The Writers Guild of America continues to meet with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers in negotiations that, everyone hopes, will result in a new contract and no WGA strike. Latest word from within the bargaining sessions is that the Producers have withdrawn their demand that writers give up the long-standing custom/right of residuals. This is not a major concession by the AMPTP since everyone knew that was just a bluff for bargaining purposes. Still, I think some are surprised they pulled it off the table now instead of later in the month.
For more on the situation, I recommend this piece by my pal Bob Elisberg. The one thing I would add is something that happens to the ranks of the WGA when strike talk is in the air…and this may be unique to our guild. It's the constant — and in many ways, pointless — division of our ranks into Working Writers and Non-Working Writers.
Most folks who are actively trying to write TV or movies fall into one of those two categories — those who have all the work they can handle and those who are actively (in some cases, desperately) seeking employment. Obviously, there are writers who have some work but could use a little more…but no one really thinks of themselves in that middle ground. They identify with one extreme or the other.
When we strike, each of those two groups thinks they're the ones suffering. The mindset of the "Working Writer" goes something like this…
We're the ones hurting from this. We're the ones walking off real jobs and foregoing real, not possible paychecks. The Non-Working Writers aren't losing much, if anything. They weren't working before the strike and most of them wouldn't be working if there was no strike. They have other sources of income. They have to because they aren't making any money as writers. But we are. We have pilot deals for new series that won't happen because of the strike. We have script deals for movies that will be called off because of the strike. We're the ones who are sacrificing.
And then along comes the "Non-Working Writer." His or her argument goes roughly as follows…
We're the ones hurting from this. We're the ones who really needed a job next week. The Working Writers have huge bank accounts to live off of and in most cases, they've written shows that will rerun during the strike so they'll be making residuals. A lot of them can go on vacation and write episodes and scripts that they can be fairly confident of selling after the strike. Meanwhile, a lot of us have projects that we've been trying to sell for years without making any money…projects that were close to a sale but which will probably not happen because of the strike. We're the ones who are sacrificing.
Needless to say, both are right that they're hurting, wrong that the other group isn't.
And one of the maddening things about WGA strikes is that no matter what the composition or the militancy of the strike force, the Producers — and the portions of Hollywood that have a clear anti-union orientation — will insist that the strike is wholly the will of the latter group; that Working Writers are being dragged kicking 'n' screaming from their posts by guys who really work at Radio Shack by day and pen spec scripts at night. This will be said no matter how loudly the important, show-running, "A-list" writers back the strike.
I should also add: There's actually a third kind of WGA member and they may even constitute a majority. That's a group that we might call Inactive or Barely-Active Writers. It's people who are not pursuing the writing of TV shows or movies as their main profession but have done it on occasion. A successful novelist who wrote one screenplay a few years ago might be said to be in this group. An actor who once wrote an episode of a TV show or a director who once in while gets a writing credit would, as well. Last night, I spoke to a friend of mine who considers himself a musician…and at least 97% of his income the last few years has come from that. But a few years ago, he shared a "written by" credit for a screenplay that was sold but never produced…so he's a WGA member. There are also studio execs who at some point got (or gave themselves) a credit and joined the WGA, either for the prestige or the Health Insurance.
In a few days, we'll have the results of the Strike Authorization Vote that the WGA is holding. The strike will, of course, be authorized. Even if you're a writer (Working or Non-Working) who doesn't want to strike, you don't want to not endorse a strike now; not when your negotiators are still at the bargaining table, trying to wring out the best possible deal before the current contract expires. In fact, it could be argued that to vote against the Strike Authorization now is to make a walkout more likely.
The questions are (a) What will the margin be? And (b), How many WGA members will vote at all? A lot of those who vote no or don't vote at all will be in this category I'm calling Inactive or Barely-Active Writers. They may abstain because a strike will not impact their current endeavors…or they may oppose a strike because they consider themselves mainly actors or directors or producers and they're casting their ballots with those hats in place. This is not like the Pipe-Fitters Union where everyone who votes is probably a guy who makes 95%+ of his income fitting pipe. Writers do other things, including writing other things. Some of us even write comic books.