Well Done, Leadership!
Thanks, Brothers!Well, I’m pretty sure one of our commenters broke some news yesterday…the Teamsters are going to (sort of) back a possible WGA strike.
This is big news.
From Variety:
The Teamsters union — representing about 4,000 Hollywood drivers, location managers and scouts, casting directors and animal wranglers — is giving the WGA’s strike plans a major boost with a show of solidarity that could seriously disrupt local production.
The leader of Teamsters Local 399 is advising members, as long as they’re acting as individuals, that they should honor WGA picket lines. The Writers Guild of America could go strike as early as Thursday; negotiations resume today at the Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers.
In a message posted Monday, secretary-treasurer Leo Reed said Local 399 can’t strike, picket or boycott a producer while its contract is in effect but added that those restrictions don’t apply to individuals.
“As for me as an individual, I will not cross any picket line whether it is sanctioned or not because I firmly believe that Teamsters do not cross picket lines,” Reed said in the message.
What does that mean?
Well, the Teamsters can’t honor a picket line institutionally (so yeah, Mona was wrong). However, part of their deal is that if their council sanctions, or approves, of another union’s strike, then individual Teamsters cannot be disciplined for refusing to cross a picket line.
And in a not-so-subtle message on the Hollywood Teamsters’ home page, their Division Director, Leo Reed, announced that he would be one of those individuals who wouldn’t cross a line.
The upshot?
Panic.
I was shooting on the backlot at Paramount today, and I heard that the studio is reassigning all trucks and deliveries to go off-lot, in case of a picket line. Could be rumor, could be true. Seems like smart planning to me…particularly if the companies are taking the Teamster announcement seriously, which they pretty much have to.
The strategic upshot?
This just might help avert a strike.
Finally, at long last, we’ve got a real way to enhance our strike threat. Organizing reality was an abortion, organizing animation was a boondoggle, the corporate campaigns fizzled, the attempt to disrupt product integration was naive and impotent…
…but this is for real.
The Teamsters can shut a company down faster and more completely than any other union in town.
Now that the companies have to worry about an instant shutdown if the WGA strikes, they’re going to have to do a better job of bargaining.
And if they do a better job of bargaining, our side might actually get something to work with in negotiations.
Look, if Verrone is hell-bent on striking, then none of this matters. We’re all screwed, and there’s a bad deal in our future.
But if he’s not…and all I can do is hope that he’s not…this is a terrific strategic gain. We just amped up their fear level and made the threat of a strike far more potent.
And like any supporter of gun rights, I believe that showing you have a loaded gun is a good way to avoid having to shoot a loaded gun.
Well done, leadership. This was a huge step closer to your promise of an alternative to “strike or cave.”
Good luck, WGA members!
Craig,
This is really exciting news and your article is getting me more excited… I’m really excited!
I don’t know why, but the support coming from this union in particular makes me feel all warm inside. It’s like my emotionally distant, more muscly, older brother just gave me a hug and said, “It’s going to be all right.”
just posted at amptp.org, a letter from Counter to the Teamsters:
http://www.amptp.org/files/BCNoStrikeClause102907.pdf
Man. What is it with the AMPT? Everything they publish is waaay more douche-y than any of the we are united wga public statements.
Woo! Thanks teamsters and other supporters.
Craig:
I’m not sure exactly how, but clearly your support of Patric and the WGA makes you a company shill.
Shame!
Craig, just responding to your last post to me in the last thread.
I’m surprised that the drivers on your production were unaware of what happened at the meeting. This was a pretty well-publicized general meeting on Sunday morning, and all the Teamsters there knew exactly what it was about. I would have thought your guys would be in contact with some of their brothers that did attend, just to find out what the verdict was.
Seems pretty clear to me that Reed is making a clear moral choice in supporting the strike while making the obligatory mention to the contractual material that bars him from officially doing so. His reference to his individual moral choice and to the moral choices of Teamsters is an echo of what he told our drivers yesterday while announcing his support for the WGA.
It’s interesting. I was told by our gaffer that during the last Teamster strike, Local 728 informed the members that if they honored the Teamster picket lines they would be removed from the union.
To answer your question, I work on a television series for ABC. We’re on one of the smaller lots near Paramount. Pretty much my entire career has been television, other than a couple of assignments as a DGA Trainee and the odd day here or there. Part of my reluctance to follow my conscience and do what I know morally to be right is that I have spent 13 years working on a career, and before that I suffered through 400 days as a Trainee. It’s a bitter pill to swallow to consider tossing that. But on the other hand, as Oscar Wilde put it, the only principle worth having is the one you stand by when it ISN’T convenient. Never before have I come so to grips with the truth of that statement.
Another WGA,
“What is it with the AMPTP?”
They need writers :)
What’s great about this is even if they don’t individually decide to respect the picket lines, just the uncertainty that they might is going to rattle the AMPTP. The above-referenced letter sure suggests they’re worried.
I feel like I owe someone a beer.
AYAAW
Craig, If the Teamsters are unwilling to cross our picket line, how come you’re still planning to cross it?
Why, in an announcement seemingly meant to praise our leadership, do you need to rehash potshots at Verrone (“if Verrone’s hellbent on striking”, very Fox-News-like insinuation), Mona (give it a rest), and the campaigns to organize reality and animation.
Nothing anyone does is good enough, and when there’s finally good news, you still have to whine about what you perceive to be past failures.
As a writer, maybe it’s time to stop throwing bricks at our leadership. It’s certainly time for you to stand with the Teamsters, and honor the WGA’s picket line.
Is it just me or does Counter’s letter to the Teamsters sound a bit like Ef You? And, um, aren’t they the last people you’d want to say Ef You to?
Susan
I sincerely hope a strike is averted. If there is a strike it will be awful timing for me and could scuttle the best opportunity I’ve had in a decade. However, if there is a strike I will probably walk a picket line and attempt to convince any member of any union to honor it in spite of whatever legal obligations they have or repercussions that follow. Mostly because I feel that’s what will make it short and give us the best chance to get a fair deal on what really matters: new media. I’ll have deep admiration for anyone that agrees not to cross but respect anyone that feels they have to live up to their contractual duties. I won’t attempt to define anyone else’s personal morality for them nor do I like anyone trying to define mine for me. Hey, I have Irish blood. I’m a little self-destructive and never met a futile, losing battle I didn’t like. I had a great-uncle who did a year in Danbury Prison because he didn’t feel comfortable honoring what the U.S. Congress felt was a legal obligation to name people with whom he’d attended certain political meetings. That’s the culture I’m from. But that’s just me. Man’s got to do what a man’s got to do.
