Poached from the TAG blog... thoughts?

From Steve H:

The Indecision is Over
... Let the employment begin!

Kevin beat me to the punch with this, but I post the news anyway:

After five weeks of negotiations, we have accepted employment as writers for Sit Down, Shut Up! under a new contract.
Though the program will be produced under the jurisdiction of IATSE Local 839, The Animation Guild (TAG), we have achieved Writers Guild of America (WGA) parity in key areas such as auditable residuals, new media, script fees, merchandising rights as well as a guarantee that these gains apply not only to ourselves but also to all future writers on the show.
We thank the WGA for its guidance and support during this process. We believe we’ve made a statement to the studios how important the standards of the WGA are to working writers. All animation writing -- television and features -- should be covered by the WGA.
This contract is a compromise: an improvement over the standard TAG terms we were initially offered, but not full WGA coverage. Compromises are never easy nor satisfying, always less comforting than a clear victory. We know that this is part of an ongoing struggle.
Reaching a deal will allow this program to move forward, providing jobs for many writers, animators, actors and production staff. Not every writer originally offered employment on Sit Down, Shut Up! has decided whether to return, and we understand and respect whatever decision they make. We remain hopeful that all animation writing will one day be covered by a WGA contract ...
As we say, negotiations are about leverage and momentum. It appears that nobody came away from this totally satisfied, but I'm happy that the writers made a deal that's acceptable to them. And I'm pleased ... no, delighted ... that a lot of folks are going to have work for a while.

Congratulations to everybody.

Posted by Steve Hulett at 7:36 PM
2 comments:

Kevin Koch said...
Wow, I'm amazed at the viciousness (and ignoranance) of the comments coming from fellow writers over at Deadline Hollywood Daily. The "Dirty Nine"?!? Ugly and uncalled for.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 10:25:00 PM

FROM ME:
Agreed.

We can go back and forth on IATSE/TAG/WGA whatever until we're blue in the face, but minimums are minimums and you get what you negotiate.

These writers were in the middle of their own post-strike strike... What did they think was going to happen when they let go of their fight for prime time animation?

At the same time, I think TAG has a responsibility now to take what these writers negotiated and use it as a springboard to raise incomes across the board for TAG writers.

This was the last battle of the strike, and even though they weren't trying to, they won a victory for IATSE animation writers.

Will our union do something with that?

Apparently there ARE residuals on my work, and they cover more than just me.

...and I feel better knowing that.

(Here comes math. I prepare to be corrected.)

So... apparently, when I write a half hour script, and am paid $7500... management kicks in about $1750 per script into health care. Which means that as an IATSE covered union type, you get full health care for $3500 per year.

Good health care probably costs 5 times that.

What makes up the difference? You guessed it: Residuals that go to the union, not me.

So, going back to the root of all this - the "Greater Good" comment:

How do feel about the fact that freelancers, and people who work on daily call, and short-term employees that work on my productions get covered because of these residuals? Better than I would knowing that money was simply not being collected.

It doesn't mean I'm thrilled with all aspects of TAG, but it does give me some small peace of mind to know that monies being raised on my work, work which COULD NOT have existed without others working on (or fixing, depending on who's leading the discussion), does something for them as well.

Other writers reading this? Kevin? Steve H? Obligatory Angry anonymous guy? Am I right in my numbers?

And if so, why the hell didn't somebody say so 48 comments ago? :)

July 10th

Woo.

Nothing like a dust up to make me want to realize there are faces attached to these names.

July 10th. Evite going out to writers.

If you haven't gotten it yet, shoot me an E-mail.

Fuzzily...

- Steve

Obama as a metaphor

Nothing kicks the debate up to 11 like a talk about residuals, huh?

To Steve (and others): As I said, here and there, some of my venom has less venom right now, for a few reasons.

On a larger scale - I know that the 9 scripts I wrote the first season of Yin Yang Yo probably chunked enough hours into the pension to help cover the insurance of 7 additional workers. Not writers, workers.

Seriously, if that's how the hours work, I have to assume IA gets paid on my work and when I go "over" on my hours, that money goes somewhere.

And now I have to think - as a human being, as a person... as someone who makes money in a business that takes so many other people to make happen... is that bad? Am I going to be annoyed about that?

It's an election year. This year, I am voting AGAINST pocket book issues and voting for Barack Obama. (As long as we're mixing apples and oranges). Why? Personal reasons... but voting for Barack WILL affect my pocket book. My taxes WILL go up.

