SAG-AFTRA Voice Actors Now on Strike Against a Number of Game Companies

[Recusant]

Given what gamers put up with the industry doing to them, I don't think the actors can count on much support from this end. A pity. I hope this works out well, but frankly I don't see that happening.

Yeah... no. Pretty much everybody else on the development side deserves royalty before voice actor do. People play game for the gameplay, the story, the competition or the graphic. Very few people play because they heard the game had awesome voice acting, the only game I can think of that could sell itself with that is Bastion and that's a small indie title. VA can just go at the back of the queue, or not, if they strike they'll just be replaced by somebody else, since, again, there pretty expendable.

Unless I am mistaken, they want royalties. Hah! The developers who have spent half a decade slaving over the game don't get royalties, and a half-talented hack who comes in for a three day shooting session wants them?

Good riddance.

There's an old Russian folktale that this attitude reminds me of. There were once two farmers, Alexyev and Rabinovich. Both were poor, each having only a single cow, but they were fiercely competitive. One cold winter day, Alexyev's cow died, and, depressed by the realization that he couldn't compete with Rabinovich any longer, he left the village on a long walk. As he approached the partially frozen pond, he saw someone struggling in it, desperately trying to keep from drowning. Alexyev threw the man a rope, pulled him in, and brought him inside to warm him up, only to discover that it was not a man. It was a fairy spirit, who, grateful for Alexyev having saved his life, offered him a wish: anything his heart desired. Alexyev was at first stunned by the news, but then his face split in a huge grin. "I wish Rabinovich's cow was dead!".

 

[Fox12]

So they wanted to cut out 75% of the voice actors in the field, or force them to join? Fuck 'em. I think they'll find that they are expendable. In other news, if you ever wanted to enter the industry, then now would be the perfect time to try. At least their harassing EA, though. Fuck EA.

Hey, can Johnny Young Bosch go on strike too? Please?

 

[Fox12]

Yeah... no. Pretty much everybody else on the development side deserves royalty before voice actor do.

Then they should unionize. This is what unions are for. It's not about who deserves something first. It's about who actually stands up to fight for their worker rights. Something like this has a chance to inspire developers to do the same. Especially if voice actors can pull it off. So some support from the actual gamers would be nice.

If the union actually cared about worker rights then they wouldn't have tried throwing 75% of their peers under the bus. They don't care about worker rights. They care about themselves. Let them go back to working at office depot or wherever.

 

[Areloch]

I'm fully behind pretty much everything they've put forward - aside from the residuals. I said the same in the other thread.

And not even as a "the devs don't get residuals either" bint.

Fact is, both the devs and the VAs were paid for the work they performed. Why would they continue to be paid after the work is concluded? That really makes no sense. I'm 100% behind arguing that the pay should be higher - for both parties - but residuals for a completed work doesn't make sense to me.

As for anti-union opinions in the US, as others have said, it's pretty much the union's fault. When unions step into a space and strong arm companies and people in the same field into using union people or none at all, among other unpleasant behaviors, it quickly drains the good will that unions can build up by 'helping those in need'. It also doesn't help when some of the demands come off as straight up greedy, like the residuals part.

If I recall correctly, they rejected an offer for a 9% pay increase (which may potentially be too low, to be fair) - for residuals, which on a major blowout release could net them 4x the work they were actually paid for originally after the fact. Others may disagree, and I feel VAs AND devs should be paid better in general, but the entire framing just feels considerably more greedy. Attempting to lock out non-union VAs (or apparently causing their own problems to the point where union VAs will take non-union jobs under aliases because they couldn't otherwise) and the like is just icing on the anti-union cake in this case.

Edit: As another example: toss in pretty much anything with "the police union" in there, and you can see why the public doesn't really like unions all that much.

 

[Fox12]

I'm fully behind pretty much everything they've put forward - aside from the residuals. I said the same in the other thread.

And not even as a "the devs don't get residuals either" bint.

Fact is, both the devs and the VAs were paid for the work they performed. Why would they continue to be paid after the work is concluded? That really makes no sense. I'm 100% behind arguing that the pay should be higher - for both parties - but residuals for a completed work doesn't make sense to me.

As for anti-union opinions in the US, as others have said, it's pretty much the union's fault. When unions step into a space and strong arm companies and people in the same field into using union people or none at all, among other unpleasant behaviors, it quickly drains the good will that unions can build up by 'helping those in need'. It also doesn't help when some of the demands come off as straight up greedy, like the residuals part.

