Written by: Kimberly Brandt
Researched by: J. Aaron Landau
Edited by: Stefanie Herrington

Forget American Idol, the biggest thing to hit the entertainment industry this winter has been the Writers Guild of America going on strike. With the current flood of reality television, the networks are missing out by not capitalizing on this. Think about it: throw all the negotiators in one house, mix in a bunch of cameras and toll-free phones lines, then let America decide. Add in a few celebrity guest stars, et voilà ! Ten weeks of ratings success. Why? Because unless we vote, our favorite shows will forever be in reruns. Genius.

I jest — sort of (give me a few more weeks of House repeats and I’ll forget the idea’s impracticality). When the WGA went on strike November 5, 2007, most of the general public, myself included, never imagined that the Writers’ Strike would last more than a month; certainly not long enough to have a substantial impact on our television habits. Now, as we approach the third month of the strike, viewers are feeling the effects of the strike full-force, leaving us with the question: When will it end?

This article is not intended to be an argument either for or against either side of the dispute. Nor is it a discussion of what the writers are asking for. Rather, I’m looking at the settlement process. What should be going on right now in negotiations and why is it not happening?

The Players

The Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers (AMPTP): The AMPTP represents more than 350 American film production companies and studios in almost all entertainment industry guild and union contracts, maintaining that they are “the entertainment industry’s official collective bargaining representative.”

The Writers Guild of America, West (WGAW) and the Writers Guild of America, East (WGAE): These are technically two labor unions, collectively referred to as the Writers Guild of America (WGA).

The Dispute

Every three years, the WGA’s contract (called the Minimum Basic Agreement) with the AMPTP is up for renegotiation. In 2007, negotiations between the two sides broke down over three major issues: DVD residuals, jurisdiction in reality and animation, and new media. (For further discussion of the issues, please see Issues in the strike.)

What’s supposed to be going on?

In theory, the WGA and AMPTP are engaged in a process often referred to as “collective bargaining.” What this means in this case is that instead of having all the writers involved renegotiate their contracts with the producers and studios, the two labor unions (WGAW and WGAE) are conducting one large negotiation with the AMPTP on behalf of the writers. In other words, kill hundreds of birds with one stone (sorry PETA).

Fair warning, folks: here comes the legal bit. Collective bargaining is governed by section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The NLRA was enacted in 1935 to protect the rights of both parties in a dispute, in this case the writers and the producers. (See National Labor Relations Board.) Section 7 states in part that:

Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment. [emphasis added]

What it boils down to is that, though not mandatory, collective bargaining between labor groups in a fight is protected by the government. Imagine, for example, if the terms of each writer’s contract had to be individually negotiated. Not everyone would receive the same deal, some studios might make an agreement as to one issue, but not another, and so forth. Collective bargaining is meant to provide uniformity that protects everyone so that every writer in the guild gets the same deal and every producer in the AMPTP is agreeing to the same terms. Sounds good, right?

Stay with me for a little bit more of this. In a situation like the WGA strike, collective bargaining would be the most beneficial route for both parties to take in resolving their dispute. Rather than having a massive number of different deals being negotiated, each side should have a unified position that can then be altered over the course of negotiations. Collective bargaining also opens up dialogue between the two different groups so that they may come to an agreement on their own, as opposed to other methods of dispute resolution such as arbitration (where a third party would decide who is right and who is wrong). For obvious reasons, it’s important for the WGA and AMPTP to come to an agreement each side is happy with. Both sides have to continue to work together in the industry; even the most devoted Reality TV fan cannot live on such fare alone. Added to that is the fact that no one, particularly the entertainment industry’s consumers, wants to see this happen again when the writers’ basic contracts are up for negotiation again in 2010. (For further discussion on collective bargaining, see Collective Bargaining Negotiations.)

Why hasn’t this worked?

The simplest answer is that neither side will compromise enough. Though at heart similar in its goals to other labor disputes, since this strike involves members of the entertainment industry, there are some additional factors which do not necessarily encourage immediate settlement. If, for example, the United Auto Workers union were to go on strike against an automobile company, production would halt and the company would feel the effects almost immediately. In this case, however, television shows and movies that already have scripts can continue to be produced, even without the writers. Added to that is the television networks’ ability to produce new reality shows and game shows, as well as air reruns of their regular television show lineup.

At the beginning of the strike, the studios’ backlog of programming gave the AMPTP an edge in bargaining. Writers need paychecks, but the networks could afford to wait them out. However, as we edge closer to the third month of the strike, the balance could be shifting to a more equitable level. Popular network shows have run out of new episodes, ostensibly losing the studios a great deal of both viewers and money. The most notable strike casualty of late was the Hollywood Foreign Press Association’s Golden Globes ceremony. The WGA refused to allow a waiver for writers to work on the show and members of the Screen Actors Guild promised to honor any WGA show pickets. What is normally one of the most glamorous nights in show business was turned into what appeared to be a televised news conference (See Strike rubs glitter off Golden Globes). Might this very public display of the strike’s power to affect the industry be the thing to tip negotiations in their favor? Perhaps.

…Or perhaps not. Even as the guild’s hardball tactics gained them notice, the same hardened stance might be weakening the WGA within. Rumors abound that guild members are growing leery of the WGA’s tough stance, worrying that public sympathy for the writers’ cause could be damaged. (See In Writers Strike, Signs of Internal Discontent Over Tactics). Murmurs of dissent and possible breaks with guild leaders further give credence to the idea that the WGA may not be as strong within as it needs to be in order to successfully negotiate with the AMPTP.

A not-so-united front?

The ability to utilize collective bargaining in order to end the strike has been severely damaged in recent weeks by the emergence of separate deals. The WGA has made interim agreements with several production companies, such as Worldwide Pants, United Artists, The Weinstein Company and Dimension Films, and MRC. On the surface, these agreements sound good, and to an extent they are, as they allow some writers to work once more. But the amount of progress these agreements make toward ending the strike as a whole is small. While the interim agreements can boost morale and give the appearance that a larger divide-and-conquer stratagem is at work, the plan is flawed.

First, it does not appear that the WGA has a reason why it will make an agreement with one company but not another. Why Letterman but not Comedy Central, for example? Any goodwill the WGA will receive from making one agreement can be tempered by irritation that the guild will not make a similar agreement with another company.

Second, while it is true that some writers will be able to work with these agreements, others are still forced to remain on the picket lines. This will undoubtedly cause further division among guild members. To make exceptions for some but not others, even if there is a logical reason for the choice, still leaves many writers out of work while their counterparts are once again able to enjoy a regular paycheck.

With every separate agreement made, with every week passing that so many writers are unemployed, the ability of the guild to present a united front in negotiations with the AMPTP is being undermined. Without a strong front, the WGA’s bargaining stance is weakened, and unless one of the major production companies, such as Disney or NBC, decides to make a separate deal, the position of the AMPTP is still secure enough to wait out the writers.

So where does this leave us viewers?

Annoyed, perhaps, as time stretches on with no end to the strike in sight; waiting for the two sides to come to an agreement. As The Daily Show host Jon Stewart so rightly joked, “Listen. NBC, they don’t care, they’ll bring back Fear Factor. They’re not afraid of you people.“ So that is how we’ll wait, America — with our American Gladiators and our Desperate Housewives repeats, watching to see if the WGA and AMPTP can come to a uniform agreement that suits both sides — or if negotiations will turn into a never-ending case of the reruns.