What everyone already knew is now in a letter which WGAE President Michael Winship and WGAW President Patric Verrone sent to members tonight:
As Negotiating Committee Chair John Bowman wrote you last night, we are continuing to negotiate the terms of a tentative agreement with the AMPTP. We anticipate that we will be able to present the terms of that agreement to you in the next few days. In order to have a full discussion with you of the terms and how they were reached, and in order to get your input before making recommendations or decisions, we have scheduled membership meetings for current-active members only for this Saturday, February 9, in New York and Los Angeles.
The New York meeting will take place at 2 pm ET in the Broadway Ballroom of the Crowne Plaza Hotel at Times Square, 1606 Broadway (Broadway and 49th Street).
The Los Angeles meeting will take place at 7 pm PT in the Shrine Auditorium (665 W. Jefferson Blvd.).
We urge you to attend. We have gotten to this point in our negotiation as the direct result of the power of this strike, which each of you has generated. Neither the Negotiating Committee, nor the East Council or the West Board, will take action on any contract until after the membership meetings are held and your voices have been heard. We are all in this together.
So what will they be doing until Saturday? Why couldn’t they meet sooner? Seems like wasted time.
Comment by waiting — February 5, 2008 @ 7:18 pm
Here is the playbill for Saturday
Your leaders will speak. They will say you supported us when we asked for a strike. Now support us when we tell you we want to stop the strike and work things out. We will get what we need but we must stop TODAY. Please understand that. The negotiating committee has approved a strike stoppage while we work this out.
Move along hardliners. Nothing to see here.
The Show must go on.
Comment by Lambsikins — February 5, 2008 @ 7:24 pm
Way to go, Patrick! Can’t wait to hear what the deal is. I’m sure it won’t be the greatest of all time, but it will be reasonable and practical… just like you. Thanks for your incredible efforts and leadership.
Comment by George Glass — February 5, 2008 @ 7:59 pm
Okay. So now all I have to do is not go insane before Saturday. Right. *deep breaths*
Comment by Caitlin — February 5, 2008 @ 8:03 pm
The ONLY way our voices can be heard is by every single member voting on this contract. Not a giant room full of people where the board gets a general idea of where people stand. For all we’ve through that is not okay.
WE ALL DESERVE A VOTE BEFORE THE STRIKE IS CALLED OFF!
Comment by LISTEN TO US!!! — February 5, 2008 @ 8:03 pm
Im basically a non-entity in all of this from Wellington New Zealand. All I can say is I appreciate the fight. Peter Jackson had to fight New Line. With all his power and fan support it took time and was not easy. It was an individual fight in many ways and very specific and very provable. They still shat on him as though he was insignificant - FTW what on earth did they think they could ever gain but shame?
I honestly don’t know what they thought. Maybe in these things it is simply an accountant saying “I have talked to the lawyers and yes you have lost - but deferring the loss by 18 months gains you X dollars and thus the payout is only 50% of the payout today. I suspect 90 plus percent of all these things works in this way.
And all they ended up with was Utterly unsurprisingly just that: they got the shame and Peter won; Bob Shaye is a walking has-been as a consequence but hey if the customer wins thats the REAL result. In the end of this fight the Hobbit will be more or less where it belonged all along - it could never be any other way.
But YOU MUST look after your own interests in creating a similar result.
So my one hope and wish for all the WGA members is to look at everything on the table - take a deep breath here and go yes I know this may not be what we hoped for, but will waiting for better actually achieve more?
If your answer is yes then tell them all where to stuff it. But before you do that judge your advisors and what they tell you. Judge your trust in them. Judge the loss you have already taken and what future gains might be. In this I mean simple math. Three months of no income for many must already equal several years of even the very best anticipated enhanced additional income. If you had worked right through and earnt more what have you gained?
Well you have gained honor, and you have gained respect. And you may just, even if it is not immediately apparent, just slightly stemmed the tide of the consistent avalanche of the studios dictation of the way in which they acknowledge and reward those that are fundamental in making their very livings.
Don’t back down, this is a time of change, and even the 3 years of this contract will see all hell break loose; you can absolutely bank on that. Weigh that in too as nothing the producers give you will be anything they can not afford NOW, knowing in 2011 or 12 it will be a breeze on the balance sheet before they stump up (in their minds) a minor increment next time around.
Residuals will always be the bastard that makes the evil ends meet for writers. Directors don’t and won’t ever face the same evils. Be sure in your mind that that simple difference is suitably recognised in your deal versus the DG before you accept it.
As much as anyone I just want my bloody shows back! But damn it there is so much more of importance here I just know the consumer in me is of no importance to the bigger picture. So know that too - happy viewers are a studio godsend FIRST, and benefit to you second. Don’t be swayed by public opinion either - as much as so much of me wants you to be.
I’ve said my piece - I hope the presentations, and the votes, leave a result that everyone is able to live with and gives a pathway that everyone can walk down amicably together towards the future of the industry. From a TV perspective, 2007 wowed me more in terms of the quality and invitation of new shows than any other I can remember. The renewed shows retained or exceeded their prior value almost to a man.
All of that starts with the writers. Any good televisual project can at best start off great and end great. None start poor and end great. Many start great and end poor. The point here is its down to the writer to make a great show - NOTHING BUT a very well written show will EVER be a great show - it’s only ever then down to director and crew to ruin the vision or support it; they cant create it.
God Speed to the best resolution you all can collectively get!
Mike
Wellington NZ
Comment by Mike M — February 5, 2008 @ 8:38 pm
Godspeed, writers. Listen to your leaders and do what you think is best for you, while being mindful that your decision affects thousands.
Comment by tv editor — February 5, 2008 @ 8:57 pm
Nikki,
First, this is excellent news.
Second, I wanted to thank you for your superb strike coverage. I’m not an entertainment insider - rather, I’m a boring law student - but your in-depth coverage has been great for lay and expert readers alike, and has filled a void that the mainstream media apparently is loathe to touch in any depth.
Keep up the great work. I have my fingers crossed for the WGA membership!
Comment by Ames — February 5, 2008 @ 9:18 pm
done
Comment by Bill — February 5, 2008 @ 9:45 pm
Patric and the rest of the leaders -
If it is true that you and the board are going to decide if the strike is called off before there is a vote, HOW DARE YOU TAKE AWAY OUR RIGHTS AS MEMBERS OF THIS UNION.
You cannot possibly know what the majority of members feel by hearing a handful of them at a filled auditorium.
What if a handful of people spoke at the superbowl and then ten people judged the entire crowd off those opinions to decide who our next president of the United States is?
All members deserve the right to vote before it’s decided if the strike is over. There was a vote to strike and there should be a vote to call it off, too.
I have been behind you guys from the beginning and I expect the same loyalty in return.
Comment by What? — February 6, 2008 @ 5:12 am
OK writers please do yourselves and everyone else entangled in this mess a favor. Go to your meeting and LISTEN to what your leadership has to say about this deal they’ve worked out before reacting. LISTENING is different than HEARING through filters based on all the pre-conceptions brewing in your brains.
Since you’re all meeting as a large group, here’s my favorite quote from “Men in Black” to remember if you choose.
“A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.” -written by Ed Solomon
Comment by BTL Mom — February 6, 2008 @ 6:38 am
What an inconvenient time to require membership get their asses downtown! I will have to miss most of my niece’s wedding to attend this meeting.
And for what?
To be told by Verrone, Bowman and Young that they support some deal in which the WGA allowed the companies to find a new and far from creative way to screw us?
The AMPTP this time around have successfully pulled off something called a PROMOTIONAL window, a time when they make money and pay us zip– but Verrone plans to try to convince membership that 2% of distributors gross in year THREE of the new contract is somehow a ground breaking advancement? This 2% distributors gross falls after another promotional window ?
Hey, I’ve got a bridge…
Why is there ANY sort of promotional window?
Define “distributors gross” please!
This sounds like another awful situation for writers, akin to four cents on DVDs!
I hear there are ways to follow traffic online and writers should enjoy the success of the properties they created along with the AMPTP when they make money online– WHILE THEY ARE ACTUALLY POPULAR AND SUCCESSFUL– not two weeks or even a month later.
Do these people representing us know anything about the area they are negotiating in?
Can they appreciate the troublesome precedent they have just allowed for?
They just listen to what the other guys tell them? Is that it?
I hate to sound like a broken record– but why were experts in this area not hired to handle these negotiations? Or at least hired to ADVISE against these onerous terms?
I find it suspicious that none of the stories on this deal mention what the DVD rate was raised to in these negotiations.
