne Federman wrote a piece for the Atlantic in 2011 titled “What Reagan Did for Hollywood,” in which he details the unprecedented advancements that Reagan helped secure for workers in Hollywood before going on the path to become one of the most emphatically conservative presidents in contemporary American history.
I called Federman to discuss the significance of the 1960 strike and its relation to the state of Hollywood today. This conversation has been condensed and edited for clarity.
Nadira Goffe: What were the circumstances that led to the 1960 SAG strike?
Wayne Federman: So the SAG strike was about one issue, and that issue was motion pictures made by the studios that were now being played on television. That started around 1948. [The union] kept wanting to talk about this issue, and [the studios] kept kicking the can down the road, year after year, negotiation after negotiation. So, eventually, the membership of SAG were like, We have to deal with this issue. It was very, very, very contentious. And they brought back Ronald Reagan, who had been president of SAG from 1947 to 1952, to lead the union. He had a TV show, he had been host of General Electric Theater, and his movie career had kind of waned a little bit, but he was very respected by the membership, and they brought him sort of out of retirement to lead this strike. So he got elected again.
Why did they invite him back? What was so special about him?
Because he was an extremely effective leader of SAG in the late ’40s. At that time, he was considered a liberal Democrat, but by the time he was brought back as SAG president to lead this strike, he had had a political conversion. … I don’t think he was a registered Republican at that time, but he was certainly starting to lean that way. The membership liked him. They remembered that he had been this good union leader before, and when he was head of SAG in the early ’50s, he helped get residuals for television actors [for reruns].
But here’s a little thing: Nancy, his wife, did not want him to take this job, because now you’re going up against the people that can hire you. You’re the face of the industry, of these actors, and now you have to go up against the heads of Warner Brothers and MGM and all of the major studios. But he eventually said yes, and as soon as the strike was resolved, he didn’t even finish out the term. I believe he resigned after the strike was successfully negotiated.
What were the main union ideas behind the 1960 strike?
Let’s say you get hired to act in a film. Basically, the person hiring you is taking the risk. They’re paying you your salary, and in return, they own that product. So, what SAG was saying was, You can play that film anywhere in the world, you can play it in Italy, you can have it dubbed—but when you put it on television, that’s a new revenue stream. Also, the argument was that that is taking work away from other actors. Because if you have this movie on, that time slot is no longer available for working actors.
On the other side, the head of 20th Century Fox [Spyros Skouras], his argument was very simple: Why should I pay you twice for the same job? I’ve already paid you for this job. I own this at this point. And that was basically the position of all of these studio owners. At the beginning of the strike, they were like, We’re not even going to talk about residuals. It’s a nonstarter. And Reagan said, We’re “trying to negotiate for the right to negotiate.” That’s how far apart they were. It was so foreign to these guys that they would have to share their revenues with actors after they’d already paid the actors. Ultimately, one studio, Universal Pictures—believe it or not, the head of Universal, a guy named Lew Wasserman, used to be Ronald Reagan’s agent—was the first domino that dropped. I think Lew Wasserman thought it was inevitable anyway: If it wasn’t going to happen in 1960, it might happen in ’65. And then one after another [gave in], until, I think, the 20th Century guy was the last guy, who was like, All right, I’ll give it, I’ll pay you again for something I’ve already paid you for, through clenched teeth.
As weird as it may sound now, in the old days, you could only see Paramount movies in Paramount theaters [due to vertical integration]. At that time, the studios were in a big fight with television. There was a big Supreme Court ruling called the Paramount Decree, where the studios had to give up distribution [control] of their movies. And that cost them. And then people started staying home and watching television, like I Love Lucy, and so the movie industry was hemorrhaging money. There were some studios that wouldn’t even show a television set in people’s homes. It was a real battle because they were losing so much money because television was exciting and new. So they were like, Oh my God, this is one place where we might be able to make some money. And now you’re asking us to give you a percentage of it.
What is the importance of residuals? As you said, actors had already gotten paid.
