The WGA has posted the names of 28 writers who crossed picket lines during the WGA Strike on their website. Most of them went to work on soap operas. The union also posted an open letter ridiculing them for breaking the strike.All these writers still have "financial core" status in which they pay union dues and are still represented by the Guild. They can't, however, participate in guild elections (either with votes or holding an office) or union activities.
The Association of Motion Picture and Television denounced this move accusing the WGA of violating labor law by "seeking to deny employment to these writers in the future."
Something as hot-button as a strike always has its divisive elements. With the strike over, this whole situation sounds childish. U.S. labor says that the striking members can still be protected by the Union. If the WGA doesn't like that, they should try to change the law rather than posting "witch hunt" letters on their website.
All the new shows - VIDEOS
The Upfronts: FOX
Carter Bays of How I Met Your Mother: The TV Squad Interview
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-23-2008 @ 8:10AM
grumpyoldman said...
These poor guys didn't have a huge endorsement deal with American Express like Tina Fey has. They were just guys and gals trying to feed their family.
This union crap has got to end before it ruins this country.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 10:34AM
0megapart!cle said...
While I certainly sympathize with the individual positions of these writers, you can't be serious about ending all unions for some reason because of it!! Unions provide a vital role in this country, and consumer and individual rights would be eroded to an unbelievable degree if they didn't exist. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater!
4-23-2008 @ 11:44AM
Karen said...
Unions do nothing at this point but drive up wages and costs. Useless. They had their place (in regards to ensuring a safe work place) but their time has come and GONE.
The more than is done to rid this country of unions the better! Pfft!
They are retaliating against these writers and I hope something can be done to protect them.
4-23-2008 @ 12:11PM
Bash said...
Yeah let's get rid of the unions so we finally don't have to read about corrupt union officials anymore! Without any officials negotiating with the companies where managers earn millions we finally can cut out the middle man and directly have the managers tell the 8$ an hour workforce why they have to deal with layoffs while the managers who "managed" to run the company into the ground get kicked out of their paid contracts with hefty severance packages!
End the corruption now!
4-23-2008 @ 12:13PM
BStu said...
Unions drive up wages? That's a bad thing? I mean, that's their purpose. Frankly, they aren't doing that job well enough considering the gulf that has opened up between the pay of union members and business executives in the last few decades.
Unions aren't perfect. Neither is capitalism. But both are better than the suggested alternatives.
4-23-2008 @ 11:02AM
mj said...
My mom and my ex husband were in unions. I saw first hand what they did. I hate unions. At one time, they tried to help workers. Now it is who you know, and how much you can pay. People need to realize the real reason jobs are leaving this country. The unions. Yes, they helped get decent wages, and benefits. But look at the money the UNIONS are raking in. If you aren't a suck up, you might get 'missed' for a job. The unions need to retrench, and stop doing to the workers what they started out trying to stop.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 11:30AM
Rich said...
Just a couple of quick points
-The WGA probably has no problem with US Labor law in this instance. Here, the WGA is able to collect the dues of those 28 members without giving them a voice in the Union (ie: choosing union officials)
-Those 28 members can no longer participate in the internal affairs of the WGA. However, when it's time to re-certify (or if they'd like, start their own de-cert petition) the Union, those 28 members still have right to vote with everyone else on whether the WGA (or any union) will represent them.
-The WGA cannot seek to deny employment to those 28 writers. So, in publishing those names, was the WGA trying to prevent those writers from getting work, or showing some transparency in internal union discipline. I think the answer is somewhere in the middle, and its nothing to really care about.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 11:52AM
Johari said...
Kind of sad that they're doing this, considering they didn't really get what they wanted in the strike.
Reply
4-23-2008 @ 12:12PM
BStu said...
They could change the law, or do this. The studios chose to hire scabs. They hardly have a right to complain that this is being pointed out. Of course it was going to be pointed out. Everyone knew that. Its silly to act like this wasn't expected as soon as these writers crossed the picket line. This is the kind of penalty they take for that action. Its proportionate and reasonable. Some of their fellow writers won't want to work with them. If they have enough clout, they can make sure they don't. Which is fair. Look, the strike breakers knew what they were doing. Acting like they didn't do it is the opposite of fair. Whatever comes to them is something they decided to accept. This is the same thing whenever anyone else crosses a picket line. I don't see why these strike breakers should get special treatment on that count. They made their choice and if they couldn't deal with the ramifications, then they shouldn't have made that choice.
Reply
4-24-2008 @ 9:07AM
Anonymous said...
"They could change the law, or do this. The studios chose to hire scabs. They hardly have a right to complain that this is being pointed out. Of course it was going to be pointed out. Everyone knew that. Its silly to act like this wasn't expected as soon as these writers crossed the picket line."
Nope, they chose to let their existing workers exercise their legal right to leave the union and carry on working. If the workers hadn't, well, soap isn't exactly all that healthy as it is (a several-month hiatus might prove fatal) and it's not exactly cheap to make, but I don't think the companies put any undue pressure on the workers.
(The thing is, soap writers don't actually benefit from any of the things the WGA was striking for, and apparently they're not exactly happy with how little support the WGA has provided on things that do matter to them. Plus, they're not exactly well paid compared to other writers, they have things like families and mortgages to worry about, and they don't regularly have long periods of time with no screenwriting work like most of the other WGA members. All in all, they were far harder hit by the strike, and they might be better off forming their own union independent of the WGA.)
Reply