Working AD, Don’t be surprised, I’ve been ‘polling’ a number of drivers on the show I’m on, and very few knew any details about the strike, other than that it’s going to happen. When I asked if they were going to honor picket lines, they typically didn’t know, but a few offered to bring in a newsletter that was sent to them about the situation. Haven’t seen it yet.
Sadly, Tom Short and the IBT don’t get along either… notice a trend? There’s some bad blood there from a while ago. Your Gaffer’s comment doesn’t surprise me and while it’s harsher rhetoric then what I’ve heard (I’m in a different IATSE local) it amounts to the same thing.
Working AD:
None of our drivers knew. Nor did the Transpo Captain. Nor did the Transpo Coordinator.
No one knew until I asked them to call the Local and find out what was going on.
If one of the Teamsters on your show is more plugged in to the union, then he might have spread the word. Did he say how many Teamsters were at the meeting?
I assume none of our transpo guys were there probably cuz they have pretty early call times.
Anon #9:
You’re kind of a dingaling, aren’t you?
Here you are posting a comment on an essay entitled “Well Done, Leadership!” and you’re complaining that I’m “throwing bricks at leadership.”
Sometimes I experience people in life I call “injustice collectors.” You appear to be one of those unsatisfiable few. It’s only gonna get more annoying for you from here on out, so you might want to consider not reading this blog anymore.
As for your point, my answer is simple, and obvious.
The Teamsters’ collective bargaining agreement protects and indemnifies individual members who choose to not cross another union’s picket line.
My collective bargaining agreement with the DGA does not contain that provision.
End of argument, okay? Both the DGA and The Teamsters are required to urge their members to go to work. The Teamsters, however, cannot be individually punished for not crossing a WGA line.
DGA employees can be disciplined.
If I don’t show up for work, then all that happens is this: I get fired, I get replaced, I get sued, I will absolutely be wrong both morally and legally for violating my contractual promise, and some other man or woman will quickly step into my place to finish the film, which will get released.
Please explain how this benefits anyone.
Maybe, no one knew on your set because you were planning to cross the picket line yourself. Something about… starting from the head.
Okay, I’m kidding, so don’t get all upset. But it’d be great if you joined in and observed the strike should there be one. As someone posted in the last thread, there will be directors and actors and showrunners who honor our strike. It’d be great if you were one of them.
If I wasn’t a DGA member and just in the WGA, I’d walk a picket line and do so with pride (and I may yet, regardless of DGA status—what I do on MY time is my business) because the cause is worth it.
I’m just glad we have Guild leadership with some teeth for a change. Your blog reminds me of the sort of attitude that got us in this fix with our previous contracts.
I agree with the poster who said it’s time for you to stop throwing bricks at the leadership. No writer I know, myself included, wants a strike. But we can’t duck and run just because it’s hard and painful. Stop whining. This is for the good of writers for years to come. If we get a good contract it will be no thanks to you and this attitude you perpetuate.
You sound like a mouthpiece for the DGA. Now you can call me a “dingaling” like the last poster who disagreed with you….
Contract Cap’n:
Okay.
You’re a dingaling.
Boy, we sure are recruiting our finest for Strike Captains…
Contract Capt.,
I’m glad this Guild is showing some grit, but sometimes grit leads to blind self-destruction. All Craig has done is tap them on the shoulder and reminded them there may be a steep fall ahead.
What’s wrong with that?
Sweet! This feels like when the Irish turned on the English to fight alongside William Wallace…
And Nick Counter is a little bitch…sheesh…every statement he makes is always an F-you to the audience. He negotiates like Dick Cheney.
Craig and others,
Since it appears teamsters do not sit at their computers all day checking up on the strike, what can we do to inform them of their union’s support?
Excellent rebuttal, Craig.
SML — I agree the fall could be steep, the price could be high. Strikes are risky. But no one is more aware of this than the Guild leadership. David Young, who is the chief negotiator NOT Patric Verrone, is a well-spoken, cool-headed, bright guy. It’s clear to me after the meetings I’ve attended where he and the others have spoken that this is something that keeps them up nights. They are not cavalier about any of it despite anything written on this blog.
As for informing the Teamsters of the strike, there will be leaflets handed out tomorrow at studios.
Mike,
“This feels like when the Irish turned on the English to fight alongside William Wallace…”
But who’s who? Because I think there’s a scenario where the DGA is Ireland, Nick Counter is Wallace, we’re the English, and the teamsters are France.
Contract Capt.,
I can’t speak for Craig, but I never believed the NegCom was being cavalier. I believed they were being stubborn.
It’s nice to hear that Veronne is a bright guy (amongst many pleasant adjectives). That doesn’t mean Craig or you or I are obligated to put our faith in him. In fact, I would argue it’s our duty to keep faith and likeability out of this debate.
The NegCom chose to keep its negotiating tactics to themselves and they have, seemingly, scared the shit out of the AMPTP. The catch 22 of this choice is it scared the shit out of some of its own members. And when you scare your constituency, they’re going to grumble.
We have a right to question the NegCom’s motivations and strategy. It’s debatable whether or not we have a right to hear their answers (I think we do), but questioning is allowed.
From Nikki Finke’s site:
“I’ve learned that the WGA is currently working on newsletters to distribute to crews and other industry workers to explain its position in the face of what it is calling the AMPTP’s “misinformation” campaign.
This follows anecdotal reports I’ve received from various network shows that crews are expressing their anger about the looming strike. I’m told that Tuesday morning, from 6-8 am, WGA members will be handing out flyers to union truck drivers and any driver who enters five of the major lots. A strong showing is being requested “to show the AMPTP that we are able to mobilize our members”.”
I’m an aspiring writer, but also a television editor working almost exclusively in reality. I was one of the many editors the WGA brought into their headquarters a couple years ago to try to convince me to help them organize reality.
While I totally agreed with what they wanted to do, I was completely and utterly turned off by the pervasive notion that I was somehow “anti-union” for questioning their tactics, demanding explanations for the strategy, and actually expecting them to have a rationale for their actions that went beyond “because everything a union does is great.”
That’s such bullshit. If you want to be a responsible union member, I think it’s part of your duty to question your leaders. Make them prove to you that their decisions are being made thoughtfully, throughly, and with the best intentions of the ones they represent. Make them prove that their committment is equal to the one they are demanding, and make them earn the trust that is so vital to their success.
And you do this with friendship, respect, openess, and a complete willingness to be proven wrong as well as to be proven right.
These decisions are too important to be done blindly. And any leader that asks for blind obedience should not be trusted to lead anything. Any collegue that questions your resistance to making blind moral decisions should also be challenged.
Because true loyalty is not built out of fear. It is built from transparency and intelligence. And I think that’s what Craig is consistently demanding of the WGA leaders.
And if I’m ever lucky enough to become a member, I’ll be doing it too.
