Writers' Strike, Cont: Studios Back Out of Negotiations

[tad10]

Originally Posted by Leto Eu`Acumen

Looks like it is going to get pretty nasty.

I hope the Writers guild can hold out until the Screen Actors Guild gets in on the action and makes the same demands.

I have zero sympathy for the studios.

Leto,

I read somewhere recently -- and now of course I can't find it to link it -- that the writer's strike (from the studios' perspective) is really more about the SAG then the WGA. They want to crush the WGA so the SAG will capitulate when it is time for AMPTP/SAG negotiations.

[Leto Eu`Acumen]

Originally Posted by tad10

Leto,

I read somewhere recently -- and now of course I can't find it to link it -- that the writer's strike (from the studios' perspective) is really more about the SAG then the WGA. They want to crush the WGA so the SAG will capitulate when it is time for AMPTP/SAG negotiations.

Ya, I have read that myself.

What frustrates me is that the situation doesn't even seem very complicated: We are moving into new media (internet content) and the studios don't want to pay the writers, actors and anybody else they can think of a cut of it.

Sure, there is more to it than that, but still.

The SAG has, what, like 140,000 members or something like that? It dwarfs the writers guild. I'd want to set a precedent to make that confrontation easier too.

It doesn't sound as if it is going to happen, but that is why I wish the WGA can hold out until the SAG etc gets involved.

[ex-genj]

I see no reason to keep paying for cable, maybe ever. I'm canceling it today.

[Dandai]

I think I remember reading somewhere that it's hard for the studios to acknowledge a problem when writers are driving Mercedes to work? I'm admittedly very ignorant on this, overall. I tried getting a feel for what was going on by reading the article but it didn't offer much background, just speculation.

[Leto Eu`Acumen]

Originally Posted by Dandai

I think I remember reading somewhere that it's hard for the studios to acknowledge a problem when writers are driving Mercedes to work?

Firstly, most don't.

Secondly, the studio heads paying them wouldn't be caught dead in a Mercedes anyway so I have no sympathy for them

[Gaereth]

I always dislike unions and strikes. How many people are on strike? How many people not in said union are currently not working because of said strike?? And at Christmas no less.

-shrug- I guess I come from the mindset that you establish a contract or working arrangement with your employer and then stick with it until either you or your employer chooses to do something different. You. Not a group of people...you.

If you feel you aren't being adequately reimbursed for your effort then renegotiate or move on to somewhere else that gives you what you are looking for. If your employer feels they aren't getting their moneys worth out of you they can cut said moneys or let you go in favor of someone else.

Unions are about the good of the many over the long haul. Short term problems or the general screwing of members, or those relying on members, during a strike are seldom a higher priority to the collective good of the members.

Should writers get a portion of where ever their products end up?? Sure. But get rid of the union, let each writer work out the best deal they can and call it a day. Some will do great, some will get screwed, but a general precedent will get set and certain expectations will be common place during negotiations. You know...like every other non-union situation.

I know I don't want to be in a situation where collective practices influence my life and my ability to live it. I don't want to be categorically lumped with a large group of others that define what I make, receive, or can realistically expect out of life. Now...if I was a no talent hack or a slug I could see how such collective practices would be great for me....but on the whole I want to rely on myself rather than others.

-shrug- I guess the writers situation could be completely different, I don't know. I just dislike being part of a collective rather than an individual.

[Thorpe]

It wouldn't be hard to cancel cable. The only two channels I would really miss would be HBO and Showtime.

Hell, I could just pick a few series that are on DVD to watch one episode per weak and it would feel just like cable (minus the commercials)! I did this with a few friends when Lost ended last season. God do I love The Wire now.

[GrobbeeTrull2.0]

The only thing I like on cable is College Football, Pro Football, Discovery Channel HD/normal, and Sci-Fi.

The rest can go.

[Himeo]

The only thing I watch on television these days is the NHL. Everything else I pirate like a mother fucker. ARRR!

Hollywood is in some deep shit. I know I'm not the only 20-something playing video games and using the internet for my entertainment. If movies and t.v. disappeared tomorrow I'd buy season tickets to Ducks games and I'd go to Barnes & Noble more often. Nothing else would change.

What can Hollywood do to get my business back?

[Faille]

I wonder how effective it would be for the writers to organize pickets at walmart and similar stores that urge people to choose different gifts for Christmas then DVD's and movies. I don't think any studio wants walmart pissed at them.

[Szlia]

Originally Posted by Gaereth

I always dislike unions and strikes. How many people are on strike? How many people not in said union are currently not working because of said strike?? And at Christmas no less.

-shrug- I guess I come from the mindset that you establish a contract or working arrangement with your employer and then stick with it until either you or your employer chooses to do something different. You. Not a group of people...you.

If you feel you aren't being adequately reimbursed for your effort then renegotiate or move on to somewhere else that gives you what you are looking for. If your employer feels they aren't getting their moneys worth out of you they can cut said moneys or let you go in favor of someone else.

Unions are about the good of the many over the long haul. Short term problems or the general screwing of members, or those relying on members, during a strike are seldom a higher priority to the collective good of the members.

Should writers get a portion of where ever their products end up?? Sure. But get rid of the union, let each writer work out the best deal they can and call it a day. Some will do great, some will get screwed, but a general precedent will get set and certain expectations will be common place during negotiations. You know...like every other non-union situation.

I know I don't want to be in a situation where collective practices influence my life and my ability to live it. I don't want to be categorically lumped with a large group of others that define what I make, receive, or can realistically expect out of life. Now...if I was a no talent hack or a slug I could see how such collective practices would be great for me....but on the whole I want to rely on myself rather than others.

-shrug- I guess the writers situation could be completely different, I don't know. I just dislike being part of a collective rather than an individual.

You are insane. The very reason unions exist is because thing where done as you said and it results in 100% of employees getting screwed. Not 20%, not 50%, not 80%: 100%. The mythical guys making great deals are just that: myths created to motivate the actual guys to go get screwed by their lone self. Unions exist to balance the power of the employers and the employees.

[Algol Devilstar]

Well at the risk of sounding selfish, I hope this shit is over soon. Fuckers.

[GaliemVaelant]

Writers throughout the WGA should right this moment be getting organized about beating major media organizations to the punch in web-exclusive content. Take away or outperform the studios' online revenue by providing better, newer content, and it won't be an issue anymore. The WGA holds power too, but they need to work to use it. The longer this goes on, the more I side with the writers because it's the studios who could end it at any time.

[Lithose]

Originally Posted by Szlia

You are insane. The very reason unions exist is because thing where done as you said and it results in 100% of employees getting screwed. Not 20%, not 50%, not 80%: 100%. The mythical guys making great deals are just that: myths created to motivate the actual guys to go get screwed by their lone self. Unions exist to balance the power of the employers and the employees.

Yep, the 17%, or less, unionization rate in the U.S. has been what has protected workers.

The only balance of power with employers is profits.

Most conditions for workers in America improved because of government intervention and safety measures..Later conditions improved because the American worker was more educated and more difficult to replace in certain industries (Software/electronics). Unions did very little to help the "general" work force.

Edit** Just to "back up" my facts, here is the Statistical Abastract of the U.S..

[Arbitrary]

Originally Posted by Lithose

Yep, the 17%, or less, unionization rate in the U.S. has been what has protected workers.

The destruction of blue collar employment over the last few decades has a way of fucking with statistics.