Low Visibility

While I doubt they have any sort of completed deal, I think it’s safe to say that the DGA has already discussed with the AMPTP where they’d likely make one once they sit down. Whether or not this will be good or, shall we say, less good, for the WGA remains to be seen. Depends on what figures they’ve settled for this time in order to keep the peace… and their members working.

According to the New York Times, there have been informal talks already taking place between the WGA and the producers last week, even in advance of the authorization tally. It was viewed as a sign of optimism.

Still, much of the damage is already done. Once the strike authorization went out, the feature business shut down and the major networks closed up not long after.

Even if there is no strike, this pilot season is a bit of a mess.

I’m gonna guess unless there’s some Oslo-style secret talks going on, Nov 1st the fun begins…

Too far away for progress w/o bloodshed.

AYAAW

You left out a possibility. The guild doesn’t strike at all because they reach an accpetable agreement with AMPTP before the expiration of their contract.

Stranger things have happened.

“Stranger things have happened.”

I can’t think of one.

No way the studios bend on DVDs in the next week and a half (or ever), and no way leadership comes back and says “all that stuff about DVDs? Joking!”

If we don’t get meaningful concessions fast, we should strike early and press the advantage we may have gotten from convincing the studios and networks time that we’re not going to give them time to stockpile.

With the successful SAV, we’ve turned the threat of an early strike into a negotiating point. To back away from this threat is, in effect, a concession to the AMPTP. And for what? Retracting their proposal to revamp (basically eliminate) residuals?

We should make real concessions (i.e. delaying the strike) when we’ve gotten real concessions, not empty gestures.

The DGA won’t even talk to the companies if the WGA is on strike, because the AFL-CIO won’t let them…

I could be wrong on this, but the WGAw isn’t a member of the AFL-CIO (WGAe is).

So I don’t know how AFL-CIO rules play out in this instance. God knows, plenty of unions ignore AFL-CIO rules when it suits them.

But I don’t think the DGA will enter into negotiations with the AMPTP until the WGA’s contract lapses.

I think you’re way out in right field with the DGA issue. Their contract isn’t up for a long time yet, mid 2008, and there’s no advantage to their striking a deal until they see what the WGA gets from their strike. Make no mistake… we’re going out one way or the other. The Alliance will NOT allow us to work without a contract… they’ll force a lockout until we settle. D.

“there’s no advantage to their striking a deal until they see what the WGA gets from their strike”

Except bringing an end to the WGA strike and getting its members back to work. If the DGA deal looks reasonable, there will be incredible pressure for us to take it.

Steve:

The DGA is a member of AFL-CIO (I believe).

David G:

The DGA has already formed their NegCom. They have already signalled a desire to negotiate early, and they did so (at the same relative earliness) in 2004, so while it’s possible that they don’t negotiate early, it’s silly to think that an early DGA negotiation is right field thinking. It’s not. In fact, it’s far more probable than not.

The DGA has little incentive to wait out a WGA strike.

i am perversely optimistic there won’t be a strike. i don’t see the companies locking the writers out. the most likely scenario to me is everyone continues to work on the old deal because some degree of progress is being made, however slight, and the comapnies use the framework they’ve gotten from the DGA as a guide to close a deal with the guild before the holidays.

Can anybody shed some light on the relationship bewteen the WGA and the DGA? They must have a myriad of mutual members, and mutual interests. Seeing that the DGA is viewed as the power house in this, are any efforts being made to join forces?

I think the DGA has ties to the AFL-CIO, which is working to curtail runaway production — AFTRA, IATSE, CWA are all affiliates affected by the issue, same as DGA — but they aren’t actually affiliated.

• Ted

Can anybody shed some light on the relationship bewteen the WGA and the DGA? They must have a myriad of mutual members, and mutual interests

One thing to consider is that most DGA members are not directors. Most members are part of the assistant director world who are somewhere on the following career track: DGA trainee (not full members, more like associates) > 2nd 2nd AD (full dues paying members) > key 2nd AD > 1st AD > Unit production manager.

So a studio backed feature will have all these positions and one director. TV shows can use a different director every episode, with some doing several eps over the course of a season, but each show will have a permenant crew of AD’s.

AD’s want to keep working. That’s how they make their money. In features, 2nd AD’s qualify for small residuals, but it’s the salary that pays the bills.

From an AD perspective, writers have a leisurely life. TV writers routinely complain about 12 hour days, but almost every AD has done his share of 20 hour days, on his feet, under constant pressure to keep the cats herded and marching in the same direction.

