Strike

[Bartek]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7074306.stm

No20Strike20IA20Clause2011-1-07.pdf

[RPSharman]

I'm not really sure how I feel about this strike.  On one side, I think it's important for a union to finally stand up for itself.  On the other side, we in the IATSE have been getting shafted for years.  Most of us, with the advent of the new "low budget" agreements, have experienced working longer hours and more days for the same annual pay.  Over ten years, our salary has not kept up with the cost of living, and has gone from a very good living to a just about average one.

With the exception of the few of us out there who still care, our industry has turned from film making as an art form, to spewing out product to fill hundreds of channels, thousands of Blockbuster Video stores, and millions of websites.  While the good writers will continue to earn and deserve well beyond the standard wages, should the average working writer expect an increase in wages for mass producing poor content for millions of viewers who seem to be willing to watch just about anything?

[Noah Timan]

While the good writers will continue to earn and deserve well beyond the standard wages, should the average working writer expect an increase in wages for mass producing poor content for millions of viewers who seem to be willing to watch just about anything?

They are not going on strike because they feel that they should be paid more since their work is so effin good -- it's not a merit award. 

[Jeff Wexler]

I'm not really sure how I feel about this strike.  On one side, I think it's important for a union to finally stand up for itself.  On the other side, we in the IATSE have been getting shafted for years.  Most of us, with the advent of the new "low budget" agreements, have experienced working longer hours and more days for the same annual pay.  Over ten years, our salary has not kept up with the cost of living, and has gone from a very good living to a just about average one.

One big difference is the I.A., certainly the leadership of the International, does not behave like a labor union. We have been getting the shaft for years, this is true, but we are getting it FROM OUR OWN UNION! We have over 35 separate contracts which allows the producers to pick and choose how we will be paid and employed, in some instances it is cheaper for a production to "go union" than to be non-union. We have almost no power through our union leadership because the leadership does not want us to have any power. The Writers Guild and Screen Actors Guild (and I might add the Teamsters which is a true labor union) understand the power that they have and are willing to exercise this power. The provisions in all the WGA and SAG contracts that have been negotiated over the years historically provide a much higher standard than anything the I.A. has ever negotiated (and this goes for WORKING CONDITIONS as well as wages --- this is the cornerstone of what a labor union is supposed to fight for). Both WGA and SAG have been willing to exercise the one fundamental right a union has --- the right to strike (something the I.A. is not willing to even consider).

If our contracts came up at the same time, industry wide, we would not be bound by the "no strike" clause in the contract. When the contract expires we would ALL be free to strike and honor eachother's picket line. Do you think the producers would hold out with a lengthy strike if they were without writers, actors, drivers, camera, sound, makeup, hair, grip, electric, wardrobe...  basically everybody.

If the I.A. wanted to support the WGA there are many things that could have been done instead of just threatening us with expulsion if we honor a picket line. I understand the necessity of a no strike clause in the contract that protects the producer, the worker and the contract, during the term of the contract. The I.A. could have made very public statements of support and requested that all I.A. members who are not actively employed join the ranks of the Writers' picket lines. This is what SAG has done (since they have a no strike clause as well and are not allowed to honor a picket line if they have a work call).

The bottom line is that a union will only have power if its members demand it and in the case of I.A. membership there is so much obstruction and lack of democracy between the members and the union leadership, our voices are (obviously) not heard. If the Writers lose, we ALL lose. After each loss, the producers are even more confident that the unions will never be anything more than a minor annoyance on the road to mega-profits the likes of which have not been seen in any industry in recent times.

I think the producers want to break the WGA and are quite prepared to weather a long strike. The situation with the writers because of the nature of the writing work they do, will allow the producer to continue making the product. The existence of the so-called hyphenate, the writer-director, writer-producer, actor-producer-writer and so on, poses some interesting possibilities. I believe that if the strike does not end quickly it will merge into the SAG negotiations. SAG is in much the same place as the Writers because they both get residuals. SAG has even more power, if they wish to exercise it, because they are not behind the scenes (like the writers) but are in front of the camera.

