SHOULD YOUR CHILD CROSS THE LINE?

Let's be honest with each other. 9,000 professional kid actors are on strike against the Commercial Producers. Doesn't that leave the door wide open for non-union kids?

Some parents think so. It is to those parents who are contemplating providing escort service and allowing their child to cross the union picket lines that I address this letter. I would also like to talk to those older children who may be thinking about crossing a picket line. What do you owe the theatrical unions anyway? Don't they make it almost impossible to join with all that Taft-Hartley, SAG-eligible, and "must join" stuff?

First, what is the up-side for a non-union kid actor of taking a job in a commercial if one is offered to you during this Strike? There is the joy of winning a competitive audition, I grant you that. I am not so far removed from getting my first commercial that I have forgotten what that feels like. Being "chosen" is a natural high.

Then what?

Then, my friends, it's Business…with a Capitol B which rhymes with T and that stands for "Trouble."

Who will negotiate for you? Franchised Agents are supporting this Strike. Legitimate Agents will not negotiate for you. A Manager is breaking the Law if they negotiate for you. Has the Company signed an "Interim Agreement?" Is the pay comparable to the old SAG Basic? Is it a Flat Fee arrangement? What is the Company and what is the Product? How long is your exclusivity? Where will the commercial be broadcast? Are there residuals? Where is the commercial being shot? Is there a wardrobe call? Will there be a Studio Teacher (required under the Law in California)? Do you have to travel?

Do you understand that your work on a Struck Job will not be a secret? Are you prepared for demonstrations at the location?

If you have hard feelings toward unions in general and want to make a personal statement by accepting Struck Work, I ask that you examine the underlying reality of Labor/Management tension.

Employee benefits didn't just happen. They were fought for and hard-won. Business did not willingly "give away" the 8-hour day, compensated overtime, vacation pay or medical benefits. Actors did not always have residuals, meal breaks, turn-arounds and child labor laws. The minimum pay actors fought for which we call "Scale" was won at the bargaining table and on picket lines well before most of you were born. Even your relationship with your Agent was a matter of organized labor setting up the rules after years of controversy and strife. The Arbitration process that guarantees a "day in Court" is something Labor had to fight for so disputes between employers and employees did not end up in expensive litigation.

Organized Labor is often attacked for favoritism and featherbedding and seeking its own institutional advantage. Charges of corruption and nepotism have had a historical basis in fact. Headlines about Mob-influence and rigged elections have dogged unions for years.

What seems to have been forgotten in the past thirty years is why unions came into existence in the first place…and it began, believe it or not, with Child Labor. In civilized countries there was widespread agreement that some forms of labor were not appropriate for children. If you think that battle is over then you haven't been paying attention to the Kathy Lee Gifford headlines or the fight against the major shoe company's employment practices in the Third World.

250 million children are currently at work around the world in non-farm jobs! Why does Big Business continue to employ children? Because they can, that's why. Business employs children because children have no voice, no power, and they do not vote. Children belong to their parents. Kids work cheap and there seems to be an endless supply.

The Entertainment Industry uses Child Labor. That's a fact. It was not an accident that kids in the entertainment business were exempted from Federal Child Labor Laws sixty-two years ago. It is not an accident that most States have no rules for kids in the Business, or that Canada has just not gotten around to setting up guidelines for working kids in nine of their ten provinces. It is not an accident that working kids have for decades been seriously under-paid and then discarded when the "cuteness" wears off.

The root cause behind the rampant exploitation of children in a working environment is the nature of Business itself; A corporation is driven to satisfy the needs of its owners and shareholders. The product or services a corporation offers does not matter. Business will always seek to lower labor costs. Business will always find ways to minimize expenses. Business is about Profits, not about caring. We seem to have forgotten the reality behind Business practices.

The obscenity behind the current commercials contract breakdown is that the people on the other side of the table from the theatrical unions represent interests that have never had higher profits, larger executive compensation packages, or media delivery systems.

If you think the huge conglomerates that now dominate the Entertainment Industry care about kids just take a look at their over-all product line. If you think there is a sense of Social Responsibility in Hollywood's or Madison Avenue's corporate boardrooms you've got another "think" coming.

They have more. They want to pay less. Crossing the AFTRA/SAG picket line buys into that mentality. Leave aside the idea that you are taking work from a kid who is playing by the rules and observing the sentiments of his union peers. Leave aside the whole notion of collective bargaining and the reason for its existence.

The question, really, is, "Are you willing to sell your child under conditions favorable only to your employer?"

Do you seriously believe that a corporation that pays out hundreds of millions of dollars to fired executives NOT to work can't afford residuals for work broadcast on the cable system they own?

Remember the old expression, "A dollar down, a dollar when you catch me?" That's what can happen when you work non-union. What happens when the paycheck is held up, or the commercial runs on an unauthorized cable channel? Who protects you?

Let's say your prospective employer on that national commercial offers your child compensation based on the old Screen Actors Guild/AFTRA commercial contract, minus, of course, the residuals for Class A broadcast. Is that "the Deal" you'll accept?

Do you not see the irony if you accept employment on terms negotiated by the very institution whose Strike you are breaking? Minus, of course, that pesky residual payment we call "Pay For Play." How many times can you see your child's image on the screen before it hits you that you are not being paid for that appearance?

Remember, in this country at least, Money is the way we keep Score.

It comes down to this: On which "team" do you want your child to play? Personally, I hope all parents and kids, right across this nation, union and non-union alike, just sit this one out until the two sides reach an agreement somewhere down the road.

I welcome your thoughts, and we'll keep it private unless you say otherwise.