Well, let's see where we are with this puppy…
There's still no news about the AMPTP returning to the bargaining table with the Writers Guild. One presumes this will occur after the first of the year and probably after the AMPTP has opened discussions with the Directors Guild on their contract. A lot of folks seem to be assuming that the DGA will rapidly make one of its quickie deals that gives it a little bump while setting up some sort of precedent that undermines other unions.
I doubt that. For one thing, the DGA is in no real hurry. Their contract doesn't expire until the end of July. Secondly, a lot of DGA members — especially those who are also writers and/or actors — have made it clear to the guild leadership that they don't want to see the DGA allow itself to be used against the other unions, nor do they want to accept a deal that concedes many of the points that the AMPTP is refusing to give the WGA. Lastly, if played right, the DGA could have a lot of leverage as a result of what's happened with the WGA. It's too good an opportunity to blow on a fast sellout.
Or so all the logic tells us. Then again, this is the Directors Guild that sometimes thinks the best way to deal with the AMPTP is to not make trouble for them.
The AMPTP is out trying to sell the idea that the current strike is all the fault of those stupid writers, not of the organization that has refused to bargain in good faith or, lately, at all. I don't see this p.r. campaign as gaining any real traction, nor do I see it weakening WGA resolve. For every one writer who begins to doubt that we're doing the right thing, another twenty get angry and more determined. But I guess Nick Counter has to say something.
David Letterman's company is about to open talks with the WGA about the possibility of an interim contract…and do take note of how many news sources were reporting last week that such a deal was close or near-certain or even already completed. It's a good reminder of how totally wrong and rumor-driven some of the news coverage of this strike has been. They commence discussions tomorrow, and the consensus in the WGA seems to be not to grant such a deal.
I know there's a respectable argument that the WGA should pact with Letterman's outfit, Worldwide Pants. Dave is likely to return with or without an interim deal, and having his writers back — and the removal of a picket line that will scare away desired guests — would give him an advantage over competition with no interim contract. If that would help Dave clobber Jay, wouldn't that put additional pressure on NBC to settle? (Answer to that: Maybe but maybe not. And CBS, which would see two of its key programs probably return to at least their old levels of profitability, might figure that they then had less reason to settle.)
There may, however, be even a better reason that the WGA will not make that deal with Letterman. According to this article in Variety…
Situation is complicated by the fact that while Worldwide Pants owns the CBS latenighters, company cannot dicker with the guild on the
central issues of new-media distribution because CBS controls most of the new-media rights on those shows.
This whole strike is about new-media distribution and if Letterman's company can't make a deal in that area, that's a contract-killer right there. We're on strike against companies that don't want to share those revenues.
So it looks like Dave will be going back to work on January 2 but without his writing staff. It seems highly appropriate that his only announced guest for that night so far is Donald Trump, a man who believes that in any dispute between employer and employee, the employer is always right.
Lastly: Folks keep asking me how long I think the strike is going to last. The other night over dinner with some writers, I made what everyone seemed to think was a strong case: All logic-based indicators would, I think, point to the AMPTP trying to make a deal on or around February 1 and not, as some have suggested, keeping the WGA out until next June or so. When I get some time, I'll write up that argument for this page…but it will have to be qualified with a reminder that so far in this strike, and many times in other labor disputes, the Alliance has not done what you'd think would be in its best interests. Sometimes, the execs involved are stubborn, much as some of our elected officials cling to strategies long after they should have course-corrected.
The AMPTP also has this "rule of one" where one of the core member companies can veto a deal that the others all want to make. In the '88 strike, there were several major studios that thought it was insane to let the thing go on as long as they did. But they were not unanimous so that strike went on longer than even some on their side wanted. This one may, too…but when I get a chance, I'll tell you why I think it would be really foolish of the AMPTP to let this one go much past Groundhog Day.