[NEohioPAL]Union Financial Core questions

Wed Sep 21 10:30:52 PDT 2005

-------------------------------1127323852
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello all in Fred-mail land,
I have a question about union membership status. I apologize for anyone not  
interested who are forced to read this (who do not have the option of the 
Delete  button.) I realize this will move rather quickly to the discussion board 
but I  thought I would see what the Cleveland market feels about this issue, 
since I  have been reading about it nationally.

I am an active and proud member of both AEA and SAG (with plans to join  
AFTRA and SSDC when the opportunity arises) and have been frustrated by the  
number of non-union film jobs that I have which I have to walk away from (each  
would pay more than my union stage work.) I have heard all the talk about  
Financial Core status, spoken with people on both sides, and here is the basic  
situation as I see it:

--As a full member of a union (SAG, for example), I must only do union  work, 
and can not accept work on a non-union project even if the money is  
comparable.

--By declaring oneself "financial core", the individual is considered a  
dues-paying non-member of the union, and then can work non-union or union jobs  at 
his or her own discretion.

--This prevents the union member from the basic amenities of the union  
(newsletter, parties, awards, offices, etc.) but pension and health are still in  
effect because their business is a separate entity from the membership  
department.

--The challenge seems to be the moment of re-admission to the union, and  
having to defend the choice of changing to that status.

I have been reading discussion groups nationally and they are all divided.  
It seems like the smaller markets (the most recent I have been reading is  
Seattle) have quite a large number of Fi-Core actors.  

Is this a recommendation for the Cleveland market? Who is for, who is  
against? Has anyone been Fi-Core and rejoined the union? What was the  outcome?

(I look for all the same faces from the Pay/NoPay maelstrom...)

Larry Nehring
"Be safe; act  dangerous."

-------------------------------1127323852
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3DUS-ASCII">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=3Drole_body style=3D"FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY:=20=
Arial"=20
bottomMargin=3D7 leftMargin=3D7 topMargin=3D7 rightMargin=3D7><FONT id=3Drol=
e_document=20
face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D2>
<DIV>Hello all in Fred-mail land,</DIV>
<DIV>I have a question about union membership status. I apologize for anyone=
 not=20
interested who are forced to read this (who do not have the option of the De=
lete=20
button.) I realize this will move rather quickly to the discussion board but=
 I=20
thought I would see what the Cleveland market feels about this issue, since=20=
I=20
have been reading about it nationally.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I am an active and proud member of both AEA and SAG (with plans to join=
=20
AFTRA and SSDC when the opportunity arises) and have been frustrated by the=20
number of non-union film jobs that I have which I have to walk away from (ea=
ch=20
would pay more than my union stage work.) I have heard all the talk about=20
Financial Core status, spoken with people on both sides, and here is the bas=
ic=20
situation as I see it:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--As a full member of a union (SAG, for example), I must only do union=20
work, and can not accept work on a non-union project even if the money is=20
comparable.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--By declaring oneself "financial core", the individual is considered a=
=20
dues-paying non-member of the union, and then can work non-union or union jo=
bs=20
at his or her own discretion.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--This prevents the union member from the basic amenities of the union=20
(newsletter, parties, awards, offices, etc.) but pension and health are stil=
l in=20
effect because their business is a separate entity from the membership=20
department.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>--The challenge seems to be the moment of re-admission to the union, an=
d=20
having to defend the choice of changing to that status.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I have been reading discussion groups nationally and they are all divid=
ed.=20
It seems like the smaller markets (the most recent I have been reading is=20
Seattle) have quite a large number of Fi-Core actors.  </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Is this a recommendation for the Cleveland market? Who is for, who is=20
against? Has anyone been Fi-Core and rejoined the union? What was the=20
outcome?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>(I look for all the same faces from the Pay/NoPay maelstrom...)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Larry Nehring</DIV>
<DIV><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D2 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"10"=
>"Be safe; act=20
dangerous."</FONT></DIV></FONT></BODY></HTML>

-------------------------------1127323852--