Working Rule 8: The Magic Bullet?
Posted by Craig Mazin on 06 Oct 2008 at 11:38 pm | Tagged as: The MBA, WGA Issues
Oprah came out to celebrate the opening of Tyler Perry’s new studio, but I guess she either doesn’t know or doesn’t care that Tyler Perry is apparently a union buster.
From THR:
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) – Four writers involved with a Writers Guild of America organizing effort at writer-director-producer Tyler Perry‘s cable TV show “House of Payne” have been fired.Just going by what’s been reported, the WGAw has a pretty good chance of winning this one. You don’t employ people for years, and then suddenly decide they’re no good and need to be fired shortly after they ask for union representation. That’s a blatant no-no, and I expect that Tyler Perry is going to get his ass handed to him on this one.The production company says they were fired for cause, but the union said Thursday that they were dismissed because they were involved in the organizing effort. The WGA West plans to picket Tyler Perry Studios in Atlanta when the facility opens the wekend of October 3.
The guild claims that the problems began in April when the writers — Kellie Griffin, Christopher Moore, Teri Brown-Jackson and Lamont Ferrell — were among seven scribes seeking to negotiate a first WGA contract with Perry’s production company, House of Payne. The company produces “House of Payne” and the upcoming TBS show “Meet the Browns.” No contract has been signed.
Perry’s attorney, Matt Johnson, said that the four were fired because of poor work performance. Griffin, Moore, Brown-Jackson and Ferrell had worked on more than 100 episodes of Perry’s TBS series, now syndicated on Fox. The three remaining writers were asked to stay on, and two did.
“We continue to work toward a resolution of their contract,” Johnson said.
The WGA has filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board, claiming the four were fired unjustly and that Payne’s company bargained in bad faith.
In thinking about this case, as well as some other organizing problems the WGA has been dealing with, I started to wonder a bit about how the union views one of its own working rules. The working rules govern the conduct of WGAw members. If you violate them, you can be fined…all the way up to the entirety of what you earn on the project for which you’re in violation.
Some of the working rules are obvious. “Don’t accept less than minimum for your work” is a no-brainer. Without that one, union members would be caught in an undercutting race to the bottom. But perhaps the single most important working rule is Working Rule #8.
No member shall accept employment with, nor option or sell literary material to, any person, firm or corporation who is not signatory to the applicable MBAs.Why is this the most important rule we have? Well, the companies own subsidiaries that have agreements with our union, but they also own subsidiaries that do not. For instance, Disney has a company that has a deal with the WGA, but it owns plenty of companies that can do non-union work.Violation of this Rule shall automatically subject the member to a fine, the maximum amount of which shall not exceed 100% of the remuneration received from such non-signatory.
Working Rule #8 is so important because it requires union members to only work for union companies. Right? Disney can make a non-union live action movie if it wants to, but it can’t get any members of the WGA to write on those movies, because those writers would be violating Working Rule #8.
The key limitation to Working Rule #8 is “applicable MBAs.” What that means is that Working Rule #8 only restricts me as long as we’re talking about a project that could be covered under our existing collective bargaining agreeements.
Our MBA doesn’t cover feature animation, so I can do a non-union feature animated project if I want. But our MBA does cover live action features, it does cover network prime time, it does cover game shows, it does cover basic cable…
Uh…wait. Whoa. Hold up.
Every feature writer knows they can’t work non-union gigs. I don’t know any feature writer in the WGA who has ever broken this rule. But isn’t our entire argument on reality TV that most of those shows should be covered by the MBA as game shows? And if we have a deal on basic cable, why are we trying to get WGA deals on shows that WGA writers are working on?
Why are any WGA writers working in scripted reality or basic cable shows if they’re non-union?
Why are we not enforcing Working Rule #8?
The easy answer is that no one wants to “blame the victim.” If WGA writers are working non-union for Tyler Perry’s basic cable show or for a “reality” game show like American Idol, we shouldn’t punish them by taking their salaries. We should attack the shows.
Well, at the risk of saying something extremely unpopular (yet again), how about we do both?
