Richard Masur writes: This year a small group of disaffected SAG National Board members and Alternates who owe their incumbent status to USAN, have decided that they haven't gotten their way in the Board room, because "something is wrong". So they've mounted a counter slate. Please DO NOT BE FOOLED. They are doing this because of personality not policy conflicts. The proof is they cannot define a single policy on which they differ from USAN's.
Well, there it is, out in the open. This is the language those of us on NY Board have become accustomed to. Mr Masur's statement helps to shine a light on the absurdity of what seems to be, historically, the commonplace practice of many SAG Board Members and their supporters when they are challenged. The claim, when they are threatened, is many times "this one or that one doesn't like me" or "they hate us" - that's why they're doing this. It couldn't possibly be that they have a different point of view worthy of respect or examination. This latest threat to the common good has taken the fearsome shape of unobstructed democracy. Mercy... how terrifying. The strategy of devaluing a differing opinion you feel threatened by is recognizable to me. I remember having seen it during the first Bush administration, when Karl Rove was running domestic policy in our country. The President himself was not capable of doing the job of leading the country, so an intelligent advisor was really at the helm.
The proof Mr. Masur offers is as hollow as the policy of discrediting any who disagree with him. Anyone who has read the literature that OSU has put out can tell there are in fact lots of substantive differences between these two groups, but the most important, is perhaps in the way we would choose to lead. A true meritocracy is a system in which leadership candidates or policy decisions are evaluated based on qualifications and objective intellectual criteria. The NY SAG Board currently does not function this way. It should, but it doesn't and this ain't good news folks. For merger to be the best it can, for us to stay relevant in a new century with New Media, we will need to operate in the most professional manner possible.
Here is why I am running with OSU this year. I have zero political ambitions and I don't care what party or individual gets the credit for merger or successful contract negotiations. I care even less for the personal politics that always seem to invade what should be straight business affairs of the Guild. I don't have first hand knowledge about the political difficulty with MF and USAN and UFS over the years nor do I know well or care about the players in that drama. The reason I serve the Guild is that my family of five is dependent upon the future integrity of our contracts. There is nothing more important to me on the planet than the well being of my children. I care about business and money. Who could honestly believe that I would allow the fleeting and absurd personality issues of a group of actors to effect my decisions about that?
Richard Masur has been fond of saying outside of the boardroom that he does not care what the merger looks like as long as it happens - that's just not good enough for me. This is an insanely complicated effort upon which the fortunes of over a hundred thousand people lie. If it's not good enough for you either, then vote OSU.