There is a lot to think about but my hope is that we do not succumb so immediately to this feeling that the Writers are ruining our world, we just want to go to work and get what we can (hey, I don't want to lose my house anymore than anyone else), because they are fighting the good fight and should have as much support and solidarity as we are able to muster.

-  Jeff Wexler

[old school]

I think the evolutionary aspect of the biz that RVD refers to is the heart of the matter for all of us. This world we ( actors, writers, directors, crafts) work in is in a radical realignment due to the internet and self produced content, and down right theft. Much like the Music biz, the old models don't work as they once did. Jeff is correct when he states we should support the writers, actors, etc.. and not vilianize them. The Producers, (multi nationals) need to rethink their position and figure out with us how we can control the product we all produce and still make money. Like running water, you can't stop evolution and change, but you can understand it and make it work for you. My 2 cents on a Saturday as I make another commercial that will play on NBC, CBS,  ABC, or whatever when they play reruns and reality shows as they loose more and more viewers to the internet,youtube,xbox,etc..... Maximum respect to all us dinosaurs.

CrewC

[RPSharman]

I want to be clear that I fully support labor unions, and I understand what the WGA membership is looking for as a whole.  In no way am I trying to vilify writers.  They have every right to pursue fair compensation.  The question I am pondering is... what IS fair?  Perhaps a one year interim contract would aid both sides, and allow more time to figure out what sort of revenue will be lost/gained as more people skip Crew's commercials on their DVR or elect to watch TV/Movies on-line or wait to buy/rent their favorites on DVD.

[Marc Wielage]

There is a lot to think about but my hope is that we do not succumb so immediately to this feeling that the Writers are ruining our world, we just want to go to work and get what we can (hey, I don't want to lose my house anymore than anyone else), because they are fighting the good fight and should have as much support and solidarity as we are able to muster.

Jeff, I've been telling people I know in post the exact same thing: that it's easy to resent the WGA for going out on strike, but the reality is, the issues they're fighting for are very real and important, and aren't just "fat cats trying to squeeze the studios for more money" (which is what many of my co-workers believe).

The issues are very complex, and it's not a simple black & white situation. I know that Mayor Villaraigosa has actually participated in at least one of the negotiations, and pointed out to both sides that if the WGA would be willing to postpone their strike to May/June, at least that would coincide with the SAG and DGA contract, and all three guilds could hammer out a compromise with the studios. The WGA could theoretically ask that the contract be back-dated to November 1, and they'd get their residuals -- assuming there are any to be handed out. According to the LA Times, a prolonged strike will affect the jobs of 300,000 people -- which include many whose businesses depend on the studios, production companies, networks, and post houses giving them ancillary work (everything from restaurants to truck rental companies to security guards to all kinds of companies you might not think of as being connected to the film & TV business).

Note that NBC/Universal's Jeff Zucker said two interesting things this past week: 1) that Apple "destroyed the music business" by pricing songs on iTunes at 99 cents; and 2) that in the two years iTunes had sold TV episodes online, NBC made a grand total of $15 million (trivial compared to DVD, etc.). It's clear to me he was trying to send a message to the writers that the studios are not making gigantic profits with downloads.

Granted, comments like this are incendiary and biased, but it does at least show why the studios are acting why they are. I also think the TV networks are terrified at the downslide in ratings over the last few years, and it's clear that this part of the business is undergoing some very radical changes that are going to affect all of us.

My buddy Mark Evanier (a WGA member) has an interesting blog where he's commented at length on many of the issues of the strike, and I think he's done a pretty good job presenting several sides of the argument. Those interested can read it here: http://www.newsfromme.com/

[wolf]

from Mike:

I sense possibly a turning point in Hollywood labor. I think Short (Boss of Bosses in the IATSE)

has painted himself into a corner with all this childish "House of

Hate" rhetoric.  WGA is fighting for some key technology issues.  If

they win, we'll win down the line, but if they don't win, we

definitely won't win either.

Short tried to break a growing solidarity in Hollywood, but instead

he's left looking like Nick Counter's (production Corps main negotiator) poodle or just plain foolish.