And I wonder: How is that different from my work in IA? Everybody talks about universal health care - that shit's gotta be paid for. Well, I think it's safe to say that at 7500 per six month period, IA health care is pretty much socialized medicine, and pretty much universal. You work in animation, chances are you're going to get it. You work for IA, chances are you're going to get it.

IA covers what - 100k people with health and benefits? I have to assume my hours help with that. So perhaps, on some of this, I have to put my ACTUAL money where my PHILOSPHICAL heart. Unlike every other union, IA is NOT a single issue union. They have writers (which I think they could do a better job servicing) but they have a lot more. Even TAG is not a single issue guild. They have writers (which I *know* they could service better).

We're part of a whole, whether we like it or not.

Which is why I'm starting to feel change needs to come from within, rather than waiting for any other union - or lack of one - to save the day.

Apples and Oranges? My breakdown of the residuals discussion

Okay.

So, I'm not the biggest fan of how IA/TAG handles writers within it's fold. No big secret there.

But for very good reasons, I've had to do some digging into something I think IA gets right for writers - Health care.

Steve H - You'll be better at the math than I am, but here's my guestimation.

If I writer writes one half hour of material - they are paid 7500 and clock in at 300 hours. That is enough to qualify them for health care for six months. That means someone making 15K per year can get health and pension. Do that fifteen years, and you get health care for life. (I don't know what the "for life" plan is for the WGA).

So now, I want to do some math. I am intentionally NOT differentiating between animation and live action, and I am rooting all of this in the basic cable world, because that's what I know.

Animation writer
One half hour: 7.5K
No additional monies. Ever.
Healthcare: Triggered for six months upon completion of script, 300 hours of pension and health credited.

Basic Cable Live action writer
One half hour script: 12K
Reruns ONCE: 6K more.
Total with 12 runs (since that's where the math stops changing): 21K (ish)
Health care: Triggered at 31K

Head expoloding yet?

So here's what it boils down to:
You write two scripts a year, you get health with both.
With IA/TAG - You make 15K, and that's it.
With WGA - You make 42K, with the potential to make more.

So here are the questions every writer asks when they think of this stuff:

Is an IA writer compensated higher in credited hours for work than others in the union? (300 hours for one script? I would say yes.)
Is there a difference between the two if there are no reruns? (Yes. 4.5k)
Could a writer take that 27K and buy their own health plan for their family? (Maybe. Depends on health, I suppose.)
Does a writer qualify for health care in IA faster than the WGA? (Sorta)

So for people like me - people who work in BOTH unions - it's a conundrum. I would much rather be getting WGA minimums for my work. But if I wasn't getting WGA work, my world view would be much, much different.

The question is this: What is apples and oranges?

Writing vs. Writing?
Prime time animation writing vs. Basic cable animation writing?
WGA Basic cable writing vs. IA basic cable writing?

Those are the facts, as I know them. I know how I feel about the whole thing. The question is, if the above is correct, how do you?

Sit Down, Shut Up? Honestly... when it comes to my unions, I'm used to it.

So, yeah. There's this:

Writers take a stand over 'Sit Down'
Dispute highlights ongoing tension between unions

On Thursday, the writers for Sony Pictures TV's upcoming animated Fox series "Sit Down, Shut Up" walked off the show in pursuit of WGA representation.

The writers, who are members of the WGA, claimed that they were misled by Sony TV that they would be covered by the Writers Guild, while the studio had made arrangements with another union, IATSE.

The labor dispute highlights the ongoing tension between the two unions over jurisdiction in primetime animated series. The writers on all other animated Fox series, produced by 20th Century Fox TV, are represented by the WGA. (20th TV also co-produces "Sit Down," but Sony TV, which developed the comedy with studio-based writer Mitchell Hurwitz, is the lead production entity.)

Sony TV produces "Sit Down" through its animation division, Adelaide Prods.

Under IATSE, writers not only won't get new-media revenues and other terms the WGA negotiated with the studios during the strike, they also won't get paid residuals, a crucial safety net for scribes between jobs.

There's a bunch of other blah blah blah stuff in there - but it really boils down to this. The writers on this show are getting a taste of how little animation writers make under the IATSE contract. Or, to be fair, how little they make "in success." I'm sure their episodic rate was the same - it's the residuals and the back end that's lower than they're used to.

And by lower, I mean NONEXISTENT.

I'm torn here: Of course, I'm pulling for the writers, because in the end, all they're asking for is money "in success." But then, there's ambivalence, because I am not so foolish as to think it will affect anyone but these individual writers. Good for them, doesn't mean anything for the rest of us.

