|
Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet
I actually think it's fairly significant in that it's showing the way forward to ending this strike.
How do you figure? UA is not a member of the AMPTP. It has as much signficance as Letterman's production group signing a separate deal. |
This UA deal is very interesting, but it's not clear how important it may be. It might be a clever way for MGM to keep making films without MGM itself abandoning the AMPTP. It might be a sign that we're going to get a dozen more deals like this by folks like Weinstein and other non-AMPTP participants. It seems to me that much like signing the deal with Worldwide Pants, this is a way of targeting some members of the AMPTP harder than others. MGM now has an advantage over Universal. Will that cause some dissention in the ranks at AMPTP? It's a dangerous game, and it's hard to predict who it will benefit.
|
The UA and Worldwide Pants deals are good for the WGA in the court of public opinion because they are evidence that the WGA's demands are reasonable. The next time the AMPTP tries to present the WGA as over-reaching, the WGA can point out that several smaller producers have agreed to the exact same deal they want to strike with AMPTP.
|
Originally Posted by JasonF
The UA and Worldwide Pants deals are good for the WGA in the court of public opinion because they are evidence that the WGA's demands are reasonable. The next time the AMPTP tries to present the WGA as over-reaching, the WGA can point out that several smaller producers have agreed to the exact same deal they want to strike with AMPTP.
|
Originally Posted by Jimmy James
The AMPTP can pretty credibly counter that neither UA nor Worldwide Pants are in the same shoes as the parties to AMPTP, though. Neither one of them produces much (possibly anything) in the way of scripted television. Same goes for Weinstein if they get a deal going.
Also, the strike isn't just about TV, but about films as well; it's just TV that's been noticeably affected at this point though. |
Originally Posted by Jay G.
Worldwide Pants has produced several sitcoms in the past, including Everyone Loves Raymond. And it produces at least two scripted shows right now: Late Show and the Late Late Show.
Also, the strike isn't just about TV, but about films as well; it's just TV that's been noticeably affected at this point though. If Worldwide Pants and UA don't plan on producing the next Six Feet Under or It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, they don't have much at all to do with the biggest issue in this strike. |
The Deadline Hollywood blog is reporting that Walden Media (producer of the Narnia movies) laid off most of their production staff due to the strike.
They also report that Warner Bros. is getting ready to lay off lots of staff as well. |
Originally Posted by DJariya
The Deadline Hollywood blog is reporting that Walden Media (producer of the Narnia movies) laid off most of their production staff due to the strike.
They also report that Warner Bros. is getting ready to lay off lots of staff as well. When do they go back to the table again to discuss terms? |
The official story announcing the pending layoffs at Warner Brothers. This strike is just pissing me off more everytime I read a story like this. Thank God I work in Sports Television rather than entertainment.
http://www.variety.com/article/VR111...ryid=2821&cs=1 Warner sets layoffs due to strike Studio to let go unspecified number this month By DAVE MCNARY, TATIANA SIEGEL The pinkslips just keep coming -- even though film production remains robust. Faced with the death of scripted TV production and ongoing uncertainty over the WGA strike, showbiz continues to trim jobs. Still, it's not all gloom and doom, thanks to studio stockpiling of features as a hedge against a possible SAG strike this summer, much as occurred during the early months of 2001. Offlot feature production in Los Angeles has jumped 52% during the strike vs. the year-ago period, with a total of 152 permits during the first nine weeks of the work stoppage. But the depressing strike-related news continued Tuesday with a quartet of downbeat developments: Warner Bros. has notified the more than 1,000 employees in its studios facilities operations that an unspecified number of layoffs will be announced later this month. "It now appears that the WGA's strike will continue for the foreseeable future, and we must begin to scale back our operations due to the decline in production activity," WB said in the notice. Anschutz Film Group shingles Walden Media and Bristol Bay shuttered the majority of their creative departments and laid off much of the physical production staff as well. Exec veep of production Alex Schwartz was among those let go. Walden will retain the key players on its "Narnia" team. The Innovative Agency is one of the first agencies to make strike-related cuts. Over the past several weeks, the percentery quietly laid off seven employees from its staff of 65 in its Los Angeles offices. Scripted TV production in Los Angeles is down to a single show, ABC's "October Road." A total of 62 skeins have been shuttered due to the strike, with a direct economic impact of $160 million per week. More than one option(Person) A Kitman Ho (Person) Alex The developments have come with the WGA strike in its third month and no new talks scheduled. More job losses are expected if the strike continues into February and March. The Warners layoffs were disclosed in a letter sent by senior VP Joann Black, who said the cutbacks would be effective on Jan. 18 and that the decisions would probably be announced next week. "We anticipate these cutbacks will be temporary, and that many employees