Just about every AD young enough to have not yet given up has a script, or several, he’s working on. Almost none of these scripts are good enough for anyone to consider. If they could write, they would. Generally speaking, they can’t.

Oh yeah.

Lots of AD’s want to direct. Relatively few of them get the chance. Successful writers have a much better shot at the director’s chair (see above). There’s always some low level grumbling about this - “That idiot can’t even read a call sheet!” etc.

So the AD’s want to work above all, and most of them will never be in a position to get much in the way of residuals anyway.

Patric doesn’t have to worry about a strike, since he can live off mommy and daddy’s trust fund, like the rest of the trust fund babies who have these romantic ideas of what a strike is all about.

Never thought I’d see the day I hoped the adults from the DGA stepped in and straightened out the sandbox, but it’s definitely necessary. Reading about the vote tally and the knowledge by Dear Leader of who did and didn’t vote (and likely how they did), I am more than ever convinced that the accurate name of this so-called “union” is The Wanker’s Guild.

I’m curious about the internal politics within the AMPTP, and particularly, the balance of power therein between entities who care more about television than movies, and vice-versa. (Though I realize that in the era of vertical integration this distinction may be meaningless, since every studio does both, and every network just about is aligned with a studio.)

But anyway, the reason I’m wondering is because I could imagine a scenario that goes something like this:

1) WGA and AMPTP wrangle over the next two weeks; both sides make small concessions— not enough to make a new deal worthwhile to the WGA, but enough to make a strike harder to sell to membership (for instance, a small concession on the New Media issue).

2) But in order to pressure the WGA to take the deal, AMPTP locks us out on November 1st.

Is this totally nuts? I don’t know. I’m pretty new to the WGA and the business in general so I don’t have a feel for these things. In any case, if it’s not completely nuts, it seems more likely to happen if the movie side of the AMPTP has more power than the TV side (though, again, maybe it’s wrong for me to ascribe two sides to AMPTP), since it seems like the movie business would much better withstand a strike (assuming it doesn’t last much more than four months) than the television business.

Plus, now that the WGA pulled a ‘Crazy Ivan’, as Craig put it, maybe the other side might pull one too.

I would be eager (and relieved) if one of the more seasoned people here could explain why this is crazy-talk and wouldn’t happen.

“For the sake of everyone who works in this business, l hope things turn around quickly.”

Actually, you should just say ‘For the sake of writers, I hope things turn around quickly.’

Because the studios and networks aren’t hurt by a strike. In fact, the studios make more money when they DON’T make movies. They can go for two years without any new product if they have to; they’ll just lay everyone off and live off the fat of their libraries.

It’s tougher for TV networks, but they can writers if there’s a work stoppage. No problem.

There’s no point to striking, honestly, for any ent. biz union. You can’t win, not in this day and age. If you do strike, once you settle, it’ll just be for the tiny little cost of living improvements you’ve always gotten for the last thirty years, and nothing more. You’re not gonna get DVD money, you’re not gonna get internet money until the money actually starts flowing, you’re not gonna get anything you want. You never have and you never will.

The only way you’re gonna get companies to pay you fair rates, get jurisdiction for reality TV, fair DVD participation, is to create your own media companies and stop taking your business to the existing studios and networks. You’re going to have to get your stuff financed and made outside the current companies, and probably distributed outside the current companies, too.

‘Nen if the AMPTP companies want you back, you can dictate the terms, because you don’t need them anymore.

Today, both the AMPTP and the unions need each other, but the AMPTP can outlast the unions. By far. Meaning writers need the AMPTP more than the AMPTP needs you. Until that changes, there’s no point in striking, you’re just cutting off your nose to spite your face.

I don’t know if anyone has read Nikki Finke’s Deadline Hollywood Daily but she has posted some reporting she has done on the negotiations thus far.

Her big “scoop” tonight is that the threat of a strike doesn’t matter to the moguls who run Hollywood (TV more so than movies) because the fall season sucks so far. And that us going on strike will allow them a “do over” and time to regroup and get “better” programming on the air.

My guess — this is just spin. But I hope our side has plans to do some PR work of its own, too.

Because the studios and networks aren�t hurt by a strike. In fact, the studios make more money when they DON�T make movies. They can go for two years without any new product if they have to; they�ll just lay everyone off and live off the fat of their libraries.

