For all those who think WGA members are all highly paid, I am here to prove to you that that is not the case. (I've been a member since shortly before the 1988 strike, back when we had to dodge tyrannosaurs to get to the studio to deliver the work)
A writer qualifies for a year of health care for each quarter in which they earn the equivalent of the MBA guild minimum for a 30-minute sitcom script. Last time I checked, that was something around $22k. Not that much, nowadays.
The guild likes to say that the average pay of members is around $80k/year - that's taking all the money paid to WGA members and dividing by the total number of WGA members. I recall back in 1988 that the figure that year was $50k - so looking at it over the past 35 years, members haven't kept up with inflation.
The more telling number is the percentage of members who qualify at any given quarter for health insurance. Back when I joined, that plan was Solid Platinum 24-carat. Today it's painted with a thin coat of platinum paint; I have far better coverage from the VA. Be that as it may, back in 1988, 85% of the members qualified at any given time for health coverage; in other words, 85% of the members made at least the sitcom minimum in a year. The most recent figure I am aware of from a couple years ago is that on average 35% of members now qualify for health care at any given time. In other words, 65% of the membership isn't making that $22k/year for a 30-minute sitcom.
The number of guild members I know personally who get the majority of their income from other work than writing makes the union look like the lower ranks of SAG. I make more money from writing non-fiction books than most of the younger WGA members I know make from their writing.
I was approached this past year by a couple of young writers who read in my author's bio that I am a screenwriter, asking my advice on how to break in. I told them if they don't have a trust fund to draw on that they shouldn't think about it. The job I loved for the past 40 years I wouldn't recommend today to my worst enemy.
Re: Bupkis, I'm guessing you meant fourth episode instead of fourth season. I was hesitant to dive into another show, but I'll give it a shot now after I watch this week's episode of (the severely underrated and underpromoted) Mrs. Davis.
Re: WGA strike...it really is kinda amazing just how few major labor disruptions there have been over the last 25 years. Once upon a time in America, strikes of all sorts (miners, factory workers, teamsters, actors, journos) were so common you could practically set your watches by them. The fact a strike like the WGA's has become so uncommon I can't help but feel reflects two changes to our economy over time:
1) A cultural resentment of unions as the pay & benefits fought for and won by the pioneering unionizers went from new and emergent to something more than just the expected baseline but the expected minimums, often in fields beyond those which had unionized.
2) The actual cost of going on strike has risen to the point that even when the workers understand they probably should strike for better pay or benefits, they literally can't afford to, even when they live in two income houses. Somewhere in there is a potentially fascinating graduate thesis for an economist, but the rise in the cost of living over the past, eh, 50 years or so is so drastic it really is no surprise that in the wake of the pandemic's "pause" giving people a vision of how things (for some) can clearly be better, they're choosing to fight for that "better".
Lastly, I gotta say, I think the deathgrip on the streaming metrics by the studios is ultimately self-defeating. Data without context is utterly meaningless and I highly doubt most studio execs have the acumen to truly understand the context often required. Not because they're dumb people, I don't think they are, but because for every Bob Iger there's 5 Michael Eisner's
I am neither a writer nor a studio executive but it seems clear to me that there is a huge knowledge abyss at play here. Since I think WGA members are pretty close to their economics, it feels (and I use the word deliberately) that the studio side is relatively uninformed about the current economics of their businesses and have therefore to negotiate from the classic toddler position of NO! Viewers/subscribers now have to be factored in with the traditional advertisers as a source of revenue and they have to know us as well. We really are not spaghetti to be thrown at the wall in the hope of positive outcome. They know more about each of us than I care to think! The goal of executives in such an environment is to study that data, figure out a business model that works and then negotiate as if (as is true) all parties need each other to make and sell product for which a profitable mix of payers will pay.
I love Guardians of the Galaxy, and am looking forward to the new one, and kinda disappointed this is the end.
I have backslid on the other Marvel movies, I haven't seen any of the new ones that came out in the last couple of years, though I own them, so I assume I will eventually.
And here I thought I was going to get a fresh Sonny Bunch take re: the WGA strikes and why this is a perfect example of why studios need to contract out to the (still existent) Pinkerton company to "handle" the matter.
For me, I watch MLB, College Football and some classic programs - none that require any WGA talent. With the emergence of many reality TV shows, demand for writers decreases. In my late 60s, I don't really care about TV and entertainment any more and I suspect that many Bulwark conservatives don't care about an upcoming WGA strike. I don't think any MAGA voters care either - they may be happy to see Hollywood suffer.
For all those who think WGA members are all highly paid, I am here to prove to you that that is not the case. (I've been a member since shortly before the 1988 strike, back when we had to dodge tyrannosaurs to get to the studio to deliver the work)
A writer qualifies for a year of health care for each quarter in which they earn the equivalent of the MBA guild minimum for a 30-minute sitcom script. Last time I checked, that was something around $22k. Not that much, nowadays.
