
Hollywood Upended as Unions Tell Writers to Fire Agents - save_ferris
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/12/business/media/hollywood-writers-agents-fire.html
======
Waterluvian
It feels like this reinforces this feeling I've had about money. Those who
work with the money always seem to carve out a larger slice for themselves,
often in increasingly clever ways. It's a one directional battle where those
who don't work with the money are always on the defensive.

I'm thinking a lot about managers and sales at the engineering firms I've
worked at in the past. They get to see the numbers coming in, the salaries of
everyone, and have a lot more say over who gets paid what. They've got the
data which is power. The talent who actually produce the product are in the
dark.

~~~
jadbox
This is one of the reasons why I believe in rev-share employee co-ops. The
power dynamics are greatly equalized: everyone gets to see the profit and
everyone knows how much others are getting paid. Sure, there's uncomfortable
and challenging situations to still work through, but the benefit of having
more distributed worker ownership and transparency is a value worth pursuing.

~~~
AlexTWithBeard
I believe in them as well, but... but where are they?

With all the benefits of hard working people and without stupid, greedy
managers standing in their way, co-ops should be literally everywhere!

~~~
AngryData
Co-opts are ripe throughout the agricultural sector, but they do have to fight
hard to maintain those positions because short-sighted corporate competitors
undercut the co-opts pricing with unsustainable practices. Often it is cheaper
to pump farmland for all it is worth until the topsoil is depleted and thin,
then just buy up different farmland from struggling small farmers who got
undercut from the unsustainable practices. While the depleted farmland either
gets sold off to developers or gets put into a wildlife program where they get
paid rent by the government to leave it fallow.

So it is still a battle between people looking for short personal profits
against those who are seeking long-term sustainable profits. There is no
associated extra costs for depleting farmland or practicing unsustainable
farming methods so assholes will continue to abuse it as long as they make
money on it.

~~~
danieltillett
Unless these corporate competitors are stupid, then taking a short sighted
approach means the returns from not exploiting the future are too low. The
problem is not corporations, but the regulatory structure around farming where
the true value of the future is not correctly valued. If these corporations
made more money not exploiting the future than exploiting it then they would
act in the long term interest.

------
testcase_delta
David Simon (of The Wire) wrote a hilarious and edifying piece on the main
contention in these negotiations.

He explains in it how agents systematically screw over writers:
[https://davidsimon.com/but-im-not-a-lawyer-im-an-
agent/](https://davidsimon.com/but-im-not-a-lawyer-im-an-agent/)

~~~
pmh
Previous discussion here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19570735](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19570735)

------
jaabe
It’s probably because I know very little about how Hollywood works, and I’m
definitely coloured by how much of HR departments we seem to be able to
automate and digitise these years. But why do writers need agents? Why does
anyone really need an agent in 2019?

I mean, I understand the value of lobbying and networking, I use it quite a
bit in my own life, but is it really so hard for writers to connect to
employers, that they need to pay someone to do it?

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
It's not hard for writers to connect to employers. It's hard for studios to
connect to competent writers without wading through a tidal wave of utter
dross.

From the studio POV, an agented writer is likely to be at least reasonably
competent. From the writer POV, an agent is likely to be at least a reasonably
competent negotiator and have direct industry contacts.

The idea is that the studio gets people who can do the job without having to
read thousands, perhaps tens of thousands, of terrible scripts from wannabes.
Agents try to talk up writer fees and include standard extras because writers
have no clue what their services are worth to a studio, and many don't
understand the finer points of studio contract law.

When the system works, everyone benefits. Of course it doesn't always work,
and writers get screwed in all kinds of creative ways. But agenting means that
on balance they still do better than they would going up against Gigantic
Media MegaCorp Studio on their own.

Now, streaming has created an explosion in TV programming, and some agents are
setting themselves up as production houses rather than as talent managers.

This changes the balance of power and makes agents more like an employer with
a vested interest in cutting a deal than a representative with an interest in
cutting a good deal for their client.

Hence the (off-screen) drama.

~~~
ThrowawayR2
> _Of course it doesn 't always work, and writers get screwed in all kinds of
> creative ways. But agenting means that on balance they still do better than
> they would going up against Gigantic Media MegaCorp Studio on their own._

Interesting concept. In the tech industry, I'd be much more okay paying an
agent or agency directly to represent me than being in a union, since I'd be
able to vote with my feet (by switching agencies) and my money if I feel a
particular agency is not properly representing my interests.

