Writer's Strike

It looks likely that the Writer's Guild of America, of which my father is a member, is probably going to go on strike tomorrow primarily over the studios' unwillingness to pay so-called "residuals" -- money that writers get when their shows or movies are shown on television or released on video -- in digital media. The union explains the issues here if you're interested.

Obviously, the entertainment unions are pretty small in terms of membership, but they're one of the best examples out there of the idea that working people can advance their interests through unions even outside of traditional "hard hat" or public sector industries.

Comments

The best part of a writer's strike is that 1) if it goes on long enough, studio execs bend the rules and start accepting spec scripts from aspiring writers, and 2) if you like a series that is written by Canadians you are one of the few people who don't have to worry about a drop in quality.

Of course, you can't always tell if something drops in quality--you can't get worse than hitting bottom naturally.

Posted by MNPundit | November 4, 2007 6:43 PM

No Daily Show. No Colbert.

I'll make the sacrifice as a viewer, though. I support strong unions.

-----

"Obviously, the entertainment unions are pretty small in terms of membership, but they're one of the best examples out there of the idea that working people can advance their interests through unions even outside of traditional "hard hat" or public sector industries."

The NBA Players Union is like this too.

In a sense, stuff like this resembles an old-fashioned guild rather than an industrial union.

Posted by Petey | November 4, 2007 7:02 PM

Actually, Matt, entertainment industry unions aren't proof of anything. That industry is sui generis-- there are far more people who want to work in it than there are slots, and many people who do work in it value the ego trip, proximity to celebrities, and fame just as much as any monetary compensation.

So the unions-- more like guilds really-- act as a kind of gatekeeper to ensure that most people who want to work in the industry remain stuck waiting tables or filming porn flicks. That's simply a very different function than most unions.

As a result, they also really can't advance their members' interests (other than the interest in restricting the supply of employable talent) very effectively. The last writers' strike was a disaster, and even if the writers have valid claims, this one probably will be an even worse disaster; the industry can go a long time producing reality shows and talent contests and not taking a huge financial hit, and it's pretty easy to find nonunion talent given that there are so many people on the outside looking in.

Posted by Dilan Esper | November 4, 2007 7:03 PM

And speaking about movies, if you're interested in recent British Labour Party politics at all, I highly recommend you set up your TiVo's for this Thursday.

The 2003 British telemovie The Deal is going to be on HBO this Thursday night. It's never been shown in America in any form, so this is really nice.

It's the story of the legendary dinner meeting between Tony Blair and Gordon Brown in the early 90's where they worked out who was going to go first as Party leader.

It's done by the same writer/director/actor team who did the rather similar The Queen and Nixon/Frost.

And if you, like me, thought that the scene in The Queen where Blair is told, "Gordon's on the phone," and replies, "tell him to wait," was the single funniest moment in the movie by far, you really ought to TiVo The Deal on Thursday.

Posted by Petey | November 4, 2007 7:04 PM

I heard on the radio that the Teamsters will support the writer's union, making it more difficult for Hollywood to continue to function...holding up deliveries, can't depend on deliveries, etc.

Posted by Garuda | November 4, 2007 7:12 PM

Here's an idea for those of us who believe MY needs an editor. We can edit his posts. For example, this one becomes:
-------------------------------
The Writer's Guild of America, of which my father is a member, will likely strike tomorrow, primarily over the studios' unwillingness to pay "residuals" -- money that writers get when their shows or movies are shown on television or released on video -- in digital media. The union explains the issues here.

Obviously, the entertainment unions are relatively small in membership, but they do exemplify that working people can advance their interests through unions even outside of traditional "hard hat" or public sector industries.

Posted by pithier | November 4, 2007 7:14 PM

So, on TV, what kinds of shows does this affect? Are News programs affected as well as entertainment?

Posted by Kevin | November 4, 2007 7:18 PM

Actually, Matt, entertainment industry unions aren't proof of anything.

AIUI, unions are the primary means by which people who work in the entertainment industry get health insurance and other benefits.

Posted by Peter | November 4, 2007 7:33 PM

So, on TV, what kinds of shows does this affect? Are News programs affected as well as entertainment?

No, not the news.

