It's been a while since we dug into the ol' Strike Mailbag. Let's start with this one from Bolera, whoever he or she is…
I'm reading on some boards that many WGA members are mad about the settlement with David Letterman's company and may go back to work and break the strike. Do you think that's really going to happen? And in light of that, do you think the deal with Dave was a bad idea?
I don't think that's really going to happen. I mean, there are probably a few guys out there who have been itching all along to cross the picket lines and go back to work, and who've been waiting for some excuse to be outraged and do so. You have that in any union. So far in this strike, I've seen a lot less of that than I did in the four previous WGA strikes where I carried a picket sign. In each of those, we had a band of name writers announcing — and not anonymously — that if the strike wasn't settled in X days or weeks, they were going to return to work and sabotage (or quit) their own union. In '85, we had a large group that said that before the strike, before we'd even gotten the AMPTP's "final" (and terrible) offer.
As far as I know, none of those threats were ever really acted upon. In 1985, the strike did collapse before the dissidents had to make good on theirs. In other years, anyone in that position kept postponing the pulling of the trigger until it became moot. Interestingly, I can think of at least three writers who made such pronouncements in years past and are among the most militant members supporting the current strike.
So far, what I've seen is probably what you've seen: A few anonymous people posting such threats on the Internet…or warning that they know of vast quantities of unnamed showrunners who are convening and agreeing to head back to work any day now. Some of these messages are obviously bogus and I don't necessarily think they're AMPTP plants trying to undermine us. Some may be WGA members who wouldn't actually risk their own careers to take that action but who want to nudge their Guild to make more concessions and end the strike sooner.
We seem, as a Guild, to be very much together on the position that there must be a real share in New Media before a contract will be acceptable. On other issues, there's a majority but not as overwhelming a one. I had a friendly debate the other day with a writer who believes — and I think he's dead wrong about this — that if we only drop the notorious Six Demands, the AMPTP will scurry back to the table and give us everything we want in DVDs and Internet Streaming. Yeah, and if he also loses ten more pounds, Rebecca Romijn will leave her husband and move in with him.
Frankly, observing from afar, I think workable compromises are possible on a couple of those areas…and the ones about Fair Market Value and Distributor's Gross are too important to abandon. Those two are about closing the loopholes that allow studios to agree contractually to pay us a fair share…and then not pay it. Giving those up is like getting someone to agree to give you a share of the profits but granting them the power to define what constitutes profit.
I'd also add that just because you read an anonymous message in which someone says "I'm a WGA member and a staff writer on an NBC series," it doesn't mean the guy who wrote that message doesn't really work in the stockroom at Best Buy. I have an acquaintance who sends me a tirade about once a week — a fellow who occasionally sells a comic book script or two. He's angry that he doesn't sell more. He's furious that he's never gotten a TV job or sold any of the dozens of screenplays he's written. And he's especially livid that we've walked out on jobs that he would do for free, and which I suspect he's now offering to do for almost free. But no one wants his work…which, by the way, I'm not knocking at all. I've never read any of it. It could be brilliant for all I know, and he could just be doing a rotten job of selling it or having bad luck. (I suspect the former and that it's only going to get worse. The more desperate and bitter you seem, the less likely anyone is to even read your scripts or consider hiring you.)
Anyway, I'd wager that this guy — or others like him — are writing some of those messages, trying to gin up a little Schadenfreude. Look it up if you don't know the word. There's a lot of it in our profession. Some are probably nurturing the fantasy that not only will the strike collapse but that the producers will all say, "Let's never hire any of those people again. Let's find all our writers from now on by checking out the stockroom at Best Buy."
The deal with Letterman's company has probably put a very small dent in WGA solidarity for some while at the same time heartening a much larger number of members. If it's followed in the next week or two by other such interim contracts — especially if there are some significant independent movie companies in there — it'll be seen as a brilliant strategic move. Even now, most WGA members are not unhappy to see someone going back to work, especially since it's Dave's crew, which has been as supportive and loyal as anyone on the picket lines. I was leery of it at first but the more I think about it, the more I think it was a good gamble.
Our next question is from Shel Weisman…
So Letterman's writers go back to work and Craig Ferguson's do, as well. Does this mean no picket lines around the places they tape their shows? Doesn't Ferguson tape at the main CBS studio?