My understanding of the meeting was that it was pretty big - but none of the drivers on my show has given me any numbers, and I don’t think it polite to ask.
I did print out Counter’s letter for them, and they laughed at it. Our captain, between chuckles, said to me “WE’RE not going on strike. We’re just not crossing their lines.”
The meeting was held at 8AM at the Sportsman’s Lodge on Sunday morning, according to the Hollywood Teamsters website. So this was not a matter of drivers needing to be up early on Monday. The meeting took place between 8AM and 11AM on Sunday and was then over. My conversation with the drivers happened at 515AM on Monday. (My calltime at the backlot was 512AM, and they must have been there for a while when I came out and asked about the other company’s trucks in our cast’s parking spots.)
I should also express a debt in verbal gymnastics for my prior post to Rod Lurie, who I realized after the fact, had completely inspired some of my language.
Working AD,
Thanks for the info. Keep it coming.
More totally awesome, fair and balanced strike coverage from the Times today:
THE BIG PICTURE: There’s nothing new with the WGA strike
“To be fair, it’s hard to imagine a more difficult group to negotiate with than Hollywood writers, who despite their considerable talents have a reputation for Olympian feats of troublesome, self-destructive behavior. From Herman Mankiewicz to Billy Wilder, from Paddy Chayefsky to Robert Towne, it’s hard to say who qualifies as the biggest pain in the neck.”
Also, writers are drunks, violent, and prone to murder and mayhem (cause that’s how we portray ourselves on film, so it must be true).
Still awaiting clarification on the use of the term “honor the strike”” that I asked for in the last thread.
Showrunners, directors and actors who will walk off their producing, directing and acting jobs when the Guild calls a strike, and not work for a Guild-struck Company until the strike ends?
Showrunners, directors and actors who are not employed in the capacity of “writer” at the time of the strike but will nonetheless refuse to perform A-H services as directed by the Company?
Showrunners, directors and actors who will not cross picket lines but, when picket lines are not present, will continue to their jobs as required by their contracts?
Or something else?
“To be fair, it’s hard to imagine a more difficult group to negotiate with than Hollywood writers, who despite their considerable talents have a reputation for Olympian feats of troublesome, self-destructive behavior. From Herman Mankiewicz to Billy Wilder, from Paddy Chayefsky to Robert Towne, it’s hard to say who qualifies as the biggest pain in the neck.”
LA Times entertainment writer = couldn’t make it as a screenwriter. Puta!
Aw…did the wittle Times weporter want to be a scweenwiter?
But on a serious note, the Times article is exactly why I say WGA writers should be reaching out for support in mainstream America. Write those letters to the Des Moines Register (or whatever it’s called) and get your side heard. I don’t mean the big bucks writers, either. I mean working or not working WGA writers should reach out…paint an Everyman/woman face on the writers so that folks don’t look at us all as crazy, greedy bastards.
Okay, enough of my unsolicited opinion.
See, I read the same Times article and I still think the overall tone is very much in favor of writers.
Basically it said the writers deserve more, but they’re a difficult bunch.
Are you all really saying that’s not true? C’MON!
I’m a writer. I know other writers. I read comments and blogs like these pretty often. We ARE a difficult bunch.
There’s no shame in it. It’s part of what makes writers unique and valuable. Maybe we should warm up to the fact and start loving it…lol.
If writers are “difficult” than everyone else is bonafide batshit cray-zee mothaeffers…
Yes, yes…of course. Writers are the best, we are the most sane at all times, we hold the key to truthiness.
It’s perplexing why people misunderstand us so…
Ooops…that ^^^^ was not meant to be anonymous.
“The Teamsters can shut a company down faster and more completely than any other union in town.”
The teamster support is fantastic, and can only help, but as much as it would be nice to believe the above, it’s just not true. In ‘88, when they went on strike, production continued. Most - if not all - the studios just hired scab drivers and went back to work as usual.
Now that the Teamsters have provided this potentially devastating leverage, I would like to see the Guild reaffirm its commitment to good-faith negotiations. Pull Reality off the table. It’s high-profile, it’s a dead horse and if we make the first move, it would go a long way toward swaying or solidifying public opinion that we’re not trying to bully anyone - we only want a fair contract.
If a crew of Teamsters were to honor a picket line and not cross it, the studio couldn’t go out and hire a bunch of scabs to work that show could they? Wouldn’t that violate the IBT contract?
I agree it’s time to pull reality and also, though this doesn’t seem the most popular position among posters, DVD increases. It seems to me like the equivalent of a battle over vinyl at the dawn of the digital age. Let’s strip it down to the issues that matter going forward and call Counter’s bluff. If the AMPTP still clings to its no residuals on new media and rollbacks in separation of rights, etc., the blame for a strike will fall on them. That will make it easier for more members of various unions to honor picket lines (whether that means physical or theoretical lines and people with or without contractual obligations through other collective bargaining agreements) and a shorter strike if there must be one.
While it’s a pisser to read stuff like the Times article, this isn’t a strike that is dependent on public opinion. No one’s trying to get Joe Public to boycott anything and at the end of the day, it really doesn’t matter what they think. What is critical, though, is that writers don’t start buying into the AMPTP’s propaganda. That’s the danger of this kinda of press IMO.
DLW:
I think it’s too early to pull DVD. DVD and New Media should be the last two (major) items for which we fight tooth and nail and then ultimately sacrifice DVD for Internet.
Cap’N, I agree that public opinion isn’t vital to the success of the strike, but there are some sticky points to get over before real negotiation can begin and Reality is high on the radar. I don’t think anybody’s ready to go to the mat for it, so why don’t we show ourselves as the bigger people and let it go?
DLW
Am I missing something here. You keep saying DVD should be off the table. Yet last year, sales in the US were over 16 Billion dollars.
I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t mind a slice of that.
If our negcom is reading, I’d vote for letting reality go as well. And although I’d like to see animation brought into the WGA fold, isn’t that something covered by another union already? Or can we realistically get jurisdiction there?
When the membership voted on and overwhelmingly approved the Pattern of Demands, we didn’t get to vote on which contract proposals were NOT strike-worthy. It was a package deal, as I recall.
“I don’t know about you, but I wouldn’t mind a slice of that.”
We get a slice of that.
Cap’n,
“While it’s a pisser to read stuff like the Times article, this isn’t a strike that is dependent on public opinion. No one’s trying to get Joe Public to boycott anything and at the end of the day, it really doesn’t matter what they think. What is critical, though, is that writers don’t start buying into the AMPTP’s propaganda. That’s the danger of this kinda of press IMO.”
There’s also the effect it has on the men and women who crew the movies we write. If the PR game had no benefit, neither side would be playing it.