will be called back to work once the strike concludes," she added. "We regret that we must take these actions; please know that we have delayed as long as we can. We appreciate the focus and teamwork you've all shown during this difficult time." The studio's required to issue such a notice under provisions of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, which applies when a business with 100 or more full-time employees is laying off at least 50 people. In response to an inquiry by Daily Variety, Warner issued this statement: "These WARN notices were sent because, in certain circumstances, federal and California law can require employers to give notice of staffing changes. Due to the ongoing WGA work stoppage, some studio divisions will have to lay off employees. We regret the impact this will have on our employees, and we hope to bring them back to work once the WGA strike ends."More than one option(Co) Daily Variety Filmography, Year, Role (Co) Daily Variety Reps for Disney, Sony, DreamWorks and 20th Century Fox said Tuesday that they have no film-related layoffs in the works. A Paramount rep said the studio's repurposing shuttered TV series facilities for commercial and feature film use in an effort to stave off layoffs, but the Melrose studio is unsure if the effort will prevent the need for staff reductions. In local TV production, 45 of the 46 one-hour dramas that would have been in active production have been shuttered while another six were already on hiatus, according to permitting agency Film L.A. A total of 15 half-hour sitcoms are also dark, while two others were set to be on hiatus. Film L.A. estimates that every TV drama episode scheduled but not produced means a loss of $3 million in direct production spending, based on an average of 200 people directly employed in production. The loss of each half-hour sitcom segment equates to $1.5 million in production spending, based on 88 employees. "The actual economic impact is significantly higher due to the ripple effects," Film L.A. topper Steve McDonald said. |
Who needs writers ? Who needs actors ?
Get these guys on NBC primetime ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5nZcFIf3qc |
Originally Posted by GizmoDVD
Awesome. More people out of jobs. Good job WGA!
When do they go back to the table again to discuss terms? |
Originally Posted by wewantflair
I don't understand why it's the WGA's fault but not Warner's. -confused-
So Giz is absolutely correct, it is entirely the WGA's fault that these layoffs are happening. |
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Warners is willing to make movies and TV shows. WGA will not work. They COULD be working right now under the terms of the old agreement and be negotiating a new deal. They are not.
So Giz is absolutely correct, it is entirely the WGA's fault that these layoffs are happening. The studios could very quickly get everyone back to work. |
Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet
In your scenario, where is the impetus for any of the studios to work out a new deal? That's kind of the point of a strike.
The studios could very quickly get everyone back to work. The point is that they COULD be working under the terms of the old deal but are choosing not to (whether that reason is valid or not is immaterial). That cannot be argued against. To say that the studios could very quickly get everyone back to work is only half true. The corollary is that the WGA could as well. |
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Warners is willing to make movies and TV shows. WGA will not work. They COULD be working right now under the terms of the old agreement and be negotiating a new deal. They are not.
So Giz is absolutely correct, it is entirely the WGA's fault that these layoffs are happening. An at-will employer does not have any obligations to off-clock employees either, which is why I wouldn't consider Warner "at fault." Neither entity is at fault. It's a business dispute. However, assigning blame to WGA members is simply an inaccurate or oversimplified view of at-will employment. |
Originally Posted by wewantflair
That reasoning, for lack of a better word, is asinine. WGA members are not compelled to work for any reason, moral or practical. Neither is anyone else in this country. We do not have compulsory labor here. This is not a slave state. If at any time I am unsatisfied with the terms of my employment, I will not work. As an employee of a company, I have no obligations to that company unless I am being paid for my time.
An at-will employer does not have any obligations to off-clock employees either, which is why I wouldn't consider Warner "at fault." Neither entity is at fault. It's a business dispute. However, assigning blame to WGA members is simply an inaccurate or oversimplified view of at-will employment. Also, I understand it sucks for production staff, but they work in a business that is inherently unstable. It's not like a 9-5 desk job and I think you'll find that many of these people are routinely out of work for stretches of time under normal studio operations. It's also why I don't fault people like Conan for going back to work as long as they honor the no writing clause. They have a lot of staff they were concerned about. |
Originally Posted by wewantflair
That reasoning, for lack of a better word, is asinine. WGA members are not compelled to work for any reason, moral or practical. Neither is anyone else in this country. We do not have compulsory labor here. This is not a slave state. If at any time I am unsatisfied with the terms of my employment, I will not work. As an employee of a company, I have no obligations to that company unless I am being paid for my time.