If every WGA writer working in reality and basic cable stopped tomorrow, that would have a serious impact on those shows. An immediate impact, one would hope. If a reality show chose to continue on without WGA writers, then so be it. But could most basic cable shows do so? I doubt it.
I don’t mean to sound harsh, but if I nor any of my feature film sisters and brothers line our pockets or support our families with non-union work (in order to not undercut each other on union work), why should game show or basic cable writers be able to get away with it? Why aren’t we demanding that Working Rule #8 be applied fairly and consistently across the board?
Hell, we don’t even have to apply the fines. Use it as a lever if you want. If a basic cable show has a staff that’s 50% WGA, apply #8 to those writers and try and force a WGA deal on the show.
Look, there’s no chance we’ll ever get real jurisdiction over basic cable if we’re soft on Working Rule #8. No chance at all. The companies will always find the path of least resistance, and here’s an area where we’ve just rolled over and not bothered to resist at all, even though we have the means to do so…and even though we ask many of our other members to do so.
It appears that at least some of the writers protesting their termination on Payne are WGA members.
I support the fight to get them a WGA contract. I support the WGAw’s unfair labor practice charge against Tyler Perry.
But I have a bigger question that I think deserves an answer.
Why were some WGA writers allowed to violate Working Rule #8 for a hundred episodes on a non-union show?
Perhaps there’s something I’m missing. If so, I’m all ears. But I fail to see how we’re ever going to win an organizing war if for every writer we recruit through the front door, there’s a writer walking out the back.
How is the Tyler Perry issue different from that of the Sit Down, Shut Up situation? It’s my understanding that all the writers involved signed on to shows with the hope or promise that their respective show becoming WGA sanctioned deal–is that a violation of Rule # 8?
Maybe the Tyler Perry/SDSU situations are exactly the same, maybe those writers were promised or lead to believe that they’d be WGA protected, but the deal was a lie and they now have no other option but to walk off (I could be cynical here and suggest that those Tyler Perry writers never expected the show to go 100 episodes–for syndication purposes–and now want a piece of that pie, but I won’t. But it’s something to think about.) like their counterparts from SDSU.
But you’re right, there’s a bigger question here and that’s asking why the WGA leadership hasn’t found a way to determine if a TeeVee has to be a WGA signatory before a writer goes to work on it…
And if a writer decides to work for a non-signatory…and bare with me here while I go off on a tangent, the WGA should find a way to toss people out of the Guild for violating union rules, even if it’s a suspension for a designated time frame (because, sadly, going Fi-Core isn’t much of a big deal, but loss of work would be…then there should be some sort of penalty involved, otherwise what’s the point of being in the Guild period?
The WGA has got to figure out a better way of policing the Guild-signatory issue and what to do when those agreements are breached, even by its own members.
But Sit down, Shut up is animation, and not covered under the MBA. Just as Craig is free to do an animated feature, so were the SDSU writers free to work on an animated TV show.
My point wasn’t the differences in the shows involved, but with the agreements that were promised. The Sit Down, Shut Up writers were promised a WGA deal and I wonder if he same wasn’t done for the Tyler Perry writers. Moreover, and this is the larger issue, should WGA writers be writing for anyone who is not a WGA signatory period? And if not, what sanctions will there be, if any? And if there’s no punishment for writing for non-signatories doesn’t that undermine the purpose of being part of the WGA?
I maintain that a writer is either in the WGA or not. The WGA needs to take a stronger stand on the “nots.”
Hank:
Working Rule #8 has nothing to do with any animation that isn’t Fox-produced primetime animation.
Also, I don’t believe the Tyler Perry writers were ever promised their show would be WGA, which is why they were trying to force the issue by self-organizing after 100 episodes.
The WGA cannot and should not discipline members for working for employers with which it does not have applicable agreements. That would be both unprincipled and, perhaps more importantly, blatantly illegal…just as illegal as Tyler Perry firing writers for daring to try and organize.
The WGA can discipline members who work for non-sigs in the area of live action features, network and basic cable live action sitcoms, dramas, game shows and variety shows, and animation produced by Fox that airs in network prime time.