Ted,
I can partially answer your questions. In terms of showrunners, two I spoke to have said they will go into work to close down if we go on strike. They will not perform “A-H” services or any other service. They understand the ramifications of their actions contractually, but they believe that facilitating the studios is “crossing the picket line” morally. (These are very high profile showrunners.) They also tell me that other showrunners are planning to do the same.
In terms of the high profile directors, I don’t have first-hand knowledge as the other posters might. This comes from talking to WGA/DGA members who have been gauging the support of some high-profile directors. They will not work during a WGAw strike. Period.
As for the actors, I don’t know. Someone else who posts about this will have to speak to that issue.
I will try to dig up more information for you.
BUT I hope there is no strike!
Let’s a pick a number for digital delivery, future residuals as a % regardless of conduit and name it, eliminate rollbacks, toss out jurisdictional stuff at this moment in time, concede the aspect of separated rights that controls decision making for stage adaptations of produced and exploited-screenplays while retaining a piece of their gate, and put some parameters in place as to what constitutes ‘promotional’ use on the internet (hint: if there are ads or pop-ups, it’s not promoting, it’s content). But striking over generalities and slogans and laundry lists of ‘respect’ and what we deserve is for the birds.
I think it’s naive to assume PR is not important and, sadly, the Guild has not addressed it effectively. A strike, if absolutely necessary, will live and die by the support, or lack thereof, of other showbiz workers like the Teamsters. Those workers all have families and friends with whom they’ll discuss the issue while determining how to approach a strike situation. If the general consensus is “The writers are being greedy and hurting everyone with their strike” there will be less sympathy, which will translate into less actual support. If the consensus is “The producers are greedy and attempting to take away rights and compensation and, if they succeed, might do the same to us,” there will be more solidarity across various unions and more people willing to put their own positions at risk to honor a WGA work stoppage.
The thing I find so frustrating is that the AMPTP has not budged from a position of significant rollbacks, yet the public perception seems to be that writers are hell bent on striking over gains. This must be seen as an egregious failure of public relations policy. I guess all the good copy writers haven’t sold that big spec yet and are still hawking antiperspirant on Madison Avenue.
<< DGA employees can be disciplined.
If I don’t show up for work, then all that happens is this: I get fired, I get replaced, I get sued, I will absolutely be wrong both morally and legally for violating my contractual promise, and some other man or woman will quickly step into my place to finish the film, which will get released. >>
Come on, Craig, that’s not the argument people are making. They know you would be violating your contract, etc. But you would also not be honoring the strike of the union you actually belong to.
Look at the Oscar Wilde quote, again.
The DGA needs to grow a pair. If they did and they told you to honor the strike, would you than change your mind about the contract?
If the studios lock us out, are the Teamsters allowed to not show up to work as a sign of solidarity?
I’m not sure this question is as silly as it sounds.
Ed-
I would like a bigger slice of that 16 billion dollars too.
I also want a pony.
Ryan I am aware of that lol. I meant a bigger slice.
DWL - if you don’t ask for a pony you won’t get one.
I just don’t get the argument that DVD is dead and should be off the table. DVD sales and rentals are forecast to grow, albeit more slowly. But still grow. The market in the UK has just risen by 37%
If it is so dead then why is it such a sticking point?
I’ll bet Ted would have been more than happy with a couple of points more on POTC sales and rentals. An extreme example perhaps but nonethless true.
The studios make close to 80% of their entire profits from DVD and TV sell through. I think they’d be quite happy to see DVD off the table.
Craig said: I will absolutely be wrong both morally and legally for violating my contractual promise…
Come on, Craig. You are nothing if not smart. Plus, you’re a businessman. Morally violating a show biz contract?
Contracts are about the damages to be paid if one breaches. Period. I don’t mind your high-horse standing but that one couldn’t go unremarked.
Ed-
And the Canarsee Indians would like more than the $24 they got for Manhattan. I know this is how the moguls view this issue and it’s the one they’re most emotionally committed to holding the line on. The good news is that, in spite of the fact there’s still money left in DVD, the clock has begun ticking on it. I’d rather concede a past battle lost and win the future.
Just in case, I’d like a brown pony with white spots.
If the studios lock us out, are the Teamsters allowed to not show up to work as a sign of solidarity?
I’m not sure this question is as silly as it sounds.
From what I understand, their union contract allows them to not cross a picket line and protects them from being punished because they didn’t cross the line.
I suspect this provision has its origin back when crossing a picket line could get your head bashed in.
It’d be a nice provision to add to our WGA contract since we might want to return the favor some day.
Oh, and I’m not sure, but I don’t think that means that the teamsters can just not show up at work without getting penalized. I think the provision only applies if there’s an actual picket line at the place they’re working.
I know this is going to be hard for some of you to hear, but what Craig decides to do when/if strike comes is for Craig and Craig alone to decide. Hell, if he did decided to honor the picket line half of you would castigate him for not offering to do it earlier!
Secondly, I don’t think DVD comes off til the end either. But you have to realize (fairness notwithstanding), studios view DVDs the same way the WGA views rollbacks on residuals.
The lockout question is a fascinating one. I’m not sure. The issue has to do with picketing, but if we’re locked out…do we picket?
Is it a meaningful picket?
I don’t know.
Hey, Craig!
Completely off-topic: in your post from 2006 you mention some guy A Format to End All Formats, you listed how to set the margins to achieve fifty lines per page. But I don’t know should I in Final Draft detract those right margins from 8 in or 8.4in… That is, I don’t know at all how to play those in FD… Can you help me? I only know I should go to Format > Elements. Thank you!
Moral Too wrote:
Perhaps our morals are different.
When I sign my name to a deal, that’s a promise I intend to keep, and I keep it. The same morals that bind me to that promise bind me to my promise to my own union, which is that I will not provide writing services during a strike.
I don’t pick and choose which promises I keep, depending on politics or convenience or circumstance.
OK, now I see that comment has no apparent sense, but you’ll get it. ;-)
Craig said: “Perhaps our morals are different. When I sign my name to a deal, that’s a promise I intend to keep, and I keep it.”
My experience has been that people who talk about their morals tend to be the most unethical of all. You must be the exception.
Wasn’t Craig asked about his morals? Isn’t talking about his morals just a sign of…uh…answering a question?
That’s interesting MORAL TOO coming from someone who apparently thinks conracts are mainly about the economic cost of the breach for damages.
Bit of trolling going on methinks.
This from a person who signs their posts, “Moral Too.” Oh, the irony.
Hi. Does anybody know if we’re going on strike?
“I know this is going to be hard for some of you to hear, but what Craig decides to do when/if strike comes is for Craig and Craig alone to decide.”
I’m so tired of the “HE HAS THE RIGHT TO DO AS HE PLEASES!” argument.