Unfortunately, here the writers are being represented by both an agency and a
union and are therefore being double-billed, so to speak.

~~~
sethhochberg
Plus, as an employee, I negotiate salary and benefits with confidence but
always keeping in mind that I'm negotiating against someone who I have to work
with once we sign the contracts - you can only push your position so strongly
while maintaining a comfortable working relationship for the long term, you
can say "its just business" all you want but people on the other side still
get their feathers ruffled. In some sense, the agent or recruiter here is also
being paid to be the asshole - everyone expects it of them, hardball is part
of the deal, the employee being hired can just sit back and shrug and say
"hey, my agent is tough to deal with sometimes, but they're good at their job"
and reduce confrontation with their new boss. On top of that the agent has
perspective on market rate for a role that goes well beyond what you could
hope to gather in Glassdoor, by asking friends, etc. If it were commonplace in
tech, I'd absolutely hire an agent on my behalf if I were doing gig work.

------
hhs
TL;DR version: The Guild wants agencies to sign a Code of Code, and many
agencies have not.

According to the WGA website (i.e.,
[https://www.wga.org/employers/agencies/agency-code-of-
conduc...](https://www.wga.org/employers/agencies/agency-code-of-conduct)):

 _" The Code of Conduct is a landmark agreement that realigns agency
incentives with their writer-clients and eliminates the conflicts of interest
inherent in agencies’ receipt of packaging fees and financial interest in
production entities. Agencies signed to the Code may only represent writers
for a 10% commission and may not receive packaging fees or be affiliated with
a company producing or distributing motion pictures.

The Code also contains important provisions on how agencies must represent
writers, provide timely information to the WGA to enforce the collective
bargaining agreement and writers’ individual agreements, and promote non-
discrimination and inclusion."_

If interested, here is the complete 15-page WGA Code of Conduct:
[https://www.wga.org/uploadedfiles/employers_agents/agencies/...](https://www.wga.org/uploadedfiles/employers_agents/agencies/wga_code_of_conduct_4-13-19.pdf).

------
tomelders
It's worth listening to the last few episodes of the Script Notes Podcast.
John August (Big Fish, Titan A.E., Charlies Angles) is on the board of the WGA
and they've been keeping listeners up to date with these negotiations.

This episode in particular is a good overview of what's going on and what the
complaints and objectives are...

[http://scriptnotes.net/393-twenty-questions-about-the-
agency...](http://scriptnotes.net/393-twenty-questions-about-the-agency-
agreement)

~~~
trentlott
That's fantastic, thanks!

------
mc32
Related discussion couple of weeks ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19570735](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19570735)

------
tomatotomato37
Is the association of agents quoted in the article a union for agents? I
haven't heard of any union vs union fights happening before, so this could be
interesting.

~~~
OldFatCactus
Union vs union happens all the time on the worksite. Try changing lightbulbs
at a factory without being part of the electricians union

~~~
linuxftw
Try setting up an LDAP group without being part of the LDAP team. Try ordering
a replacement drive for your laptop without being part of the procurement
team. Try opening holes in the firewall without being part of the network
security team.

Unions really don't have much to do with this problem. It's merely an aspect
of the division of labor. It's also probably a net-negative for the factor to
have production stop so a worker can replace a bulb (assuming the production
isn't stopped because of the bulb).

~~~
OldFatCactus
Does the LDAP group submit a Grievance to your org? Do they demand to be paid
wages lost from your usurpation of their role? Apples to Oranges. Ftr I am
pro-union but this is a uniquely union problem

~~~
linuxftw
> Does the LDAP group submit a Grievance to your org?

If you went in and made unauthorized changes, for sure.

> Do they demand to be paid wages lost from your usurpation of their role?

That depends. If we're talking about, say, government contracting, and the
LDAP team is paid on a per-request basis, and you circumvent this, yes, they
would rightfully demand to be paid what they're entitled to in the contract.
Of course, in this case, it's probably two separate employers in one larger
organization, but it does happen.

In the case of unions, the union has a contract to do certain things in return
for certain compensation. A condition for doing it at a certain price might be
that the contract is exclusive. Plenty of examples of this type of pricing in
the business world.

So, not really a unique union problem.

~~~
dub
There's no LDAP Group Membership Reviewer Union. Management could declare
"LDAP group membership requests are now self-service" at any time, if someone
presents them with a compelling case that it's better for the company.

At public companies in the US, people get paid to review your LDAP group
membership requests for a simple reason: CEOs and CFOs don't want to go to
jail for failing to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley.

If you're at a private company, though, and you think the change controls at
your company are a net loss in value, that seems like something to discuss
with your CTO.

------
JumpCrisscross
> _Two specific practices have gnawed at television writers. One is the
> agents’ decades-old habit of packaging a roster of talent from their pool of
> clients for a given project. In return, the agencies waive the usual 10
> percent commission fee paid to them by individual clients and collect large
> sums, called packaging fees, from the studios._

This is a textbook case of selling out one’s clients. Also, 10%!

------
tareqak
It’d be interesting to see what kind of technology business could come around
as of dealing with this: Agent as a Service? Some kind of group Tinder
(multiple writers on a project) / Fantasy Basketball using auctions ? Expedia
/ Google Ads / stock market with materially different sides to the auction?

------
RickJWagner
Hollywood is a monopoly that has gone on far too long. Weinstein, mono-think,
corruption all around....

I hope technology can democratize things somehow. Hollywood needs reformation.

~~~
linuxftw
Abstain from Hollywood. Consume and support independent media.

If 1% of people stop consuming Hollywood, is that going to change Hollywood?
No. But that 1% would be a HUGE market to an upstart/independent market. That
new market would be a threat to Hollywood, and that _might_ change Hollywood.

~~~
yesco
I more or less do just that by watching Japanese stuff instead, it isn't
exactly "independent" but good enough for my purposes.