I'm not sure I can put it any more simply, but I'll try to for your sake. WGA can work. Studio will pay. WGA will not work. Studio will not pay for no work. Studio no money to pay people when no work make no movie or tv. Studio must fire people when no money. Learn to understand people before you criticize them or their posts. To do otherwise is, just as you say, asinine. |
Originally Posted by wewantflair
An at-will employer does not have any obligations to off-clock employees either, which is why I wouldn't consider Warner "at fault." Neither entity is at fault. It's a business dispute. However, assigning blame to WGA members is simply an inaccurate or oversimplified view of at-will employment.
Originally Posted by DVDJosh
So Giz is absolutely correct, it is entirely the WGA's fault that these layoffs are happening.
|
Originally Posted by rfduncan
In a sense, you could be considered correct. In a domino-effect manner, the strike is resulting in these layoffs. |
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
That's all I'm saying. Strike = no work. No work = no product. No product = no money. No money = layoffs.
|
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
Your reading comprehension skills are quite poor. NEVER, at all, or in any way, did I say anything about forced labor.
I'm not sure I can put it any more simply, but I'll try to for your sake. WGA can work. Studio will pay. WGA will not work. Studio will not pay for no work. Studio no money to pay people when no work make no movie or tv. Studio must fire people when no money. Learn to understand people before you criticize them or their posts. To do otherwise is, just as you say, asinine. I do understand you quite clearly. You are oversimplifying to the point of creating a straw man. Let me make this simple. a) WGA can work: Sure they can, but they have already deemed the terms under which they were working to be unsatisfactory. Thus the verb "to be" ("can," in your "hilarious" cave-speak) is an oversimplification. I "can" drive nails into my genitals with a hammer, but there are numerous factors preventing me from doing so, just as there are factors preventing the writers from working, such as inadequate (as they see it) compensation. b) Studio will pay: Again, an oversimplification, due to your choice of the word "will." According to the studios, the studios "will" pay. According to the writers, the studios "will not" pay (enough). c) WGA will not work: Dare I say, yet again, an oversimplification? The WGA will not work for inadequate (again, as they see it) compensation. Just as you, I, or the studios won't, which is why unprofitable shows are canceled without consideration for these same janitors and other staffers who are being fired now. d) Of course studios have no money to pay people who aren't working - nor should they. Nobody is arguing they should. WGA has a very specific set of demands on the table that are required to get them to come back to work. Truth be told, they would probably accept less than what is on the table. The studios know this and will not pay it. That is their business - they can choose to do this if they want. The point is that once studios make this choice, they cannot be absolved of blame. |
Originally Posted by rfduncan
In the oversimplified sense, yes. But what *I* am saying is the layoffs are only the result of the executives being unwilling to pursue another alternative... like say get back to negotiating or ... I dunno give the WGA that for which they're asking instead of being Scrooges?
It is unfortunate that the little guy is caught in the middle, but they always are. |
Originally Posted by DVD Josh
What you are saying is oversimplified too. The layoffs are a aggregation of the greed and arrogance of both the WGA and the studios.
It is unfortunate that the little guy is caught in the middle, but they always are. |
Originally Posted by wewantflair
Your attempt to be funny and clever causes you to misunderstand yet again. You are neither clever nor funny.
Your post: DVD Josh says the WGA should be forced to go back to work and get paid whatever the studios want. Don't even try to deny that, it's what you wrote. I didn't even remotely say that. Whether it's oversimplified or not, it's entirely true that if the WGA was working, people wouldn't be laid off. They have chosen to take a principled ground and there are consequences for that. They don't have to work, but the studios don't have to keep employees around either when there is no money coming to pay them. The next time you misrepresent what a person on this board is saying, don't be surprised when you are called out for it. |
Originally Posted by Tracer Bullet
I'm curious- what specific WGA demands do you consider greedy and arrogant?
2) An unwillingness to take any tiered compensation or assume any risk with new media. 3) Right of meaningful consultation. You are a writer, not a producer or director. Those three off the top of my head. To make it clear: THE STUDIOS ARE ACTING LIKE UNREASONABLE ASSHOLES TOO. There clearly should be higher residuals and the writers should share in new media revenue. I'm not siding with either of these parties. I don't see any reason to. The net result of their actions has resulted in America getting screwed. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:57 AM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.