It’s so redundant.
Ya, ya…everybody has the flippin’ right to do whatever the flip they want - as long they are willing to accept the consequences!! One of which being that people may criticize you for your actions or opinions. Having the right to do something doesn’t make doing it right. So stop pointing out “hey it’s his right, his blog, his life!”. You’re not furthering the debate.
While I don’t agree what Advised to Remain Anon says above, I will fight to the death to protect his right to say it!
How about a moratorium on all posts regarding opinions on how Craig conducts his personal life and a moratorium on all First Amendment rhetoric?
I come here for info on writing and the WGA.
I don’t care if he crosses or not. I’m just sick of the posts that keep hammering him on it because there is nothing more to say. The posts don’t add anything to the conversation and are taking on the tone of “are we there yet?”
Craig’s taken his stance. He’s told us many, many, many, many, many times. If you think by hammering him more it will change, well, time to look up that definition of insanity.
Wow, Capn. It doesn’t matter what the public think?
Because the “herd” can’t effect change by writing in and demanding shows to not go black? For christ sake they saved “jericho” You ever watch 5 minutes of that show? Most of the “joe public” postings I’ve read have been favorable to the WGA, everybody hates the big bad corporations, BUT if you want to, go ahead an alienate them.
Hi everyone:
I won’t get into the myriad of things that pisses me off about strikes but I do know that we need to keep our spirits up! For those of you who haven’t seen this bit of comedy yet, it will bring a smile to your face—guaranteed!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3Nm0HII68I
“I’m just sick of the posts that keep hammering him on it because there is nothing more to say.”
And I’m sick of the posts pointing out he has the right to do what he wants! Nobody is trying to deny his rights. But people have the right to say they don’t like what he does.
p.s. this does not exclusively pertain to craig, obviously. The “HE HAS A RIGHT TO…” argument, if you even want to call it that, keeps being made. It’s like…Blogwin’s Law.
Completely off-topic: in your post from 2006 you mention some guy A Format to End All Formats, you listed how to set the margins to achieve fifty lines per page. But I don’t know should I in Final Draft detract those right margins from 8 in or 8.4in… That is, I don’t know at all how to play those in FD… Can you help me? I only know I should go to Format > Elements. Thank you! Posted by: Benjamin at October 30, 2007 10:51 AM
Just get The Hollywood Standard,Riley, 2005.
Follow it to the letter. Then quit worrying about format bullshit, and concentrate on writing a good script.
Goofball.
Showrunners shoudn’t peform A-H writing services during a strike, because they are specifically contracted as “writers” under the MBA term “Writers Also Employed in Additional Capacities.” By definition, the A-H exclusions are not applicable to their employment with a Company.
However, personally, I would urge them to reconisder the decision not to perform any of the non-writer services required by their contracts, for two reasons:
First, of course, it makes them indvidually vulnerable to legal action brought against by them by the Company in court, and the Guild cannot protect or represent them in that dispute.
Second, it makes the Guild vulnerable to legal action brought against it by the Company under the National Labor Relations Act (this is, by the way, exacty what the AMPTP is already threatening). The Guild does have a defensible position, but there is nonetheless the risk of the NLRB re-defining the Guild’s jurisdiction more narrowly then we would prefer, and that we currently assert. I believe this would be more injurious to the Guild in the long term then any short-term benefit that would be realized by showrunners refusing to perform non-writer services.
And not just possibly injurious to the Guild, but to all unions. An overview of the history of legal decisions concerning the authority and ability of unions to repsent employees shows a continuing trend of limiting that authority and ability. In most cases, the best a union can hope for is simply retaining the status quo — but, far too often, the union’s effectiveness is actually permanently undermined. And, because a decision in a case involving a specific union becomes precedent in any case involving all unions in general, I think that every union has a responsiblity to every other union to be smart about when they make themselves vulnerable to legal action by management.
And that extends to every member of a union having that responsibility to every member of any union.
And I’m not just talking out of my ass here. The 1978 Supreme Court decision in American Broadcasting Companies v Writers Guild of America — a decision that is directly on point to this exact issue, of showrunners refusing to perform any services for struck Companies — is one the most oft-cited precedents in labor law … and usually to the detriment of the unions involved in the cases where its cited.
That’s my reasoning here. While I commend anyone who is willing to risk personal and professional welfare in service to their principles, I do not think Guild members refusing to perform non-MBA-covered services for struck Companies is of great enough service to our interests — and, so their own — to offset the potential disservice to the interests of the Guild, and all other unions, that could result from that refusal.
This is probably a repeat of something that was said 700 posts ago, but singling out and going after writer-directors and writer-producers is an awfully good way to dis-empower writers.
One of the main methods right now for a writer to get more control over the final movie is to take on some other aspect of the job. If those writers walk off their hyphenate jobs they’ll lose not only the money for the current project, but also be subject to lawsuits and violation of contract proceedings that could cost them whatever they’ve earned in the past. Moreover, studios will be wary of hiring writer-hyphenates and instead hire straight directors or producers.
The upshot of this will make it so that writers have even less control of their material than they currently have (or at least have the potential to gain).
So, if you’re calling for writer-directors to break their directing contracts, understand that you’re doing a great job at sabotaging future prospects for writers.
We hold these truths to be self-evident:
Craig has the right to do whatever he wants.
Some people are very unhappy that he will cross a picket line only to direct his film.
Will that do, advised to anon?
Sure, lump me in with Kant.
Meanwhile, your frickin’ name is “Moral Too,” so what conclusion am I supposed to draw about you?
Craig,
See post #69.
Try and show up on time, okay?
“Moral Too”:
Most people enter into contracts with the intention of fulfilling the obligations they’ve agreed to and the expectation that the other party will do likewise. Contracts anticipate possible disputes as to what constitutes fulffilling those oblgiations, and include penalties for failing to fulfill obligations that are objectively determined.
But the intent and expectation is nonetheless: both parties intend to fulfill their obligations, and disputes will arise only out of differing interpretations of those obligations, and not becuase of an intent not to fulfill those obligations.
This is an ethical principle that actually has a name: “the implied covenant of good faith.”
Is making a good faith effort to fulfill one’s oblgiations a moral principle, too?
Given your psuedonym, I’d have to say … not for everyone.
Ted,
Update. Twelve showrunners have said that if we strike, they will not perform any duties during the strike. I asked one of them about your legal analysis. He said you are correct, but that you’re arguing one side of the equation. His attorney argued the other side.
Also, are you an attorney? I know Turman is and I guess you went to law school, too. Anyway, this other attorney used to work on labor issues and knows the ins and outs fairly well. A strong case can be made for the showrunners stance as well as your view. So in this case, the showrunners will go with principle and their conscience and then hit the legal ramifications when and if that comes.