If I recall correctly, they rejected an offer for a 9% pay increase (which may potentially be too low, to be fair) - for residuals, which on a major blowout release could net them 4x the work they were actually paid for originally after the fact. Others may disagree, and I feel VAs AND devs should be paid better in general, but the entire framing just feels considerably more greedy. Attempting to lock out non-union VAs (or apparently causing their own problems to the point where union VAs will take non-union jobs under aliases because they couldn't otherwise) and the like is just icing on the anti-union cake in this case.

Edit: As another example: toss in pretty much anything with "the police union" in there, and you can see why the public doesn't really like unions all that much.

Yeah, that always struck me as odd. I get why an author would receive residual payments for adaptations of their work. They own the initial rights to the IP. The same would go for any rights owner. But why would the employees be entitled to residual payments? And the unions strong arming of non-union members is just as scummy as the corporations.

I agree with their other demands, though. There should be a training instructor present for mocap, and they should get breaks after intense vocal sessions. That's just employee safety stuff.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

I
As for anti-union opinions in the US, as others have said, it's pretty much the union's fault. When unions step into a space and strong arm companies and people in the same field into using union people or none at all, among other unpleasant behaviors, it quickly drains the good will that unions can build up by 'helping those in need'. It also doesn't help when some of the demands come off as straight up greedy, like the residuals part.

How would union negotiations work if non-union workers in the same field worked for the same company?

Short answer: it doesn't, management would just lay off the union guys. Bottom line , unionization is like herd immunity and vaccinations. You need a critical amount of union members or having a union is worthless. Like unions in states with right to work laws. Unions are basically dead there because they still have to advocate for all the labor working a job, but said labor doesn't have to be in the union to get the benifits. And as soon as the union dies, work conditions, pay scale, retirement, the whole nine gets shafted, little by little.

And if VAs get residuals for TV, movies, radio, commercials, and whatever else, why not for videogames? Hell, they're even advocating for basing residuals based on copies sold, with the triggering numbers in the millions. If the game's a flop, no residuals. Hell, if the game's an indie success, it still might not sell enough for residuals.

 

[MatParker116]

I
As for anti-union opinions in the US, as others have said, it's pretty much the union's fault. When unions step into a space and strong arm companies and people in the same field into using union people or none at all, among other unpleasant behaviors, it quickly drains the good will that unions can build up by 'helping those in need'. It also doesn't help when some of the demands come off as straight up greedy, like the residuals part.

How would union negotiations work if non-union workers in the same field worked for the same company?

Short answer: it doesn't, management would just lay off the union guys. Bottom line , unionization is like herd immunity and vaccinations. You need a critical amount of union members or having a union is worthless. Like unions in states with right to work laws. Unions are basically dead there because they still have to advocate for all the labor working a job, but said labor doesn't have to be in the union to get the benifits. And as soon as the union dies, work conditions, pay scale, retirement, the whole nine gets shafted, little by little.

And if VAs get residuals for TV, movies, radio, commercials, and whatever else, why not for videogames? Hell, they're even advocating for basing residuals based on copies sold, with the triggering numbers in the millions. If the game's a flop, no residuals. Hell, if the game's an indie success, it still might not sell enough for residuals.

Because it would likely greatly affect post launch service, having to pay a bunch of actors residuals means less money avaliable to pay for coders to support multiplayer, work on patches, DLC etc.

As for this strike, it could easily be the end of SAG's involvement in the gaming industry. Anime dubbing actors are for the large part un-unionised and other actors unions internationally such as equity here in the UK can't issue a do not work order by law and those actors could be credited under pseudonyms. This could backfire quite easily.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

Because the OP neglected to post information on the other side of the story: SAG-AFTRA's explanation on what's going on.

So they wanted to cut out 75% of the voice actors in the field, or force them to join? Fuck 'em. I think they'll find that they are expendable. In other news, if you ever wanted to enter the industry, then now would be the perfect time to try.

...wha? How is this, in anyway, trying to cut out 75% of the voice actors in the field? I'm not seeing any demands about only hiring SAG members or anything? And nothing about trying to force people to join the union either.

In short, what are you on about?