I thought the point of these last three months was to raise the DVD rates AND make sure we don’t get screwed on the internet the way we have been on DVDs.
Did they make any significant gains? a cent or two at least? I know they didn’t get the 8 cents they were asking for originally– how was that ever going to be possible when they didn’t leave any room to negotiate for it in the first place?
I always felt they should have been asking for TWELVE cents if they wanted eight, and I’m no lawyer.
If I find out those DVD rates weren’t raised– I will not only vote AGAINST this deal– but I will stand up at this meeting and take issue with leadership over this matter.
First they took DVDs off the table prematurely– if they didn’t bring them back and fight vigorously for a raise in the DVD rate– esp when the trend now and for the foreseeable future is for ALL SERIES TO GO TO DVD– I will find these WGA “negotiators” completely incompetent.
This promotional window scam is just as bad as the original DVD deal.
Is it possible there can be two examples, or more, of incompetence at the bargaining table in one deal. I guess we’ll know soon enough.
Remember, once you agree to a promotional window– we’re stuck with it the same way we spent the last 20 years in this crazy DVD rate.
What will the companies do with this promotional window?
They’ll use it to make money on online advertising and then I can only imagine they will pull the episodes/movies just before they would have to pay the writer (and actor) any money and in the case of a series they will then release them on DVDs.
We’re screwed six ways to Sunday, people!
I won’t vote for this deal.
It’s worth staying out on the lines and waiting for SAG to head into negotiations — assuming they head in before, say, April.
Once films can’t go into production, well, that’s a defacto strike right there and the trigger can be considered pulled.
SAG’s leverage is to go in ASAP and straighten this stuff out sooner than later.
I say screw the Oscars, let’s make the last three months worth something.
I lost over 350k and a pilot!
–Simon
Comment by simon says strike! — February 6, 2008 @ 7:44 am
I see comments all over about how the writers are to blame for thousands of people out of work. The WGA did make some demands (Animation and Reality be represented) then the AMPTP walked out. The AMPTP said they would not negotiate with these line items on the table. I feel like the ITASE (Animation union) are getting ripped off and reality writers are getting burned, but that’s just my opinion. Anyway, the WGA agreed to remove the items from the table in order to negotiate so that the writers and the thousands of others back to work. Did the AMPTP hold their end of the deal? No, they didn’t. The DGA (Directors guild) worked out their contract with the AMPTP. Now the AMPTP decides to come back to negotiations with the WGA. Why did the AMPTP want to keep these thousands of people out of work until after the DGA settled? I see comments about how the writers just write “Crap” anyway. Well, the studios buy “Crap” from the writers and Americans watch the “Crap.” If Americans didn’t watch the “Crap,” then the studios would be forced to buy fresh material from new writers. So, it seems if we stop watching “Crap,” then writers will stop writing “Crap.” One more thing; people are saying that writers shouldn’t receive residuals. Book authors get paid for every book we buy to read. Why shouldn’t writers get paid for every movie or TV series sold?
Comment by Shark — February 6, 2008 @ 8:08 am
It’s about time! Think about all the people who are losing money out there while you people look for a couple more hundred dollars a year. It’s not worth holding out any longer. You want to get paid when something is successful but are you willing to give money back if it isn’t?
Comment by Mark Twain — February 6, 2008 @ 9:39 am
I don’t understand why we can’t get this deal done sooner. My feet outside the Fox studios are done walking, plus most of America has turned on us.
We have brought this garbage on ourselves and should get this deal done.
Comment by outofworkwriter — February 6, 2008 @ 9:41 am
I’m backing off…
until I hear from both WGA and SAG.
Comment by PJ - Writer — February 6, 2008 @ 9:44 am
Verrone, Young and Bowman may be about to experience the perpetual reality of revolutionary leaders everywhere…that the same mob that cheered you when you led them to the barricades will be the mob calling for you heads months later when you tell it what it doesn’t want to hear…
Comment by skeptic — February 6, 2008 @ 10:14 am
I own a store in Upstate NY State, so everyone can call me uneducated in union matters. However, it seems to me like some of the more hardline strikers (”simon says”, “what?” etc.) don’t recall how unions historically operate. The boards and negotiating committees make recommendations to the general membership who then vote. I think - I might be wrong - but I think that the boards have the ability to say stop striking before a vote is taken. They certainly had the ability to say a strike was authorized before a vote was taken.
The following post is from Nikki on November 1st, 2007 and it quotes a statement made by the WGA leadership (Link <a href “http://www.deadlinehollywooddaily.com/writers-en-route-to-wga-meeting-amptp-says-no-progress-can-be-made/” “here”. I hope I hardcoded it right. Quoteage:
“The Negotiating Committee then announced its unanimous recommendation that the WGAW Board and the WGAE Council call a strike. Members spent three hours in frank discussion of the Negotiating Committee’s report and recommendation…The WGAW Board and the WGAE Council will meet Friday to consider the recommendation of the Negotiating Committee and to decide the next steps. The decision of the Board and Council whether and when to strike will be communicated to the membership by e-mail and through the Captains system, and will be posted on the WGAW and WGAE websites.”
Comment by mike — February 6, 2008 @ 10:22 am
For Simon and other people who see equal virtue between striking for another 3-6 months and getting thousands of people back to work right now… Before you’ve even heard the deal… What?
If there’s a good deal, something that looks like a fair deal, I completely support the leadership calling off the strike. Voting takes time, and once you’ve made the unique decision to strike, you have to call a few audibles on the field.
Let’s remember that one of the reasons this strike has actually caused some movement on the other side (as opposed to our late 80’s disaster) is that we managed to gain the support of most of the country. The popular support, the Youtube videos, the comments by politicians and celebrities… all that stuff matters, and it has had an effect on the producers.
If our leadership recommends a deal and we, the members, figure out a way to reject it and deep-six the strike… we lose ALL of that. All of it. Our support goes away. The horns stop honking as we picket. We become the Bad Guys, or at least as bad as the moguls in the public eye. Also, the TV season ends irrevocably, the Oscars get canceled, next year’s season goes away, and our industry itself - inevitably - contracts a bit. Less money for all of us to share, no matter what the percentages are…
Will that all be worth it? Maybe. I don’t know - I haven’t heard the deal or gotten a sense of the actual conditions in the negotiations. And neither have you.
So stop the militant, chest-thumping crap and listen. When we decided to strike, we took on some extra responsibility. Not just to ourselves, but to everyone else in the industry and their families. And that responsibility is to get the best possible deal in the shortest amount of time so that we can get everyone back to work with as little disruption as possible. And they all supported us. So let’s not be a bunch of assholes before we even know what the deal is.
Comment by Adam — February 6, 2008 @ 10:32 am
What? wrote: What if a handful of people spoke at the superbowl and then ten people judged the entire crowd off those opinions to decide who our next president of the United States is?
Isn’t that how the Electoral College basically works?
Comment by Klaatu — February 6, 2008 @ 10:44 am
waiting asked: So what will they be doing until Saturday? Why couldn’t they meet sooner? Seems like wasted time.
The main points of the deal were agreed upon in the room, but now lawyers from both sides are working out the drafting language. This is important because it makes all the difference — especially the way in which things like “distributor’s gross” are defined. Apparently there are a couple of points in the DGA deal that went smoothly in the room and are now holding up the drafting of the actual contract. The WGA leadership is wise to insist on this before the meeting or a vote. (Remember the DGA has until June to draft theirs. The WGA wants to end the strike as quickly as possible.)
Comment by Klaatu — February 6, 2008 @ 10:47 am
In response to “Shark” about people complaining about writers writing crap and people watching it…..that’s part of the problem. TV viewership is WAY down on regular tv and because of this strike, will go down even further. We see many new shows start every year and most of them canceled 6 or 7 episodes in at the most, if they’re lucky. And at a time when viewers are turning in less and less because of bad writing, this is when the strike hits.
The studios took this opportunity to hit back at bad ratings and poor quality writing. Deals have been cut, expensive pilots axed, a season that was already in the dumps is finished more or less.
Yes, both sides are to blame, the WGA and the AMPTP. Maybe if the studios didn’t buy all the shows regardless of their inferior quality, writers wouldn’t continue to write bad stuff (and NO, I am not saying all of it is bad, but I think ratings speak for themselves). Maybe if writers were hungrier, they’d come up with quality concepts and not be so enslaved to the idea that pushing boundaries of taste doesn’t mean it’s good.
Hopefully, when this is over and everyone is either satisfied or at least ready to get back to it all, this will be remembered as a bad time for everyone and won’t be repeated.