This was kind of a new idea—that, if we take these movies and put them in this new medium, there’s a new revenue stream outside of box office gross. There was no such thing as movies on television when the industry started. There was no television. The idea of residuals started on radio, believe it or not. They would do a broadcast on the East Coast and then do another one for the West Coast, and they would get paid for both of those broadcasts. And then at one point they were like, We’re just going to tape the East Coast broadcast and then play it again for the West Coast. And that was really the start of, Well, can you pay us because we’re actually doing this again? So the idea was: Let’s see if we can get part of this revenue stream for our actors, because in a way, we’re now competing against ourselves.
And, essentially, even though it’s prerecorded and just put on a different medium, it’s technically multiple performances.
Right. And you’re also taking work away from actors who could be using that time slot, who could be hired to do an episode of Gunsmoke or The Fugitive, or something like that. Again, the residuals were so small at the time, but this was a paradigm shift in Hollywood.
What about residuals for films made before the strike in 1960?
TV really starts kicking in 1948; by 1956, they’re playing [movies like] The Wizard of Oz on television. That’s a big MGM musical. … It’s not one of these B Westerns that Republic Pictures made, or something like that. So, there are more A pictures making their way onto television. And so [the studios are] thinking, In the age of television, what do we do for all of these movies that were made between 1948 and 1960? They decide, All right, instead of residuals for any of those movies made between 1948 and 1960, we’re going to give you a few million dollars to start. This is the first health fund for actors, which is where I get my health insurance and pension. It was seed money [for] benefits for your workers. And so that’s how the pension and welfare started for SAG. … Now it’s got to be well over $10 billion, probably. I don’t even know the amount of money that’s been sent to actors who work in movies that get played on television, based on that 1960 strike.
And so there are no residuals for any movie made before 1960. There were people who worked in the ’30s and ’40s, like Mickey Rooney and Bob Hope, who were upset at this. They were like, Why do we strike? I thought I’d get residuals for Road to Morocco or whatever. In a way, Reagan was selfless because most of the movies he made were in pre-residual times.
What you’re essentially telling me is that Ronald Reagan decides to take up this liberal cause and basically secures residuals and welfare for the future of Hollywood actors. And then, very shortly afterward, registers as a Republican. Where he then becomes, well, the Ronald Reagan.
That is correct.
What are the circumstances leading to this current SAG strike and how do they differ from or resemble the circumstances in 1960?
For this strike, before we even negotiated, we already had strike authorization from the membership. In 1960, they didn’t. The 1960 strike was really about one issue, and this strike is about multiple issues. This is about how residuals, specifically for streaming entertainment, are being calculated. Those numbers are … not really released. It’s not like a Nielsen rating. Sometimes you’ll hear something like, Oh, 1.2 million minutes of Squid Game—what does that mean? Does that mean that many people watched one minute of it, or does that mean people watched it a number of times, or … ? I don’t know why it’s all proprietary for these streamers, but that’s just where we’re at. We want a little more transparency in that, [to consider] that if we’re on a hit show, is that paid differently than a [nonhit] show? And then there’s this A.I. situation.
You said that the studios were sort of giving up these residuals through clenched teeth. Do you think that their position on that has changed?
That’s the amazing outcome of what Ronald Reagan—and other negotiators at the time—was able to do: In a way, they were changing the paradigm of how Hollywood money is divided up. They were striking for an idea: that we deserve this for A, B, C, and D reasons. You get residuals now. Not everyone; editors don’t get residuals, but directors do. I get residuals for streaming services, but they’re just not the same. They’re not as good as cable, and they’re not as good as network. When you look at the check, you’re like, OK, this doesn’t seem like a lot. But, again, you don’t know how many people are watching it.
And also, I think when we first started looking at streaming services, we were like, We want these services to thrive so that there’ll be more work for actors. So I think that’s why we were not militant about residuals for these new platforms. No one is saying, Oh, we paid you to be on this Netflix show, and we never have to pay you a residual. The problem is that it’s not as hearty as it used to be for these other mediums. But the idea of residuals … is not going away, unless [the companies] decide to try to break the unions and just use nonunion actors and not pay residuals.
This time around, do you think the WGA strike has influenced this SAG strike?