I don’t think the WGA has actually invoked Working Rule 8 in years.
Okay, if the the Tyler Perry writers weren’t promised that show would be WGA (and they’re already WGA writers) then what were they doing working on that show in the first place, and more importantly, why did they wait 100 episodes to decide to force Perry to become a signatory? Shouldn’t that have started at the very beginning of their work? It seems a clear violation of the intent of Rule # 8 [to work for Perry] by those writers and there has got to be some way to discourage such activity.
Maybe it’s time for the WGA to pay closer attention to what its members do–something akin to what the major stick and ball sports do, which is approve all player contracts. Maybe it’s time that the WGA [before you start working] says, “We have to see that the company you’re going to work for is a Guild signatory.” If it isn’t then one of two things happen: 1. that company signs and agreement to be a signatory, or 2. then no WGA writer gets to work for that company or show.
In my mind, to allow writers to even start working on a non-signatory show or film undercuts the Guild so much as to make its existence almost moot.
There shouldn’t be any WGA writer doing any work for a non-signatory, or that’s what I believe anyway. And to prevent that from happening the WGA needs to step up and be preventative rather than re-actionary. And one way to do that is having the WGA examine all writer contracts with whatever company they’re going to work for. And if that contract is not with a signatory then the deal is null and void.
You can’t have some writers working union gigs and some not–if you do, sooner or later the only companies working will have non-union writers working for them. And that wouldn’t do any of us any good, would it?
Well, that’s the point of my essay. I believe that the WGA members working on that show were in violation of Working Rule 8…but the fact is that the WGA simply doesn’t enforce the rule for basic cable. As such, it’s kind of hard to criticize them for either not knowing the rule applied to them, or for thinking that it was something they could safely ignore.
The WGA does require copies of all contracts for MBA work, but I don’t think it can legally compel review of contracts for work that it doesn’t cover. Could be wrong, but I’m not sure what their claim would be on that.
I appreciate that you think WGA members shouldn’t do any non-union work in film or TV. I haven’t. Many others have (including Patric Verrone). Until the WGA covers certain areas, I’m not sure it’s realistic to expect that writers won’t take those jobs. The best we can do for now, in my opinion, is enforce Working Rule 8 where we can.
Craig –
The Guild’s ability to enforce Working Rule 8 hinges on Guild members being classified as employees for the purposes of the National Labor Relations Act. It can’t be enforced against independent contractors.
So, in the case of Guild members who prioritize being able to work as a writer over being able to work under Guild jurisdiction, enforcing Working Rule 8 could foreseeably increase both the number of prodcos who hire writers as independent contractors, rather than employees, and the number of Guild members who want to be hired as independent contractors, rather than employees.
Since only employees have the right to organize and bargain collectively, there is clearly a potential downside to enforcing Working Rule 8.
Does it outweigh the potential upside?
That’s the question.
-Ted
Ted:
Yes, I considered this possibility.
I think, however, that it would be an uphill climb for the studios to prevail. In the case of basic cable, for every scripted half hour or hour that is non-union, there’s an example of a scripted half hour or hour that is union, often under the same larger corporate umbrella.
So the companies would either lose on the basis that they’ve already acknowledged the employee status of people doing this particular job, or they would prevail and seek to “independent contract” all such jobs.
That’s always been the big fear, the big nuke that the companies have.
Of course, if they earn the legal right to either treat everyone as an IC or pick and choose when they want to treat writers as IC’s, the WGAw ceases to be of any importance at all. But if the theory is that rocking the boat could lead to that eventuality, then there’s nothing to stop Universal, say, from creating a company called American Films, which is a non-sig and hires WGA writers to script live action features.
At which point, we’re pretty much dead anyway. So if the choice is dead, dead or fight to live, I think fight to live is the best option. Right now, we seem to be frightened not so much of the companies as we are of the WGA members themselves who are breaking WR8.
I’d be curious to know if WR8 has been invoked at all in the last 20 years.
Why can’t the guild punish Tyler Perry? Isn’t he a member?