I wish the WGA members would remember one thing though, throughout all of this, there have been chants deriding how much studio exec’s make and how the writers deserve to be paid on par. Capitalism is what is is, all the worker bees working to make a few people at the top rivh. That’s life. It’s unfair, it sucks, but it is life. Like it or not, creative skills or below the line skills, you are a worker bee.
Now, let’s all just get back to work soon.
Comment by Below The Line — February 6, 2008 @ 10:52 am
Simon, I didn’t realize you’d seen the deal. How did that happen? The meeting time is bad for you? Guess what, the strike time has been bad for thousands of other workers and millions of television viewers. Moreover, you have no idea what will happen at the meeting. You guys did vote to strike, but nobody else in the industry got to decide. Now that your board is simply- possibly- ending the strike before a formal vote, the concept of people not making a vote on something that will affect them is horrible? Go to the meeting if you can. It’s troublesome, but you knew there would be sacrivices when you elected to strike. Any meeting time would run into a conflict for someone. I’m sorry it happened to be you, but that doesn’t make the whole thing horrible. Make your voice heard. The leadership never said they were going to ratify a deal no matter what you said. This has been going on for three months. There’s no reason to say it will surely be a better deal in another three. I’m not saying you should approve a shitty deal. But give it a chance, because the affects so many more people than the WGA. I’ve been supportive from the start, but it’s assuming, condemning, “strike for as long as we have to, screw the rest” writers like you that make people think the WGA is being selfish. You haven’t seen the deal. Your leadership’s been smart until this point. If what’s shown Saturday is good, it will make everyone happy. If not, your members will tell the leadership so. This thing should only end with a good deal. But it could very well end with a good deal very soon. Let’s not cut out that possibility with baseless assumptions and by attacking the leadership- who you told us to trust- too soon.
Comment by Caitlin — February 6, 2008 @ 11:03 am
I agree with Simon. Lets roll this toll till after the oscars and get into the film season. This is going to be a horrible screw you deal. Yeah I know I am a lonely animal in the corner while everyone else is trying to keep the lights on and kids full. Well I did that too and you know what….working a real job is not that bad. The real world is fine. But shit my pencils are out and my ink on the printer has not been empty for 4 months.
But who cares. I have learned to drive a fork lift, load rail cars with recycled milk jugs, drive to work in overalls, come home exhausted physically, leave sweat stains on my BMW cloth seats, tie steal towed work boots, do first aid on fellow employee’s whom have be sliced up by falling scrap paper and moreQ!!
Well, I’ll miss that life and carry the memories forever
Comment by spynbuy — February 6, 2008 @ 11:08 am
Shark, you make it sound like the writers receive zero dollars for their work ?! They get paid, the problem is residuals on reuse.
Authors get just the residual part (royalties), unless they get an up front payment, which is usually taken from the royalty payments. Comparing film writers to book authors is like apples and oranges. An author writes a book, and then it (maybe) gets published. There is no crew, no pension plans, etc. Given that, they still only get about 10%. With a book, all there is is words and maybe some illustrations, with a film, there is a whole heck of a lot more.
Do I side with the studios, no, but I do not subscribe to the misinformation either, from both sides.
Comment by GK — February 6, 2008 @ 11:27 am
Simon you “hear there are ways to follow traffic online?” Really? Sounds like you’ve spent lots of time researching the issues so you can make an informed vote.
Comment by geez — February 6, 2008 @ 11:34 am
simon please dont miss your niece`s wedding.go suck all of the air out of that room so we may live
Comment by steve — February 6, 2008 @ 11:34 am
This leadership has risked more and pushed farther than any other entertainment union in recent history. We can “believe,” “suspect,” “feel” anything we want about the individual terms. All fine and well. I’m always up for a good teeth-gnashing.
Bottom line though: what was achievable? What was realistic? I’ll be interested to hear. I trusted this leadership while it withstood the pressure of so-called moderates (a much smaller group than has been reported), and I will trust it when the inevitable backlash occurs from the lunatic “screw the Oscars” fringe.
We elected this slate to be strong, even militantly so. Clearly they’ve done that. Just because the deal MIGHT NOT contain everything they wanted or asked for, doesn’t mean that they failed.
The wish for perfection among some of these comments amounts to a death wish - because in practice, it would mean blowing up our negotiating team, starting over, extending the strike ad infinitum … in other words, suicide.
Stay united. Stay strong. And, I don’t know, try listening before making any nutty judgments …
Comment by Jdub — February 6, 2008 @ 12:01 pm
Thanks Nikki for your great updates and coverage. We’ll know if it’s a fair deal when we see it. I don’t expect it to be perfect. I know I won’t get everything I want, and I expect a lot of give and take. But if it’s a fair enough offer I see on Saturday, then for me it’s time to move on, and not worth spending another 3 to 6 months continuing to strike. I’m not going to get worked up until I have the facts in front of me.
Comment by I want to get back to my show — February 6, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
It seems like a lot of the friction here is because no one really knows WHAT the plan is for Saturday. I don’t really understand myself why they’re waiting until Saturday, unless it’s to get lawyers to translate legalese or something.
But it sounds to me like a lot more people would be happy if they knew for sure that they ALL would be included in a vote if they come to that meeting. That sounds only fair.
I’d like to think on the bright side and hope that the WGA leaders wouldn’t waste anyone’s time unless they ironed out a decent deal. Does anyone know for sure that the deal will suck? I just hope it’s a good one to start so this mess can be over.
Comment by Unsure — February 6, 2008 @ 12:04 pm
I understand where Simon is coming from, though a bit misguided.
I actually have a background in new media and I find any deal that gives the studios a 17-24 day promotional window to be a complete disaster not only for the WGA, but for the future of ALL CONTENT creators. I have no friggin’ idea what the DGA was thinking. But this will come back to bite them in the ass. No question.
Even dropping it to ten days is still ten days too many!
I spent yesterday contacting web producers under contract at the studios for their opinions on the this promotional window.
I was met with nothing but laughs.
Oh, and Simon– be prepared to be VERY disappointed.
The DVDs were not brought back into the negotiations.
Sorry man. I guess we’re willing to throw away the next 5-10 years?
As for your idea that the promotional window is enough time for studios to make their ancillary online ad dollars and then pull the content in time for the content to retain some value as part of a DVD release– WOW!
That would SUCK.
But now that you mention it, that’s exactly what I’d do if I were at
the studios and was given a two -three week period to do whatever I choose with content.
Last I checked 2% of nothing is nothing. . . (that was actually a quote
from a new media exec at a leading ad agency I contacted yesterday!)
Kristen
P.S.– Simon, anyone who lost 350k, probably has a nice fat cushion and can stay out on strike for another 3-6 mos. That’s where you lost me, man. No cushion here,but if the deal sucks…
Comment by kristen — February 6, 2008 @ 12:16 pm
Below the Line wrote: “TV viewership is WAY down on regular tv”
No. Network viewership is down. Overall TV viewership is up (not counting the strike). The media conglomerates just decided it’s in their best interests (?!) to divide the viewers among 400 channels than 3. Six companies own basically every channel.
Comment by Klaatu — February 6, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
You are right; there are more people involved in making a movie and/or TV shows. The similarity is that the writer creates the idea and hammers out the details. You may feel like once the studio buys the script then it’s not the writer’s anymore. That’s not the way it works. The writer is usually involved through most of the production. Any time Bard Pitt isn’t happy with his dialog, a writer has to change things to fit the situation. Just like any other industry, when prices go up so do the wages. Their contract is up and they are due for a raise.
Comment by Shark — February 6, 2008 @ 12:25 pm
Thousands are out of work due to the WGA. It’s the writer’s strike not the AMPTP strike. The WGA walked off the job, regardless of negotiation tactics by both sides - only one side left their post. That was the WGA and that is the way it will always be remembered by BTL. Just like the ‘88 and ‘81 strikes - BTL doesn’t remember the issues or who walked away for a month over what is now regarded by most WGA members as “bargaining chips” (animation, reality). They remember that the writers put them out of work and now they’re doing it again.
Now some WGA members will try to sell it as preserving all unions fates. What a bunch of crap. DGA has struck only once for 5 minutes and they still seem to be strong with great benefits and salary. By the way 4 of the 5 DGA members on a show collect residuals - so to say the DGA doesn’t care about residuals is just ignorance.
Protecting the health of the P&H funds. Another load of crap. The only way those pensions fail is if they pay out more than what is put in annually or they are mis-managed. Last I checked, my pension is based on how much I contribute. Which, due to the WGA, is short about $40k. Think the WGA getting residuals will make up that $40k? Thanks for helping out my pension WGA.