Actually, Matt, entertainment industry unions aren't proof of anything. That industry is sui generis-- there are far more people who want to work in it than there are slots, and many people who do work in it value the ego trip, proximity to celebrities, and fame just as much as any monetary compensation.

Which is precisely why a union is necessary. When labor supply outstrips demand it is vital for labor to have disciplined organization.

Or maybe I just hate capitalism!

Posted by Freddie | November 4, 2007 8:02 PM

The best part of a writer's strike is that 1) if it goes on long enough, studio execs bend the rules and start accepting spec scripts from aspiring writers

Otherwise known as scabs, you asshole.

Posted by Brautigan | November 4, 2007 8:15 PM

Otherwise known as scabs, you asshole.

'cause no one ever got anywhere in Hollywood as an asshole.

Posted by Senescent | November 4, 2007 8:24 PM

Someone correct me if this is wrong, but my understanding of the Writer's Guild is that:

1) You need to actually sell a script to get into the guild.

2) The union minimum wages mean little since most writers get paid more than the minimums.

This makes the WGA pretty much nothing like a public sector union or a hardhat union.

Posted by Fred | November 4, 2007 8:24 PM

A break-down of how to join the WGA can be found here.

Posted by Jeff Westcott | November 4, 2007 8:40 PM

Growing up in LA around movie people, it was my impression that writers' strikes were a terrible burden for the TV writers and a pretty great deal for everyone else.

Hardly anyone outside of television's regular schedule took the writing stoppage seriously. So the week after a long writers' strike was concluded, the market would be flooded with spec scripts from guild members. FWIW . . .

Posted by southpaw | November 4, 2007 9:05 PM

Dilan, you said "That's simply a very different function than most unions."

From an economic POV, it's actually the exact same function as an other union. Their goal is to set their member's wages above the market-clearing price. If they do that, two things happen:

1) There will be more people who want to get in than actually can. The union then gets to act as a gatekeeper as to who gets the rewards. Union-like guilds often do this through regulation instead (note the licensure laws in many fields)

2) Since they're setting it up as a zero-sum game, it comes at the expense of others.

Yes, many writers get paid very well and work in pretty good conditions, but there is nothing that different about the union.

And, as noted, in our system it does one good thing: It provides a group, which is pretty necessary to getting decent insurance rates.

Posted by Dave | November 4, 2007 9:09 PM

"From an economic POV, it's actually the exact same function as an other union. Their goal is to set their member's wages above the market-clearing price."

But the WGA only sets the minimum wages, and don't most writers get more than the minimum? So movie and TV writing is still mostly a meritocracy, unlike, say, the DMV or a GM plant.

Posted by Fred | November 4, 2007 9:15 PM

WGA member, here -- just came back from loading picket signs onto the vans for tomorrow.

Residuals are a real kitchen-table issue for us, as I can personally attest. For example, NBC currently re-runs whole episodes of "The Office" on their website, sells ads to the web version, then claims that this is a promotional use, so we're entitled to no residuals. We don't like that.

(SAG members are also dependent on residuals to get them through dry periods, so they are very supportive, though their contract requires them to cross picket lines.)

It's true that some writers are doing very well, but so are the studio executives across the table. But one of the parties actually thought of the stuff that generates the revenue, so I don't see why we shouldn't try to get a decent share of it.

Posted by Delicious Pundit | November 4, 2007 9:57 PM

It's a labor monopoly, plain and simple. Like any monopoly that attempts to use its monopoly power, it should be eradicated.

Posted by Steve | November 4, 2007 10:06 PM

In contrast to what Matt says, no one questions that highly educated white collar workers can unionize (like writers). In fact, many white collar fields already have a sort of union (think Lawyers, Doctors, accountants, architects, etc.)

that's not the question Matt.

The question is whether blue collar factory workers will be able to effectively use unions to better themselves. and that's an uphill battle.

Posted by thehova | November 4, 2007 10:35 PM

The point of entertainment unions of the sort used by writers and musicians is to control supply in such a way as to ensure that those within the guild receive a certain steady levels of wages in exchange for achieving a certain level of skill an experience. In an industry where (a) the barriers to entry are low and (b) there exists a large number of people willing and able to work for free almost indefinitely, one can see how workers would want to professionalize their field in order to ensure that they can get a steady paycheck while practicing their trade and also prevent the field from becoming degraded by having the field depend on cheap, disposable labor with no institutional memory.

