Those who support writer's strike

Status
Not open for further replies.
The stats that are being mentioned have one big difference - the word 'working'

It was said that the average working writer makes around $200,000 a year.
It was also said that average writer makes around $20,000 a year.

Now I'm not saying those numbers are accurate - I'm just saying there is no reason they can't both be true.
Nonworking writers make $0 a year...which might tend to drag down the average a little.
 
ugafan said:
i don't buy it. why would anyone do it for only $20,000? that's a crap salary here in georgia, i can't imagine what it would be like trying to live in california off that. i imagine the truth of what people actually make is probably somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...

For the same reason people move out to LA in droves and indie filmmakers everywhere rack up tons of credit card debit. They love what they do and take risks that they hope will lead to a sustainable income so they can keep on living their dream. I'd rather be a "working class" editor than a "well-to-do" office drone stuck in some gray cubical somewhere.


-A
 
I know of one writer who got one script for tv produced, that was it for I think almost two years. I also know another writer who's had a great gig on CSI, but that's not the norm.
 
Suffering due to lack of work or skills is one thing but suffering when you're work continues to make money is another I think.
 
A writer could make rate-card for a 10-month season and then not work for two years. It is a feast or famine business, and membership in a guild doesn't give you any guarantee of work. It does protect your interests when you are working and often brings ancillary benefits like health, welfare and pension.

Just because I have an IA600 card doesn't mean I'm DP'ing Lost or making $400k a year.

e
 
ugafan said:
i don't buy it. why would anyone do it for only $20,000? that's a crap salary here in georgia, i can't imagine what it would be like trying to live in california off that. i imagine the truth of what people actually make is probably somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...

Dude, they do it to try and further their career. You don't have to only write if you're in the guild....many people have other jobs.

Doesn't SAG say the average earnings for an actor is like $5k a year? That is why most of them are waiting tables.

The first book I ever picked up on writing for film and television said not to quit your day job when you start out...
 
are there any writers here that can give us a ballpark figure about what you actually make?
 
Luis Caffesse said:
The stats that are being mentioned have one big difference - the word 'working'

It was said that the average working writer makes around $200,000 a year.
It was also said that average writer makes around $20,000 a year.

Now I'm not saying those numbers are accurate - I'm just saying there is no reason they can't both be true.
Nonworking writers make $0 a year...which might tend to drag down the average a little.
Click to expand...

That's a good point, but then we have to define "working." This is a gig/project based industry so very few people are traditional "staff" employees that work at a single company. A writer on top network drama could probably work only a few months a year if they wanted to and make tons more than a writer on low-their cable stuff who works 51 weeks a year. In that case the "non-working" writer makes a lot more than the "working" writer if you will. Anyone know what the minimum work requirements are for a writer to retain their WGA member status?

A more well rounded way to look at it is to try and find out what the median annual earned income WGA members get from writing. There is such a wide range of wages that the top earning 3 or 4 percent of WGA members would certainly throw off an average of the guild as a whole. It's kinda like asking what's the average wage of a Microsoft employee and including every from Bill Gates to the mail room guy in the calculation.

But, as another poster pointed out, it doesn't really matter how much the writer's make 'cause they still deserve to get a cut of the pie as networks and studios find new ways to monetize movies and TV shows.

-A
 
adkimery said:
But, as another poster pointed out, it doesn't really matter how much the writer's make 'cause they still deserve to get a cut of the pie as networks and studios find new ways to monetize movies and TV shows.

-A
Click to expand...
That depends on the writer. Some of them deserve a whipping for the crap they produce.
 
DeSica said:
Dude, they do it to try and further their career. You don't have to only write if you're in the guild....many people have other jobs.

Doesn't SAG say the average earnings for an actor is like $5k a year? That is why most of them are waiting tables.

The first book I ever picked up on writing for film and television said not to quit your day job when you start out...
Click to expand...

Don't quote me, but I believe the average earning for 10% of SAG actors out there make less than 5k a year... the rest make quite a bit less than that...
 
This strike is a separate issue from what salary they earn. As it is in all the guilds, there are already rates that conform to different entertainment models.

Like everyone else who has a hand in the ATL creation of an intellectual property, the writer should have a residual interest in it through all markets - even if it is a fixed percentage of a yet-largely-unrealized ancillary segment.

If the studios, distributors and nets are making nothing from this emerging ancillary distribution stream, then the writer can share in nothing. If it is going like gangbusters, they should enjoy a fair and equitable share of same.

e
 
overlandfilms said:
This strike is a separate issue from what salary they earn. As it is in all the guilds, there are already rates that conform to different entertainment models.

Like everyone else who has a hand in the ATL creation of an intellectual property, the writer should have a residual interest in it through all markets - even if it is a fixed percentage of a yet-largely-unrealized ancillary segment.

