Here are more details regarding the situation and a motion to Equity at its AGM
Further details regarding director Guy Sprung and his case against Canadian Actors Equity Association:
Here are the details of Guy Sprung’s case from my blog:
Now there is a member’s motion that Terry Tweed will present to Equity’s AGM Oct. 21.
Details below.
Friends, colleagues and fellow theatre artists:
Below please find the member’s motion that Terry Tweed will present from the floor as item 8 on the agenda of Equity’s AGM on October 21st, to be seconded by Barbara Gordon.
Terry Tweed was a member of Equity National Council for over 18 years and President for six. Barbara Gordon was also a long-time Equity councillor and winner of the Larry McCance Award for outstanding contribution to our association.
If you believe that CAEA should live up to its own constitution and, “assist members in pursuing their lawful rights and remedies.” (Object vii of our Constitution),I urge you to register for our NAGM and make your vote count. If you are, as Diana Leblanc is, embarrassed and ashamed by how CAEA has treated one of its senior members, I urge you to register for our NAGM and support Terry Tweed’s motion.
If you have yet to register for our NAGM on Oct 21st, you can do it here:
https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_6xRWEJJERWa_NmRjnHmzHg#/registration
Additional information, including the meeting agenda, is available online at www.caea.com/NAGM-2024.
If you do support Terry and Barbara’s motion, I hope you will circulate this email to your own friends and colleagues in CAEA.
In the name of Canadian decency and justice, I thank you,
Guy Sprung
Here is the resolution Terry Tweed will be presenting:
RESOLUTION FROM THE FLOOR 2024 AGM
Whereas Equity once prided itself on offering the protection of a transparent and robust disciplinary process, where there was adherence to the principles of truth and justice, where ALL participants had the right to defence and appeal, including the accused, and where both sides were treated with equal fairness and respect, and
Whereas Equity in 2020 failed to assure the protection of Guy Sprung’s rights and privileges when a complaint was brought against him, failed to grant him an appeal which he had every right to expect and which forced Mr. Sprung to take legal action against his own Association, and
Whereas Mr. Sprung’s legal action resulted in a resounding victory for him, one that recognized
the wrong done to Mr Sprung through a failed and unfair disciplinary process, and that action exonerated him of any wrong doing, and
Whereas Equity, in the light of the Québec ruling also exonerated him, has continued to refuse to apologize to Mr. Sprung for its mistakes and to pay Mr. Sprung for his legal costs:
BE IT RESOLVED
That CAEA Council apologize to Guy Sprung in front of its membership for its failure to ensure that he received fair and just treatment, and to immediately reimburse Mr. Sprung for his legal costs before the Québec Superior Court, whose decision so clearly recognized the failure of Equity’s disciplinary process against him.
Terry Tweed
Member # 2099
Seconded by Barbara Gordon
Member #6434
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
Dear Lynn, I am happy that you are following up on this important issue.
As a former Crown Prosecutor and Defence Counsel, I am horrified at what happened to Guy Sprung here, and shocked that it happened in Canada. We must have investigations that are fair to all persons, and that always requires a careful and sound process without biases, prejudices, and partiality. The only way to move forward as a country, to reconcile our various groups, is through rigorous and fair justice.
The Superior Court Justice in Mr. Sprung’s case completely rejected the case against him. He notes that the investigation of Mr. Sprung was, in effect, not an investigation at all. “Bald facts” were “lined up one after the other,” and a final report by an investigator hired by the Actor’s Equity Disciplinary Panel was “little more than the aggregate of a lengthy series of isolated assertions.”
With respect to one of the allegations, the Justice notes that the investigator’s conclusion is based on “unrelated statements gleaned here and there from a myriad of situations of which absolutely no detail is afforded to the reader…” And the Justice concludes the following: “The reader of such words cannot but come away with a staggering impression of the disparity between the gravity of the conclusion and the shallowness of its basis.”
And this investigation, which was clearly no investigation at all, was what the Canadian Actor’s Equity Association Disciplinary Panel used to censure Mr. Sprung.