Because it would likely greatly affect post launch service, having to pay a bunch of actors residuals means less money avaliable to pay for coders to support multiplayer, work on patches, DLC etc.

And that, what, doesn't apply to movies or TV? Besides, we're only talking for residuals for games selling millions of copies. Literally millions: SAG's asking for residuals starting at two million copies sold, and capping at 8. I'm sure Take Two paying a VAs a little on the backend for GTA VI isn't going to break the bank.

If it does, then they really need better money people.

As for this strike, it could easily be the end of SAG's involvement in the gaming industry. Anime dubbing actors are for the large part un-unionised and other actors unions internationally such as equity here in the UK can't issue a do not work order by law and those actors could be credited under pseudonyms. This could backfire quite easily.

Backfire for who, the people already getting screwed? Yeah, it could mean SAG stops doing video game stuff...which is the outcome of any strike where management doesn't come to the negotiating table. Kind of a built in risk for a strike.

 

[Areloch]

I
As for anti-union opinions in the US, as others have said, it's pretty much the union's fault. When unions step into a space and strong arm companies and people in the same field into using union people or none at all, among other unpleasant behaviors, it quickly drains the good will that unions can build up by 'helping those in need'. It also doesn't help when some of the demands come off as straight up greedy, like the residuals part.

How would union negotiations work if non-union workers in the same field worked for the same company?

Short answer: it doesn't, management would just lay off the union guys. Bottom line , unionization is like herd immunity and vaccinations. You need a critical amount of union members or having a union is worthless. Like unions in states with right to work laws. Unions are basically dead there because they still have to advocate for all the labor working a job, but said labor doesn't have to be in the union to get the benifits. And as soon as the union dies, work conditions, pay scale, retirement, the whole nine gets shafted, little by little.

Oh, I understand how unions work, and how it requires a critical mass of people in it for it to work.
I heavily dislike unions being able to control your employment in a field you're trying to get into before you even get into it, however. If the VA union was so awesome, you wouldn't see major VAs persistently adopting aliases and doing non-union projects on the side because they wouldn't be able to otherwise.

If your own members are dodging union control because it causes problems, that says quite a lot about the union, does it not? To say nothing of people wanting to get into the field and being gatekept with a "either you join the union or you don't get to do any work" feels mob-esque.

And if VAs get residuals for TV, movies, radio, commercials, and whatever else, why not for videogames? Hell, they're even advocating for basing residuals based on copies sold, with the triggering numbers in the millions. If the game's a flop, no residuals. Hell, if the game's an indie success, it still might not sell enough for residuals.

Most every industry on the planet is "you are paid for the work you do". Employment cases where you get residuals are the extreme minority. So I feel it really doesn't matter how the VAs get paid in completely different industries, if the people in the industry we're talking about currently are paid for work done. The VAs should adopt a similar payment methodology(and they do).

As said before, I'm pretty behind the VAs(and the devs) being paid better for the work accomplished, but I disagree with them having a very different payment paradigm to everyone else in the industry(and most industries) when it doesn't make sense to do so.

 

[Dornedas]

So they wanted to cut out 75% of the voice actors in the field, or force them to join? Fuck 'em. I think they'll find that they are expendable. In other news, if you ever wanted to enter the industry, then now would be the perfect time to try.

...wha? How is this, in anyway, trying to cut out 75% of the voice actors in the field? I'm not seeing any demands about only hiring SAG members or anything? And nothing about trying to force people to join the union either.

In short, what are you on about?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/142541-Video-Game-Voice-Actors-May-Go-On-Strike-Over-Fair-Pay-for-Blockbusters

SAG-AFTRA would like to keep publishers and developer from hiring their own employees to do voice work without having those people join the union.

That's one of the demands they dropped, at least I presume they dropped it because it doesn't get mentioned anymore.

But that still leaves the dilemma
A: You wanted to force people to join your union, which means you are a butthole
or
B: You put this in just so you can delete it during the negotiation to proof how "reasonable" you are, which means you are lying and manipulative butthole.

Edit: You as in me addressing the union, not You you.

 

[-Dragmire-]

Activison but not Blizzard?

 

[Fox12]

I
As for anti-union opinions in the US, as others have said, it's pretty much the union's fault. When unions step into a space and strong arm companies and people in the same field into using union people or none at all, among other unpleasant behaviors, it quickly drains the good will that unions can build up by 'helping those in need'. It also doesn't help when some of the demands come off as straight up greedy, like the residuals part.