I asked a writer who normally doesn’t read this blog to catch up and weigh in and he had an interesting comment. Why are you urging people in our union that are willing to sacrifice to avert a strike and, should there be a strike, hopefully assure that it will be short, to not help out?
Craig has taken his position and there is no reason to comment on it, again. But, like someone else said, I voted for both you guys, and I regret my vote for Craig, but not for you. I still think your analysis is a huge service to guild members, but I also don’t get why you aren’t happy that some of our members will go to the mat for us. They’re braver than I am and I appreciate it.
Moral Too
You’re making no friends here, sweetheart. Craig/Ted, this troll thrives on feeding. Starve ‘em.
Ted,
Your argument in post #79 is cogent, precise, and completely convincing.
That a few will (inevitably) keep nattering to the contrary just means that some people are reading your posts with their eyes closed.
Thank you for… well… for being you.
DLW Said (#58):
“Just in case, I’d like a brown pony with white spots.”
The AMPTP Says:
No. And we’re taking back your dog.
“So in this case, the showrunners will go with principle and their conscience and then hit the legal ramifications when and if that comes.”
And if those legal ramifications end up hurting the Guild in the long run, then was the action good or bad?
It’s kind of like with the free rewrite thing. We felt we had the moral right to not work for free, so we try to go the legal route and end up losing, taking away our leverage to collectively negotiate for a stronger no-rewrite clause in our MBA.
We were morally right. We shouldn’t be pressured to do work for free. But, in pursuing that, we ended up hurting ourselves.
It just seems to me that any decision has to be studied for unintended consequences. Every decision has a benefit and a cost. If walking off costs more than it benefits, then it’s a bad bargain. Since the possibility exists that these decisions could hurt the Guild, I would hope the people contemplating such things would put more thought into it than “Damn the consequences, I’ll just let the lawyers sort all that out later.”
First of all, I’m glad the teamsters have a sense of principal. Good to know some people in the biz have it. Yet it would have been nice if the writers had the balls and brains to solve the the problem on their own instead of the teamsters needing to swoop in and save our asses.
That does, Brian.
Not that I ever said anything to the contrary…
In post #84 Ted said:
“Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.”
Dude, you’re entering into a contract with a CORPORATION. I’ve got nothing against corporations but do you really think that they, or those authorized to act on their behalf, enter into these agreements intending to fulfill their obligations in good faith? Grow up. I have friends who have created shows that you can watch in syndication tonight who were not given a penny for it because of what studio lawyers claimed their contracts said. They had to have their lawyers sue in order to see dollar one. If you think that public corporations act ethically then THANK GOD you did not win that election.
Ths name of this blog should be “The Apologist Writer.”
Moral Too and #85 Anonymous are the same person, with an identical IP.
Funny. On some days, it seems like there are six people all in complete agreement, and a quick IP check shows that there’s really just one person being a trolling jerk.
I’m happy that the Teamsters have taken this stand. It certainly increases the bargaining power of the WGA and puts pressure on the AMPTP to come to the table in a different way. Time will tell if it makes a difference, but it just might.
As for all this business over whether Craig should direct this movie or not, can we all just move on? I mean, what about all the writers who are rushing drafts in to beat the 10/31 deadline? The reality is, this is how people make their living, and maintaining good relationships with the people with whom they work is part of how they’ll ensure that they work in the future. This business is about personal relationships. Breach of contract issues aside for the moment, let’s admit that being a writer on strike is different than being an auto worker on strike. For the auto workers, the truth is that everyone really does sink or swim together. For us, this is less the case because we’re not all similarly situation. Let’s not pretend it’s easy to spit in the face of those on who your future livelihood depends. Unless you’re standing in Craig’s moccasins, it’s hard to say what you’d do. I’m assuming, Moral Too, that you aren’t currently directing a movie. If you were, maybe you’d walk out on principle, face the breach of contract music, and watch another director take the helm of your film. Because, Craig or no Craig, the movie will get made. So maybe you’d stand on principle, give up a turn in the director’s seat, brand yourself as unreliable, etc… all to achieve zero gains for the WGA, but I wouldn’t. The only way it would make sense for Craig to walk off a film that he doesn’t want to walk off of is if all directors agreed to do the same (assuming this is even permissible under the DGA’s contract, labor law, etc). Otherwise, it’s all bark no bite. And that being the case, if I were Craig, I’d carry on. And you know what, I don’t think it’s a moral issue, because here in grown-up land, we don’t pretend that having a temper tantrum is the same as achieving a goal. The Teamsters honoring our “picket line” will shut down film production. That’s real. That’s power. A single writer-director walking off set? Not hardly. So, basically, grow up and mind your own business.
Also,,, what Steven Palmer Peterson said about writer-hyphenates (and how their refusing to direct won’t necessarily benefit writers in the long-run).
I’m not Moral Too. I assume you’re not lying, so there is a kink in your system. I have posted enough comments on here for you to know I’m not Moral Too, by the way.
Craig, seriously, is someone using my IP address to make it seem like the posts are coming from my computer? Or are you playing head games with me because I’m an opposing view?
<< The only way it would make sense for Craig to walk off a film that he doesn’t want to walk off of is if all directors agreed to do the same (assuming this is even permissible under the DGA’s contract, labor law, etc). Otherwise, it’s all bark no bite. And that being the case, if I were Craig, I’d carry on. >>
Some directors will not direct. I agree that all of them won’t walk off. I also agree with what you said about writers working up to the deadline. All your points are well taken. But in a grown up world, some people still do the right thing. Or what they think is the right thing. So you don’t need to add insults to a cogent argument. I’m throwing my support to those who help shut down the down should we go on strike. It doesn’t mean you have to.
Guys, you have an inside to track to the actual financial numbers being discussed. Here’s a link to a website laying out the potential new minimums. Is this correct? If not, is there a website/link that gives accurate numbers on proposed mins on both sides of the argument?
http://www.hollywoodtoday.net/?p=2699
re: #92
I find it amusing that someone who opens his post by paraphrasing an obviously brighter writer’s argument as “blah blah blah blah blah”…
…then addresses him as “dude”…
…would suggest that he “grow up.”
Again, if we wanted to shut down the town in solidarity with the other guilds, we could. Just work under the old contract until June then strike alongside the DGA and SAG. All three of us going out at once would send a pretty powerful message.
Anonymous #95:
I think you’ll see that there are other people who are critical of me.
You and Moral Too have the exact same IP reporting through your comment form.
If it’s some random glitch of AOL or something, then I apologize for the accusation.
AMPTP would lock out waaaay before June 30th, Steven.