The Teamsters saw the importance of what WGA is fighting for and

they've called on their members not to cross WGA picketlines should it

come to that.  More importantly they've called on their members to not

rent their production vehicles in the event of a strike and I can't

think of any single thing that will more quickly cripple the industry.

Teamster Joint Council 42 has also called on their members to support

WGA's picket lines.  This would include UPS drivers and certain other

delivery trucks.  Meanwhile both a 399 observer and a Laborer's

observer are sitting in on negotiations.

Here are the WGA contract proposals

http://www.wga.org/contract_07/proposalsfull2.pdf

Their final proposal applies to all of us:

"Prohibit discipline of writers who honor picket lines of other

entertainment unions.

"Writers currently have no right to honor union picket lines beyond

the rights specified by law.

"The right to honor other unions’ picket-lines is key to union

strength and solidarity. Writers should be able to follow their own

conscience and beliefs when they encounter a picket line. There are

other entertainment unions who have honored our picket lines, and

Guild members should have the right to return that show of solidarity

without company reprisal."

a one day sick out might send a message. But the IA will never even consider it, nor will any of the local Bas, they are all buitches of TS.

Solidarity works,

Michael Everett

latter added on "the internet"

a one day sick out might send a message. But the IA will never even consider it, nor will any of the local BAs, they are all buitches of TS.

[old school]

      Marc's post concerning Jeff Zucker's take on the situation exemplifies the root problem the way I see it. Broadcasting( the media we know it) is being replaced by Narrowcasting( the evolving media dynamic) as we all have more choices for our entertainment time. Quality still sells as we have Sirius/Xm/internet radio that is rich and diverse as compared to corporate radio of today. YouTube is the wild west in LoFi Content, but entertaining.  Good Feature Docs and Labor of Love films are being made and can compete with the dumbed down crap that is produced by the majors at their price point. Shopping. Gaming, Good content abounds out there, if you are willing to look, and more people are all the time. Old-school good content can still sell, but you need talented writers, actors, craftspeople, showmen, etc to make the magic at a price-point that makes sense. Quality is the key and the advantage that todays practitioners have in their court. As the market grows, so can the art, but while the old way will never completely go away, the new dynamic will grow and change it. We all need to think long term and together IMO.

CrewC

[Jeff Wexler]

I disagree with about 90% of what you are saying here, John. You also have gotten a whole lot of things wrong about the nature of the Writers Guild, the Screen Actors Guild, The Editors Guild, the International Camera Guild, and the I.A.T.S.E. so-called labor union. They are ALL unions (with a small "u"), they all have members who pay dues, they all have boards of directors and committees that negotiate labor contracts with the employer, the all establish through collective bargaining agreements/contract that set base pay scales and working conditions --- how can you say they are not unions? A better case can be made for the I.A. having lost its way and has ceased to be a labor union in the traditional sense. Just because WRITING as a profession, or ACTING, is different than installing bumpers on cars in an assemblyline, does not make the WGA any less valid than the UAW.

There is one common aspect of all of the unions and the unions that have changed their name to "guild" (and this is a whole other discussion I will bring up later) and that is they represent working people dealing with their employers --- this fact alone should be justification enough to support ANY labor action (such as a strike) if you are a true union person.

I am going to write a detailed response to each and every one of your points but I can't do it right this moment. There are certainly some very important distinctions that you have made regarding the nature of work as a writer (or actor), the fact that they may have had only one job (or no job) in many years, but I absolutely disagree with you putting this forth as a reason to NOT support their strike.

Regards,  Jeff Wexler

[old school]

A quick note to all the members @ jwsound.net that don't live n work in L.A./Hollywood. Both Jeff n John have had long successful careers in Hollywood, no easy task. Both men have given many zillion hours serving the union and it's members, trying to make it better. Most have not and that is another thread, (guilty). Both are friends. I respect both men and their P.O.V.'s. John is 100% correct when he points out the fact that the IATSE will be the one's that loose the most. Some won't make it, and it will be hard for all. Wars are easy to start, hard to stop. I don't know the decisions that both sides of this war made, but this is where it's at....  Jeff, I agree that the argument our union's have lost their way is an easy one to make on many levels. So many concessions for bogus budgets. So many unsafe practices....  I also don't think US vr's Them is smart, long term, big picture thinking. We are all in this together, so your points are bang on....    I fear for our business and the crafts as we knew them, but this being a dynamic country,  I expect them to evolve and renew into better forms as we move on down this bumpy old road. Hope my hope is not misplaced.

