Writer's Guild Going on Strike

It's difficult to evaluate and take sides. With neither side publishing the text of the actual wants and offers on the table, who is to say what's going on. Of course, the reason we don't see the actual text is then neither side would be able to shovel the manure our way and try to win over their members and the public.

I don't think I could stomach this stuff if I was involved as a union member. Watching my earnings at zero while these yahoos go tit-for-tat (remember, the AMPTP representatives and the union leaders are likely on salary and still getting a paycheck). Just how much of a raise do the union members now need to recover for lost wages? What's worse is that innocents that are not in the unions nor AMPTP are taking a toll as well (restaurants, etc). It's unfortunate all-around.
 
Last edited:
ahalpert said:
Haha bigotry that's funny. .
Click to expand...

Google the word bigot. The very first hit " . . . in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group."

If someone belongs to a union that actively excludes qualified non-members from working, they are a bigot. Simple as that.
 
Speaking of strikes, the IATSE strike ended with a new agreement. In that agreement, it was written that they would work out details later in a meeting to happen no later thanJanuary 2022, regarding meals. I've not been able to find anything regarding if the meeting was ever held and what was agreed to. Does anybody have the results of that meeting? From the agreement:

"5. Meals
a. Producers and the IATSE agree to work with the DGA and/or production
executives in an effort to ensure that employees covered by the Basic Agreement
are provided the opportunity to take contractually-prescribed meal breaks. A
meeting of representatives of the AMPTP, IATSE and DGA to discuss the
provision of meal periods to the IATSE in a timely manner shall take place as
soon as practicable but in no event later than January 31, 2022."
 
Doug Jensen said:
Google the word bigot. The very first hit " . . . in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group."

If someone belongs to a union that actively excludes qualified non-members from working, they are a bigot. Simple as that.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this isn't a serious comment and doesn't merit a serious rebuttal. I think you should use different terminology
 
Paul F said:
.

I don't think I could stomach this stuff if I was involved as a union member. Watching my earnings at zero while these yahoos go tit-for-tat (remember, the AMPTP representatives and the union leaders are likely on salary and still getting a paycheck). Just how much of a raise do the union members now need to recover for lost wages? What's worse is that innocents that are not in the unions nor AMPTP are taking a toll as well (restaurants, etc). It's unfortunate all-around.
Click to expand...

Sure. But you could also think of how much money union members made for doing nothing during the pandemic due to covid precautions and cancellations. Or to put it another way, I lost so much money during the pandemic due to covid cancellations. And I just ate those losses. Sure, you could say that I should have written contracts to protect myself from that. So, why didn't I? Because I was afraid that it would make me a riskier hire and they would go with a different guy since we weren't using the same contract.

Union leaders will get the boot if members are unhappy with what they deliver.

if people lose a half-year of income, then it would take about 3 years to make that up if they achieve a 15% raise. (Obviously, devil in the details.)

The collateral damage to bystanders is very sad but it doesn't make sense to lay blame squarely on the union. After all, if AMPTP caved to their demands, this could end tomorrow.

This was the quote I remembered, from early July. It wasn't attributed to a named executive.

bleed the writers dry instead of negotiating a deal.

“The endgame is to allow things to drag on until union members start losing their apartments and losing their houses,” a studio executive told Deadline. Another with inside information about the tactic called it “a cruel but necessary evil.”
Click to expand...
https://uproxx.com/movies/hollywood-...ss-wga-strike/

Playing hardball is their prerogative. But it doesn't endear the studios to me.
 
Abe, I didn't follow that at all. I'm just sympathizing with the union members and how tough it must be to sit about idle while negotiations go on.
 
Paul F said:
Abe, I didn't follow that at all. I'm just sympathizing with the union members and how tough it must be to sit about idle while negotiations go on.
Click to expand...

Yes, it must suck. I just meant it's a bit of you win some you lose some -- work stoppage during a strike is a downside to union membership while the benefits you secure are the upside. Maybe at least they can take some other work while they wait?
 
ahalpert said:
Sorry, but this isn't a serious comment and doesn't merit a serious rebuttal. I think you should use different terminology
Click to expand...

Oh, I assure you I am totally serious. It is bigotry. But if you don't want to debate the point, that's cool.

No difference in saying everyone on the crew has to be a Catholic, or a Jew, or a Republican, or a Democrat, or gay, or straight. Unions who exclude qualified and experienced non-members from working are bigots.
 
Last edited:
Doug Jensen said:
Oh, I assure you I am totally serious. It is bigotry. But if you don't want to debate the point, that's cool.

No difference in saying everyone on the crew has to be a Catholic, or a Jew, or a Republican, or a Democrat, or gay, or straight. Unions who exclude qualified and experienced non-members from working are bigots.
Click to expand...

Nobody is prejudiced against non-union, thinks they're inferior, or calls them slurs. Bigotry commonly refers to racism, homophobia, religious animosity, etc. You don't need to quote a definition for us because we all know what it means. Calling unions bigoted dilutes the meaning of the word.