Ted wrote:
Second, it makes the Guild vulnerable to legal action brought against it by the Company under the National Labor Relations Act (this is, by the way, exacty what the AMPTP is already threatening). The Guild does have a defensible position, but there is nonetheless the risk of the NLRB re-defining the Guild�s jurisdiction more narrowly then we would prefer, and that we currently assert.
This is a frightening thought to anyone who’s been involved in labor issues in recent years. During the current administration (I mean the one in Washington D.C.), the NLRB has been completely stacked with anti-labor/anti-union toads. Taking an issue to the NLRB used to be a crapshoot. Now it’s suicide.
To those of you with smart lawyer friends, be careful about taking their opinions seriously unless you know for a fact that they’ve tangled with the NLRB in the last few years. If they haven’t, this could be a case where a little bit of knowledge is a very dangerous thing.
AMPTP would lock out waaaay before June 30th, Steven.
So, the reason we should ask the directors and writer-directors to break their contracts and be subject to lawsuits is because if we delayed the WGA strike until the DGA and SAG could also legally strike, then the AMPTP would essentially force the writer’s to strike (via a lockout)?
While I’m sure there’s “trolling” going on, I’m apparently sharing the same IP address with various people I’m working with here as well as new acquaintances who have recently introduced themselves. It’s nice that people aren’t attacked for being anonymous, despite the fact that no one is truly anonymous on any message board that’s moderated.
I keep hearing from the same strike captain who has nothing new to report, but just wants to make sure I’m “up to speed.” I feel I get that here.
Anonymous of post 85:
That a Guild member who refuses to perform non-MBA-covered services required by his contract with a struck Company makes both himself and the Guild vulnerable to legal action by the Company, and such legal action could result in a decision that is injurious to the Guild and could serve as a precedent that is injurious to union in general. Check.
I’m not sure what this means. The person you talked to confirmed that my legal analysis was correct; presumably, he wouldn’t have said that if it wasn’t consistent with what his attoreny told him.
Do you mean, his attorney advised him that breaching his contract for non-MBA-covered services is of great enough service to the interests of the Guild that its worth risking the Company taking legal action against both him individually and the Guild?
No, I’m not. I also never went to law school. And, yet, my legal analysis of this situation is consistent with that of your showrunner friend’s attorney, who did go to law school, who used to work on labor issues and who knows the in-and-outs fairly well. So this really isnt relevant, save as an attempt to discredit my point of view on whether or not the possible benefits to the Guild of showrunners breaching their contracts outweighs the possible legal downside to both the showrunners individually and the Guild.
However, where I do have an edge over your showrunner friend’s attorney is that I have experience in motion picture production and post-production. Granted, its in thearical, rather than in television, but it does nonetheless weigh in on this matter.
The absence of the showrunners — or, in fact, of any Guild member — will not preclude the Companies from completing production of episodes that require only non-MBA-covered services. It might impede it, it will definitely impact the quality, but those episodes will be completed, and they will be aired, and the advertising revenue is already guaranteed to the Companies and the networks.
What that absence will do, however, is provide oppotunity for non-writing employees to greater prove their value and even necessity to the television production process. I do not consider that a benefit to Guild members.
For which, as I said, I commend them. However, in this case, it is not an action I would recommend to them.
Unlike your writer friend, I don’t think the AMPTP places greater value on individual Guild members who peform non-MBA-covered services than they do on all Guild members collectively who perform MBA-covered services. If the willingness of Guild members collectively to cease performing MBA-covered services is not sufficient to make the AMPTP act to avert this strike, then this strike will not be averted.
Also, unlike your writer friend, I do not think the absense of Guild members who perform non-MBA-covered services will be felt beyond the period necessary for the Company to complete production and post-production of motion pictures that do not require services that are covered by the MBA. It is card which entire impact on the strike is spent the second it is played. Playing it will not make the strike shorter, any more than not playing will make the strike longer.
So, short version: contrary to your writer friend’s opinion, I am not urging members willing to sacrifice not to help out.
I am urging members not to take actions that will only have negligible impact on the Companies or the strike at the expense of sacrifice.
Craig, Thanks for the apology. Much appreciated. I’m checking with AOL now to see if indeed it’s their kink. Man, what kind of Guild member am I to be critical of other Guild members, even though I still use AOL! Mea Culpa!
As for Ted’s great response, all I can say without checking again is that the other attorney said that it can be argued to the contrary. And we’re going to have to agree to disagree on the sacrifice part. I and many others think it will make a difference and benefit the Guild.
Also, please don’t be so sensitive. I wasn’t belittling you. I was just curious about your legal background. Who wouldn’t be after you gave such a response? I don’t know you, though we met once, so I was just curious.
I will try to work up the courage to post on the WA boards with my name and we can talk more there.
I’m a bit confused here… isn’t the biggest point of forming a Union or Guild to gain the power of collective bargaining?
And, assuming that’s true, isn’t our biggest weapon the threat that if we are not collectively happy with a deal being offered to us, to collectively strike?
And if that’s true, then what’s the big freaking deal with the WGA going out on strike? Why are so many writers dead set against striking, no matter what?
I haven’t seen anything from Ted Elliot, but even Craig Mazin has stated on this page that ALL of the proposals the AMPTP has put forth are unreasonable, punitive, and constitute blatant rollbacks of our existing rights and income. If we all agree on this point, and if the AMPTP is unwilling to take their rollbacks off the table, then aren’t we OBLIGATED to strike in order to get a better deal?
Seriously… am I missing something? I see so much anti-strike talk here, but no convincing arguments not to go on strike. Is it just writers being worried about paying for their leased Mercedes, or is there a genuine, tangible reason that we shouldn’t go on strike? Because this set of AMPTP “negotiating stances” is so poisonous that if we accept ANY of them, we’re just cheerily agreeing to rollbacks of the rights and contractual obligations that our parents and grandparents fought for and won years ago.
Can someone help me explain why this surrender scenario is even on the table?
I’m pretty sure AOL has a finite number of IP addresses and when you are on the internet thru AOL you are using one of their assigned IPs and not your computer’s IP.
“Moral Too”:
And that should cause me betray my principles … why?
Maybe you’ve got nothing against corporations, but you sure seem to have something against people who work for corporations.
And I don’t know what you mean by “intend to fulfill their obligations in good faith.” The best I can figure is, you mean they intend to fulfill their obligations, but don’t really mean it if they send me a muffin basket.
Now, if you’d asked if I think they entered into the agreement in good faith, which means they intend to fulfill the obligations required of them by the agreement … then, my answer, is “Yes.”
Because if I thought they were entering into the agreement in bad faith, I wouldn’t enter into the agreement.
Because, you know, that would be incredibly stupid.
You know what else would be incredibly stupid?
To enter into a contract with a corporation, and not expect those authorized to act its behalf to assert and act upon an interpretation of their obligations — and mine — that best serves the corporation’s interests.