This is not the case where the Court made a subtle ruling that no one could have predicted in advance. A clear wrong was done to Mr. Sprung, and now it is been publicly affirmed as such. Mr. Sprung no doubt has suffered years of consequences, both emotional and financial, based on the wrongful decision by Canadian Actor’s Equity Association.
I hope very much that the Canadian Actor’s Equity Association apologizes to him, and compensates him for the enormous costs in time and money he has spent to right a wrong that should never have happened.
Robert Girvan, Toronto
Articulate as always, Robert. And thanks.
Thanks to Robert Girvan for his cogent analysis of the “clear wrong (was) done to Mr. Sprung.” One of the Objects of Canadian Actors’ Equity, as stated clearly in its constitution, is, “to assist members in pursuing their lawful rights and remedies.” Let us hope, with Terry Tweed’s motion at our upcoming AGM, membership can encourage Council to live up to this fundamental tenet of its own constitution.
I was forced to take CAEA to court, it was the sole recourse open to me to prove that the decision of the Disciplinary Panel was without any reasonable foundation. I also, in the interests of all members, wanted to ensure that in the future, if a member “rolls their eyes and sighs” during rehearsal discussions, this is cannot be used to justify taking away their right to work.
Guy Sprung
There is clearly a lack of understanding in CAEA about how to deal with conflicts. Guy Sprung has exposed this by pursuing his rights, and succeeding in a court of law. Of course CAEA should pay his legal bills, but at a deeper level, and for the future health of our association a huge internal examination is needed by CAEA about how to manage the complaints system, and how justice within the association should reflect the laws of our land.
Yes!
CAEA’s lack of reflection on this is shocking. Of course they should pay Guy’s legal fees and apologize.
This issue affects the entire membership. It is disappointing to see an association I have always been proud to be a member of determined to use funds (members dues) to continue to fight this issue.
I have signed up to attend the AGM and will be voting in support of Terry Tweed’s motion.
On Friday Oct 18, CAEA circulated a document from the President of CAEA that stated that upon advice from their legal counsel, if the motion passes CAEA will not immediately reimburse Mr. Sprung and apologize. The document then goes on to state that CAEA does value its members opinions. It further states that if the motion is defeated no further action is required. It also states that a member resolution is an “opinion”. Mr. Bellis, Council and CAEA staff are NOT respecting due process. Contrary to what this document suggests, this is not a unique case. I speak with Directors, Actors and Choreographers who are terrified of saying the wrongthing, or something that is perceived as wrong,, and losing their careers.
I am deeply saddened CAEA would send out such a biased statement to members who have registered to attend the AGM.
I am withholding my name as I am concerned about retribution from CAEA and Council Members.
I have been a CAEA member for 20 plus years.
Do the right thing CAEA. Be courageous and demonstrate integrity. Pay Mr. Spring’s legal fees and send out a public communique to all members apologizing to Mr. Sprung.
I sat on council for 8 years, having witnessed what I thought, as deputy of a touring show, was an unfair failure to pay overtime. As deputy, I won the case. On council, I witnessed some extraordinary artists who defended, sometimes at the cost of their own future casting, the rights of the artists they represented.
I also witnessed CAEA caving, being fearful of reprisal, and councillors in the same, fearful position.
There is no point in belonging to any association which will not stand behind, and, indeed, before its members.
There cannot be gray areas. CAEA must stand for its members, who pay for the protection.
Theatre needs to be honest.
CAEA needs to be honest.
The operative is EQUITY.
Stop being afraid, and do the right thing.
Respectfully submitted,
Stephen
I commend the previous commenters and want to add thank two Thank yous: 1 ) Lynn Slotkin, for providing this forum and knowing the importance of the issue.
2) Robert Girvan, former Crown Prosecutor and Defence Counsel, a lawyer with no personal ties to those involved, and “ no skin in the game “ except for a concern with Justice. Mr. Girvan has, for the second time, weighed in on this issue. The first time was June 15th, when his exegesis of the Quebec Superior Court judgment was so enlightening as to judicial points raised by Mr. Sprung and those alarmingly dismissed by the CAEA.( An association of which I have been a member since 1962. ) It was that post by Robert Girvan which finally gave me a clear idea about what was involved, and re-affirmed my belief that a wrong has been done to Guy Sprung. I do not lightly invoke the great Arthur Miller :
“ Attention must be paid “.