The WGA had a moment where they could have stood their ground for animation writers, and animation writing was one of the first things they folded on during the strike. No surprise, really. Animation writers (of my level, not of the Simpsons/Family Guy/King Of The Hill level) simply are not a large enough part of the WGA, and they weren't going to strike over us.

I get it.

Meanwhile, the same math works on IATSE. Non-writing union members call the shots. We're a small percentile (Steve? Got a number?) within the union that does represent us.

One doesn't want us. And one doesn't hear us. But they're both fighting loudly over us.

Thanks for the invite, guys, but I know you're only doing this to make the girl you love jealous. Call me when prom is over.

Falling Hare: Update

Hey there!

Okay, so... you're probably wondering what's up.   First, the obligatory preamble.

Seven scripts went to Stephen Worth with the caveat of "read this when you have time."  They were messengered over - scrubbed clean of any identity - and he has them.  At his leisure, he will read them.

Then, he'll let me know which script he felt best took the cartoon and backward engineered it into script form.     I have my choice, but that's not the contest.

Once a winner is picked, I will reach out to that person and see if they're okay with their work being scanned, and uploaded, as a PDF file. 

Part of my radio silence has been a little bit of good news which I'll share with anyone who wants to shoot me an E-mail.  

With that, have good weekends...

Update: Reading this weekend

Honestly, that's it.  

:)

The scripts are in!

And there are thousands of them!

Okay, honestly, it's less than that.  You know who you guys (and gals) are. :)

Here's what's up:

1)  I will read them, remove any hint of identity (which means I probably have to cut and paste and lay them into another document, because a clever reader could do a CONTROL-I and figure out where it came from)

2)  I will forward the best (in my opinion) of the bunch to Stephen Worth, along with my first, second and third place.

3)  The winner will be announced here - and that script will be placed up here (anonymous)

Keeping you posted!

Three hours!

And then, the phone lines are closed.

If you haven't voted for your idol, and they're voted off, you have nobody to blame but yourself.

...

Wait, you know what I mean.

Tick, Tick, Tick.

It's April 27th.

Three days away from the cut off, which is midnight the 30th.

Stephen's been posting his theories, and I've been storing submissions... but to be honest, I ain't got that many.  If you send something to me, you've got halfway decent odds.

And if you're still polishing, shine it up and get it in.

:)

SPAM, a lot.

Hey gang.

So... somehow, my E-mail got into the hands of evil doers last night. Around 12:45 AM.

I have to say around 12:45 AM because that's when I started getting about 20 bouncebacks a minute.

I'm being promised by my web person that it's being fixed but just to be safe:

IF YOU HAVE SENT A SCRIPT, RESEND with "SCRIPT" in the subject line. If you are sending a script, send it with "SCRIPT" in the subject line.

Because right now, it might get lost in a sea of bullshit.

:)

The problem with Vilification...

...is you learn, 99 times out of a hundred, that once you start actually talking to someone, they don't turn out to be villificatable (not a word, I know.)

Stephen and I finally connected today.    As you know, part of the reason I want to do the "script that classic" contest is to find that middle ground - prove that words can paint pictures, show that there's a place in animation for scripts.

We talked for about a half an hour - I know this because my Iphone counts upwards - and it was a good chat about animation, cartoons, process, what works and what doesn't.

And while we CLEARLY have different viewpoints, I think that Stephen's world and mine are not as far apart as the internet might make it seem.   So... here's where we're at with this.

Stephen's the judge on this.    That's always been the goal:  Get the guy who is the historian at the ASIFA archive to judge a contest based on words.

I'm the filter - you send the script to me, I "anonymize it" and send it to him.  But I am the moat between submission and judgment.  Which is, as I've said, seasoned to taste.

I know what I'm looking for, so does he.    And you guys know the process.  As of right now, the number of scripts received is... well... LOW.    There are still 12 days left to get me the script so they can be judged.

We now interrupt the update with a side note.

SIDE NOTE:

Interesting point of conversation:

While I believe history is important, I also understand that people are inspired by what they know.  Ren and Stimpy inspired people.  So, quite frankly, did Fairly Oddparents.  Different people from different sides of the isle, to get involved with different sides of the same industry.  Everybody's going to have an opinion as to what's better.