It was the first thing I checked. Interesting, his credits on IMDB are not WGA-determined, and his name doesn’t come up on the WGAw’s “Find A Writer” search.
I can’t say with certainty, but all available evidence seems to indicate that he’s not a member of the WGA.
So I guess this would mean that Eric Kaplan writing for the upcoming non-union animated series “The Drinky Crow Show,” on Adult Swim, does not violate rule #8?
Emory, that is correct. The only animation writing that would violate rule 8 would be, as far as I can tell, for a prime time animated television show produced by Fox.
If an Adult Swim show were to be union, it would be IATSE 839 anyway.
So no, I don’t think Eric Kaplan would be violating rule #8. There is no “applicable contract” to what he’s doing.
Craig -
If a prodco acted to classify writers as “independent contractors” rather than “employees,” the NLRB’s determination would apply only to writers who worked for that prodco. And, while the NLRB would take established industry practice into account in making its determination, there are a number of other factors that would be given substantially more weight.
So it would be possible for writers of one Prodco to be classified as “independent contractors,” while writers of another Prodco are classified as “employees” — even where the same cable network licensed programming from both Prodcos, and even if both Prodcos were owned by the same corporation.
-Ted
The Guild just sent out an email invoking Working Rule #8, but only applying it to Freemantle’s new Ozzy Osbourne show and the Tyler Perry productions.
Any other non-Union cable show is apparently still fair game.
Ryan:
I saw that. It’s very puzzling to me, and I don’t think they’d be able to get away with selectively applying WR8.
More on that later.
Ted:
True, but I think the legal ramifications would very quickly spread beyond that one show.
I understand wanting to invoke Rule #8 but what usually goes unsaid except in the tiny pockets of Hollywood space occupied by people of color is that there is a dearth of opportunities for minorities. If blacks can find a gig, they take it, whether it’s WGA signatory or not because they know that’s likely the only gig they are going to be able to find. That’s the issue that needs to be addressed. When UPN and WB merged to become the CW, many black writers lost their jobs. Unlike white writers, they were not able to just pick up another gig lickety split elswhere. Agents send black writers out only to black projects. White producers in general, are most reluctant to hire black writers. Since agents are only sending black writers out to black shows, the white producers can relax because they’ll never even see black writers, relieving them of the ‘unpleasantness’ of having to reject them personally or be accused of racism. There’s the code among producers and agents that you don’t send minorities to ‘white’ shows. You can’t even afford to have minority shows on your credits for fear it’ll be found out you’re black and it’s all over from there. (Unless, of course, you have an ethnic sounding name, at which point you are irretrievably sunk) Also, why are white shows never called ‘white’ shows. They are called mainstream. Yet if there’s more than 1-2 black people on a show, it’s a black show or more politically correct, an urban show? To be called urban is to be relegated to specific networks and usually bottom-of-the-barrel time slots. How many times has “The Game” changed time and days? How many ‘urban’ shows are cancelled not only without fanfare but without proper warning to even the show’s producers and stars, depriving them of a proper series wrap-up espisode?
Tyler Perry understand all of this, resulting in the infamous “Cope or quit” line that he gave his writers. He knows they won’t be able to go anywhere else, at least not for a very long time, when some other black show opens up. Though my uses for Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are so few I could count them on one finger, (insert joke) they did put the heat on the networks momentarily and briefly some jobs opened up for minorities behind the scenes. Once the heat was off, it was business as usual. I dare you to count the number of black writers (or any minority writers) in television right now and compare it to the white writers. It’s always uncomfortable for white writers to hear about this, but think how uncomfortable it is to be black and know that you are being blocked from employment because of your race, here in 2008. Tyler playing the race card is the worst because, of course, he is black, yet he is running a plantation- in Georgia ironically. No health care?! Come on, Massa Perry!
However, you get what you pay for and we know that show is terrible, successful ratings be darned. So it’s ridiculous to claim low job performance is the reason for firing those writers, one of whom was the head writer.