CrewC

[miker71]

I don't take livelihoods at stake lightly, however the ancient Chinese proverb goes "When the winds of change are blowing some build shelters. Others build windmills."

I don't think the strike is any kind of windmill - though I'm sure I'd disagree if I was on residuals :-)

[Jeff Wexler]

Further comment on some other posts:

“I support real unions, but I do not support loosely associated groups of people in a Guilds because they are not unions.”

I would hardly characterize the Writers Guild or the Screen Actors Guild as a “loosely associated group”. Both organizations are highly organized, well focused and hugely more supportive of the members. And yes, they are unions and their leadership is charged with insuring the best wages and working conditions they can obtain --- just like our union is supposed to be doing. Our union (the I.A.) is however NOT pursuing any policies with regards to bettering our situation --- our contracts (read contractS - plural - where a producer can pick and choose) are getting worse and worse. The I.A. has refused to even consider supporting other unions (oh yeah, we’ll support the supermarket workers but not the writers) or to consider the one big weapon every union has --- the power withhold your labor. Has the I.A. provided a strike fund? The WGA has one, SAG has one. I guess our "real union" doesn't need one because Tom Short will never let us strike --- he has made that promise to the Producers long ago.

“The DGA and some others do, but the Writers and Actors Guilds don't stand for the same things that real unions stand for.”

I would agree with you here if you consider the I.A. a “real union” but my agreement with you is not on the grounds you think. The I.A. is supposed to stand, first and foremost, to better our WAGES and WORKING CONDITIONS --- this our leadership does not do. WGA and SAG (and the Teamsters I might add) do just that. When my father completed “Who Needs Sleep?” which addressed the absolutely most important aspect of our working conditions, chronic long hours that threaten our health and safety, our very lives, he was unable to get the support from any of the (as you call them) “real unions.” The first industry organizations to sponsor an industry screening of “Who Needs Sleep?” was The Writers Guild and the Screen Actors Guild --- not my fathers own I.A. UNION (that changed its name to “GUILD” so as to be able to distance itself from anything to do with labor issues).

“Unlike IA craft unions, the majority of writers have other jobs because most don't work every day as writers.”

 

Oh, and we all work every day in the sound department? The I.A. has no obligation to us to get us work, everyday or any day, and WGA and SAG are no different in this regard. One big difference between the I.A. and WGA and SAG is that you can join up even if you have only worked ONE DAY in your chosen craft. The I.A. has been so restrictive with its admission policies and this has been to the detriment of us all. One of the reasons the Writers have so much power is that they have so many dues paying members (and as you point out, so many of them are not working) and this is a god thing, not a bad thing when it comes to negotiating.

“The teamsters were urged by their President, Leo Reed, to honor the picket lines on an individual basis because the union itself can't.  Let's ignore the fact that the writers never did and never will support them, the commitment was still made.”

The President of the Teamsters is a far more enlightened person than our I.A. President --- Lou Reed understands the power of solidarity and support, the very cornerstone of unionism.

“Our unions and associated businesses will be suffering more than they will ever appreciate by starving during their strike because they don't have back-up jobs like most writers.”

Even more reason for us to support their strike so that it will end quickly. Even though our I.A. leadership has made it very clear that we are NOT allowed to honor the picket line, we could all do the same as the Actors (who are not working) and the Teamsters (who are working but have an individual conscience) and walk the picket line in support of the writers. If there was grassroots rank and file membership support from the I.A. workers, this would not only shake up management it would also shake up our corrupt do-nothing leadership in our union. There is real power there --- one of the first benefits would be a quicker end to the strike so we could all get back to work.