Well, I think it did. This is just one person’s opinion. But the Directors Guild of America settled with the producers, and I think that the Writers Guild felt like, Oh, that was really kind of a leverage point for us, that we would maybe be in this together. Even though legally you’re not allowed to be in it together, but wink, wink, we’re in this together. I think the actors were aware of it, and they were like, We have your back a little bit. Again, it’s a separate negotiation, and there should be a bright line. But in my opinion, being out here, I feel like the Writers Guild was hoping, OK, now we have more leverage, obviously. We have a little more power. And there’s going to be more pain inflicted. The Emmy Awards might be postponed—as an actor, you’re not allowed to promote your movie that you’ve already done.
How are you feeling? You’re in both unions.
Yes. How am I feeling? Well, mixed is how I’m feeling, to tell you the truth. Most of my friends are like, Eff those guys, look at how much so-and-so makes, these faceless internet oligarchs that own all the content, eff those guys, let them feel a little pain. That’s kind of what a lot of my peer group is like. But I’m a little more like, “We’re in this together. Does it have to get to this, where there’s a work stoppage?” I’m super sympathetic to people who aren’t in the union that rely on film production to make their living—caterers and all of those people. I feel terrible for them. I go on the line sometimes, and it’s a little bit of a party atmosphere—there’s music playing, and they do karaoke, and we get free food thanks to Drew Carey. So I’m mixed. No one’s asked me that. Thank you.
It’s complicated. If it were easy, people would be doing it all the time.
It’s a complicated issue. It’s like Reagan. It’s complicated.
Nadira Goffe: What were the circumstances that led to the 1960 SAG strike?
Wayne Federman: So the SAG strike was about one issue, and that issue was motion pictures made by the studios that were now being played on television. That started around 1948. [The union] kept wanting to talk about this issue, and [the studios] kept kicking the can down the road, year after year, negotiation after negotiation. So, eventually, the membership of SAG were like, We have to deal with this issue. It was very, very, very contentious. And they brought back Ronald Reagan, who had been president of SAG from 1947 to 1952, to lead the union. He had a TV show, he had been host of General Electric Theater, and his movie career had kind of waned a little bit, but he was very respected by the membership, and they brought him sort of out of retirement to lead this strike. So he got elected again.
Why did they invite him back? What was so special about him?
Because he was an extremely effective leader of SAG in the late ’40s. At that time, he was considered a liberal Democrat, but by the time he was brought back as SAG president to lead this strike, he had had a political conversion. … I don’t think he was a registered Republican at that time, but he was certainly starting to lean that way. The membership liked him. They remembered that he had been this good union leader before, and when he was head of SAG in the early ’50s, he helped get residuals for television actors [for reruns].
But here’s a little thing: Nancy, his wife, did not want him to take this job, because now you’re going up against the people that can hire you. You’re the face of the industry, of these actors, and now you have to go up against the heads of Warner Brothers and MGM and all of the major studios. But he eventually said yes, and as soon as the strike was resolved, he didn’t even finish out the term. I believe he resigned after the strike was successfully negotiated.
What were the main union ideas behind the 1960 strike?
Let’s say you get hired to act in a film. Basically, the person hiring you is taking the risk. They’re paying you your salary, and in return, they own that product. So, what SAG was saying was, You can play that film anywhere in the world, you can play it in Italy, you can have it dubbed—but when you put it on television, that’s a new revenue stream. Also, the argument was that that is taking work away from other actors. Because if you have this movie on, that time slot is no longer available for working actors.
On the other side, the head of 20th Century Fox [Spyros Skouras], his argument was very simple: Why should I pay you twice for the same job? I’ve already paid you for this job. I own this at this point. And that was basically the position of all of these studio owners. At the beginning of the strike, they were like, We’re not even going to talk about residuals. It’s a nonstarter. And Reagan said, We’re “trying to negotiate for the right to negotiate.” That’s how far apart they were. It was so foreign to these guys that they would have to share their revenues with actors after they’d already paid the actors. Ultimately, one studio, Universal Pictures—believe it or not, the head of Universal, a guy named Lew Wasserman, used to be Ronald Reagan’s agent—was the first domino that dropped. I think Lew Wasserman thought it was inevitable anyway: If it wasn’t going to happen in 1960, it might happen in ’65. And then one after another [gave in], until, I think, the 20th Century guy was the last guy, who was like, All right, I’ll give it, I’ll pay you again for something I’ve already paid you for, through clenched teeth.