To point towards Shonda Rimes, Mara Brock-Akil, or even Barack Obama as examples of black people being on the come-up is ridiculous as these are THREE people. Their success is wonderful but has little to do with the rest of the minorities (Asian and Latinos also) who struggle daily to get a writing job, or any decent paying job for that matter, when one’s ethnicity weighs so heavily on the yay or nay. We should be able to live our dream the same as anyone else. How long must we take jobs elsewhere while waiting for the odd black show to offer one or two writing jobs that a skillion black folk are trying to get? Will invoking Rule #8 level the playing field or edge out the very few who actually made it into the ball game?
P.A. –
WGAW organizers have consistently relied on two tactics:
Public demonstrations intended to garner free press coverage for the Guild’s organizing efforts, preferably in way that presents the Guild as having the moral high ground (the American Idol bus tour, the product integration stunts, the entire recent strike, etc).
Encouraging Guild members to refuse to fulfill contractual obligations to employers (the NBC/Universal webisodes, the ANTM walk out, the Temptation walk out, the Shut Up Sit Down walk out, etc).
It’s interesting how the firing of four of the seven writers who participated in organizing/union activities happened to coincide so nicely with the opening of Tyler Perry’s studio in Atlanta, don’t you think?
Because Working Rule 8 discourages writers who’ve previously worked under Guild jurisdiction from accepting work outside Guild jurisdiction in the future, it has the effect of reducing Guild members’ access to employment opportunities — which, of course, includes, minority Guild members. But that’s not the intent of the rule — the intent of the rule is to protect the Guild’s interests as a union, even where those interests are in conflict with the interests of individual writers.
The problem here, I think, is that the Guild is invoking Working Rule 8 against specific employers — one of which affords greater opportunity to minority writers — rather than invoking globally against all non-union prodcos that employ Guild members in jobs over which the Guild claims jurisdiction.
-Ted
I agree Ted. If you’re going to invoke the rule, invoke it against all, across the board, all the time.
That, by no means, lets Tyler Perry off the hook. He knows what it’s like to be ignored, have your intelligence insulted (you can’t write on ‘our’ show as black writers can only write ‘black’, but we can write on your shows because we understand your culture thoroughly since we’ve watched B.E.T. and COPS) and be shown the door before you even get to the door so many times, you wonder if you are really a masochist. With these experiences under our collective belt, to treat his writers like they are fast food or Walmart workers is doubly inexusable.
I’ll be honest, The Guild has been good to me, the little guy, who has no idea when I haven’t been paid a residual. The Guild is on it. If some company skipped, WGAw makes sure I get paid. When I lost a residual check (don’t ask- to this day I have no idea what I did with it), they were quick to re-issue another one. However, The Guild would really be doing something if they started some sort of Working Rule for minorities to assure fair play in hiring.
As it is, I became a licensed financial advisor for several years (I just quit four months ago, how’s that for great timing) because I needed steady income and also to prove to myself that my color did not limit me or my intelligence in the rest of the world. I cannot emphasize enough how hurtful it is to have people keep limiting your creativity and your ability to compete all due to melanin. Oddly enough, I didn’t feel that limitation so much in the world of finance even though I was the only one of color in my institution. I was also the only one with so many security licenses. I chalk it up to the fact that I didn’t care as much. I cared very much about the people and their money, but writing is my heart. There’s a difference.
I am unsympathetic as to the timing of The Guild gearing up the picketers for Tyler’s studio opening. Besides, the picketers were far enough away that they made no difference whatsoever to the festivities going on or the celebrities sashaying in. There are other shenanigans going on in Tyler’s camp that proves this is not a “Oops, I messed up but didn’t mean to” incident. Of course, Tyler has admitted to no wrongdoing and is claiming on his site that he is being targeted, thereby making himself the victim. This is someone who takes advantage of the messed up Hollywood racial situation while espousing Christian values. This man is out for self by and large, which in and of itself is fine. That’s to be expected. However, when it includes exploiting other people, your own people no less, that’s infuriating and unfortunately, also to be expected. (not that it would be any better if he was exploiting other folk, but you see my point; it’s like exploiting your own family as opposed to strangers- somehow it’s worse)
My skin is thicker these days. Knowing what to expect is half the battle to protecting my skin, though it’s made me very jaded. When you first see a Tyler Perry, your heart hopes that things are going to change, however slow might be the transformation. Then these incidents happen and you realize that it’s not the color of skin at all that dictates when people will treat other people decently and fairly. It is, as Martin Luther King said, the content of character.