Yours truly,
Diana Leblanc
24.12.02 – I come to this fiasco too late to vote at the AGM in support of Terry Tweed’s resolution. But I did send this along to Equity Communications in response to their email today. Copies were also forwarded to Scott Bellis, Arden Ryshpan, and my Atlantic councillor Karen Bassett.
===================================
What a shame.
Someone should write a play about this. Who would we cast as the villain of the piece? I wonder.
Thanks for letting me know that Equity has decided to ignore the Quebec Superior Court decision. And, after the passing of a member resolution, substantially supported by the majority attending the National AGM, to further ignore the will of its own membership. The member who put forward the motion used to serve as president I believe.
Kudos to our present Council! (An investigator might detect a note of sarcasm here)
HMMM!
I have tried to inform myself further by reading about this debacle. I’d heard about it through the grapevine but I have now gone and read the considered ruling from the Quebec Superior Court. No one comes out looking great.
However…
Such an unfortunate set of circumstances seems only likely to get worse the longer our Association chooses to hold on to its untenable, intransigent position.
Hiding behind the tired and not so true shield of “the matter is still before the courts” puts paid to the wink and nod of “while respecting the will of its members”. It would be helpful to know just exactly how the member’s resolution would be “detrimental to the Association”. What is Council’s rationale? Does it go beyond simply a face saving and perhaps economic decision. Seems our reputation is suffering already on several fronts. Sweeping it under the carpet just won’t do. Respect the will of the members and air this out.
Paul Rainville
3570
The email below was sent to Equity members today.
On Dec 2, 2024, at 1:05 PM, Canadian Actors’ Equity Association wrote:
Dear Member,
In compliance with Equity’s Bylaws, we are sharing this notice regarding the outcome of Council’s deliberations on the member resolution which passed at the 2024 National Annual General Meeting by vote (39-Yes, 21-No, 15-Abstain).
A relatively uncommon occurrence at the NAGM, a member resolution enables members to get issues that are important to them onto the meeting agenda to be heard and discussed by the membership in attendance. If adopted by the members, it becomes a declaration of Council’s “opinion or purpose,” regarding the issue described in the resolution.
However, under Equity’s Bylaws, Council may vote to set aside the resolution if it is determined that the resolution may be “detrimental to the Association.” In such instances, Council must advise the membership of “its decision and supporting reasons.”
Following two lengthy discussions at Council and consultation with Equity’s legal counsel, Equity Council has decided to set aside the member resolution at this time. While Council recognizes the will of the members, the resolution in question entreats action on matters which are currently before an Ontario court, in a claim filed against Equity by the member named in the resolution.
Council has since entered into settlement discussions with the member/plaintiff in this case, further complicating its ability to immediately act on the resolution.
Equity Council has both an obligation to heed the advice of the Association’s legal counsel and fiduciary duty to avoid taking any action which may prejudice any legal claim against Equity. As such, Equity Council will defer the member resolution until the matter is resolved through settlement or in a court of law.
If you have any questions, please contact president@caea.com.
Re: Paul Rainville’s Concerns and Guy Sprung
The concerns of Mr. Rainville are understandable. However, it is premature to judge the Equity Council based on their recent communication about deferring the resolution until the matter is resolved or decided in Court.
It is entirely in the power of the Equity Council to honour the Member’s Resolution to give justice to Guy Sprung in the exact form indicated in the resolution. However, given that there is a Statement of Claim filed by Guy Sprung, no doubt to provoke a fair settlement of this matter, the Member’s Resolution and the Court Matter must be resolved together. This, one hopes, is what the Equity Council has told its lawyers to do. This can be done quite quickly, and is easy to do, though it takes some paperwork to prepare.
It is important to understand that the Equity Council is the boss, not the lawyers. The Member’s Resolution has given Equity Council a mandate to render justice to Guy Sprung. The job of lawyers here, is or should be, to implement this Member’s Resolution. I have no doubt this will work out, provided the Equity Council wishes to honour the Membership of the Union. At this stage, one must not judge, not yet at least, but hope for the one correct offer to be made to Guy Sprung.
Robert Girvan, Toronto