The guild likes to say that the average pay of members is around $80k/year - that's taking all the money paid to WGA members and dividing by the total number of WGA members. I recall back in 1988 that the figure that year was $50k - so looking at it over the past 35 years, members haven't kept up with inflation.
The more telling number is the percentage of members who qualify at any given quarter for health insurance. Back when I joined, that plan was Solid Platinum 24-carat. Today it's painted with a thin coat of platinum paint; I have far better coverage from the VA. Be that as it may, back in 1988, 85% of the members qualified at any given time for health coverage; in other words, 85% of the members made at least the sitcom minimum in a year. The most recent figure I am aware of from a couple years ago is that on average 35% of members now qualify for health care at any given time. In other words, 65% of the membership isn't making that $22k/year for a 30-minute sitcom.
The number of guild members I know personally who get the majority of their income from other work than writing makes the union look like the lower ranks of SAG. I make more money from writing non-fiction books than most of the younger WGA members I know make from their writing.
I was approached this past year by a couple of young writers who read in my author's bio that I am a screenwriter, asking my advice on how to break in. I told them if they don't have a trust fund to draw on that they shouldn't think about it. The job I loved for the past 40 years I wouldn't recommend today to my worst enemy.
Re: Bupkis, I'm guessing you meant fourth episode instead of fourth season. I was hesitant to dive into another show, but I'll give it a shot now after I watch this week's episode of (the severely underrated and underpromoted) Mrs. Davis.
Re: WGA strike...it really is kinda amazing just how few major labor disruptions there have been over the last 25 years. Once upon a time in America, strikes of all sorts (miners, factory workers, teamsters, actors, journos) were so common you could practically set your watches by them. The fact a strike like the WGA's has become so uncommon I can't help but feel reflects two changes to our economy over time:
1) A cultural resentment of unions as the pay & benefits fought for and won by the pioneering unionizers went from new and emergent to something more than just the expected baseline but the expected minimums, often in fields beyond those which had unionized.
2) The actual cost of going on strike has risen to the point that even when the workers understand they probably should strike for better pay or benefits, they literally can't afford to, even when they live in two income houses. Somewhere in there is a potentially fascinating graduate thesis for an economist, but the rise in the cost of living over the past, eh, 50 years or so is so drastic it really is no surprise that in the wake of the pandemic's "pause" giving people a vision of how things (for some) can clearly be better, they're choosing to fight for that "better".
Lastly, I gotta say, I think the deathgrip on the streaming metrics by the studios is ultimately self-defeating. Data without context is utterly meaningless and I highly doubt most studio execs have the acumen to truly understand the context often required. Not because they're dumb people, I don't think they are, but because for every Bob Iger there's 5 Michael Eisner's
Sonny - thank you for this. Incredibly informative. I really enjoyed reading Colby Day's 2021 and 2022 in review from his position as a screenwriter.
Er ..what? Nathan Ballingrud has a new book and I didn’t know? How did I not know? You’ve made my week.
I am neither a writer nor a studio executive but it seems clear to me that there is a huge knowledge abyss at play here. Since I think WGA members are pretty close to their economics, it feels (and I use the word deliberately) that the studio side is relatively uninformed about the current economics of their businesses and have therefore to negotiate from the classic toddler position of NO! Viewers/subscribers now have to be factored in with the traditional advertisers as a source of revenue and they have to know us as well. We really are not spaghetti to be thrown at the wall in the hope of positive outcome. They know more about each of us than I care to think! The goal of executives in such an environment is to study that data, figure out a business model that works and then negotiate as if (as is true) all parties need each other to make and sell product for which a profitable mix of payers will pay.
smh sonny has fallen victim to the woke mind virus
Your brain is mighty, Sonny Bunch.
I love Guardians of the Galaxy, and am looking forward to the new one, and kinda disappointed this is the end.
I have backslid on the other Marvel movies, I haven't seen any of the new ones that came out in the last couple of years, though I own them, so I assume I will eventually.
The ratio between the amount of meetings a writer takes and the amount of work they get paid to do is depressing.
And here I thought I was going to get a fresh Sonny Bunch take re: the WGA strikes and why this is a perfect example of why studios need to contract out to the (still existent) Pinkerton company to "handle" the matter.
For me, I watch MLB, College Football and some classic programs - none that require any WGA talent. With the emergence of many reality TV shows, demand for writers decreases. In my late 60s, I don't really care about TV and entertainment any more and I suspect that many Bulwark conservatives don't care about an upcoming WGA strike. I don't think any MAGA voters care either - they may be happy to see Hollywood suffer.