Craig:
Thanks for clarifying. Of course, I probably should’ve figured that out considering another Adult Swim show, Moral Orel, is written by Dino Stamatopolous, Mark Rivers, and Jay Johnston among others. Those three are WGA members, and Dino is creator.
But I’ve found yet another grey area. Despite Cartoon Network and Adult Swim’s original intentions to show cartoons, they both dabble in live action. Cartoon Network produced the scripted live-action/animation hybrid show “Out of Jimmy’s Head,” which had a contract with the WGA, and not concessionary like Class of 3000 either (Eric Kaplan was also showrunner on Jimmy’s Head).
Now with the kids’ side of the channel producing WGA sanctioned live action scripted content, it also occurs on the Adult Swim side, all of which fall under the umbrella of The Cartoon Network, Inc. The difference, though, is there’s no union for the Adult Swim live action. Their first scripted live action comedy in 2007, “Saul of the Mole Men,” was written by Tom Stern, Josh Gardner, Hugh Davidson, Peter Girardi, and Craig Lewis (creator). I believe Stern and Gardner are both WGA members, not sure of the others. Adult Swim also finished a season recently of another scripted live action series, “Fat Guy Stuck in Internet,” written by Curtis Gwinn and John Gemberling. I don’t know if they’re members, but they both wrote for The Man Show and Human Giant.
Except for SAG or AFTRA, it’s rare to find an Adult Swim show involving any kind of union, including The Animation Guild, IATSE 839. In fact, only one of their shows out of over 20 has a contract with TAG, and that’s The Boondocks, which is a Sony Pictures property and is housed at Adelaide Productions.
emory:
If the Cartoon Network is running live action scripted shows, then as far as I can tell, any WGA member writing for one of those non-union shows is violating Working Rule #8.
Part of the problem of organizing reality and game shows is that most of the writers who work on those shows are NOT WGA members. They no doubt would like to be members and get health insurance and residuals, but the reality (pun intended) is that they can’t just walk off their job and demand that their shows go union. Listen, we are at a crossroads here, putting aside the snobbery and condescending attitude of a vocal minority of WGA members about reality shows, the WGA must organize these shows. The guild is about writers and these people are writing. It doesn’t matter if you think it isn’t as pure as writing sitcoms or features, it is writing. An argument can be made that some of the writing on reality and game shows takes more skill than writing on some sitcoms or even some features (Jay Wolpert discussed that very thing on the WGA site.)
So the question is this: Who is responsible for making reality and game shows WGA contracts? Is it the writers on those shows? The WGA? Or both? One thing is for use, enforcing rule 8 isn’t going to do much to hurt the companies because there are so few WGA members working on those shows. Make them members and it is a win-win for the WGA.
That’s axiomatic. “WGA member” means, an employee in a bargaining unit represented jointly by the WGAE-WGAW. Obviously, someone who is working a non-union job is not a “WGA member.”
However, being subject to Working Rule 8 is not dependent upon being currently employed under WGAE-WGAW joint jurisdiction. It’s dependent upon being voluntarily subject to either the East or West constitution and by-laws, including, natch, Working Rules.
As I mentioned upthread, the whole point of Working Rule 8 is to discourage individuals who have been employed under Guild jurisdiction in the past from accepting employment outside Guild jurisdiction in the future.
The reason for this is that — theoretically, at least — the job of “writer” under Guild jurisdiction is one that requires a skillset that is not readily available in the general population. Working Rule 8 seeks to deny non-signatory employers access to the pool of potential employees who inarguably posses that skillset — thus providing non-signatory employers impetus to become signatory.
This is why, ultimately, every single attempt the Guild has made over the last couple of years at organizing a specific non-signatory show or non-signatory employer has ended with either employees walking out (as in the case of ANTM) or threatening to walk out (as in the case of The Daily Show and The Colbert Report).