As weird as it may sound now, in the old days, you could only see Paramount movies in Paramount theaters [due to vertical integration]. At that time, the studios were in a big fight with television. There was a big Supreme Court ruling called the Paramount Decree, where the studios had to give up distribution [control] of their movies. And that cost them. And then people started staying home and watching television, like I Love Lucy, and so the movie industry was hemorrhaging money. There were some studios that wouldn’t even show a television set in people’s homes. It was a real battle because they were losing so much money because television was exciting and new. So they were like, Oh my God, this is one place where we might be able to make some money. And now you’re asking us to give you a percentage of it.
What is the importance of residuals? As you said, actors had already gotten paid.
This was kind of a new idea—that, if we take these movies and put them in this new medium, there’s a new revenue stream outside of box office gross. There was no such thing as movies on television when the industry started. There was no television. The idea of residuals started on radio, believe it or not. They would do a broadcast on the East Coast and then do another one for the West Coast, and they would get paid for both of those broadcasts. And then at one point they were like, We’re just going to tape the East Coast broadcast and then play it again for the West Coast. And that was really the start of, Well, can you pay us because we’re actually doing this again? So the idea was: Let’s see if we can get part of this revenue stream for our actors, because in a way, we’re now competing against ourselves.
And, essentially, even though it’s prerecorded and just put on a different medium, it’s technically multiple performances.
Right. And you’re also taking work away from actors who could be using that time slot, who could be hired to do an episode of Gunsmoke or The Fugitive, or something like that. Again, the residuals were so small at the time, but this was a paradigm shift in Hollywood.
What about residuals for films made before the strike in 1960?
TV really starts kicking in 1948; by 1956, they’re playing [movies like] The Wizard of Oz on television. That’s a big MGM musical. … It’s not one of these B Westerns that Republic Pictures made, or something like that. So, there are more A pictures making their way onto television. And so [the studios are] thinking, In the age of television, what do we do for all of these movies that were made between 1948 and 1960? They decide, All right, instead of residuals for any of those movies made between 1948 and 1960, we’re going to give you a few million dollars to start. This is the first health fund for actors, which is where I get my health insurance and pension. It was seed money [for] benefits for your workers. And so that’s how the pension and welfare started for SAG. … Now it’s got to be well over $10 billion, probably. I don’t even know the amount of money that’s been sent to actors who work in movies that get played on television, based on that 1960 strike.
And so there are no residuals for any movie made before 1960. There were people who worked in the ’30s and ’40s, like Mickey Rooney and Bob Hope, who were upset at this. They were like, Why do we strike? I thought I’d get residuals for Road to Morocco or whatever. In a way, Reagan was selfless because most of the movies he made were in pre-residual times.
What you’re essentially telling me is that Ronald Reagan decides to take up this liberal cause and basically secures residuals and welfare for the future of Hollywood actors. And then, very shortly afterward, registers as a Republican. Where he then becomes, well, the Ronald Reagan.
That is correct.
What are the circumstances leading to this current SAG strike and how do they differ from or resemble the circumstances in 1960?
For this strike, before we even negotiated, we already had strike authorization from the membership. In 1960, they didn’t. The 1960 strike was really about one issue, and this strike is about multiple issues. This is about how residuals, specifically for streaming entertainment, are being calculated. Those numbers are … not really released. It’s not like a Nielsen rating. Sometimes you’ll hear something like, Oh, 1.2 million minutes of Squid Game—what does that mean? Does that mean that many people watched one minute of it, or does that mean people watched it a number of times, or … ? I don’t know why it’s all proprietary for these streamers, but that’s just where we’re at. We want a little more transparency in that, [to consider] that if we’re on a hit show, is that paid differently than a [nonhit] show? And then there’s this A.I. situation.
You said that the studios were sort of giving up these residuals through clenched teeth. Do you think that their position on that has changed?