Lets use John K as an example:  I think there are a couple of Ren and Stimpy's that are classics - that work, that are funny.  And then, there was the new Ren and Stimpy, which I could not watch.   There's the ranger smith cartoon which left me feeling icky (sorry, but if we're being honest, that's where I am.)  Then there's spongebob, or Power Puff girls, or more recently, El Tigre  (picking stuff we talked about) that most of the time, I leave laughing.  And impressed.  And maybe even jealous that I could not have done that.

I think most of the time, writers who post are more interested in "There's two ways to do it, and they're both right" more than the artists who post are.  But script writers aren't trying to cut artists out of the picture - their opinion is that the words drive the art.  Which relegates the board and art to a place where it serves the word and script.

Artists that believe scripts have no place in animation want to relegate writers to serving cofee, or at the very least, punch up.

I defend the Family Guy and South Park's of the world as "pop" - they are cartoons of the moment.  And they are as strong if not stronger, to me, than some of the classic sitcoms I enjoyed growing up and SOME of the board shows I see now.  

They are - on an entertainment level - STRONGER to me than some of the stuff that he holds up as classics.

I will let him discuss this.

His point is interesting and intellectually valid:  The sitcoms I like have actors interpreting the words.  And then, there was a moment where I realized - a good board artist / story person  is the person who takes the words in a script and turns that cartoon character into an actor, the same way Woody Harrelson did on Cheers, or Kramer on Seinfeld.

I hadn't really thought of it that way, honestly.  And, to be fair, I don't know that I care too much about that while I'm laughing my ass off at the cartoons I like.   Moreso, I don't know how you make an adult, prime-time, sitcom style cartoon with those goals, or if that even matters.

There are scripted shows I don't like, and board-driven shows I do.  And vice versa.  It's all about personal taste.  What I don't like is anyone telling writers their contributions are invalid, or unimportant.

So now, we're having dialogue.  Which I think is important.

So, the contest continues.  The criteria is admittedly arbitrary.  But the goals are concrete.

Me?  I'm looking for a script that best shows "Falling Hare" in script form.  So is he.   And as long as words are used to do that, we're all on the same page.

Tomorrow:  I'm going to talk about my view point about the difference between "Animation" and "A cartoon."  They can be, in my mind, two different things.  They have different criteria.    And neither are wrong.

Glad to be back.

   - Steve

P.S.  Taking down the moderation now.

Jesus. Thank you, Jury Duty.

Okay. Back on Track.

It's amazing to me, by the way, that the court system can pull you out of your life... but then the DA and the Public Defender can set their schedule anyway they want.

You: Out for 8 hours, four to five days a week.
Them: An hour or two in the AM, 90 minute lunch, a couple hours in the afternoon, and then done by 4.

Why do the wheels of justice run slowly? Because they're YOUR wheels.

I owe Stephen Worth a call, and you guys an update. That's my goal for today.

- Steve

P.S. We convicted of Voluntary Manslaughter.

Whoa whoa whoa...

Hey there.  Diving in.  

1)  I'm still on Jury Duty, so I haven't had time to connect with Stephen yet.  But...

2)  Stephen:  You can use whatever criteria you want, but two caveats:

      A)  The contest is to watch Falling Hare, and write it in script.

      B)  The winner is the script that best reflects that cartoon in a way that it could then turned into an actual cartoon.  "None of the above" can't be an option because we're looking for the best version of that.

That being said: 

Ya can't put out rules as to what you're looking for in the middle of this, as it gives an unfair advantage to people who haven't submitted yet.    If we do this again, feel free.

But the above has always been the mission statement for this... anything other than that - and especially changing how this works - wouldn't be cool.   (Note:  I moderated comments long enough to get this up here and connect via Email)

Tomorrow's the last day of jury duty, and I'm sure we'll chat after that.

    - Steve

             

Extension!

Well, as you probably guessed by the recent back and forth, I'm going to extend the deadline. No rule changes, same deal: Write "Falling Hare"

Submission deadline moved... one month. April 30th.

Just to remind from the previous post:

- - - - - - -

So, by now, some of you have probably figured out what I was thinking about... but maybe you didn't figure out all of the details.

I think there are writers who can write lyrically, visually and well enough that they can script out a classic.

I am not so vain as to think it's me.

But I do believe that person is out there.

And so, in honor of this week's "Annie Awards," which also includes script writing as part of its list of honors... I'd like to propose, announce (and God Help Me, fund) the First annual Script Script That Classic Contest!

The rules are pretty simple:

Watch the cartoon. Write a script in Final Draft, or in RTF format. Mail it to me at Marmel@marmel.com. Include your name, address, contact information, etc.