But if you want to get technical, the reason your definition doesn't apply is because it says " in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group." And then if you click on the definition of "prejudice" in the same Google dictionary, it says
"dislike, hostility, or unjust behavior deriving from unfounded opinions.
"accusations of racial prejudice"
Click to expand...
That simply doesn't apply here. Unions monopolize the labor pool in their respective industries and that's the nature of how they work. You can't have collective bargaining without a collective. Even if you think that's unjust, it's not rooted in an unfounded opinion but in the fact that employees can get a better deal if and only if they all band together.

None of this requires explanation to reasonable people and frankly I think less of anyone who shares this opinion because it's a facile argument with the goal or at least the effect of downplaying actual forms of bigotry while simultaneously weakening labor power.
 
Regarding the data, the actual offer that the AMPTP published, says nothing about who gets to see the data. It only says the data will be released. Disappointing if they are hiding something.

Reading the actual offer, which the AMPTP has published here are some highlights - all quoted from the release:

- "The Companies have redefined the economics of the development room by offering both a minimum
length of employment (regardless of weeks worked) and a new and improved compensation structure for
High Budget SVOD and pay television series and serials. Writers in a development room will now be
guaranteed a minimum of 10 weeks of employment and, for Article 14 writers (other than Story Editors
or Executive Story Editors), the week-to-week rate will increase by 43.8% over the current rate, raising
the rate from $9,888 per week to $14,214 per week. Staff Writers’ rates will increase by 31.3% over the
current week-to-week rate, from $5,302/week to $6,959/week; the rate for an Article 14 Story
Editor/Executive Story Editor will increase from $9,888/week to $12,978/week.

- In a first, the companies agreed that Staff Writers employed under Article 13 will receive script fees in
addition to their weekly salary. This represents a 46% increase for a Staff Writer employed for 20
weeks on a one-hour network or High Budget SVOD series who writes one script.
The Producers’ proposal increases residuals for use of a High Budget SVOD Program on foreign
streaming platforms by 76% (and increases residuals by 22% overall) for the largest services. This is
on the heels of the hefty 46% increase in High Budget SVOD residuals that the parties agreed to during
the 2020 negotiations

- To provide critical production experience to writers who aspire to become Showrunners, the Companies
propose that, following the closure of the writers’ room for a single-camera High Budget SVOD and pay
television series or serial, the Showrunner may select at least two writers to be employed (together
with the Showrunner) during production of the series or serial, for a period of at least twenty (20)
consecutive weeks,"
 
As a WGA writer said to me today.

Set aside the AI for a moment.

All the WGA are asking for is what WGA members already get in broadcast.

She said if she was working on a show for broadcast, none of what they are asking for would even be challenged or a problem.
 
Paul F said:
Regarding the data, the actual offer that the AMPTP published, says nothing about who gets to see the data. It only says the data will be released. Disappointing if they are hiding something.
Click to expand...

I didn't vet the claims of the article I copied in. Either way, I don't think the numbers can stay hidden forever as streamers move to a primarily ad-supported model. My impression is that advertisement reach verification is a serious business. (Except, perhaps, when it comes to google search results...for some reason)
 
Doug Bee said:
All the WGA are asking for is what WGA members already get in broadcast.

She said if she was working on a show for broadcast, none of what they are asking for would even be challenged or a problem.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with giving them a sweetheart deal in the first place, as many freelancers who have given discount rates to new clients can tell you
 
From the first paragraph, with a guarantee of 10 weeks and $14,000/week, a writer is guaranteed $140,000 if they get on a show. It's not Bel Air money but it's a living. 10 weeks on and the rest of the year off.
 
Paul F said:
From the first paragraph, with a guarantee of 10 weeks and $14,000/week, a writer is guaranteed $140,000 if they get on a show. It's not Bel Air money but it's a living. 10 weeks on and the rest of the year off.
Click to expand...

I thought part of the issue in the first place was that they could reclassify writers as something other than staff and sidestep the minimums?
 
I'm confused why this was a "sweetheart deal." Backstage reported:

-In 2019 SAG-AFTRA negotiated a streaming agreement with Netflix to be paid residuals for Netflix productions.
- In 2020 SAG-AFTRA negotiated a TV and theatrical contract with AMPTP covering film, television and new media, which includes streaming. It was estimated performers would gain $750M in streaming residuals.
- In exchange, SAG-AFTRA agreed to a new residual structure for broadcast television, costing actors over $170 million in network residuals.

Here is my question: In "exchange" for what? The 2019 deal was a deal with Netflix that paid residuals for their originals. The 2020 deal with AMPTP was a gain for the actors of $750M in streaming residuals. I presume these are 'other than Netflix' residuals. Is SAG-AFTRA saying they agreed to a new residual structure for broadcast television that cost actors $170M as a favor for taking in $750M? I don't understand it because it looks to me that although there were winners and losers among the actors, there was a net gain overall for the actors of $580M. I don't understand where the sweetheart part of those deals enters into it.

Here is the link. You can figure it out and tell me because I don't get it.
https://www.backstage.com/magazine/article/hollywood-unions-streaming-service-pay-74135/
 
ahalpert said:
I thought part of the issue in the first place was that they could reclassify writers as something other than staff and sidestep the minimums?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's a real problem. Despite my sarcasm, writers are getting a pittance from the streamers as compared to what they get elsewhere. The situation, from what I'm reading from the writers is quite bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top