Well, it definitely means no picketing of the Ed Sullivan Theater in New York where Letterman does his show. In the case of Mr. Ferguson, he does tape at CBS Television City at Beverly and Fairfax, and that would ordinarily present a problem: How do we picket CBS, which we're still on strike against, without picketing Craig Ferguson? As it happens, the WGA decided two weeks ago to stop picketing that CBS facility, which is where I picket, and to move those picket teams over to Paramount. Picketing will continue at the CBS lot in the Valley.
I wondered at the time why we were abandoning Beverly/Fairfax since that's a very visible, important place to demonstrate. Maybe it was because they anticipated this deal. We have some pretty sharp folks strategizing so it wouldn't surprise me.
From "Dina B" comes this query…
So how do you think Leno without writers will fare against Dave with writers? I like both guys and would like to see the WGA show do better but fear that America long ago decided it liked Jay over Dave and that that's how it will go.
I don't know what'll happen because it's so unprecedented. A lot of it will depend on guests. Can Jay and his staff get enough interesting people to cross the picket line and come on? Will all the Big Names stampede to Letterman? Or if Jay's show is a disaster, will more people enjoy watching the train wreck over there? I have no idea. The first few nights both shows are back, the ratings probably won't be indicative of anything other than which way the Curiosity Factor is playing out. After a bit, some sort of trend will set in and I'm guessing it'll be a stronger Letterman show and a weaker Leno one, even if Dave does not retake the lead.
Jay Leno's a very nice, hard-working fellow who in the past has demonstrated an uncanny willingness to extend himself to help others and to do what's right. I think he got some very unfair, undeserved slams during the Tonight Show Wars, painted as a guy who elbowed the King aside and seized the throne away from its rightful heir. That was nonsense. He's always been one of the good guys and he's also a much better ad-libber than a lot of people think.
Unfortunately for him, he'll be hampered not only by the guest problem but by this lovely Catch-22: The funnier his show is and the more he does what he does best, which is monologue-style jokes, the more he's going to be accused of scabbing and employing scabs. I don't think a lot of folks resent him going back. He does have a perfectly valid, legal contractual obligation as a performer. He does have a staff (a very fine staff) that was about to be laid off. He did, at considerable personal expense, shut down for two months rather than to rush back on like Ellen DeGeneres. He has demonstrated his support for the strike and says he will continue to do so.
But if he goes out there and does a bad show, he's going to get hammered for that. And if he does a good one, he's going to get slammed for violating the rules of a strike he professes to support…and all of that effort is going to bolster a franchise that he's being forced to leave, anyway. So he's in a tough position, which is not to suggest I feel particularly sorry for the guy. I never feel that sorry for the career travails of anyone who makes that kind of money.
And our last question this time is from Billy Batson, who I'm guessing is not the kid who turns into Captain Marvel, but is actually someone who just likes those comic books…
I don't understand how the WGA can fight for jurisdiction over Animation from the studios. Isn't that some other union's job? Or isn't it up to the people who write Animation to decide what union they want to have represent them?
The Animation Guild, Local 839, has jurisdiction over some Animation Writing. At the moment, it's a majority but it's not exclusive. The WGA has jurisdiction over some, as well. There's a lot that is not covered by either. Obviously, it's a long-range goal for the WGA to cover all of it but that's way in the future, maybe on some other planet. The immediate battleground is those jobs that are completely unrepresented for collective bargaining. We want to give those writers the opportunity to elect, if they wish, to have the WGA represent them. (Full Disclosure: I have occasionally been one such writer.)
That "if they wish" is a key point to remember because the AMPTP is talking like we're asking them to just give us jurisdiction over everyone, regardless of what those writers want. Not so. First off, the writers working at studios signed with 839 are not in play. Nothing in the current negotiations (or probably the next one or the one after that, etc.) will affect their status. Insofar as the rest are concerned, what the WGA is asking for is for the AMPTP to get out of the way and not prevent a standard, garden-variety National Labor Relations Board action wherein those writers would get to vote for WGA representation if that's what they want. The AMPTP knows they will almost all want it.
We're making a completely reasonable demand here: Just let the basic process work. I hope the WGA doesn't get steamrollered into dropping it. I mean, I know that at some point, we're going to have to drop a couple of items on our Wish List that we really, really want and should get. We're expecting the studios to drop a couple of their fondest desires (like, say, to keep all the money from selling our work on the Internet) so we'll have to abandon some things. It would be a shame if this one had to go.
And right now, I have to go. Sorry this was so long. Tune in later today (maybe) for a long discussion of something that really matters: That Pie Face game.