Neil Gaiman wrote me last night asking me to explain what's going on with the current rift between the Writers Guild of America, West (hereafter referred to as WGAw) and its Right Coast counterpart (WGAe). That's right, Neil. Give me the impossible assignment. I'm almost afraid to tackle it because the dispute sounds so petty and childish, but it may explain why these affiliated organizations do not achieve more for their members, and why some of us have opted to excuse ourselves from Guild politics. I did my time, thank you, and this is yet another example of why I don't go back.
As briefly as I can tell it: The two Guilds have existed for decades as parallel, largely-united entities. They are closer than sister organizations but not quite Siamese Twins. They negotiate together, they do many things as one…but they have separate leaderships. They also fight a lot. No matter who's running the WGAw, they always seem to be fighting the same battles with WGAe and forming uneasy compacts when the two must link arms in some crusade.
The dividing line, by the way is the Mississippi River. If you're on this side and you write TV or movies, you're under the jurisdiction of the WGAw. If you're on the other side, you're WGAe and proud of it. But of course, some writers are bi-coastal. Some productions go back and forth. And there are many services, especially in the area of screenwriting, which the smaller WGAe is unable to provide…so the WGAw provides them for all. The constitutions of both organizations require a screenwriter living in the east to join the WGAw and specifies that half of those folks' dues will go to WGAw. If I understand my history correctly, this was the practice until some time in the seventies when it stopped.
Why did it stop? No one seems able to explain, but things have been pretty volatile in the WGAw since that approximate time. We've spent a lot of time and energy battling with the Producers…and when we're not battling the Producers, we attack each other. Every so often, someone out here has tired of fighting Management or Ourselves, and they raise the issue of the WGAe allegedly not living up to the agreement. Nothing has ever been resolved or seriously pursued until just recently when the current WGAw board made a major issue of it and things got very nasty. Let's see if I can fairly summarize both sides…
The WGAw contends that the WGAe is waaaay in arrears on paying bucks to the WGAw for services and that a lot of its screenwriter members were long ago supposed to join WGAw and that all this needs to be mopped up. The WGAw maintains that this is all spelled out unambiguously in the similar (but not identical) constitutions of the two organizations.
The WGAe responds that, first of all, the wording ain't that clear — there are questions — and that those parts of the constitution haven't been enforced in 30-some-odd years so why start now? The WGAe is currently involved in an important negotiation regarding newswriters and in an election dispute. They say that even if the WGAw is right (which they aren't conceding), the WGAw has picked the worst possible time to raise these issues and is doing so to harm the WGAe.
The WGAw has replies to all that, but the important thing is that there is an arbitration process, described in both Guild's constitutions, that can bring in a neutral party to play Solomon and carve up the baby. The WGAw invoked the clause that triggers this process and it specifies that the arbitration must commence in 60 days, which in this case means April 10. First order of business is for the two sides to agree on an arbitrator. After some delay and an accusation of stalling tactics, they agreed on a Justice Joseph Grodin…though the WGAe told the WGAw not to contact him until there was further communication. Then there was no further communication.
Worried that the 60 days was being frittered away, WGAw President Daniel Petrie composed a letter over both his signature and that of WGAe President Herb Sargent. Addressed to Justice Grodin, it merely asked if he was available to serve as mediator. Petrie sent it to Sargent and said, in effect, "if you have no objection, I'm going to send this." There was no reply so Petrie sent it. Sargent became furious that it was sent at all, but also that it was sent with his signature since, for one thing, he hadn't written or okayed it. The WGAe therefore withdrew its approval of Grodin as mediator. A new one has been selected and since I haven't heard anything in a week or so, I assume things are on track for the arbitration to begin…but that something will soon arise to get everything off-track again. Betting on WGA discord is like laying money that the Milwaukee Brewers won't be in the World Series.
So what's really going on here? My expert analysis, which is worth about a dime on the open market, is that it all goes to the defensive posture of the WGAe, seeking to maintain its independence. It's a much smaller entity and given the way Show Business has migrated steadily west over the years, it will only get smaller. There are a lot of folks who have suggested that the WGAw go all-out to absorb the WGAe, and the WGAe probably sees all this as laying groundwork for such a takeover. I don't know if that would be better or worse for writers as a whole but I can certainly understand how some WGAe members fear getting lost in a bigger labor organization. The WGAw expends its best efforts on screenwriting and whatever kind of prime-time TV is currently hot. The last 30-or-so years, WGAw members who write game shows or variety shows, to name two categories that don't have big constituencies, have felt that their Guild does not pay enough attention to those areas. It's easy to imagine that the localized concerns of WGAe members could get the shortest kind of shrift if, officially or unofficially, they become a subset of the WGAw. On the other hand, there are those out here who think a merger or takeover would end the squabbling and help writers on both coasts, and that the primary obstacle is that the WGAe's paid staff enjoys high salaries and wants to keep enjoying them.
How this will all play out, I dunno, but I doubt it'll be healthy in the long run. In the short run, it may just be a temporary Cease Fire, which is sometimes all you can hope for in Guild disputes. The expectation seems to be that the arbitrator will work out a compromise that will say neither side is wholly in the wrong. That's kind of what arbitrators do, especially in a case like this.
The WGA, when it works the way it's supposed to, is a grand and vital organization that has made it possible for creative folks to swim with sharks and not get too badly mauled. Even when it doesn't work, it's preferable to no representation at all…and I say that as someone who has written loads of teevee shows with WGA coverage and without. The "without" jobs have been animation projects. Cartoons were once wholly outside the WGA's purview but they're slowly-but-thankfully moving under Guild protection. There's a reason that darn near every single person who has written animation the last thirty years wants that to happen.
Still, the WGAw is too often a dysfunctional organization that splinters along a wide array of party lines — haves versus have-nots, militants versus statesmen, young versus old, hyphenates (writer-directors or writer-producers) versus full-time writers, etc. It's an enormously democratic institution but at times, letting everyone have their say can be quite immobilizing. Most committees are "open," meaning that any members can be on them, and I once chaired what I think was the largest Guild committee ever. It proved rather tidily that when you get enough opinionated people in a room and they all get to speak and vote, nothing can ever get done. As more than one WGA member has commented, "Management doesn't have to try and divide us. We do a fine job of that, ourselves." The current WGAw/WGAe dust-up is yet another chapter and the end of the book is nowhere in sight.