Another voice from the WGA: "The DGA deal as it stands today is bad."

Despite last week's admonition by WGA leaders to members to cool down the rhetoric, high-profile writers continue to take potshots at the DGA deal.

Tom Fontana and WGA West board member Phil Alden Robinson have already made their displeasure known; the latest comes from John McNamara, whose credits include "The Adventures of Brisco County," "Profit," "Lois & Clark," "Vengeance Unlimited," "The Fugitive," "Eyes" and "Jericho."  In a post on United Hollywood, McNamara opens by noting that his overall deal at CBS/Paramount was terminated Jan. 14.

"Given that this financial blow is due to the strike and the fact that it's been well over a decade and a half since I made any real money via the MBA, I should be writing to you gentlemen begging you to take the DGA deal," he said, referring to the WGA's minimum basic agreement. "Nothing could be further from the truth. I'm writing to urge you -- don't settle for anything less than the best deal possible."

McNamara doesn't go into details about the DGA terms, but he's still explicit about it just the same. And he urges WGA members to hold out for a better deal.

"The DGA deal as it stands today is bad," he wrote. "It may be a bad deal with a few good points, but it is not the reverse. Don't be swayed to think otherwise. You know what's right here. Everyone does, no matter what they say out of anger, desperation, greed or exhaustion."

Here's the entire post --

On January 14th, my overall deal at CBS/Paramount was terminated. So this is actually my two cents... plus hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I bring this up so you'll understand that starting on November 5th, I began losing a substantial amount of money. (To put in perspective: I started my career as a playwright, and what I made in my first year of writing theatre, I lost each day as a suspended showrunner.)

As of the 14th, I’ve now lost everything due me under my term deal.

Given that this financial blow is due to the strike and the fact that it's been well over a decade and a half since I made any real money via the MBA, I should be writing to you gentlemen begging you to take the DGA deal.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

I'm writing to urge you -- don't settle for anything less than the best deal possible.

Because this isn't about me or my losses. This isn't about any one writer. This is about thousands of us, up and down fortune's ladder, some who are better off than I am right now, many much worse off, but each of us linked by this:

We all know the difference between a good deal and a bad deal.

"Good" is any provision where our share grows alongside all possible delivery forms.

"Bad" is anything else.

The DGA deal as it stands today is bad. It may be a bad deal with a few good points but it is not the reverse.

Don't be swayed to think otherwise. You know what's right here. Everyone does, no matter what they say out of anger, desperation, greed or exhaustion.

My Dad was a trial lawyer. He spent most of his life trying to sway people. A job that was always easier when he represented a client whose plea or defense was legally sound. Because then he didn’t have to use as many words. My father always said, “The more words you use to explain something, the less true it is.”

What you’re trying to do can be boiled down to two short, declarative sentences:

If they make nothing, we make nothing. But the more they make, the more we make.

Any argument against those sentences would have to be elaborate in the extreme. Possibly confusing. And certainly disingenuous.

Do what's right. Don't back down, don't concede, don't give in to fear, pressure, or worst of all, the common wisdom.

I set out to have a long career that would weather many ups and downs. So far, that's what I've had and there's no denying I'm in one of life's little troughs at the moment. But I'm not alone. And I haven't lost my bearings. This is a fight for the future.

Someday, when that future becomes the present and I look back on all of this, I want to say I was a small part of a big fight that mattered. I stood with people who knew that. We rose together and took action.

I'm proud to do what I do for a living; more proud of that than any check that's ever crossed my desk. Checks are cashed, and parking spaces are painted over. But I'm a writer -- with you -- forever.

- John McNamara

Comments

[Stuart Creque]

Kid of sounds like a union man to me.

"Do what's right. Don't back down, don't concede, don't give in to fear, pressure, or worst of all, the common wisdom." Good advice.

[ed]

I'm not sure why everyone is jumping all over the DGA regarding their deal. The DGA members follow a different compensation plan where they are paid more upfront and less on the back-end. The deal probably makes great sense for them. Isn't it great that the two sides were able to come to agreement quickly and evidently to the delight of each? So, enter the WGA. Do what is right for you and stop dumping on the DGA for the deal they've made for their members.

[a suit]

I agree. The WGA got gains across the board for their members and created opportunities in new media for both their members and the business at large. Isn't that the idea in a guild contract?

