WGA set to strike - TV Season could be truncated/delayed (1 Viewer)

[Greg_S_H]

Here's a pretty detailed article:

http://www.variety.com/VR1117975066.html

 

[Chuck Anstey]

A self-imposed tax so that workers can hold a company hostage, threatening to try and kill it if their ransom demands are not met.

 

[Walter C]

This thread has been an interesting read.

Hopefully, both sides will find ways to avoid a strike.

 

[Scott-S]

Writers going on strike is just greed. The only ones it hurts are the viewers.

It is greedy to suddenly want more money for your work, and it is greedy to be making more money without giving some back to the folks that did the work. It is greed on both sides.

We are now going to have even more reality and game shows thanks to greed.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

So. . .companies have "terms of use" and workers have "ransom demands?" Seriously?

Let's see. When employers try to set terms, they're just exercising their free market rights, but when employees try to set terms, they're "whining" and "trying to defeat mathematics" and "demanding ransom."

Priceless!

 

[Ken Chan]

That's one reasonable arrangement. Another would be that as long as the product makes money, especially if it gets sold again as a new thing, the people that made it get a cut.

And yes, unions enforce that, which is a good thing. It helps value actual work over wealth.

 

[Chuck Anstey]

I completely disagree that greed is the cause here. The real causes IMO are:

1. The audience will watch whatever POS show is broadcast. Most people watch TV by simply watching "the best of what is on" instead of some minimal threshhold of entertainment value where they would choose to turn the TV off and do something else. So shows are simply trying for the largest share of a relatively fixed audience. The audience does not reward good writing, only "the top half of group".
2. Law of numbers. 10,000 people applying for one job means hard work and low wages. That is simply mathematics at work. You want better wages for the overall group of writers / directors / actors? Stop trying to be one.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

No argument there. . .

 

[Chuck Anstey]

A company, as in a single entity, can set their terms. Companies that collude to fix wages get in trouble and is illegal. If you don't like them, go to another company. An employee, as a single entity, can set their terms of continued employment ("I want a raise") and if the company doesn't like them, they can let them go. Unions are not single entities at all but a collusion of employees trying to fix their group's wages. If their demands are not met, they try to bring down an entire company (including all the other workers in the company that do other jobs) because their group isn't happy. Companies used to do that tactic to all their employees with "company towns" or collusion but was fortunately made illegal and their are protections in place for employees. No such protection exists for the company though.

I would describe your understanding of economics here as anything but priceless.

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The unions exist to protect the rights of the workers, because the balance of power between a company and a single employee is inherently unbalanced. The result is that the workers get better compensated for their labor than if they had negotiated induvidually. Wanting to get the best possible deal for your effort seems to me to be a tenet of capitalism.
The unions' power is automatically checked by the true financial needs of the company. If the company fails, the employees are all out of work. This is why contract negotiations between companies and unions are reactive to the financial situation of the company; the commercial aviation industry and more recently the UAW have made significant concessions during contract negotiations to help the companies stay financially solvent. If a company agrees to a contract that is too generous, that it deserves to suffer the consequences. Same for the union that refuses contract terms that are necessary for the company's survival.
In this case the producer's union (aka "the company') can afford more generous concessions in new media. That is the opening that has allowed the WGA, SAG and DGA to swoop in. Whether the strike happens depends on whether all sides feel they have more to gain by holding out than what they'll lose from the financial consequences of the work stoppage. Don't forget that the writers will be losing out on business just like the producers will.

 

[Chris]

Here's the official word:


The union has already voted that they will allow WGA to call for a strike anytime after 12:01 tonight midnight, Nov. 1. So, since we close 10/31 with no progress, this is a very bad sign.

http://www.amptp.org/negs.html

 

[Chris]

Variety has this morning's assessment:


http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...ryid=2821&cs=1

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Based on your completely fictional description of the movie business, I'll have to take that as a compliment.

 

[Ethan Riley]

Writers have always been in a precarious position because the Big Guys believe that writers are expendable and easily replaceable.