Health Plan is a bit different. AMPTP contributed residual amounts sure take a bite out of the overall costs of rising health care. But BTL have to maintain minimum hours each quarter to even qualify. Since the WGA were so gracious to “preserve unions and their benefits” most BTL didn’t qualify for 1st quarter health care 2008 and 2Q isn’t looking good either.
Like it or not BTL will always remember 2007 as the year the WGA put them out of work through the holidays. Instead of WGA staying on the job and working through the negotiating and then if that failed go out with SAG in June when you had even more power. WGA east’s newspaper folks worked for 2 years under an expired contract with the WGA.
So now what? WGA put so much trust in the Neg Com and leadership- members owe it to them to go listen to what they have to say (I’m sure your niece will understand). But while WGA is busy planning their next “dress like Alf” on the line day or “If Joss was such a brilliant writer how come all of his old writers are now EP’s/Showrunners on network prime time shows while he’s still whining about residuals” day. Remember that each WGA member represents about 10 BTL’s that they put out of work and that WGA members owe it to BTL to think beyond their own WGA pocketbook. (I’m out $350k - please… most BTL will never see that kind of $$$$)
Show runners don’t be afraid to go back to work. The rank and file WGA members could never understand the pressure of having 200 crew members looking to you to get them back to work. Writers are looking at the 8 other writers in the writer’s room. You’re looking at the 200 people on the soundstage. There’s been no punishment for Marc Cherry or Carlton Cuse for posting their shows. (Don’t have your cast pass out food on the line in their wardrobe - it gives away when it was shot). Let’s get crews back to work.
Or WGA can continue to “Wreak Havoc”. David Young has a pretty good track record of moving industry out of the country. First Guess now CBS. I encourage every BTL to wear their Guess Jeans and Canadian Flag T-shirts on the first day back to work. That is if we ever get to go back.
Comment by RIP WGA — February 6, 2008 @ 12:43 pm
I’m an outsider, but I’ve read (and read between the lines of) lots of news, blogs, official statements, contracts, etc. over the past months. I believe that once the strike started, the WGA officials, leaders, and volunteers did the best possible job they could to bring about fair compensation for their members.
Now they’re facing a real dilemma. Given the AMPTP’s finessing of the DGA negotiating committee, and given the fact that the year of so-called professional research the DGA commissioned apparently led to such a crappy deal, the WGA negotiators and board and then the membership may have to choose to accept or reject an offer without knowing for several years if that offer is an equitable one or not. I’m only an outsider, but Verrone, Young, Bowman, United Hollywood, et al. have earned my respect. If in the long run their recommendation doesn’t turn out to be the best choice, it won’t be because they didn’t try.
Comment by Outsider pov — February 6, 2008 @ 2:11 pm
To “What?”
You write: “All members deserve the right to vote before it’s decided if the strike is over. There was a vote to strike and there should be a vote to call it off, too.”
Actually, there was no vote to strike. There was a vote to give the leadership the AUTHORITY to strike. It’s very different.
It was their decision, not yours or mine, whether or not to call a strike and at what time to call it. I think they made the right call, especially brilliantly doing it mid-season as opposed to waiting until June when the studios would have stocked up enough material to go for a year or more (if you think the devastation to below the line workers has been bad, and it has, think how much worse it could’ve been.)
Similarly, our elected leadership has the option to call off the strike. Not the entire membership.
But the entire membership does have the option or ability to say yes or no to the contract that is offered us. That is your right as a member. That will be the vote.
Come to the meeting if you can and speak up, or contact your board members and members of the negotiating committees (all who have been on the picket lines this week, with times posted when they will be there.) They are there to answer questions and get your opinion on matters. And remember, they are the ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES of the writers guild membership and I trust them to continue to represent us well.
Comment by Jenny C — February 6, 2008 @ 2:18 pm
I hear the AMPTP will be sending 50 cases of vaseline to the Shrine on Saturday night along with the contract, eah WGA member will receive 1 jar upon entering…
Comment by belowthelineguy — February 6, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
At previous meetings, it had been said “we don’t even have an offer we can cave on”.
I wonder if we’re going to get the cave-offer on Saturday?
Well I’m not caving. If it’s a bad deal- and I’m not saying it will be, but if it is- forget it. I’m voting “no”.
Comment by WGA Writer — February 6, 2008 @ 2:51 pm
To those writers like “Simon” who have posted–While I appreciate your need and right to stand up for what you deserve, I don’t think you understand the gravity of the situation for others in your industry. You say you have lost 350K and a pilot–and while that is huge, it sounds as if you are in a better position to take such losses. My husband is an animator who has been laid off as a result of the strike. We have been struggling just to make rent and have to choose weekly between which bills are more important to pay. He knows many in his position with families who are losing houses. But here is the difficulty–again, while I appreciate your full right to get what you deserve, you and others with your opinion that you will strike until after SAG gets involved in June, don’t realize that so many of your co-workers in the industry will be utterly destroyed if you do. It’s one thing to make a stand when it’s only yourself who will be hurt by the losses you incur. It’s quite another to make a stand that affects thousands of others and hurts them incredibly (most of whom make far less than you do) WHEN THEY HAVE NO VOICE OR SAY IN THE MATTER. My husband and his co-workers do not have a vote in the writer’s guild. Yet, they have been directly affected. You speak about getting your fair share–and normally I would agree with you. The producers are greedy bastards who seemed to want to punish labor by striking in the first place. But the time has come for this to end. If it continues, THERE SIMPLY MAY NOT BE ANY JOBS TO RETURN TO, and then what will all of this have been for? There is a tipping point that has long been passed where you have lossed far more–and the entire city has lost–far more than anything you might have gained. I hate to let the big corporate types win; I’m a political activist myself. But with so much at stake, with so many others’ futures on the line with no voice in the matter, it’s irresponsible to be so inflexible. This goes for all of you. Both sides need to end this, to give a little and compromise like adults. The survival of the entire industry is at stake, which may be irrevocably damaged if the strike were to continue much longer.
It’s better to cut your losses, if need be, than to lose everything for yourself and everyone around you. If more shows are cancelled, more seasons shifted to reality t.v.–what will any of you have won? The contract you begrudgingly agree to won’t be worth the paper it’s written on–there won’t be any jobs remaining for it to apply to. And in the meantime, those of us in the industry who depend on these shows for our daily bread will be victims of TWO bullies who simply wanted to show the other side up. I urge both sides to do the mature thing, compromise, despite all the weeks of negativity. Your and our very survival depend upon it. Be the bigger men and women. Show the producers you are strong, united, in pursuit of fairness, but not reckless to the point of self-destruction at any cost. That cost will be everyone’s future, not just yours.
May practical, calmer, mature heads prevail.
Comment by Morgan — February 6, 2008 @ 3:16 pm
sounds like simon would rather be a “striking writer” than going back to being an “unemployed writer”.
Comment by reality bites — February 6, 2008 @ 3:27 pm
hey
i found this on the united hollywood strike swag site. i take it this indicates the strike is either almost over or only really fat writers will still be picketing
———-
Writer’s Guild On Strike
The official strike shirt of the WGA West.
100% cotton. 100% union made.
$20 per shirt, plus shipping.
ALMOST SOLD OUT - XXL, XXXL ONLY.
lets hope the proof is in the teeshirt.
Comment by Fiddling While Hollywood Burns — February 6, 2008 @ 3:33 pm
Simon-
Family should come first. Go to the wedding and enjoy yourself. Your neice will hopefully only get married once and you should be there if only for your future grandnieces and grandnephews that might ask Mommy why there’s no picture of Great-Uncle Simon in the wedding pictures.
I’m sure there’s someone with your “omnicient” view of the deal contents that can will make it to the Shrine. There are 10,000 of you. Your leadership can and will call off the strike without a formal vote. You’ll still have a chance to approve or disapprove the deal when the ballots are mailed.
Comment by BTL Mom — February 6, 2008 @ 3:45 pm
Damn, Simon. Wish I had 350k to lose!
Comment by Crewguy — February 6, 2008 @ 4:00 pm
You have cloth seats in your BMW? how mid-western.
Comment by writer — February 6, 2008 @ 4:15 pm
To advocate staying out until June — which likely amounts to striking well into the summer, if not fall — can only mean that the individual is either: independently wealthy; fiscally irresponsible; or doesn’t, in fact, make their living writing. For the latter instance — if you don’t pay your bills this way, then by all means indulge in all the fulminating and posturing you like, but have the grace and rectitude to abstain from casting an actual vote in a situation in which you have no direct and immediate financial stake. To do otherwise is fundamentally immoral. If this is an aspiration or hobby, something you once did or only intermittently do, and not how you regularly provide for yourself or your family, then to cast a vote to so drastically impact people whose livelihoods depend on the outcome is unconscionable. This isn’t a theoretical position. I’ve directed in the past, belong to the DGA, but haven’t worked in that capacity for years. And even when I did, recognized that, being a sideline, I had no right to cast a vote for office holders much less presume to put people out of work. I won’t vote on the DGA deal. It would be improper to do so. There are real and serious economic consequences at stake here for working writers. Have a conscience.