That’s the amazing outcome of what Ronald Reagan—and other negotiators at the time—was able to do: In a way, they were changing the paradigm of how Hollywood money is divided up. They were striking for an idea: that we deserve this for A, B, C, and D reasons. You get residuals now. Not everyone; editors don’t get residuals, but directors do. I get residuals for streaming services, but they’re just not the same. They’re not as good as cable, and they’re not as good as network. When you look at the check, you’re like, OK, this doesn’t seem like a lot. But, again, you don’t know how many people are watching it.
And also, I think when we first started looking at streaming services, we were like, We want these services to thrive so that there’ll be more work for actors. So I think that’s why we were not militant about residuals for these new platforms. No one is saying, Oh, we paid you to be on this Netflix show, and we never have to pay you a residual. The problem is that it’s not as hearty as it used to be for these other mediums. But the idea of residuals … is not going away, unless [the companies] decide to try to break the unions and just use nonunion actors and not pay residuals.
This time around, do you think the WGA strike has influenced this SAG strike?
Well, I think it did. This is just one person’s opinion. But the Directors Guild of America settled with the producers, and I think that the Writers Guild felt like, Oh, that was really kind of a leverage point for us, that we would maybe be in this together. Even though legally you’re not allowed to be in it together, but wink, wink, we’re in this together. I think the actors were aware of it, and they were like, We have your back a little bit. Again, it’s a separate negotiation, and there should be a bright line. But in my opinion, being out here, I feel like the Writers Guild was hoping, OK, now we have more leverage, obviously. We have a little more power. And there’s going to be more pain inflicted. The Emmy Awards might be postponed—as an actor, you’re not allowed to promote your movie that you’ve already done.
How are you feeling? You’re in both unions.
Yes. How am I feeling? Well, mixed is how I’m feeling, to tell you the truth. Most of my friends are like, Eff those guys, look at how much so-and-so makes, these faceless internet oligarchs that own all the content, eff those guys, let them feel a little pain. That’s kind of what a lot of my peer group is like. But I’m a little more like, “We’re in this together. Does it have to get to this, where there’s a work stoppage?” I’m super sympathetic to people who aren’t in the union that rely on film production to make their living—caterers and all of those people. I feel terrible for them. I go on the line sometimes, and it’s a little bit of a party atmosphere—there’s music playing, and they do karaoke, and we get free food thanks to Drew Carey. So I’m mixed. No one’s asked me that. Thank you.
It’s complicated. If it were easy, people would be doing it all the time.
It’s a complicated issue. It’s like Reagan. It’s complicated.
By Shera Avi-Yonah and Andrea Salcedo
The Washington Post
July 14, 2023
A portrait of former SAG-AFTRA president Ronald Reagan hangs in SAG-AFTRA headquarters, when the actors union announced its strike. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
The year was 1959, and talks between the Screen Actors Guild and movie studios had stalled.
The actors sought residual payments from TV channels that reran films they’d worked on, in what would have been a drastic shake-up.
Producers, seeking higher profits from new media, refused to negotiate.
So SAG called in a ringer who had retired from union leadership: Ronald Reagan.
Reagan, an actor and Democrat at the time, served as SAG’s president from 1947 to 1952, winning for television actors the kind of residuals movie actors wanted, and eventually helping cement Hollywood as the new capital of TV production.
After agreeing to return to the SAG presidency in 1959, he would preside over a five-week strike that resulted in SAG winning residual payments for film actors. Hollywood writers also staged a strike, getting their own payments for movies screened on TV; theirs lasted 21 weeks.
In a move that would be echoed this summer, the dual strikes in 1960 aligned writers and actors on the picket line, bringing much of Hollywood’s work to a standstill.
And Reagan would be among those who ended them.
“[The deal] was overwhelmingly approved by the membership,” Iwan Morgan, author of ‘Reagan: American Icon,’ told The Washington Post. “They were very keen to get back to work and make money. … He was a pretty good negotiator, there’s no doubt about it. Reagan would later joke that negotiating with Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leader, over arms reduction was nothing in comparison to having to negotiate with the studio heads.