Because I am definitely going to assert and act upon an interpretation of their obligations and mine that best serves my interests.
Yeah, so? Fish swim, birds fly, corporate attorneys interpret contractual obligations so as to serve the interests of the corporations. Welcome to the real world, “Moral Too.”
Oh, so they asserted an interpretation of the corporation’s obligations that best serves their interests, and the court upheld their interpretation? Good for them.
You mean, in accordance with my ethics? No. But, then, based on the evidence of your posts, I don’t think you act ethically, either.
Yeah, ‘cause the silly notion that most of the resources that went to hire organizers and researchers should have gone to beefing up the Contracts Department so the Guild would be able to enforce the most aggressive interpretation of the MBA possible in all cases, and be vigilant against any attempts by AMPTP Companies to assert and act on an interpretation of the MBA that served their interests … that would have just doomed us all, huh?
SAG sent this email out around 2PM today:
Screen Actors Guild National Board of Directors Issues Statement in Support of Writers Guild of America
The National Board of Directors of Screen Actors Guild unanimously approved a statement of support for the Writers Guild of America (WGA) at its plenary meeting in Los Angeles Oct. 27.
Saturday’s resolution, which is included below in full, sounds a resounding note of support for the WGA from the highest elected body of Screen Actors Guild.
SCREEN ACTORS GUILD STATEMENT OF SUPPORT FOR THE WGA
WHEREAS the advent of digital production and distribution of content through the Internet, cell phones, and other new media platforms has created a moment of historical urgency for the Guilds that represent creative talent;
WHEREAS our employers sought to change the compensation structures fought for by generations of actors, writers and directors by proposing to pay residuals on a profit-only basis across all media;
WHEREAS our employers have thus far been unwilling to counteroffer the reasonable WGA payment proposal for Internet streaming and instead call such use “promotional” even when whole pictures are shown and new revenue is generated;
WHEREAS our employers persist in equating content downloaded over the Internet with the sale of DVDs despite the complete absence of manufacturing costs and the relatively de minimis cost of digital distribution;
WHEREAS our employers have thus far been unwilling to recognize that the wages, working conditions and residuals provided in our basic contracts should govern work made for any platform, new or old;
WHEREAS our employers have had sufficient experience in new media to make confident, public revenue projections to their shareholders, but nevertheless insist that they must study new media for another three years before they can bargain a residuals formula;
WHEREAS any solution devised for payment of residuals in new media must address the problems of monitoring and enforcement;
WHEREAS our employers have been unwilling to improve the unjust home video residuals formula despite record home video revenues they have reaped since convincing the Guilds over 20 years ago to help grown this market by accepting a discounted residual;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the National Board of Directors of Screen Actors Guild that:
The current position of the AMPTP and its members referred to above are unreasonable and would set a dangerous precedent for all creative talent.
The Guild supports the WGA and any other Guild or union that seeks to resist the employer positions referred to above and fight for fair compensation and protections for creative talent in the motion picture, television, and new media industries.
Adopted unanimously this 27th day of October 2007 by the National Board of Directors of Screen Actors Guild.
Sorry. That makes no sense.
“Yeah, ‘cause the silly notion that most of the resources that went to hire organizers and researchers should have gone to beefing up the Contracts Department so the Guild would be able to enforce the most aggressive interpretation of the MBA possible in all cases, and be vigilant against any attempts by AMPTP Companies to assert and act on an interpretation of the MBA that served their interests … that would have just doomed us all, huh?
Ted”
as one of those ‘new hire’ organizers, I’d have to agree w/ Ted on this. You WGA members really ought to ask for an audit of the Organizing department’s budget.
Regular Joe (97),
That Hollywood Today article is a heinous, heinous piece of misinformation.
Possibly out of ignorance rather than malice—but in any case, the author is presenting numbers he describes as payments to writers for TV episodes, which are in fact budgets for entire episodes. (He’s looking at the proposal on low-budget thresholds, and not understanding what the numbers he’s looking at mean. And apparently it never occurred to him to question his interpretation when he saw that the AMPTP was proposing to increase these numbers by factors of 5 or more. Because of course studios would love and lobby for an opportunity to pay every union writer 5 times as much as they did last year. Great investigative journalism there, guy.)
Hence the claim that a TV writer can earn $2.5 million for writing a single episode. I’d sure love to work on that show….
Best of all, the “facts” he derives from his own complete failure of understanding are the ones he presents in the opening sentence of his article. (“From $5 million to $25 million. That is the proposed top price for TV writers and writing teams under the terms of the contract proposed by Hollywood producers….” Shit, fellas, why didn’t we cave to management’s proposals fifteen seconds into the negotiations?)
Oh, and comments on the article are closed, so no one can correct him, either. Best-case scenario.
I’d like to interpret this as a case of honest ineptitude, but its effect is exactly the same as a well-thought-out hit piece—so either way, thanks a shitload, Alex Ben Block.
Now prepare for an even louder round of cries concerning “those rich, greedy writers who will hurt us all to protect their millions”….
113, I’M Travis Fields. You’re not. So stop impersonating ME!
113, I’m Travis. You’re not. Grow up.
<< You WGA members really ought to ask for an audit of the Organizing department’s budget. >>
I have to say this even though I’ll be attacked. As a Guild who’s wife does community organizing and who’s family has a labor/union background in organizing, the Guild has done an excellent job of organizing. Starting from literally nothing, no one can say that the job they’ve done isn’t exemplary. The outreach program of informational meetings, dinners, emails, phone calls, etc. made my wife’s family think we’d actually become a real union. So whether you support the potential strike or not, it’s hard to fault the Guild on this issue.
I am Travicus!
That Hollywood Today article is insanely inaccurate. Craig, maybe you should consider writing something about it on the front page, since there’s no way to leave comments on the piece, and I would hate for people to be mislead. It’s worse even than that NYT article a few months ago.
For the record, #115 and 116 are the imps.
Re: AOL and IP addresses:
http://webmaster.info.aol.com/faq.html
Q. Can I use the IP address of the request to track a member’s access to my site?
A. No. Because AOL uses proxy servers to service the requests made by members, webmasters see the IP address of the gr server, not the DAHA of the member in their web site log files. The problem with trying to use the IP address to track access is that there may easily be multiple members assigned to a proxy server. All of the member requests would appear to be coming from one member if you assumed a relationship between member and IP address. In addition, members may be reassigned to a different proxy server during a session. See also Network Info.
I’d just like to let you know that DeadlineHollywoodDaily.com has turned on the “comments” feature for strike-related stories starting tonight and continuing as needed.
if i build a hotel, do i have to pay the electrician, the framer, the painter, the architect and the engineer everytime i rent a room?