Modern Family Negotiations Update: Entire Cast Shows Up for Rescheduled Table Read

If there’s one thing you can say about the members of Modern Family’s Pritchett-Delgado-Dunphy-Tucker clan, it’s that they usually come together in the end.

And in that spirit, the ABC sitcom’s entire castincluding those who sued the show’s production company as part of ongoing contract renegotiations earlier this week – were present at today’s rescheduled table read, TVLine has confirmed.

RELATED | Emmy Nominations 2012: American Horror StoryMad Men and Modern Family Lead the Pack

Season 4’s first cast gathering was slated for July 24 but quickly moved to today for fear that difficult contract talks would keep stars Ed O’Neill, Sofia Vergara, Julie Bowen, Ty Burrell, Jesse Tyler Ferguson and Eric Stonestreet from showing.

The move is an apparent good-faith gesture on the adult ensemble members’ part, and talks between the actors’ representatives and 20th Century Fox TV are expected to resume later today.



Comments (18)

  • Whew… disaster averted. Whatever would we have done if this hadn’t happened?!?!?

    Comment by onemovieeachday – July 26, 2012 11:35 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • Awww, isn’t that SO generous of the ‘adults’ to come to a table-read in “good-faith” that executives will play into their greed?

    Comment by paychck2paychck – July 26, 2012 11:49 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • As in the executives aren’t greedy and trying to hold onto as much money as possible for themselves by paying actors less? Reality check.

      Comment by DL – July 26, 2012 12:28 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • Thank you. The MF cast deserves a raise. 65,000 dollars an episode is awfully low for the number 1 show on TV.

        Comment by chris – July 26, 2012 02:27 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • Exactly. The money is there, someone has to get it. Asking for a raise isn’t greed.

        It’s the same with sports. People are always complaining that athletes/actors make too much money. That’s because sports/TV are popular: people watch them on TV, ratings go up, advertisers pay to get noticed, money is generated. Should it be held in a safe so that no one gets “too much money”? No, it gets distributed based on the work each member did to help generate that money. Economics 101.

        Comment by John – July 27, 2012 10:01 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • They should have just re-written the episode to feature the kids without any of the adults. That could’ve been awesome!!

    Comment by Lino Wickedmercenary Galvan – July 26, 2012 12:01 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • An all-kid episode would be awesome! but not to “punish” the adult actors, just because it would be cool. It could be the Valentines Day episode – two parter. The first episode is all the adults enjoying childless valentines days. The second episode is what happened to the kids on Valentines day– Haley and Dylan take them on a day trip. Maybe they are tesing themselves as future parents together, and having their own love storyline.

      Comment by Bernard – July 26, 2012 01:39 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • How generous of them to show up for the job they’re paid to do. Totally disgusted by the recent actions of the cast (well, the adults anyway).

    Comment by Kristina – July 26, 2012 12:19 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • Agreed. While I can understand that they believe they are entitled to earn more based on the success of the show, their salaries are already so ridiculously high that I have zero sympathy for them.

      Comment by tripoli – July 26, 2012 02:25 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • I could care less about how much money they ask for; they are absolutely entitled to renegotiate their contracts. But suing the studio to force their hand and trying to get their contracts voided…come on.

        Comment by Kristina – July 26, 2012 08:35 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
        • Yeah, imagine wanting to get out of a contract that you discovered violates state law. Like you, I would also much rather let the state take advantage of me.

          Comment by John – July 27, 2012 10:12 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
          • Oh please, I find the timing a little too convenient. They’re hardly working under harsh and inhumane conditions. $65k an episode may not be what they feel they deserve, but for most of the rest of America that makes that in a year, it’s not exactly sympathy-inducing. I don’t think any of them are being “taken advantage of”.

            Comment by Kristina – July 27, 2012 03:45 PM PDT  
          • Kristina: Who ever said they were trying to induce sympathy? They’re not asking anybody to feel sorry for them. But in any case, the fact that most of the rest of America makes <$65,000/year is completely irrelevant: as I said somewhere above, the show is generating millions. The money has to go somewhere, and better it goes to those involved in proportion to their involvement than all of it going to higher-ups at the studio.

            And I'm not sure what your definition of "taken advantage of" is. As far as I'm concerned, when your employment contract violates state law and the employer refuses to correct that issue, that's taking advantage of somebody, just as an employer paying below a state's minimum wage would be taking advantage of an employee. It doesn't matter than minimum wage is negligible compared to $65,000 – a law is a law, and there was one being broken here.

            Comment by John – July 27, 2012 09:10 PM PDT  
  • Wouldn’t it be nice if, in the real world, we could all behave like TV stars?
    My job doesn’t pay me enough millions. I’ll show them; I won’t come in tomorrow. They’ll be groveling soon en– oh, pink slip.

    Comment by Mína – July 26, 2012 01:17 PM PDT  Reply To This Post
    • Except that their “office” depends on their presence there, so they won’t get a pink slip as fast as you would. And if by “behave like TV stars” you mean we should all be able to get periodic raises of a reasonable percentage of our salary and that we should have the availability of and freedom to use a court system when our contracts violate state law, then yes I can’t wait for that day (sarcasm).

      Comment by John – July 27, 2012 10:06 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
      • thanks for adding that (sarcasm). I might never have read between the lines without your assistance (derision).

        Comment by Mína – July 27, 2012 11:37 AM PDT  Reply To This Post
  • I find that people who haven’t had Economics 101 haven’t had other 101′s (such as Sarcasm). Good job averting the topic though.

    Comment by John – July 27, 2012 02:01 PM PDT  Reply To This Post

Leave a Reply

Comments on TVLine.com are monitored. So don't go off topic, don't frakkin' curse, and be gone with your offers of discount leather goods. Talk smart about TV!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s