In fact, the money the studios make comes from the Gossamer-Winged Cash Pixie — a mystical creature that lives off of smog and the corpses of starved artists (of all sorts). In the 18th century, Adam Smith tricked us into believing that income is derived from products and/or services.

Unfortunately for studio executives, most of the world, including Wall Street, has also been tricked by Adam Smith’s nefarious lies, and thus stock values (and CEO option package values) will plunge during an extended strike.

Don’t forget the masses. The masses hunger for entertainment. They starve. If you don’t keep them fed, they’ll turn to books or masturbation. And there’s no guild for masturbation.

Didn’t the grocers’ strike screw shit up for Safeway? I think the union took roll backs but devastated Safeway’s business (or at least permanatly cost them 25% of their customers).

Then, when their next contract came up for negotiation, they got their rollbacks undone.

I kind of like the idea of going out so long we fuck it up for everyone. Including them.

Even if there were a guild for masturbation, I can’t see them going on strike for much longer than a few days.

And there’s no guild for masturbation.

Except ours, since it’s what half the membership does during 80% of their working hours. How do I know? I look at the crap they create.

20 years ago, there was a system in place in which writers actually got paid for being writers. I know, it’s a novel concept, but bear with me. It was a world in which the WGA could say that the average income of a union member was $50,000/year and it was true - 80% of the membership qualified at any given time for health insurance (and it was a real health insurance plan, not something that makes me glad I finally qualify for the VA for that year in Vietnam, which is vastly superior to what you people wish for every year) - unlike today, when the WGA says the average member makes $60,000 per year (which doesn’t even keep up with inflation over 20 years, which means it’s less than before) and the truth is that 80% of the union doesn’t qualify for health insurance at any given time, which means you didn’t earn the equivalent of a fucking 30 minute sitcom at “guild scale” in the preceding 12 months - you didn’t make $24,000 from writing last year!

What happened 20 years ago was that when we idiots let the strike go 23 weeks to get what we could have had in 23 hours if the majority had had their heads screwed on (straight, crooked, whatever), the other side discovered that the system that existed allowed a lot of crap to get “developed” that never went anywhere. Within three months of the end of the strike, the first million dollar spec was sold, and the idiots who come here in their droves thinking they can write decided they’d like that (you have a better chance of being hit by lightning than you do of winning the screenwriter’s lottery - hell, you have a better chance on Saturday night at the local liquor store, buying 4 quick picks).

We didn’t win 20 years ago against stand-alone studios run by people who actually liked movies, and you idiots think you’re going to beat minor arms of intergalactic corporations run by people who think movies are widgets???

And people wonder why I call it The Wanker’s Guild.

TCinLA -

Cowering and sky-god worship will get you nowhere.

The evil empire behind the studio system has myriad reasons to keep the entertainment industry running, too many to list. If they didn’t, they’d shut it down. Don’t forget, when it comes to the wga demands we’re talking reasonable concessions, a “fair share”. The moguls know this. Why don’t they tell the AMPTP to give in to those demands? Policy, greed, to keep face. Take your pick. Bear in mind, a strike affects business. Big time. And for those “intergalactic corporations” it’s all about the mighty dollar. They could lose more money in a few weeks of a writers’ strike than they would in years of paying writers reasonable residuals on new media. And that’s why the strike hammer looms so dangerously over their heads. It could give’m a big fucking headache.

To Anon #18 who quoted Craig’s “For the sake of everyone who works in this business, l hope things turn around quickly.” And then added: “Actually, you should just say ‘For the sake of writers, I hope things turn around quickly.”

It just astounds me how many of the “writers” who comments in these threads seem to be unable to read. Craig wrote “everybody who works in this business” and you answered with a long comment on how he should have just said “for the sake of writers” because the studios can outlast a strike.

How did you manage to reduce “everybody” to “the studios”?

Are the studios “everybody who works in this business?”

Is it your experience that nobody but studios and writers work in this business? And don’t studios run by your megagalactic corporations have employees who will be badly affected if a strike means they’ll be fired from their job?

It’s ironic to see that, now that they can indulge their fantasy of fighting an epic battle against some evil empire from outer space, some of the anonymous writers have quickly forgotten their cry of “film-making is a collaborative medium!”

Working in a “collaborative medium” also means that a lot of people depend on each other for their jobs. It’s not just writers or/and the corporations who run the studios which will be affected by a strike.

No, Mr Anon #18, Craig was absolutely right when he said “for the sake of everybody who works in this business.” Because everybody who works in this business will be affected if the writers strike.