How would union negotiations work if non-union workers in the same field worked for the same company?

Short answer: it doesn't, management would just lay off the union guys. Bottom line , unionization is like herd immunity and vaccinations. You need a critical amount of union members or having a union is worthless. Like unions in states with right to work laws. Unions are basically dead there because they still have to advocate for all the labor working a job, but said labor doesn't have to be in the union to get the benifits. And as soon as the union dies, work conditions, pay scale, retirement, the whole nine gets shafted, little by little.

And if VAs get residuals for TV, movies, radio, commercials, and whatever else, why not for videogames? Hell, they're even advocating for basing residuals based on copies sold, with the triggering numbers in the millions. If the game's a flop, no residuals. Hell, if the game's an indie success, it still might not sell enough for residuals.

That's fine, but don't get surprised when a huge segment of the population decides they don't like the union for inserting themselves into their livelihoods. Guess what? Believe it or not, some people don't want to be in a union. They don't want to give up some of their money to fees, or negotiate with their employer through a third party. But then a union comes in and says that, if they get their way, then you have to either join them or loose your job. And if you join them because you have to, and not because you want to, then you're "obligated" to join them on strike, if they should eve make that decision. Again, they don't care about the workers. They care about their members who pay them money. Which, in this case, is less then 25% of the work force. They need to cut out this mob boss bully shit. I have no sympathy for them whatsoever.

Because the OP neglected to post information on the other side of the story: SAG-AFTRA's explanation on what's going on.

So they wanted to cut out 75% of the voice actors in the field, or force them to join? Fuck 'em. I think they'll find that they are expendable. In other news, if you ever wanted to enter the industry, then now would be the perfect time to try.

...wha? How is this, in anyway, trying to cut out 75% of the voice actors in the field? I'm not seeing any demands about only hiring SAG members or anything? And nothing about trying to force people to join the union either.

In short, what are you on about?

Because it would likely greatly affect post launch service, having to pay a bunch of actors residuals means less money avaliable to pay for coders to support multiplayer, work on patches, DLC etc.

And that, what, doesn't apply to movies or TV? Besides, we're only talking for residuals for games selling millions of copies. Literally millions: SAG's asking for residuals starting at two million copies sold, and capping at 8. I'm sure Take Two paying a VAs a little on the backend for GTA VI isn't going to break the bank.

If it does, then they really need better money people.

As for this strike, it could easily be the end of SAG's involvement in the gaming industry. Anime dubbing actors are for the large part un-unionised and other actors unions internationally such as equity here in the UK can't issue a do not work order by law and those actors could be credited under pseudonyms. This could backfire quite easily.

Backfire for who, the people already getting screwed? Yeah, it could mean SAG stops doing video game stuff...which is the outcome of any strike where management doesn't come to the negotiating table. Kind of a built in risk for a strike.

They already made these demands in the beginning. It doesn't get mentioned anymore, so maybe they dropped it, but it was never a reasonable demand to make in the first place. What they were really trying to do is force people to join them or they would lose job opportunities with the biggest companies in the industry. But,since you discussed this in a prior post, I assumed you already knew about this. Again, if the unions were so great, they wouldn't have to strong arm people into joining them.

 

[SlumlordThanatos]

Activison but not Blizzard?

They're the same company. Anything that mentions Blizzard also mentions Activision, and vice-versa.

 

[Callate]

Bluntly, I don't think this is going to work. Video games got by for decades on rounding up whoever was working late in the office to do a little VO-work. With the possible exception of movie- or television-based games (a small niche which frequently lives up to its mediocre reputation), most consumers rarely expect to see particular actors in particular games.

I recognize that there are actors in the industry with strong reputations, reputations which make ears perk up when they're cast in a role (Nolan North, Jennifer Hale, and Troy Baker, among others), and other games that have been enriched by notable actors voicing roles (many of Bethesda's and Rockstar's games come to mind.)

But there are countless games in which hiring out of the local community theater group would lead to a sizable improvement over expectations, and little would be missed, without opting into SAG-AFTRA's terms and setting a precedent they would probably regret.

 

[Fox12]

Bluntly, I don't think this is going to work. Video games got by for decades on rounding up whoever was working late in the office to do a little VO-work. With the possible exception of movie- or television-based games (a small niche which frequently lives up to its mediocre reputation), most consumers rarely expect to see particular actors in particular games.