And in a world in which the noose around intellectual property possession is getting tighter and tighter, becoming both highly protected and practically indefinite, I makes sense that the writers would want to make sure that they get a piece of the IP pie.

Posted by Tyro | November 4, 2007 11:03 PM

Tyro, if what your saying is true, I can't imagine the writers guild will be very successful. It sounds too easy for major studios to circumvent the guild.

Posted by thehova | November 4, 2007 11:20 PM

Delicious Pundit,

What about the writers who are also producers? I imagine a number of them are members of both guilds. What happens with them? Do they continue to write for shows they produce while their staff writers are on strike?

Posted by Fred | November 4, 2007 11:52 PM

For anyone interested, there was a great write-up of the basic details of the strike - motives for both sides, precedents, etc., on Pajiba.

Posted by jhupp | November 5, 2007 1:38 AM

I have a lot a sympathy for the writers on the web rebroadcast residuals; I completely agree they should get a piece of the action.

That said, the writers are in far worse bargaining position than '88. While ownership may somewhat more consolidated, the "market" is far more fragmented, because it includes so much more, including, but not limited to, reality shows, cable, and video games. Heck, people may even break down and actually go outside. The other problem is that with the advent of DVD's, the web, and the modified copyright law, ownership is much more capable of sustaining revenues for a longer time with no labor input.

I do not see anything but a token gesture toward the writers when this gets resolved. In the long term (i.e. more than 3 years) they may be able to build some leverage, but if even it goes approx 22 mo like last time, the status quo will be sustained.

Posted by Kenny | November 5, 2007 1:44 AM

Otherwise known as scabs, you asshole.

Oh you mean the people stuck basically eating shit because all the slots are taken when they have good ideas?

Yeah. I feel real guilty over not keeping them grubbing the dirt.

Posted by MNPundit | November 5, 2007 7:42 PM

Oh you mean the people stuck basically eating shit because all the slots are taken when they have good ideas?

Yeah. I feel real guilty over not keeping them grubbing the dirt.

Yeah, man. What we should do is smash the union so that when problems like this happen and writers are getting screwed out of their fair compensation, they have no mechanism whatsoever to fix it.

Posted by Freddie | November 5, 2007 8:24 PM

If the union is keeping people who are better at the job than their members from doing the job then perhaps there should be smashing.

Posted by MNPundit | November 6, 2007 11:07 AM

Honestly, I have to agree with Pundit. This union may need to go, or at least be restructured.
The writing quality of television is so low these days that most of America would rather tune in to see who can remember the lyrics to bad songs than tune into something that may or may not hit the mark this week. While this does not apply to all shows, even the really good ones continue to slip.
Televison staff writers are brought in to work on established characters and ideas. Joe Blow who got a job writing on whatever based solely on one idea, just because the unions say you've got to hire one of their guys doesn't deserve anymore than what he was initially paid for his idea. Then it should become property of whoever paid for it. Seriously, it seems like selling a painting to an art lover, then saying he has to let you borrow the picture so you can display it in your mom's living room whenever company comes to visit.

Posted by ZK | November 10, 2007 5:17 PM

I work for **** but in their **** department which couldn’t be more unrelated to what is going on between the feuding sides. Yet, “the other side of the story” comes in terms of what the news is neglecting to report: myself, my co-workers, my bosses, as well as countless others in other departments face potential lay-offs simply because we have the misfortune of being stuck on the same roller coaster as this whole dilemma. What angers me most is that people who support either side seem to be fueling the idea of refusing to give in or negotiate, as if it is some fun game or a symbolic statement of “the demise of the working-class”. The sad thing is, I don’t even care about the symbolism or the fighting. I just want it to end. I love my job, and have never worried myself over making sure I broker a good deal or secure contractual terms. I simply go to work, do my job, get my paycheck and do what I can to help the department, and the company as a whole. Is that so much to ask? I just can’t logically see the fairness of a situation where even one family must face potential loss of livelihood.

Posted by Joy | November 16, 2007 2:41 AM

You know what really sucks about this? Besides of course, the unfair treatment of the writers, and I do not blame them for striking one bit. But, second to that, the thing that sucks is that football season is about done. That means that nothing worth a damn will be on now!

Posted by Jason | November 16, 2007 3:25 PM