Comment by working writer — February 6, 2008 @ 4:39 pm
Below the Line, do you even work in this industry? Do you have one shred of evidence to back up this claim that “bad writing” is causing viewers to tune out?
Give me a break. Many of the best written shows and movies fail to attract an audience. Don’t tell me, let me guess, the public feels that the level of writing on “I wanna date my mama’s boyfriend” or whatever high-rated reality show is the best thing on offer out there? If you support high quality writing, then maybe you should go on a crusade to eliminate network executives, dumbed-down notes, horrible concepts, and overall interference with what we do. What a joke.
Comment by Ohplease — February 6, 2008 @ 5:01 pm
I see a lot of posts saying that you want copyright and to be paid for every viewing like an author gets paid for a book….
When a book author writes a book it is a finished product (except for bounding of the book), and a musician same (except for the mix). In the movie and tv industry the writer writes a script as an employee of the studios and then producers, directors, talent, agents, electricians, cameramen, set designers, makeup artists, hairstylists, prop people, location scouts, editors, sound mixers, visual effects compositors…on and on…bring it to life. You don’t get copyright because it is akin to a person working for Mattel and designing a toy…the design is theirs but it has to still be produced and manufactured…they don’t get any money off of each sale of each and every toy, the design and copyright belongs to Mattel. The designer designed it as an employee …get the difference?????
rHob
Comment by rHob — February 6, 2008 @ 5:11 pm
So Simon, let me get this straight…if a studio is still making money off of a streaming product, they are going to take it down and not stream it anymore, just because now they’ll have to pay a writer? Really, does that make any sense to you? The studios would throw away their 94% or 95% just to not give the writers their 2% and SAG their 2% and the WGA their 1%? So the studios will throw away 95% return just to screw you? Take 2 pills and call me in the morning!
rHob
Comment by rHob — February 6, 2008 @ 5:25 pm
“I lost 350k and a pilot”
I lost my house. My family didn’t celebrate Christmas. This has been the most miserable time in my life.
So, go fuck yourself Simon. There are plenty of people in this town who need to get back to work. Selfish prick.
Comment by fuck you simon — February 6, 2008 @ 5:27 pm
Unless this deal is acceptable to SAG, we have to stay on strike anyway. If SAG is going on strike, then everything will shut down again on March 1. This meeting isn’t even scheduled until Feb. 9. There will be 2 and a half weeks left in Feb. Two weeks’ work isn’t worth settling for a crappy deal when we’re going to be out of work anyway and SAG will end up negotiating something better. It’s all up to SAG.
“It’s one thing to make a stand when it’s only yourself who will be hurt by the losses you incur.”
You realize that’s impossible, correct? There are always people affected by a strike outside of the union, THAT’S WHY STRIKES ARE EFFECTIVE. They show how important the labor of the striking group is and how far-reaching the effects are. If the Teamsters go on strike against UPS, it affects consumers and businesses who are waiting for their deliveries. If nureses go on strike against a hospital, it affects patients. If transportation workers go on strike against the city, it affects commuters. There is no way to make a stand and not affect anyone else. Transportation workers can complain about dangerous working conditions forever and be told not my problem, who cares. But the minute commuters are affected, it becomes you selfish bastards, I don’t care about your problems but how dare you not care about mine, forget yourselves, think about me, I need you.
Comment by come off it — February 6, 2008 @ 5:28 pm
No, I don’t see the difference. Publishing companies often approach authors and ask them to write something specific, paying an advance upfront. They’re employees as well, under contract to a specific firm, yet they get paid up front and receive royalties. The publisher finances the binding and printing and PR and pays the editors, and still keeps the majority of the profits. Same thing here. We’re not asking for 99% of the profits, we’re asking for a 2.5% cut on reuse. We’re considered “employees” only because we stupidly sacrificed copyright decades and decades ago. How is someone who sells a finished script to a studio a studio employee? He’s not. And residuals aren’t bonuses, they’re deferred payments.
Comment by Ohplease — February 6, 2008 @ 5:45 pm
There were many of us who said last year that Verrone and Young were creating a monster by making promises to the guild that they could never keep. On Saturday, you will witness Patric and David devoured by the monster of their own making.
Comment by clairvoytantwriter — February 6, 2008 @ 5:50 pm
I am leaving town for family this weekend (FAR more important than a stupid labor dispute, doy) so I hope to god that my moderate brethren and sisteren (should be a word) are able to carry the day. If there’s a reasonable deal to be had, don’t let the hardline bullies bury us any deeper with their class war/revenge fantasies. Just remember, it’s a labor dispute, not the Bolotnikov rebellion.
That’s right. I said it.
See you monday. At work.
Comment by Ted Striker — February 6, 2008 @ 6:26 pm
For the love of GOD. Get over yourselves once and for all. I can have an architect design my house, but if I sell it, then that seller sells it, etc. the original architect, WHO DESIGNED THE HOUSE, never sees another dime. You guys way overstate your importance and are not that important. It takes hundreds and hundreds of people to make movies and tv series. Stop acting like it’s all about you. Take the deal and maybe some day, maybe, the town will stop hating you.
Comment by Writers Suck — February 6, 2008 @ 7:37 pm
RHOB: “When a book author writes a book it is a finished product (except for bounding of the book), and a musician same (except for the mix)…you don’t get copyright because it is akin to a person working for Mattel and designing a toy…the design is theirs but it has to still be produced and manufactured…they don’t get any money off of each sale of each and every toy, the design and copyright belongs to Mattel. The designer designed it as an employee …get the difference?????”
Actually, rHob, your argument is factually incorrect and slanted.
A play is an unfinished work as well, so by your argument–which isn’t based in any kind of law–they shouldn’t own the copyright. But they do.
The writers in Hollywood long ago made a deal (a bad one in my opinion) that as opposed to the studios paying us AN INFLATED AMOUNT FOR THE SCREENPLAY (which, as the copyright holders, we would be entitled to a much larger share of every penny they took in for use and profit of our work), we would hand the studios the copyright when we sold them the screenplay.
So the upfront cost of selling said screenplay wouldn’t be prohibitive for the studios, we came to an agreement—they would give us a very small share of the remaining profit monies that came through to them for our creation of that work, since the script and its copyright came at a relatively small price for them.
The deal was simple: if they make money, we make money.
The “example” you cite has no basis in law or anything else. It is an ill-informed attempt to minimize the contribution and sacrifice of the writer, who is the author of the work. Now, every person brings something to the table, but they are musicians in the band. The writer is composes the song.
John Lennon and Paul McCartney took in a lot more green than Ringo–because John and Paul WROTE THE DAMN SONG.
Read your history and read your law, Ringo, then maybe YOU can see the difference.
Comment by slk writer — February 6, 2008 @ 7:51 pm
Um, rhob, where do you see even ONE post of a writer asking for copyright?
Nowhere. But you just wanted an excuse to go off on writers and belittle their contributions.
Can’t wait for the strike to be over so you can go jabber somewhere else.
Comment by rhob is a big fat jerk — February 6, 2008 @ 8:05 pm
rHob, let me break it down for you.
Just like the toy designer at Mattel, we don’t get a percentage of every movie ticket sold, nor do we get more money based on the number of viewers for a firstrun network episode.
We get a payment upfront. However, that payment is smaller because we agree to defer part of it in exchange for residual payments.
Do you understand? The initial payment is for the first use only. We’re also entitled to be paid for the future as the studios and networks make more money off of reuse of our original content that falls outside the original agreement. The studio system is over, we’re not put on salary at Warner Bros for 20 years, we can’t afford to hand over our work for a small fee and watch the studios make billions off it for the next 20 years while we’re sitting at home waiting for the next job–although this is exactly the position a lot of animation writers are still in, unfortunately.
This system actually benefits the studios, and I’m sure you can understand why. If they had to pay all compensation for every potential reuse over a 30 year period upfront instead of being able to defer those payments, then costs would increase. They would probably save some money on major hits by settling on a midrange formula, but they’d lose a lot of money on episodes that never repeat, series that are cancelled and never make it to DVD, etc.
A large part of the reason why A and B list members of the DGA aren’t as dependant on residuals is that they get paid a lot more upfront, plus they often get points on the gross.