At the time, creatives had to contend with the popularization of a new medium, TV. Now they’re dealing with a similar issue in the form of streaming, plus existential questions raised by artificial intelligence — a combination that led to another dual strike when SAG-AFTRA announced Thursday that its actors would stop their work. The move from SAG-AFTRA (the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists merged with SAG a decade ago) aligned with the Writers Guild of America in its strike that has run since June
When Reagan began his SAG negotiations, the movie studios refused to even discuss residuals, said actor and writer Wayne Federman, who has written about the 1960 strike and spoke to The Post on his way to the writers guild picket line Thursday.
Producers argued at the time that actors had been paid once for their work and shouldn’t get money over and over for the same work. After a month of fruitless negotiations, Reagan called a strike authorization vote in February 1960. SAG members walked off sets one month later, on March 7.
Reagan benefited from long-standing relationships within the industry — including with the future head of Universal Studios, Lew Wasserman, who had been Reagan’s agent.
“Reagan in 1960 should never have been fronting SAG negotiations because not only was he an actor, he was also a producer,” Morgan said. “There were possible conflicts of interest here, but Reagan kept them out about the fact that he had co-production credits. That only became public knowledge afterwards.”
Charles S. Boren, left, vice president of the Association of Motion Picture Producers, shakes hands with actor Charlton Heston at the end of the Screen Actors Guild's strike against seven film studios in 1960. Shown next to Heston is SAG President Ronald Reagan, shaking hands with B.B. Kahne of the AMMP. (Bettmann/Bettmann Archive)
Criticism also came from fellow SAG official and actor James Garner
“I was a vice president of the Screen Actors Guild when he was its president,” Garner said in his memoir. My duties consisted of attending meetings and voting. The only thing I remember is that Ronnie never had an original thought and that we had to tell him what to say. That’s no way to run a union, let along a state or a country.”
The actors and the studios reached a deal after five weeks of negotiations. Actors would get residual payments for films produced in 1960 and after. Any films they’d worked on before 1948 would pay actors zero residuals. In lieu of residuals for films made in the interim, the studios gave SAG a $2.65 million lump sum that the guild used to create its first pension plan.
The deal caused some grumbling among actors, Federman said, including Mickey Rooney and Bob Hope, who believed SAG could have won retroactive payments for all pre-1960 films.
“There was a feeling that Reagan had caved in — again — under pressure from MCA [the company who represented him] because MCA was desperate to end the strike,” Morgan said. “There was a feeling from some of the old stars that Reagan had not pushed harder.”
Still, it represented a distinct pro-labor moment in Reagan’s career.
Reagan shifted from his Democratic roots and supported Richard M. Nixon’s presidential aspirations in 1960, then registered as a Republican after that election, The Washington Post reported. In 1966, while he was running for governor, Reagan won “about 25 or 30 per cent of the labor vote,” the New York Times reported. A decade later, while campaigning for the White House, he characterized “big labor” as a problem for the country.
Shortly before that 1980 election, AFL-CIO President Lane Kirkland, in announcing his organization’s support for President Jimmy Carter, said Reagan’s supporters were “among the most bitterly antilabor forces in America,” according to a September 1980 dispatch in The Post
“Ronald Reagan is no friend of working people,” Kirkland said. “His past record proves that fact, and we must make sure that union members have the facts to match against the glib rhetoric.”
Despite the criticism from a leading labor voice, Reagan defeated Carter in a landslide and set up a presidency that would put him on another side of union dealings.
In 1981, members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO), one of the few labor unions that endorsed Reagan during his run for office, walked off their jobs citing unfair wages and long hours.
But Reagan, who at the time was following a Kennedy-era executive order that limited public workers’ abilities to strike, did not come to the table with the union, which had about 13,000 workers at the time. If he capitulated, Reagan’s advisers said, he’d have every other union in the public and private sector demanding better wages, Morgan told The Post.
“Reagan is being told by his economic team and his closest advisers, ‘If you cave in now to PATCO you’ll look weak,’” Morgan said.
Had he done this, Reagan would have never been able to reduce the country’s 13 percent inflation rate at the time — a key part of Reagan’s economic plan during his first term, Morgan said. So Reagan gave them 48 hours to return to their jobs or be fired. Many workers at the time thought the former actor was bluffing, according to Morgan. But Reagan wasn’t, and the first head of a labor union to be elected into the White House became the first president in decades to end a strike.