And it’s that same “everybody” who is “positively affected” when writers fill up blank pages. Instead of, “when the writers go on strike”, I’d love to hear, just once, from someone other than a writer that works in this business that it’s “management” that’s gonna put everybody out of work.

The WGA needs to strike on Nov. 1 — anything less will be considered a failure by the majority of its members. Why? Because for most low-level to low-mid-level WGAers (like myself) can’t get work anymore anyway — that’s what these protracted “negotiations” have cost the average dues-paying member. A strike at this point wouldn’t change my economic condition (which was frozen a couple of weeks back when I stopped getting paid) but it would honestly ensure that I would most likely be back on my feet sooner. Any other opinions out of the WGA seems to be coming from people who can afford a strike.

Anonster:

Odd.

You sound just like the AMPTP, who keep insisting that this strike is being fomented by “non-working writers.”

Having said that, I actually sympathize with your position, inasmuch as I do worry that very wealthy, very well-cared-for writers are driving the bus on this strike.

In the end, it’s not the rich writers or the underemployed writers who suffer the most during a strike, but the middle class of writers.

Craig —

From the trenches here that is certainly the feeling. Though I support the WGA’s demands, I have to say to the rank-and-file it does feel a little bit like rich people playing in the sandbox of lefty union politics.

Yeah, can’t blame you for that one. I don’t just have that feeling now. I’ve had it since I joined the union (and particularly in 2001, the last strike frenzy year, when I was definitely a middle-class writer with a new mortgage and my first child on the way).

The problem is sifting out the worthy from the bluster. Lefty unionism and limousine liberalism aside, getting a good residual rate for internet downloads is a worthy cause, and by “worthy” I mean “worth a sacrifice.”

I’m keenly aware that the Lefties of the Past are why I have credit protections, residuals of any kind, health care, a pension, etc. I’m willing to do my part as well.

All I’ve ever asked in return (and that sounds diminishing, but it’s not…it’s a huge ask) is that my Guild actually know what the hell they’re doing when they send us all into the breach.

Right now, I’m not sure they do know what they’re doing. I can’t say they definitely don’t, but my experience with this group is less than encouraging, particularly given their history with other labor actions (like ANTM and the entirety of the reality television “corporate campaign”).

I have visited this website twice a day for a couple of weeks. I like to get the strike perspective from writers in addition to the media. I am not a writer or a producer, but I will be gravely affected by a strike, should it happen.

Only today have I heard mention of “the others” that will be hurt with a strike. My husband is a crew member of a primetime show. We are in escrow on a house and the contingency is up the beginning of November. If this strike happens, not only will we have to back out of escrow, but we will have to stay in our apartment and start living on our house savings. All of our friends are in the industry and will also be out of work. A strike affects everyone - from the top tier execs to the lowly janitors cleaning the exec’s office. It affects PAs, wardrobe, makeup, craft services, art department, payroll companies, sound and camera and on and on and on.

My husband is in IATSE, and as a union man we support the WGA with what they need to do. I just hope that the WGA and AMPTP leaders will consider the ripple effect that this strike will create - adding tension to an already sagging real estate market and poor economy in general. Our unemployment rate is bad enough without adding thousands more…

I’m really crossing my fingers that there will be some clear thinking during the negotiations today.

So, I’ve posed this question previously, but seems to have gotten lost in the shuffle of things…but what is the WGA’s jurisdiction over stuff like FunnyOrDie? I think everyone agrees the New Media stuff is the important stuff, and the line seems pretty clear for stuff like webisodes of The Office or full episodes on iTunes, but what about tech companies that produce web content? Where Silicon Valley meets Hollywood is where it gets confusing for me. Would it be the equivalent of an Indie movie, where if the tech startup is not a signatory, then WGA writers are prohibited from writing for it? Craig, if you wanted to post random funny videos you come up with, are you prohibited from doing so since you’re a WGA member? What about during the strike? What if writers want to create content to put on YouTube, would they be considered scabs? Craig, what if Kleiner Perkins (a premier VC in SF) approached you to start a video sharing site, offered you no money, but 50% ownership of the company in exchange for creating content? Who has jurisdiction over all of that? It seems to me the AMPTP doesn’t care about this since they don’t own any of these web properties, but it seems like something the WGA ought to give its membership some clearer guidelines on…

Dear “WORRIED”,

I don’t know one fellow WGA member who is unfeeling or unaware of the consequences of a strike to the entire entertainment business. But the bottom line is that the WGA has to put the welfare of its own membership first. I don’t mean that in any callous way, it’s just a matter of being self-concerned as I’m sure all IA members are when their contract comes up for gouging by the AMPTP.