Comment by Econ101 — February 6, 2008 @ 8:13 pm
as a long standing member of SAG i have a message for writers like simon… folks make your deal…and lets go back to work because i’ll tell you this…after all these months of starving to support your strike SAG WILL NOT VOTE TO STRIKE.
EVERY actor i talk to says they would vote down a strike.
our support for this strike is coming to a close and i’ll tell you why - we realize that the WGA only cares about the WGA - you guys don’t care a damn about the other guilds - SAG included.
Proof of this is - if you guys strike a deal and go back to work and then–in a few months we decide to strike - do you honestly think you’d walk out and support us?
not likely.
so make a deal and lets get back to work.
Comment by sag man — February 6, 2008 @ 9:19 pm
In 1941, 67 years ago, Budd Shulberg’s character of Al in What Makes Sammy Run described going to a meeting of Writer’s Guild. Here it is,
“I felt the that if the Guild had a place in Hollywood it had yet to discover what it was. The low paid writers wanted the Guild to be a real bread and butter union, and the congenial five hundred dollar a week guys thought what writers needed most was a communal hangout like the old writers club where they could sit around and get to know each other. The twenty five hundred dollar a weeks writers with famous names seemed to be most interested in increasing their influence in picture productions and spoke fine, brave abstract words about the scope of the medium and dignifying the position of the screen writer. The meeting seemed a little too much like a caterpillar separated into several parts groping blindly for each other.”
From reading all the posts on all the sites these past few months, it’s apparent the Guild’s members have made absolutely no progress from being caterpillar parts. You can sign off with all the “we’re in this together” and “in solidarity” that you want. Once you all come off the picket lines you’ll be stealing each other’s jobs again and go back to being rude to the crews and thinking that you’re the only ones who matter.
Comment by clem kadiddlehopper — February 6, 2008 @ 9:30 pm
Why after decades of being paid a flat rate, are so many up in arms about getting a percentage? $40k to write it, $20k on the first rerun, and so on. Irrespective of ratings. Let’s say the average is 10M viewers, which advertisers pay to reach.
So, if only 5M people watch the show, should the writer get only 1/2 as much? Or 20M viewers, the writer gets twice as much?
Let’s take a show that airs, then is available online, and, presumably, on many, many viewer’s Tivos.
If I’m an advertiser, I’m going to pay less for ads on the first run, because fewer people are going to watch it, knowing that some viewers will choose to watch it online rather than live. I’ll also pay less because I know that some viewers will watch it on Tivo and skip the ads. So total viewership goes down, and I’ll pay less.
Yet writers want more money? Putting a tv show online does not magically create more viewers. What creates viewers? Marketing and reach. Which cost money.
You already got $40k - which is in no way tied to ratings or revenue. Now you want more on top of that, when total viewership doesn’t change?
Comment by not sure I get it — February 6, 2008 @ 9:59 pm
To “OhComeOffIt”
I fully understand why strikes are so effective. I’m not naiive. And normally I would fully support such strikes. But you completely ignored the rest of what I said. Can you honestly answer my question about how much will be gained by how much may potentially be lost by continuing the strike? What if the industry really is so dramatically shifted that both you and other writers have no jobs to return to? Striking is a good idea when you do have bargaining power, when your position will truly be benefitted by having struck. If the end result is that all is lost, there is no benefit. We all lose. Can you see the difference? I”m not blaming the victim…I said I hate to see the a-holes in power “win”…but there is a reality check that is needed. It’s about survival at this point, not just respect, moral high-ground or even gaining more than might have been lost. It’s about your very existence in the industry. It’s about all our futures.
Comment by Morgan — February 6, 2008 @ 10:00 pm
“Simon” posted the exact same post on Scribe Vibe.
Simon, Couldn’t you derive a new post from the comments you received there? Some writer.
Comment by k3d — February 6, 2008 @ 11:16 pm
come off it:
so you’re saying that industry working slogs like me are the equivalent of people inconvenienced by not receiving a package or have to find another way to work? Bad analogy, pal. No where is it written that “that’s how strikes work–or why they are so effective”. NO one has agreed to that as a law. Yes they are effective because they piss everyone off and hurt those not involved. But the way it should be is that only those parties involved are the ones who should be affected. But what you and a few others are saying is that the power of the striking group is like that of a toddler throwing a temper tantrum, screaming at the top of his lungs in public because one parent won’t give him what he wants. So then, everyone around him is so damned annoyed and put out that the other parent says, “Just give it to him already! Give him whatever he wants–just make him stop screaming!” So, is the viewing public the toddler or the parent? Are the writers the toddler? Three guesses. And who is the parent just dying to give him what he wants–yours truly.
If only it were so easy.
Comment by How many writers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? — February 7, 2008 @ 12:32 am
IS ANYONE ELSE MAD THAT THE WRITERS LIKELY WON’T GET TO VOTE TO END THE STRIKE?
WE’RE GOING TO GET THE DEAL ON SATURDAY, WE’LL HAVE NO TIME TO READ IT, WE HAVE THIS MASS MEETING SATURDAY NIGHT, DURING WHICH EVERYONE WILL CLAP AND CHEER AND PUSH THE DEAL, THE BOARD WILL VOTE THAT NIGHT TO END THE STRIKE AND THEN WE’RE BACK TO WORK
SURE WE GET TO ‘VOTE’ AFTER WE’RE BACK AT WORK - BUT IT’S SO SO SO WEIRD THAT WE DON’T GET A TO WEIGH IN ON THIS DEAL THAT WE’VE BEEN STRIKING OVER.
WHY AREN’T THE WRITERS GETTING A REAL SAY? SOMETHING BEYOND ‘A SENSE OF THE MEMBERSHIP’ AT THIS MEETING ON SATURDAY?
Comment by Alex — February 7, 2008 @ 1:24 am
Can’t the members vote on whether the strike ends?
What kind of deal must it be that the strike is being called off before the members vote?
What is this?
Comment by Billy — February 7, 2008 @ 1:26 am
I agree with not sure I get it — online ad rates are lower than tv ad rates… so the more switch to internet, the less $$ you will see.
Comment by James — February 7, 2008 @ 7:13 am
I’ve spoken to a lot of writers (28 to be exact) over the last few days and it seems that we’ve divided into two camps. The successful writers who can afford to stay out are mostly (not exclusively) in the same group with the chronically unemployed writers. Both are willing to stay out indefinitely and have stated unequivocally that they won’t support the proposed WGA deal if it looks anything like the DGA deal.
The regular working writers (and the up-and-comers) I spoke to seemed to be more anxious to find something in the proposed agreement that they can support… Makes sense. They’re the ones who are having more difficulty paying the mortgage of late and are foregoing the most opportunities (at least in their minds).
My informal, completely NON-SCIENTIFIC pre-meeting survey produced the following results based upon what members know about the proposal: 18 probably voting NO, 10 probably voting YES.
On Saturday we’ll see how many minds get changed by what they hear from Patric, Dave and John. I fervently hope that our leaders have something to add to what’s currently circulating through rumorsphere.
We’ll also find out if the guild leadership is really behind this proposed deal, or if they’re just presenting to the membership for the purpose of seeing it publicly flogged in order to give them more leverage in the next round of negotiations.
Comment by observantwriter — February 7, 2008 @ 9:09 am
If this deal is less than we’d hoped for it is because the strike has stalled. I don’t write anymore and I don’t intend to write anymore so the strike does not affect me. But when I was writing and we were talking in the room (instead of writing) about the eventuality of a strike, I never thought we should strike in November when half a season or more had been written. I always thought we should strike in June, with SAG, when the most damage could be done to the new tv season and when the loss of actors would halt production. Every migrant worker knows to strike when the fruit is in the trees, not on the trucks. Striking precipitously, as we did the minute our contract expired, was foolish and born of inappropriate idealism and arrogance. Too many people have lost too much for no reason; we could have gotten to this point while working under the expired contract and just threatening a strike. We never brought any real pressure to bear on the AMPTP, and now, having had to go back to them hat in hand, we are probably going to get a feeble version of the contract we struck to get. This deal, in all likelihood, will feel like marrying Paris Hilton when you’d hoped for Brigitte Bardot. Still, if the strike has stalled and we do not get what we’d hoped for, it is incumbent upon us to admit our mistake, accept this deal and allow the rest of the town to go back to work.
Then what we need to do is take money back from the agents. Who decided we should tithe them? Tithe your god, not your agent! (And no, agents are NOT gods–they just act that way.) Take back, say, four percent per deal and roll back their participation in any deal to one year. Now that’s real money right now for all of us, taken from the people who do the least to make this business what it is.