Hollywood shutdown
What’s happening: Actors in the SAG-AFTRA union announced a decision to strike after negotiations over a new contract failed. They will join Hollywood writers, who have been on strike since early May. Follow live updates as the strike unfolds.
Why are Hollywood actors and writers on strike? The Screen Actors Guild and the Writers Guild of America say their demands are meant to protect their members as the entertainment industry is in an era of rapid change. The SAG strike could last for months, here are the rules about what actors can and can’t do.
What has the writers’ strike halted? With writers and actors both going on strike, the film industry will likely grind to a halt. Here’s what to know about the strikes’ impacts on Hollywood. This is only the second time in history a joint strike has happened, with the last occurrence in 1960 when Ronald Reagan led SAG.
By Shera Avi-Yonah is an intern on The Post’s General Assignment desk. Before joining The Post, she interned at Bloomberg News, the Daily Memphian in Memphis, CBS News and the American Prospect. Twitter
By Andrea Salcedo is a general assignment reporter for The Washington Post. She joined The Post in 2020 as an overnight reporter on the Morning Mix team. Previously, she covered breaking news and features for the New York Times metro desk. Twitter
July 14, 2023
A portrait of former SAG-AFTRA president Ronald Reagan hangs in SAG-AFTRA headquarters, when the actors union announced its strike. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
The year was 1959, and talks between the Screen Actors Guild and movie studios had stalled.
The actors sought residual payments from TV channels that reran films they’d worked on, in what would have been a drastic shake-up.
Producers, seeking higher profits from new media, refused to negotiate.
So SAG called in a ringer who had retired from union leadership: Ronald Reagan.
Reagan, an actor and Democrat at the time, served as SAG’s president from 1947 to 1952, winning for television actors the kind of residuals movie actors wanted, and eventually helping cement Hollywood as the new capital of TV production.
After agreeing to return to the SAG presidency in 1959, he would preside over a five-week strike that resulted in SAG winning residual payments for film actors. Hollywood writers also staged a strike, getting their own payments for movies screened on TV; theirs lasted 21 weeks.
In a move that would be echoed this summer, the dual strikes in 1960 aligned writers and actors on the picket line, bringing much of Hollywood’s work to a standstill.
And Reagan would be among those who ended them.
“[The deal] was overwhelmingly approved by the membership,” Iwan Morgan, author of ‘Reagan: American Icon,’ told The Washington Post. “They were very keen to get back to work and make money. … He was a pretty good negotiator, there’s no doubt about it. Reagan would later joke that negotiating with Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leader, over arms reduction was nothing in comparison to having to negotiate with the studio heads.
At the time, creatives had to contend with the popularization of a new medium, TV. Now they’re dealing with a similar issue in the form of streaming, plus existential questions raised by artificial intelligence — a combination that led to another dual strike when SAG-AFTRA announced Thursday that its actors would stop their work. The move from SAG-AFTRA (the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists merged with SAG a decade ago) aligned with the Writers Guild of America in its strike that has run since June
When Reagan began his SAG negotiations, the movie studios refused to even discuss residuals, said actor and writer Wayne Federman, who has written about the 1960 strike and spoke to The Post on his way to the writers guild picket line Thursday.
Producers argued at the time that actors had been paid once for their work and shouldn’t get money over and over for the same work. After a month of fruitless negotiations, Reagan called a strike authorization vote in February 1960. SAG members walked off sets one month later, on March 7.
Reagan benefited from long-standing relationships within the industry — including with the future head of Universal Studios, Lew Wasserman, who had been Reagan’s agent.
“Reagan in 1960 should never have been fronting SAG negotiations because not only was he an actor, he was also a producer,” Morgan said. “There were possible conflicts of interest here, but Reagan kept them out about the fact that he had co-production credits. That only became public knowledge afterwards.”