However, if the writers get their way, keep in mind that you're going to probably end up paying a little more for your dvds and downloads in the future. I guess that's fair.

However AGAIN, the writers need to understand that even with some miraculous change of heart, they're STILL not exactly going to get rich from dvd sales of their past shows. There's just too many hands in the pot. For example, take a typical sitcom tv dvd from a couple years ago. There are 22 episodes and the thing retails for about $30. Say the release sells 50,000 copies. You have to divide the profits between the retailers, the distributors, licensors, not to mention the original 22 directors, 22 writers, god knows how many Guild actors and who knows who all else. If you wrote one episode of the sitcom in question, you're probably going to get a residual check for about $30--so you can go out and buy yourself a copy.

To the WGA: Please--there's really not much profit in all this! Relax, guys!

 

[Aaron Silverman]

"Electronic sell-through is synonymous with DVD." Larger mounds of BS have rarely been spoken. Manufacturing and distribution costs, which are totally different for electronic and physical media, were the reasons why the current agreement calculates residuals based on 20% of wholesale price. (For example, if you buy a $20 DVD, the writer's cut is based on 20% of the wholesale price, not $20. The actual amount is 1.5%, which in this case might be 4 cents.)

 

[Derek Miner]

Well, that may be the case now, but I think the major factor in this situation is that everyone is looking to the future. I don't think I'm going out on a limb by suggesting that the film and television industries haven't missed the turmoil of the music industry, the decline of the CD and the rise of digital downloads. One point mentioned in the "Sam and Jim" podcast I linked earlier is that many years ago that the WGA agreed to lower payments for VHS/home video when nobody knew what future the format held, and the writers believe the current situation will lead to the same problem for Internet material. When DVD releases are grossing amounts in multiple factors of a film's box office and the music industry is rapidly moving to downloads, I can grasp why the writers think their incomes may be hurt.

 

[Derek Miner]

The Variety article posted today indicates that SAG, DGA, AFTRA and IATSE have all reminded their workers they must continue to fulfill the contracts they have agreed to. SAG is most supportive of the WGA, but tells members they can only join pickets on personal time. IATSE specifically warned workers honoring picket lines are "subject to permanent replacement." The DGA has warned members that not completing "writer-director" tasks would leave them in breach of their agreement.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

The Teamsters are officially obligated to tell their workers to not honor WGA picket lines, but the leaders of the Hollywood local have come out personally with statements like "Teamsters don't cross picket lines."

This has led to threatening letters from the AMPTP. And, hopefully, will lead to a shorter strike.

 

[Scott-S]

This whole deal is why Unions are no longer a good thing. They had their place a long time ago, but are now just thugs.

If you don't get what you want, you threaten the livelihood of others. That sounds like extortion to me.

I admit I have a negative opinion of unions after having to deal with them in my previous job. I had to install communications equipment in automotive plants. I had to get a union person to plug in my equipment or tighten a screw. I would be threatened if I was caught using a screwdriver.

Because of unions, it took me over twice as long as it should to get my work done. Meanwhile the person I had to get to plug in a piece of equipment was making 2x what I make and did almost no work.

It is no longer about protecting the workers, it is about getting the most money for the least amount of work.

Back to this topic...

Since the "big, bad companies" have said they will not budge on the DVD issue, the writers are just hurting themselves (financially) and us viewers for nothing. In my opinion, they are like a child having a tantrum.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Can you explain why it's OK for the AMPTP to refuse to budge on its demands, but when the WGA doesn't want to cave, it's a "tantrum?" Are you aware of all the other rollbacks that the AMPTP has proposed?

Did you happen to notice that the AMPTP lumped downloads in with DVDs? They're not saying "we refuse to budge on DVDs;" they're saying "we refuse to budge on DVDs, and by 'DVDs' we mean 'DVDs and electronic downloads.'" The sheer chutzpah of that is breathtaking.

No way is this "for nothing."