I recognize that there are actors in the industry with strong reputations, reputations which make ears perk up when they're cast in a role (Nolan North, Jennifer Hale, and Troy Baker, among others), and other games that have been enriched by notable actors voicing roles (many of Bethesda's and Rockstar's games come to mind.)

But there are countless games in which hiring out of the local community theater group would lead to a sizable improvement over expectations, and little would be missed, without opting into SAG-AFTRA's terms and setting a precedent they would probably regret.

The thing that gets me is that my reaction to a famous VA being cast is the opposite of a famous actor being cast in a film. If you tell me that there's a film coming out with Meryl Streep, Anthony Hopkins, Ian McKellen, and Winona Ryder, then you'll have my attention. If you tell me a game is coming out with Johnny Young Bosch, Jennifer Hale, and Nolan North, I'll probably groan. Maybe it's because the industry is saturated with and dominated by a very small talent pool, but it feels like there's much less variety. I appreciate the work they do, and I don't begrudge them success, but VA's are not a selling point in a video game. If the actor has no range, like Bosch, then I get downright sick of hearing them.

Most video games can get by without VA's. I can't say the same for film. I'm just curious how long the VA's will be willing to keep this up.

 

[Burnsidhe]

The major sticking points in the contract have little or nothing to do with *money*. They have to do with *working conditions*. An end to recording sessions of shouting and screaming for six hours straight. An end to voice actors having to do mo-cap stunt work without a stunt coordinator on hand to monitor for safety. That sort of thing. Voice actors are part of the draw for a game, and they are in just about every game now.

The money they're asking for is not the major thrust of the negotiations, as much as the video game company lawyers would have it be. And in any negotiation, you always ask for more than you're going to get to bargain away for what you really want.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

A year ago, Wil Wheaton wrote this article a year ago when SAG-AFTRA was holding a vote on whether or not to give the union authority to strike.

Something seriously sketchy, besides the mo-cap work without a stunt coordinator: "Our employers want to be able to fine the union $50,000-$100,000 if your franchised agent doesn?t send you out on certain auditions (like Atmospheric Voices or One Hour One Voice sessions)?"

Wanting to fine the union if agents don't send actors out to auditions.

"If your agent chooses not to submit you for certain auditions, our employers want to put into our contract language forcing SAG-AFTRA to revoke your agent?s union franchise. This would mean that your agency would not be able to send you out on any union jobs, including those in animation, TV/film, commercials, etc."

Publishers wanting SAG to cut off agents and actors from all union jobs if they decline auditioning for certain parts? What the ever living fuck.

 

[Kingjackl]

I can get behind most of what they're asking for, particularly in the case of stunt coordinators and health and safety. That publishers won't spruke for that while placing increasingly higher demands on actors is ridiculous and they should be taken to task for it.

The matter of residuals is a bit trickier; I'm mainly going by Steve Blum's narration on the website re: facts and a bonus for every 2 million copies capping at 8 sounds fair, but there are some issue with it. While I agree in principle that they should get paid more for higher profile gigs, the fact of the matter is that voice actors don't move sales like that. The sad truth of the matter is that live-action film and TV stars get to argue for residuals because they have a recognisable brand and can draw bums on seats. Whereas voice actors, even ones with a fan following, can be replaced with sound-alikes.

This reminds me of back when GTA IV came out and the guys who played Nico and Roman raised a bit of a stink over the lack of residuals, despite starring in what was the biggest entertainment release of that year. I can sort of sympathise; GTA IV came out around the same time as Iron Man, and there was a bit of buzz at the time that it might actually overshadow it. But the dude on the poster for Iron Man, Robert Downey Jr., made millions off it and kept making millions, while the dude on the poster for GTA IV, or rather his voice actor, was paid for his initial work (I imagine standard by-the-session rates) and then kind of faded into obscurity. With cases like that, it's no wonder voice actors would argue for more money.

A better solution, but one that's unfortunately too idealistic and open to interpretation for a union contract, is for companies to stop wasting money on celebrity voice acting and put that money toward a pay-rise for the dedicated voice actors who put the actual work in.

 

[TheScorpion]

Anyone know the list of notable VAs taking part in this?

That what I was thinking as this was going on.