“Most will never get the writing jobs, let alone the residuals that the other crafts will never see.  Like the actors next up, the working 20% (if that) make obscene amounts of money and will now have time to enjoy some of it while they take vacations and you can bet they will be working on their pet side writing projects they didn't have time for before.”

There seems to be a high degree of hostility and anger from you directed at the writers and actors, the people we work with everyday, the people without whom there would be no need for our craft work. We don’t get residuals directly because our union never fought for them. WGA, SAG and DGA did fight for residuals (many, many years ago --- read the history of residuals if it interests you) and got them. This feature of their wages is in jeopardy and needs to be protected. That is what they are doing. The reason to support their efforts is that WE will have things that need to be protected when our contract negotiations come up and if the Producers can bust one union they will be emboldened to bust another. How are we all going to feel knowing that we helped the Producer bust the Writers?

“I don't understand how or why they get residuals after they are done working anyway?  I don't see how it helps us, nor do I necessarily believe in the concept.”

Even if you do not personally “ believe in the concept” of residuals (maybe because you don’t get any) this should not diminish the importance of supporting another union where this is a very important concept (and long term historical practice). What if other unions and guilds got together and decided that they “don’t believe in the concept” that member of the sound local should still be involved in recording sound when all of that sound is going straight to the CAMERA.

“Unions have earned a pension for my family.  I support real working labor who have all their livelihoods on the line as an entire group, not coddled prima donnas who are not in a real union.”

This is a very mean spirited childish remark and again, theirs is a real union fighting for all the same basic principles that our I.A. is supposed to be fighting for. We even have prima donnas in our union, look at the highly overpaid (usually by contract) “on call” Directors of Photography ... oh, I forgot, THAT “real union” changed its name to The International Camera GUILD ... I wonder why.

We are all suffering during this strike --- all working people (even elitist overpaid writers) but the Producer is NOT suffering, yet. For us to do anything that strengthens the Producer’s position against this strike is unconscionable, whether you consider the Writers Guild a union or not. If the Writers lose we will all go back to work, but we will have all lost, as a group of workers, any chance of negotiating anything in the future. The Producers will know that they have total control over our lives, our wages, our working conditions, and we will not stand up for what is right and decent. If the Writers lose it could mean the beginning of the end for ALL labor organizations.

I will end this with a statement from Michael Everett of I.A. Local 728. Local 728’s rank and file seem to be quite a bit more enlightened than the International or some other Local of which I am a member along with John Coffey.

“It's becoming increasingly obvious that we are now in arguably one of

the most important strikes in Hollywood labor history.  Also obvious

is that the WGA has a great deal of public sympathy and very little

public opposition.  And those words apply equally to our own rank and

file.  The 728 listserve is filled with posts of members asking how

they can help and proposing various strategies.  So far these

strategies boil down to two: multi-local picketing with the WGA at set

times and one or two selected studios, and a "blue flu" job action

Monday November 26 which would add an extra day to the Thanksgiving

holiday.

I think people understand that if we don't get on the solidarity

train, we'll get left in the dust when it's our turn on the chopping

block.

These are not my ideas, but are instead coming from our rank and file.

So if our rank and file feels that way, than others must too and the

opportunity is there for us to have a significant presence on the WGA

picket lines. And one more thing -- notice how silent the International has suddenly become with their ‘House of Hate’ anti-union rhetoric?

Michael Everett”

[Jeff Wexler]

History of SAG available here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screen_Actors_Guild

History of RESIDUALS here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residual_%28entertainment_industry%29

starts with a definition:

"The Screen Actors Guild (SAG) is an American labor union representing over 120,000 film and television principal performers and background performers worldwide. According to SAG's Mission Statement, the Guild seeks to: negotiate and enforce collective bargaining agreements that establish equitable levels of compensation, benefits, and working conditions for its performers; collect compensation for exploitation of recorded performances by its members, and provide protection against unauthorized use of those performances; and preserve and expand work opportunities for its members"

[Jeff Wexler]

Definition of a Labor Union:

A trade union or labor union is an organization of workers. The trade union, through its leadership, bargains with the employer on behalf of union members (rank and file members) and negotiates labour contracts with employers. This may include the negotiation of wages, work rules, complaint procedures, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, workplace safety and policies. The agreements negotiated by the union leaders are binding on the rank and file members and the employer and in some cases on other non-member workers.