If the studios, distributors and nets are making nothing from this emerging ancillary distribution stream, then the writer can share in nothing. If it is going like gangbusters, they should enjoy a fair and equitable share of same.

e
Click to expand...
This is a post that makes a lot of sense. Shame on you for bringing logic into the discussion...:cheesy:
 
adkimery said:
But, as another poster pointed out, it doesn't really matter how much the writer's make 'cause they still deserve to get a cut of the pie as networks and studios find new ways to monetize movies and TV shows.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree. It's one thing to try to negotiate a piece of profits as part of a contract negotiation. It's another thing to expect it. I don't think the writers deserve a "piece of the action." Of course I'd argue that neither do the actors, etc. The only people who deserve royalties are the investors who put money into the project expecting a return on their investment. Everyone else are just employees, and they deserve only whatever pay they agreed to when they were hired.

I'm all for workers trying to get better pay/benefits. And renegotiating a new contract is perfectly fine. But if workers are allowed to leave their job at any time for any reason (or temporarily stop working, as in a strike), then the employer should have the right to terminate their employment at any time, for any reason.

Let's not forget all of the other support people that are now out of work because of this strike. They don't get paid when production stops. So I have a hard time portraying these striking workers as "victims" when they're costing both the companies and many other people alot of money, only because they think they deserve something they don't.
 
Tony,

How is life in the mill? I hope your foreman doesn't know you're posting on DVXUser when you're supposed to be operating the cotton gin.

:)

e
 
Last edited:
TwistedLincoln said:
I have to disagree. It's one thing to try to negotiate a piece of profits as part of a contract negotiation. It's another thing to expect it. I don't think the writers deserve a "piece of the action." Of course I'd argue that neither do the actors, etc. The only people who deserve royalties are the investors who put money into the project expecting a return on their investment. Everyone else are just employees, and they deserve only whatever pay they agreed to when they were hired
Click to expand...
Royalties/residuals are par for the course so I have no problem w/the writers wanting to make sure they get residuals from the new ways studios and networks are monitizing the shows/movies. Especially since the WGA, as a show of good faith to the studios, reduced their residuals on home video by 80% back in the 80's and the studios have never give that 80% back even though it was only supposed to be a temp cut.

But debating royalties/residuals is like debating whether or not you should tip your waiter/watriess. You either think it's okay or your don't.


I'm all for workers trying to get better pay/benefits. And renegotiating a new contract is perfectly fine. But if workers are allowed to leave their job at any time for any reason (or temporarily stop working, as in a strike), then the employer should have the right to terminate their employment at any time, for any reason.
Click to expand...
It's not like one day the WGA randomly told it's members a strike was on. This has been building for months, CA is a work at will state, and unions were born out of necessity.


Let's not forget all of the other support people that are now out of work because of this strike. They don't get paid when production stops. So I have a hard time portraying these striking workers as "victims" when they're costing both the companies and many other people alot of money, only because they think they deserve something they don't.
Click to expand...
I live and work in LA so I'm very aware of the repercussions an extend strike could have. I can't blame the writers for striking though. I mean, if you have a contract that says you get X% of from DVD sales and the writing on the wall says that DVD sales are a dead end and digital streaming/downloading is the home video market of the future don't you think its fair to get X% from digital downloads? Should you no longer be get your cut of the "home video" market just because the delivery medium has changed? I don't think the WGA is asking for anything unreasonable.


-A
 
TwistedLincoln said:
I don't think the writers deserve a "piece of the action." Of course I'd argue that neither do the actors, etc. The only people who deserve royalties are the investors who put money into the project expecting a return on their investment. Everyone else are just employees,
Click to expand...


Right, like a CEO...he gets a salary, a big fat one, and should be happy with it. As a shareholder, I shouldn't have to put up with his requests for bonuses and perks and whatnot...do your damn job and shut up, or else. Next time one of these bums tries to negotiate more money, I'm gonna crack him...the nerve.

My money invested makes money, not his decisions, or the talent of other employees. A CEO asking for profit participation is as wrong as an author wanting a percentage of every book sold just becuase he wrote the original copy. It's nuts.

Nobody has the right to demand fairness...you have to ask for it, and when you don't get it, you sit there and thank the powers that be for allowing you to even make a penny while you contribute to their getting rich.

You get paid what the market dictates, and if that market is being manipulated by an oligopoly or through clandestine collusion so that the true fair market value is never attained, then too bad. Everyone should play by the rules, except the people who can ignore or change them for their own benefit.

It's not like studios ever fudge numbers so as not to pay people....My Big Fat Greek Wedding cost $5 million to make, and took in $368 million worldwide, yet still lost money. That is proof that the studios have it rough, and that people like writers are lucky they got paid what little they did up front, nevermind expecting a percentage as per contract...imagine how bad the studio has it, taking a huge hit like that.
 
Last edited:
adkimery said:
if you have a contract that says you get X% of from DVD sales and the writing on the wall says that DVD sales are a dead end and digital streaming/downloading is the home video market of the future don't you think its fair to get X% from digital downloads? Should you no longer be get your cut of the "home video" market just because the delivery medium has changed?
Click to expand...

Interesting point, and well stated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top