If the IA and all other unions refused to cross a potential WGA picket line, think how fast this would all be over.

And so you know, one of the WGA’S demands is that that we be able, in the future, to honor the picket lines of all other entertainment unions. We’re not allowed to do that right now. All unionized workers in our business really do need the freedom to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with their sister unions to fend off the avarice of management.

Best,

C…

Re: #19

While we’re on the subject of Nikki Finke, I have to say I don’t find her reporting particularly reliable on this issue, which is too bad, because she’s clearly on the side of the WGA. But she lost me when she described the 90.3% SAV authorization as ‘overwhelming’ and a surprise to the AMPTP, when everyone I know in the Guild thinks 90.3% is solid but hardly overwhelming, and I really cant imagine the AMPTP was caught off-guard by the results (though clearly they were by the vote itself).

Finke’s agenda is, as always, to point out that she thinks executives and moguls are usually morons and I think that colored her reporting on the SAV issue. As for her latest report about the moguls not caring about the strike, who knows? But it’s clear people are trying to spin her and that she is spinnable, so I wouldn’t place too much stock in her reporting.

Malcolm:

I followed the grocery store strike, and recall at least one of the grocery corporations lost hundreds of millions of dollars while it was going on - whether they lost it over the long term: I’m not sure.

As has been the case in a lot of strikes and union complaints in recent years, a key issue was management trying to make employees pay more for their health care benefits.

I haven’t followed this issue for a while, but when I last did, companies were getting screwed by skyrocketing healthcare premiums -

but if they get to pass it on to their employees, workers in essence get to look forward to a future without any yearly pay raises, because they’d be eaten by higher premiums.

I’m no fan of Hillary Clinton, but I find it difficult to believe her ill-conceived, worse-marketed 1994 “Hillarycare” Bill slagged as “the Government decides your health care” would have been worse than having the Pharmaceutical and Insurance Companies decide our health care for us.

And yeah, guys: in a sense, the Middle Class suffers the most during a strike.

But the Middle Class is disappearing in part because they won’t unionize or strike: capitulation isn’t going to improve matters.

From Anonymous: “No way the studios bend on DVDs in the next week and a half (or ever), and no way leadership comes back and says “all that stuff about DVDs? Joking!”

Someone (I think it was Craig) suggested a couple of weeks ago that we should drop the DVD issue (a loss sustained in the past and unlikely to be reversed this year) and focus on the internet download issue (a gain that would have significant and positive implications for the future). There’s lots of ways to look at it, but strike or no strike, I too hope for a speedy resolution and for a WGA strategy that is focused on achievable aims.

Paula,

Seconded.

This is a must read article, everyone:

http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/hollywood-moguls-sound-strike-happy-see-new-tv-season-as-dead-already/

Would love to hear what people think.

Craig wrote:

“In the end, it’s not the rich writers or the underemployed writers who suffer the most during a strike, but the middle class of writers.”

Kay Reindl said something similar on her blog recently:

“See, the WGA leadership doesn’t really give a shit about people like me. Nor do the producers. It’s exactly like the government, where that middle class they’re trying to eradicate doesn’t exist unless the politicians want to get elected.”

There are some other comments posted over there that you might find interesting, as well.

Speaking of must read, go to to the AMPTP website to get a picture of how negotiations went today…

anyone know if they will be able to make independent movies during the strike? Indepenendent companys that sign waivers that say they’ll abide by any neogtiated settlement the guild agrees on. I think they may have done that in 84, or I heard that. any truth to that? That they’ll be able to make indy films during a strike. Seems a good way to stick it to the studios and get the writers and directors and actors working….

Any thoughts?

Kay has a blog?

One thing that really concerns me is the permanent effect of this imminent labor action. There are too many people concerned about the narrow justice of their position and not enough concerned about the long term health of the business. Assassinating an entire TV season when scripted dramas are already dying radically launches our audiences to new entertainment choices from which they may never return. Eyeballs on screens is what creates residuals in the first place. Why are both sides so willing to kill the not-so-golden-goose? There is too much ego in this process - labor leaders with visions of Che Guevara glory and studio negotiators who know that if they keep the fist closed they get re-hired. This is the moment fot the guild to request outside mediation. Bring in Schwarzenegger or George Mitchell or some honest broker to bang heads and let both sides save face.