-  JW

[ptalsky]

Jeff,

Thank you for your well-reasoned response to John's message.  As a member of SAG (yes, I know, that makes me very wierd in this forum) the union leadership has been as direct as they can in encouraging us to support the WGA strike.  We cannot refuse to cross the picket line, but we can refuse to accept parts and auditions.  The problem (as I'm sure you can imagine) is that turning down a part or audition is equivalent to suicide with your agent, so it is unlikely that many will do this.  What is happening is that many SAG members that aren't working are joining the picket lines when they can.

Unfortunately for me, they aren't picketing any where here in Norcal - otherwise I would stand with them when I can.  I know that this strike will hurt everyone involved in the entertainment industry and most of us aren't the ones that make $20M per picture, so it will be a painful time.  I think the best thing we can all do is hope that the strike is a short one.

Phil

[John Coffey]

I'm going to cool it awhile and take a wait and see approach...for now.  Maybe I can't see the forest through the trees, so I'm going to think this one through a little longer. 

John Coffey

[Guest afewmoreyears]

Jeff,

Thank you for your well-reasoned response to John's message.  As a member of SAG (yes, I know, that makes me very wierd in this forum) the union leadership has been as direct as they can in encouraging us to support the WGA strike.  We cannot refuse to cross the picket line, but we can refuse to accept parts and auditions.  The problem (as I'm sure you can imagine) is that turning down a part or audition is equivalent to suicide with your agent, so it is unlikely that many will do this.  What is happening is that many SAG members that aren't working are joining the picket lines when they can.

Unfortunately for me, they aren't picketing any where here in Norcal - otherwise I would stand with them when I can.  I know that this strike will hurt everyone involved in the entertainment industry and most of us aren't the ones that make $20M per picture, so it will be a painful time.  I think the best thing we can all do is hope that the strike is a short one.

Phil

Phil,

  Weren't  you one of the guys with the pots and pans last SAG go round.....  I remember well...... While picketing in Norcal don't forget your little noise makers...

  I for one still won't eat at a lunch table with you guys..... It pissed me off that much....  I know.... get over it....  yeah, but I'm still pissed about it...

  I do indeed hope it is a short strike......  Too many people will be badly hurt by a long one... 

It is such a strange state of affairs, that so many must suffer so as others may prosper...  then the wheel goes round and others will suffer so a different set of workers may prosper....  and again, and again, and in a few more years I will not have to worry about this stuff..... almost there.....  I can almost see the light....

[ptalsky]

Phil,

  Weren't  you one of the guys with the pots and pans last SAG go round.....  I remember well...... While picketing in Norcal don't forget your little noise makers...

  I for one still won't eat at a lunch table with you guys..... It pissed me off that much....  I know.... get over it....  yeah, but I'm still pissed about it...

  I do indeed hope it is a short strike......  Too many people will be badly hurt by a long one... 

Hard to tell, but I'm hoping you're joking about not eating with actors...but in either case, wasn't me banging anything - I just joined SAG this year.  :-)

But, since you didn't ask...

For me the issue isn't residuals (don't get me wrong, I love getting those extra checks) but it's about this whole area called "new media".  The problem is the current contract does not define scale for Internet/Web-based work or games.  I've been pushed to take roles where the rate was defined as $100 per day (would you do sound for $100 per day all-in?) because it's a "Web-only" project.  And this is allowed because the rate in the contract is stated as "negotiated".  I just think that something that isn't so new any more (the Internet bubble burst in 2001) needs to be better defined.  I'm hoping that SAG doesn't need to strike to get this area better defined.

Anyway, I'll repeat what I said earlier - I just hope the strike is short and that everyone can get back to work as quickly as possible.  I've been through being out of work because of someone else and no fault of my own and I know it sucks (try working for a company for 8 years, having all the executives cash out and leaving the "worker-bees" stranded high-and-dry).