Now, if you’re saying that most of the writers working on reality and game shows have never been employed under a Guild contract, nor are subject to either the East or West constitution …
-Ted
PA: I’m not trying to start a fight here, but I’m curious about your contention that agents only send black writers out to ‘black’ shows. On each of the four shows I’ve been staffed on, all of you’d consider ‘white’, there have been between 1-4 non-caucasian writers. (I’d provide the exact ethnic breakdown, but that seems besides the point.) And the major networks have all made pretty robust efforts to diversify their writing staffs over the past 5 or 10 years (c.f. the ABC/Disney fellowship, NBC giving extra money in the budget for any show who wants to add a ‘diverse’ baby writer, etc.)
I have mixed feelings about the mechanics of these diversity efforts: mostly because they seem so focused on the lowest-level staff positions as opposed to all levels.
But I gotta say, when I was a signed and un-credited (white) baby writer struggling to get my first job, I can’t tell you how many times my agents would tell me that I couldn’t get read by X show because the only money for staff-writer level (or story editor-level) jobs were for ‘diversity candidates.’ Mind you, I’m not complaining about that– I understand why these kinds of programs were/are necessary, though it sure was frustrating at the time.
But I am surprised to hear that agents only submit black writers to black shows given what I’ve seen on the staffs I’ve been on. Are you hour or half-hour? I’m hour– maybe there’s a difference in the racial politics between the two worlds.
MCS,
I don’t think you’re trying to pick a fight. You’re just asking a question and that’s great. It’s great because at least you’re interested enough to ask, thank God! Apathy, and ‘what’s that got to do with me’ is what keeps Hollywood in this lopsided stage.
I was half-hour sitcom. As mentioned in one of my posts, I am re-entering this field after I took some years off; years well-spent I might add. In this re-entry, I am doing films mainly, for both small and big screen. Sitcoms, as we know, have mainly been replaced by reality shows. I don’t necessarily wish to write for what I won’t watch.
That said, I indeed (and all my cohorts at the time) was sent out by my agent to only black shows, with the explanation that they were the only places that would hire me. I was new, naiive and anxious to work wherever would have me. I also believed that whatever the agent said was gold. I figured he must know. He’s been around and I just got there.
When you are out of a job, it’s frustrating regardless of ethnicity. Anything that seems to prevent you from getting what you want seems outrageously unfair. I understand that.
You metnioned that you worked on four shows. How long did it take for you to go from show to show? How many interviews did you have (meet-n-greets w/producers, etc) between shows? How many times had you been told by agents that they already had a white writer so they don’t have a place for you? Not that your writing wasn’t up to snuff or that your script just wasn’t their cup of tea. They already had one of you.
This was only a few years ago (6). (understanding that 6 years in Hollywood can seem like dog years) I’m sure in the current political climate, agents, producers et al would not be so bold as to come right out and say such things. Truthfully, I’d rather hear it and know where they are coming from instead of wondering why I kept getting passed on.
In case you’re wondering, I did finally get on a few shows- urban ones.
Oddly enough, I got way better responses by appealing directly to VP’s at the networks, such as WB animation. I love superheros and animation and I called a few folk who were very receptive, read and liked my scripts. They actually put me in touch with producers on some of the animated shows. I Go figure.
You are correct in saying that any diversity action taken is aimed at the lowest level. Rare is the minority exec producer, director or heaven forbid, studio exec who can greenlight a project. Those groups are about as diversified as a RNC. Actually, I don’t know of a single minority greenlighter.
Not to blues the fellowship programs, but getting in any of those programs without the recommendation of someone of influence is pretty much impossible. If you have a different experience, please enlighten me.
You know, I watched ‘Entertainment Tonight’ last night and they showed Tyler Perry’s studio opening as well as his luncheon at his home that he had the following day. There was not one mention of his dispute with the WGA or the picketing writers.
Also, why is the WGAw handling this instead of the WGAe as this is in their jurisdiction?
“Also, why is the WGAw handling this instead of the WGAe as this is in their jurisdiction?”
Because the West likes to protest.