Kevin Rooney
Comment by Kevin Rooney — February 7, 2008 @ 10:47 am
To sag man. You are no SAG man. You are an AFTRA man or a shill for AMPTP (no difference)
That is the worst insult I can think of at the moment.
Comment by Brent Wood SAG — February 7, 2008 @ 11:24 am
To: rHob is a big fat jerk:
Wow, just because you haven’t seen the posts about copyright then there must not have been any! I guess if you’ve never seen the Everglades, then they must not exist. There are posts all over this site and United Hollywood and Variety saying how you should get copyright back.
To Econ 101 (Econ was my minor in college by the way):
What law would you be quoting? I get the upfront costs being spread out over time argument, to some degree (at what point does it just become greed? My biggest argument is how you’ve handled yourselves with no regard to the tens-of-thousands of people that this strike has affected). But as far as copyright, when an invention is created, the patent may or may not go to the individual if he works for a company at the time. Even if they let that inventor keep the patent, they may do so at the cost of the person giving it up for a small fee (I have a friend who invented something for Lockheed and although the patent is in his name, Lockheed paid him a flat $10,000 and they now own it). When a Drug maker like Amgen has a product created by a chemist, it is still owned by Amgen. As far as John and Paul are concerned, they did do most of the work. The writers are not doing “most of the work” it is a lot of work, but not the majority . You are putting a framework together for everyone else in the industry to finalize, a majority of the work comes after you have handed in your script. Go project your script pages at the nearest cinema, or put your script on a DVD and see how many sell. You seem to think that you guys are above the whole employee/owner relationship. The corporations put the risk on the line, they put the money up front. When you start putting billions of dollars up for failed movies and TV shows and all of the costs of promotion and infrastructure then we’ll talk. The studios also have to second guess which way technologies are going to go DIVX,betamax, HDV, etc. Tons of money went into development by some corporation and that technology was not the technology that either took off or became the industry standard. Do I think that corporations are the end-all-be-all? Of course not. But you want to demand everything at the cost of every other person in this industry. You talk about fairness. Is that fair? If you were going to affect my life so badly, then why was I not allowed to vote for a strike? Some of you really need to get off of your high horse. For “some” of you, this strike has become and addiction. You are like a bad gambler who doesn’t know when to walk away, you hold out for more until everything is lost. I don’t see any of you putting off your residual payments until the strike was over…nope, that check still comes in the mail while everyone else is scraping to get by.
By the way, to those of you that use the “This is the nature of the biz” crap. Don’t worry. If this strike has taught me nothing else, go back to school and get my masters or my law degree and get out of this business.
I have also noticed that with the “Speechless” campaign, every one of those 2 minute videos needed about 18 people to make…that is just for 1 two minute piece….multiply that by every show and movie set struck right now and that’s the devastation that has been left behind.
rHob
Comment by rHob — February 7, 2008 @ 11:27 am
This thing about hating the Window is driving me nuts.
Look, people. When something is aired on TV for the first time, you know what we get paid? Bumpkis. Because they already bought it and they get to air it at least once without having to pay us.
The Window for streaming is the same thing. I see no reason why the people who paid for the damned show aren’t allowed to go generate some revenue off it for a couple of weeks on the Internet. THEN — and only then — if audience keep wanting to watching it on line do we get more money. Just like residuals.
Step it down people… I can’t think that on some issues people aren’t thinking clearly.
Comment by Christopher — February 7, 2008 @ 11:39 am
In book publishing, the writer is not an employee of anyone. He’s more of a junior partner with limited rights in a joint venture with a publisher.
He receives an advance against royalties, then hopes the royalties exceed the advance and the reserve against book returns a publisher calculates for each royalty period. The good news is a writer generally doesn’t have to pay back the difference between the advance and the royalties collected if the book undersells, which is usually the case. And there are other ways to make money off a book, such as foreign sales, serial rights, option money, etc.
It’s also not terribly common for publishers to commision books from writers. A writer pitches, the publisher buys, hopefully. Book agents take 15 percent.
It’s one way to make a living, I guess.
Comment by Brian Moore — February 7, 2008 @ 11:45 am
I sincerely hope there are lots of members there on Saturday like me who understand that a negotiation is a negotiation and that nobody in the leadership ever promised we would get 100% of what we asked for at this juncture. See you Saturday - I’ll be the guy at the back actually listening to the leadership and rationally weighing the pros and cons of it all. So if you’re one of the regular guys like me who has supported this strike and this leadership from the beginning, but who hasn’t decided that the way forward is to burn this town to the ground come what may, be there. It’s imperative. And to all you people screaming ‘fuck this shitty fucking deal’ that you haven’t even seen yet - come prepared to listen and to respect. Like they keep saying - we’re all in this together.
Comment by Paul — February 7, 2008 @ 12:00 pm
As a few others have expressed, I feel sorry for the negotiators. I doubt they’d be coming to you if they didn’t feel they had the best deal they could get. If you think opinions of the BTLers or public were against the writers before, it’s gonna be 10x what it is now if this deal is anything but a total piece of crap and you let it fall apart. I can’t imagine the wga negotiators would bother to try to convince you if it was. What happens if you decide to stay on strike and then SAG decides not to?
At some point there will be enough WGA side deals and non-guild deals that the moguls are going to write the rest of the WGA membership off completely. Are we going to see a situation like in the early 80s were Reagan fired the traffic controllers, except this time the moguls say ‘don’t need you’ to the remaining writers on strike. Then the only writers working will be indies or WGA side-deal’ers. That’s not going to split the guilt, right?
I wonder if the middle income/up and comers are going to stick it out or go fi-core if the deal is rejected… just when you thought this strike couldn’t get any crazier!
I don’t know who is Nero in this situation, but I see hundreds and thousands of people in Hollywood on both sides of this mess fiddling as it burns.
The messed up part is this — it’s already in the press that this strike is going to be over after this weekend… I’ve already read a news article where they said TV shows will be back as soon as April if it’s settled now… I’m already looking forward to a late spring 24 =) If the deal falls apart, to some people it is going to be like the season getting cancelled for a second time now thanks to the hype that it’s about to be over… so much for that press blackout, eh?
Comment by Seriously? — February 7, 2008 @ 12:23 pm
As a fan and supporter of the WGA, I’m not about to start celebrating anything until the writers get a fair deal! You’ve held out this long, guys, you should hold out until you get what you rightly deserve! Stay strong, writers! We miss you!
Comment by Lisa — February 7, 2008 @ 1:00 pm
rHob: You know who does get money every time an action figure is made? The person who invented the character! And who did that? Someone who wrote a comic, or created a silly television show. AKA a writer.
And as someone else pointed out, songwriters get copyrights specifically for the songWRITING itself.
You missed too many Douchenomics 101 classes, sir. And your next post was even worse. “As far as John and Paul are concerned, they did do most of the work. The writers are not doing ‘most of the work’ it is a lot of work, but not the majority.”
This dichotomy is not only false, but misleading! Paul and John did not engineer the Beatles’ records. They did not press “play” on the tape recorders, run back into Abbey Road’s sound rooms, and start playing. They mixed and engineered some of their own stuff later, and McCartney did everything on his first few solo albums, but to say that the Beatles were Paul and John doing everything by themselves does as much a disservice to the people who assisted them in creating their vision as you accuse us writers of doing to the below-the-line folks who unfortunately are suffering at the hands of multinational corporations.
And for someone who prides himself on having learned economics, it’s disgusting that you place this situation solely at the hands of writers. An economist would look at who stands to profit most - and the answer is, as always, the corporations, and by continuing to screw the writers and BTL staff this will only be abetted by your misguided and misleading bitching.
To Christopher, who discussed the online window and is far less idiotic: a very valid point on your behalf, but also consider that the lifespan of most videos on the Internet is far shorter than most other media. Songs get popular and die off over the course of weeks. Movies get popular in theaters over the course of months. Internet videos get popular, get t-shirts made, and disappear entirely in the course of days now. A studio could conceivably make all the money it plans to get from a video and kill it with the perfectly reasonable caveat that it’s no longer popular, all before a writer gets red penny one. And also consider that residuals don’t necessarily depend on massive audience return. Shows in syndication get rerun simply to fill time in most cases. This is not so on the watch-anything-at-any-time Internet. There isn’t even the same kind of distribution, in that syndication is a guaranteed stack of residuals. One may argue that this means writers shouldn’t benefit that much from syndication in the first place, but that’s a whole other can of worms.
Comment by Seth — February 7, 2008 @ 2:28 pm
RHOB: “As far as John and Paul are concerned, they did do most of the work.”