Charles S. Boren, left, vice president of the Association of Motion Picture Producers, shakes hands with actor Charlton Heston at the end of the Screen Actors Guild's strike against seven film studios in 1960. Shown next to Heston is SAG President Ronald Reagan, shaking hands with B.B. Kahne of the AMMP. (Bettmann/Bettmann Archive)
Criticism also came from fellow SAG official and actor James Garner
“I was a vice president of the Screen Actors Guild when he was its president,” Garner said in his memoir. My duties consisted of attending meetings and voting. The only thing I remember is that Ronnie never had an original thought and that we had to tell him what to say. That’s no way to run a union, let along a state or a country.”
The actors and the studios reached a deal after five weeks of negotiations. Actors would get residual payments for films produced in 1960 and after. Any films they’d worked on before 1948 would pay actors zero residuals. In lieu of residuals for films made in the interim, the studios gave SAG a $2.65 million lump sum that the guild used to create its first pension plan.
The deal caused some grumbling among actors, Federman said, including Mickey Rooney and Bob Hope, who believed SAG could have won retroactive payments for all pre-1960 films.
“There was a feeling that Reagan had caved in — again — under pressure from MCA [the company who represented him] because MCA was desperate to end the strike,” Morgan said. “There was a feeling from some of the old stars that Reagan had not pushed harder.”
Still, it represented a distinct pro-labor moment in Reagan’s career.
Reagan shifted from his Democratic roots and supported Richard M. Nixon’s presidential aspirations in 1960, then registered as a Republican after that election, The Washington Post reported. In 1966, while he was running for governor, Reagan won “about 25 or 30 per cent of the labor vote,” the New York Times reported. A decade later, while campaigning for the White House, he characterized “big labor” as a problem for the country.
Shortly before that 1980 election, AFL-CIO President Lane Kirkland, in announcing his organization’s support for President Jimmy Carter, said Reagan’s supporters were “among the most bitterly antilabor forces in America,” according to a September 1980 dispatch in The Post
“Ronald Reagan is no friend of working people,” Kirkland said. “His past record proves that fact, and we must make sure that union members have the facts to match against the glib rhetoric.”
Despite the criticism from a leading labor voice, Reagan defeated Carter in a landslide and set up a presidency that would put him on another side of union dealings.
In 1981, members of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization (PATCO), one of the few labor unions that endorsed Reagan during his run for office, walked off their jobs citing unfair wages and long hours.
But Reagan, who at the time was following a Kennedy-era executive order that limited public workers’ abilities to strike, did not come to the table with the union, which had about 13,000 workers at the time. If he capitulated, Reagan’s advisers said, he’d have every other union in the public and private sector demanding better wages, Morgan told The Post.
“Reagan is being told by his economic team and his closest advisers, ‘If you cave in now to PATCO you’ll look weak,’” Morgan said.
Had he done this, Reagan would have never been able to reduce the country’s 13 percent inflation rate at the time — a key part of Reagan’s economic plan during his first term, Morgan said. So Reagan gave them 48 hours to return to their jobs or be fired. Many workers at the time thought the former actor was bluffing, according to Morgan. But Reagan wasn’t, and the first head of a labor union to be elected into the White House became the first president in decades to end a strike.
Hollywood shutdown
What’s happening: Actors in the SAG-AFTRA union announced a decision to strike after negotiations over a new contract failed. They will join Hollywood writers, who have been on strike since early May. Follow live updates as the strike unfolds.
Why are Hollywood actors and writers on strike? The Screen Actors Guild and the Writers Guild of America say their demands are meant to protect their members as the entertainment industry is in an era of rapid change. The SAG strike could last for months, here are the rules about what actors can and can’t do.
What has the writers’ strike halted? With writers and actors both going on strike, the film industry will likely grind to a halt. Here’s what to know about the strikes’ impacts on Hollywood. This is only the second time in history a joint strike has happened, with the last occurrence in 1960 when Ronald Reagan led SAG.
By Shera Avi-Yonah is an intern on The Post’s General Assignment desk. Before joining The Post, she interned at Bloomberg News, the Daily Memphian in Memphis, CBS News and the American Prospect. Twitter
By Andrea Salcedo is a general assignment reporter for The Washington Post. She joined The Post in 2020 as an overnight reporter on the Morning Mix team. Previously, she covered breaking news and features for the New York Times metro desk. Twitter
No comments:
Post a Comment