And furthermore, Mr. McNamara talks about how the more a studio makes, the more a writer should make. It sounds good but it makes no sense...the writer gets paid upfront, before anyone else. The writer takes the LEAST financial risk of any other part of the creative partnership. If the writers want to share in the possible financial success then they must share in the possible financial disaster (a much more common scenario). If they want genuine back end then they should give up front end. The WGA should create an optional deal where the writer makes a modicum or no money up front but becomes a part owner of the final product.

[ray]

Um, actually, I believe writers already consistently invest more than anyone else in the process. Doesn't it take months and months and months to write scripts? While doesn't it take weeks to do principal photography? And you're certainly not talking about specs. Did the producer pay for the year of research to create the script for that spec feature? No, the writer invested that entire year of their life on their own dime. But the studios benefit from a system where they only buy the specs they want and don't have to pay a dime for the process involved. Time = Money, so the writers did invest a GREAT deal of capital, with possible risk of NO PAYMENT WHATSOEVER. Writers already more than just about anyone else involved take on the underlying risks in their projects. It seems to me the suits want to have their cake and eat it too.

[As long as it takes]

Bravo, Ray. In actuality, writers are paid far less than the full value of the script upfront, with an understanding that they'll receive additional, or "residual" payments, along the way as the product is repurposed.

[The real Fi Core]

I wonder if he's proud of childern losing there health care benefits,my father was a eastern european immigrant who was a factory worker back east,who during his short life, he taught me what a working man was,he was happy with just a job,now back to school,do the striking writers on Leno really make 8000 a week?And don't preach to me about this being for rights of workers,calling this strike,put the real workers out of a job.I wonder what the general public would think of that ?
Prima donnas

[The real Fi Core]

My schitzo other half keeps talking about the general public, but any poll you take, any person you ask, they all support the WGA! Even right-wing wacko Mike Huckabee supports the WGA. And what's with me saying you should just be happy to have a job, no matter what your employee decides to pay you? Doesn't my crazy other self know how economics work, how certain rare skill-sets are always paid higher wages? It's another form of supply and demand. Jeez, did I even graduate from Elementary School?!

Anyway, again, I'm sorry that this split personality of mine is so freaky! And that my other half is such an ill-informed, bitter ass-wipe blow hard! I hope my next mean post when "Dr. Jeckyll" takes over isn't half as bad as my prior posts. Man, I am a tool!

[a suit]

to ray - I can't disagree that writers spend a lot of time on their work and we're all grateful for it, but that is what they're paid to do and they're paid well for it (thanks to the WGA's minimum contract).

And you're also right that they write a spec on...well, spec. And if they sell it they will get paid for their services. Their agents and lawyers will do their best to get payment commensurate with the value of the piece. And my point is that if they would like to actually own the project there should be a WGA option to get paid nothing or little upfront in exchange for an actual place at the ownership/producer table. I think it would empower writers and free them from the disgruntled "worker for hire" universe they're stuck in.

[a suit]

to The Real Fi Core - yes, the writers have a lot of public support, and why wouldn't they? Writers are cool. Picket lines are cool...they are fighting the man. Since very few people, and that includes most of the writers on the picket line, actually know the truth of what they're striking about we can safely assume that most of the horns honked are not supporting any specific contract item.

And as for wages, the WGA (unlike the DGA) is not asking for one raise in any of the Guild minimums. In film, what a writer actually gets paid upfront is the real money that most writers make. The vast majority of commissioned scripts never get made so residuals are moot. If the guild wanted to put money right into writers pockets that's how they could do it. It's why so many writers are calling this a television strike since the issues involved have little or no effect on film writers.

And one final point, there are writers out there who are making unfathomable amounts of money for their writing. How could this be? Each and every writer, by regulation, MUST have an agent or a lawyer negotiating for them and protecting their rights. EVERY WRITER. Keep that in mind....

[The real Fi Core]

I think you undersestimate the public, but that's not unusual for a suit. Much of the public understands that the writers are simply asking for a small piece of the revenue when the worlds they invent are put on the internet. And though it's true that many screenwriters make their living selling scripts that will never be made, millions of films -- in fact, probably all films ever made -- will soon be available online for direct download or streaming. Each one of those films has a writer or writers. They deserve a small share of that revenue. This is a absolutely a screenwriter's strike as well.

And for the record, the guild IS asking for a small increase in guild minimums, as they do every contract negotiation, in order to keep up with cost of living increases. That's very common knowledge -- what company do you work for, suit? Why don't you know that?

Anyway, while I don't agree with most of your positions, I do appreciate your cordial manner, unlike my jerk-off other half. Thanks.