Since you didn’t have a response to the playwright example I cited (as the actual facts would clutter your argument), I will quickly answer the last of your weak points.
The SHARE of work is not why they were paid more. They were paid more because they get A ROYALTY for WRITING the song, jacknuts.
As far as your drug company example, that chemist is AN EMPLOYEE of the drug company. As previously posted, the studios do not EMPLOY writers any more. (Back in the day, they had writers on salary, and your example might correlate then. It does not now.) We enter into an agreement that was forged long ago–we hand over the copyright, take a smaller upfront fee, and share a piece of the revenue our work generates.
RHOB: “The corporations put the risk on the line, they put the money up front. When you start putting billions of dollars up for failed movies and TV shows and all of the costs of promotion and infrastructure then we’ll talk. ”
No, let’s talk now. I hate to break it to you, but they cover their end on failed tv shows as well (I’ve seen the cost amortization numbers.) They take a risk, but it is calculated and failures aren’t always LOSSES. Maybe you’ve got one of your old Econ textbooks lying around that can brush you up on that.
For their investment, THE STUDIO GETS THE LION’S SHARE OF EVERYTHING. Which they should. But I repeat, your tired played-out talking point about who does the amount of work, who invested, and who’s due what isn’t based on any current copyright law, history, or tradition. It doesn’t even work on a MORAL level–it’s simple Bush-era corporate bullying greed trying to come down on largely middle-class group that they’d rather starve out and squeeze until they are left with no protection and no recourse. They would prefer to not have to deal with us—other than the fact that THEY HAVE TO.
Have fun in law school. You won’t be missed.
You don’t have to go to business school to see that. Stevie Wonder can fucking see that.
Comment by slk writer — February 7, 2008 @ 2:36 pm
Let’s assume that some sort of residuals are fair (and that writers accept less upfront because they anticipate residuals down the line).
The reason writers are seeking a percentage for streaming is that the flat fees offered are so low. The studios’ justification for offering such low rates is that they don’t expect (or claim they don’t expect) to make much money from online distribution and can’t afford to pay the traditional flat fee for reuse. So by offering to take a percent of ad revenue from content rebroadcast online, writers would be offering to share the studios’ risk in this new medium.
The real question is “why didn’t the studios offer a percent instead of the demeaningly low flat figure ($600/1200)?” And the simplest answer is that the studios expect to do quite well with online advertising. Such a scenario is quite possible and could happen sooner than the 3-year agreement term. One reason, mentioned by NotsureIgetit, is that viewers are ignoring commercials thanks to tivo. And even viewers who don’t tivo are ignoring commercials. Advertisers are increasingly reluctant to pay top $ for a commercial that’s viewed only by the living room furniture. Online ads, on the other hand, can be below or to the side of a streamed program, so that viewer eyeballs are a certainty, and these ads can be made interactive so that viewer interest can be proven.
But as NotsureIgetit also point out, if some viewers shift to online or IPTV broadcasts, advertisers will surely pay less for original broadcasts, which translates into smaller upfronts for the talent. Smaller upfronts and ridiculously low streaming residuals mean a substantial pay cut for writers.
But here’s the kicker. Fairly soon, there won’t be any “original” broadcast. All new content will be streamed by IP directly to tv sets (or set top boxes like those made by Sony and Sling Media). And digital (streaming online) distribution will replace syndicated content and reruns even sooner. To add insult to injury, with online distribution, a residual-free window like the one in the DGA contract results in still further slashing of payments to writers. Most viewers will probably stream series content on a week-to-week basis (i.e. within the window), just as they watch programs now (and as the audience of the online series quarterlife watch that show).
Bottom line: without either a percent figure for material rebroadcast / broadcast online or a decent flat figure, then a deal like the DGA’s could mean severe hardships for working writers.
Comment by Outsider pov — February 7, 2008 @ 3:47 pm
“Then what we need to do is take money back from the agents. Who decided we should tithe them? Tithe your god, not your agent! (And no, agents are NOT gods–they just act that way.) Take back, say, four percent per deal and roll back their participation in any deal to one year. Now that’s real money right now for all of us, taken from the people who do the least to make this business what it is.
Kevin Rooney
Comment by Kevin Rooney — February 7, 2008 @ 10:47 am”
Interesting thought, Kevin. In fact, why not get rid of agents completely, right? That way, you guys can just negotiate your own deals. Yeah! You guys can go up against the studios’ top biz affairs people, and I’m sure you’ll end up with the best deal possible. Right?! Better than any agent with a long-standing relationship with that lawyer could do, right?? And you can pore through the studios’ crafty legalese found in most of the initial drafts of writers’ contracts. I’m sure you’ll spot all the little traps in there! And you guys can also spend hours and hours and hours on the phone with network and studio executives, showrunners, line producers, production co execs in an attempt to get yourself a job. I’m sure they are just dying to take your calls and read your samples! While you’re at it, you can also call all the development execs and get them to hear your pitches! That shouldn’t be a problem at all.
Ugh. Give. Me. A. Break. Yet another demonstration that, according to SOME writers, if you’re not the one writing words on a page, you don’t count. Abhorrent. You know, you’ve been watching way too much ENTOURAGE. Don’t let it fool you. Agenting is an distinctly un-glamorous freaking brutal job and to dismiss it (and those who choose it as a career) offhand like that is both ignorant and repulsive.
Comment by Not an agent but you suck anyway — February 7, 2008 @ 8:48 pm
Outsider POV
-
Let’s say total ad revenue for a first-run broadcast is $2M. Of that writers get $40k, in addition to their regular pay.
Now let’s assume that the show is available online for a full month after it first airs. And that 20% of viewers don’t watch the show when it’s broadcast, but instead watch it online. So audience for the first show drops, and ad revenue drops, by 20%, to $1.6M. Let’s say the network is able to sell all the online viewers at the same rate, making $400k.
So now, as a writer, you want $40k, your regular pay, plus, let’s say, 2% of $400k - $8k.
Now, the network made exactly what it made before, but the writer made $48k instead of $8k. Fine - we all want more money - but it seems dishonest to call this a moral, or just, or fair, argument. It’s just “gimme more”.
Comment by nsigi — February 7, 2008 @ 11:15 pm
Actually, George wrote some great songs, too.
“And Your Bird Can Sing,” “While My Guitar Gently Weeps,” anyone?
Not too shabby.
Speaking of shabby, the deal sounds like it’s going to kind of suck, but I’m prepared to go back to work Monday nonetheless.
Guess you really can’t fight Douchebag Hall.
R.I.P. John Grimsley. Respect.
Comment by Aceball — February 7, 2008 @ 11:48 pm
“at what point does it just become greed?”
Greed? you mean taking someone else’s work and making a bazillion dollars off it? Give me a damn break. Way to be anti-greed. That goes double for you blaming us for the crew members being out of work. Did we lay them off? No. The studios did. We have no obligation to work without a contract, the studios have an obligation to bargain with us, which they did not do. None of our demands were unreasonable, and except for corporate greed that pains you so this would have been over before it started. It’s laughable when a lot of us are middle class that you cry over whether Iger is going to be forced to settle for $56 million or take a cut to $55, poor baby, and then talk about greed.
“the patent may or may not go to the individual if he works for a company at the time”
Feature writers don’t work for a company. Writers of spec scripts aren’t employed by companies. So what you’re saying is, if you’re an independant contractor who’s subsequently hired by a company, they own the material you produced before you went to work for them in perpetuity after you’re paid for one-time use of that product?
“You are putting a framework together for everyone else in the industry to finalize, a majority of the work comes after you have handed in your script.”
I guess we should stop asking for all of the profits and ask for a cut commesurate with our contribution that still leaves the majority of the profits in the hands of others then.
“If you were going to affect my life so badly, then why was I not allowed to vote for a strike?”
What would you expect to vote on, for god’s sake? Should the actors be able to get together and decide that crew members should work for free so they can make more? You don’t get to tell people they have to work without a contract, or they have to give up residuals, or that they’re not entitled to coffee breaks, or, um, anything. It’s not up to me to tell you what conditions are okay for your contract or to tell you, “You don’t have a contract? Screw you, I don’t care, work anyway, and the studio will pay me all your money.” See, if I don’t give a rat’s ass about you, a stranger, and I got to dictate the terms of your contract, it probably wouldn’t work out too well for you. That’s why we get to negotiate our own contracts and actually agree by majority vote to the terms under which we work instead of letting Jim next door tell us he’s fixed it for us to work 24 hours a day and not get paid at all. Jesus!
Comment by Common Sense — February 8, 2008 @ 1:22 am