Phil

[Jeff Wexler]

Two good articles in the L.A. Times today regarding the WGA strike. The first one explains that the strike is NOT between the Writers and the Producers as is usually stated in the press; it is between the Writers and the Alliance (which is the Studios, Networks, etc.).

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-strikeproducers13nov13,1,3507099.story?coll=la-headlines-business

The second article is about fear and uncertainty.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/news/la-et-bigpicture13nov13,0,5476678.story?coll=la-tot-entertainment

[Phil Palmer]

An interesting strike story from our set yesterday.

We had a picket line show up about an hour after call time.  We were on location in Studio City, an easy spot to picket.  The picketers showed up with cowbells, a saxophone (sounded like Lisa Simpson was outside), whistles and a mirror which one person tried to disrupt a rehearsal by reflecting sunlight into actors eyes.  The police became involved and lots of discussion ensued. 

The picketers insisted their right to behave in this manner, while the police maintained that this was in violation of their permit to picket.  WGA legal eventually showed up and confirmed that the police were entirely correct in their position, that the members of the picket were not behaving appropriately.  The WGA legal representative pulled the picket line and they dissappeared...on to some other location.

We later found out that only 2 of the dozen or more picketers were writers.  That the persons making the most of the disturbance were not WGA, that they were either supporters and/or people who had lost their jobs due to the strike.

We finished the day....

~PWP

www.palmeraudio.net

[wolf]

from

http://news.yahoo.com/s/weeklystandard/20071120/cm_weeklystandard/twoamericastwohollywoods

Jonathan V. LastTue Nov 20, 10:06 AM ET

The Hollywood writers' strike has placed the Democratic frontrunners in something of a bind, forcing them to choose between unions and the entertainment industry executives who are some of their most important big-money contributors. The responses of Senators Clinton, Obama, and Edwards have been revealing.

A strike has long been in the offing. The two unions that make up the Writers Guild of America voted overwhelmingly (by over 90 percent of their 12,000 members) to authorize a walkout on October 18. Their main point of conflict with the Alliance of Motion Pictures and Television Producers (which bargains on behalf of the movie and TV studios) was the royalties associated with downstream revenue.

Profits from computer downloads of movies and TV shows are the most contentious issue. Currently, content is distributed on the Internet in two ways: Some movies and TV shows are purchased and downloaded through services such as iTunes or Amazon Unbox; in these cases the writers get a negligible portion of the take (a third of a cent for every dollar of profit). Alternatively, studios allow viewers to stream TV shows (not movies, yet) from their websites. The studios sell advertising within these streams, but have wiggled around having to share this revenue with writers by labeling the streams "promotions" rather than "broadcasts." This prevents writers from getting any share at all of the profits. The Writers Guild strike is, at heart, an attempt by writers to claim a small sliver of these two pies. Their position is not unreasonable.

The strike was called on November 5. Within hours, the three top Democratic hopefuls released statements of support. Hillary Clinton's two-sentence statement said, "I support the Writers Guild's pursuit of a fair contract that pays them for their work in all mediums." It then urged the parties to resume bargaining.

John Edwards went a bit further, contributing three sentences to the cause. Characteristically, he noted his own long history of strike support: "As someone who has walked picket lines with workers all across America and as a strong believer in collective bargaining, I hope that both sides are able to quickly reach a just settlement."

Barack Obama went furthest in his own short statement. "I stand with the writers," he declared. "The Guild's demand is a test of whether corporate media corporations [oops] are going to give writers a fair share of the wealth their work creates or continue concentrating profits in the hands of their executives." It wasn't, perhaps, everything the Writers Guild might have hoped for, but it was better than the union got from Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, or Dennis Kucinich--none of whom as of Friday, November 16, had pronounced on the strike. (Bill Richardson issued the most substantive, and thoughtful, support of the lot.)

After their brief statements, Clinton and Obama fell silent. When asked whether any further demonstration of support for the strike was planned, the Clinton campaign simply re-emailed its original statement of quasi-solidarity. When asked the same question, the Obama campaign did not respond. After staying quiet for almost two weeks, Edwards attended a rally for the WGA at the NBC picket lines in Burbank last Friday. Clinton was scheduled to make a campaign stop in Los Angeles last Saturday, but as of Friday had no public plans to do any events in support of the union.

Why such tepid support for the most significant union action likely before November 2008? The answer is that the writers' strike puts Democrats in a tight spot. (So tight that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office will only say that she has no plans to say anything whatsoever about the strike.)

On the one hand, you would expect Democrats to rally to the side of any union, particularly a Hollywood union--particularly a Hollywood union with a legitimate gripe against giant corporate media conglomerates. On the other hand, the management in Hollywood has given Clinton, Obama, and to a lesser extent, Edwards, barrels of money.

Paramount Pictures chairman and CEO Brad Grey has given the maximum to Clinton (as well as to Dodd, McCain, and Giuliani, which makes him a reactionary by Hollywood standards). The Sony Corporation's chairman, Howard Stringer, has also maxed out his contributions to Clinton. Sony's film division chairman, Amy Pascal, gave the max to Obama, as did her vice chairman, Yair Landau.

Richard Cook, chairman of Walt Disney Studios, gave to both Clinton and Obama; Oren Aviv, president of Disney's film production, maxed out to Clinton alone. At Warner Brothers, both the president and the chairman gave to Hillary and Obama, with the president, Alan Horn, also throwing money at Edwards. New Line's CEO, Bob Shaye, maxed out his contributions to all three.

At DreamWorks, David Geffen gave to Obama and Edwards, while Jeffrey Katzenberg gave to those two, plus Hillary. Viacom's Sumner Redstone and the Weinstein Company's Harvey Weinstein gave exclusively to Clinton. There are more examples--many, many more--and when you look down the list you see that nearly every powerful executive in the industry, from Peter Chernin and Kevin Reilly at Fox to Robert Wright at NBC/Universal to Nancy Reiss Tellem at CBS, has been giving to one or more of the big three Democrats.

That may partly explain the candidates' reticence to stump for the Writers Guild the way they might have stumped for, say, the UAW. Another explanation may be that the writers are part of the overclass in the Democrats' vision of the "two Americas." In film, writers are guaranteed a minimum of $106,000 for a screenplay; in TV, networks must pay at least $20,956 for a 22-minute sitcom script and $30,823 for a 44-minute show. (In practice, those numbers are usually doubled since the writer gets a large payoff for the first rerun.) The studios and networks report that the average working writer makes $200,000 a year; the average worker in Los Angeles County makes $52,572.

But if the Democratic notion of "two Americas" is cloying, there are, without question, two Hollywoods. And in the alternative universe of Hollywood, the writers really are the downtrodden.

In the entertainment industry, writing is a sometime thing, with about half of Writers Guild members unemployed at any given time. Because Hollywood writing is rarely steady--movie projects take a long time to complete, but then are finished; TV shows are often canceled--writers rely on residuals to give them some income stability. And Hollywood certainly isn't averse to giving out residuals. A recent study of the film industry by Global Media Intelligence suggested that studios give away as much as 25 percent of a film's profits in residual payments. Last year, that amounted to $3 billion in after-release payouts. From this river of cash, writers received only $121 million. By contrast, an actor or director can receive residual payouts anywhere between $20 million and $70 million for a single picture.

The entire situation is richly ironic: Democrats, corrupted by big-corporate money, barely standing by a union composed of liberal, upper-middle-class scribblers. But the final irony is that the writers' strike presents an actual instance of giant income disparity and economic unfairness. And the Democrats are, for the most part, keeping quiet about it.

Jonathan V. Last is a staff writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD.

[Arnold F.]

The existence of the so-called hyphenate, the writer-director, writer-producer, actor-producer-writer and so on, poses some interesting possibilities.

My brother, who is the supervising editor for a reality tv show, has already been made the Story Editor.  No hyphen but the same work-around.

Arnold