I will then log it, anonymize it (remove all names, etc.) and then submit it for judging.

And while I plan on reaching out to other board artists, directors and story people to help go through the stuff and give opinions, I would like the final judge of this to be Stephen Worth.

Pick the best of the bunch. Show script writers what's right.
And in return, you can take the worst of the bunch, and gut it.

Here's what happens when a winner is picked.

The winner will be announced, and un-anonymized. I will see that the winner is paid a "teleplay fee" for a short-subject script - as determined by the IATSE/TAG 839 rules. I think it's a little less than $2000. This may be out of my own pocket, but I'd like to see this person be paid to punch up an existing project. (Note: If the winner is from out of state, travelling to a punch up meeting would be on them.)

I will personally make an in-kind donation to the ASIFA-Archive.

So... it might be a bust, but I'll still honor my part.

So, three days and counting before the March 31st deadline for "Script that classic" times out. And the fact is, submissions have been... well... LOW.

And that's cool. It was an experiment, it started a debate, and that's what I was gunning for. And perhaps I could have promoted it more - but then, I had a few weeks of human stuff hit, and that's life.

For the record, submissions are still open. Also for the record, Stephen Worth wrote a very eloquent defense as to why he didn't want to judge this, and I respect it. To be fair, his time would have been very minimal. So will mine.

However, there are still three days or so left to submit a version to me, anonymously and there still is a cash reward that will be paid out. And I will do this again. Next time, tho, I might shrink the contest down to a section, rather than a whole script. Lesson learned. :)

I return to Jury duty and will announce a winner mid-April.

Script That Classic Update

Hey guys.  Quick update.

1)  Some scripts coming in.  Would like to see a lot more.  I'm going to set a deadline for script entry:  Monday, March 31st.  (I'm out of town a lot in March)

2)  I am still discussing this with Steve Worth.  We'll be chatting later in this month about his role in this.  It's important to me that the ASIFA ARCHIVE be the judge of a good script.  That's my point.  But "none of the above" and "they all suck" is not an acceptable answer.

So... Rules still apply!

Contest is still on!

Solid dates in place!

Scripts sent to Marmel@marmel.com

Contest: SCRIPT THAT CLASSIC!

So, by now, some of you have probably figured out what I was thinking about... but maybe you didn't figure out all of the details.

I think there are writers who can write lyrically, visually and well enough that they can script out a classic.

I am not so vain as to think it's me.

But I do believe that person is out there.

And so, in honor of this week's "Annie Awards," which also includes script writing as part of its list of honors... I'd like to propose, announce (and God Help Me, fund) the First annual Script That Classic Contest!

And the classic I'd like to propose be scripted - retrofitted backwards from classic cartoon (as listed by our friend and periodic poster Stephen Worth) is "Falling Hare."



The rules are pretty simple:

Watch the cartoon. Write a script in Final Draft, or in RTF format. Mail it to me at Marmel@marmel.com. Include your name, address, contact information, etc.

I will then log it, anonymize it (remove all names, etc.) and then submit it for judging.

And while I plan on reaching out to other board artists, directors and story people to help go through the stuff and give opinions, I would like the final judge of this to be Stephen Worth.

Pick the best of the bunch. Show script writers what's right.
And in return, you can take the worst of the bunch, and gut it.

Here's what happens when a winner is picked.

The winner will be announced, and un-anonymized. I will see that the winner is paid a "teleplay fee" for a short-subject script - as determined by the IATSE/TAG 839 rules. I think it's a little less than $2000. This may be out of my own pocket, but I'd like to see this person be paid to punch up an existing project. (Note: If the winner is from out of state, travelling to a punch up meeting would be on them.)

I will personally make an in-kind donation to the ASIFA-Archive.

I humbly ask other producer on this 'blog to chip in work as well. (Hell, the more that gets chipped in, the less out of pocket I face. I'm not an idiot. :) )

But it boils down to this: I will only do this if Stephen judges, in deference to his knowledge of the past. I freely admit - I know less about this than a lot of people. So I'll need the assistance of people with artier minds than I.

The cartoon is picked - one of the classic cartoons of all time. Chosen by someone with not only an encyclopedic knowledge of animation... but who directs the archive that honors it.

I'm in for the parts I can bring to the table. My time. My scripty-producer head. Cash. And opportunity.

Stephen? Whattya think?

Just in case anyone was actually waiting...

...I'm dragging a little ass.

Nothing like a whirlwind trip to the superbowl to slow down your animation experiments.

Will return to posting, probably, Weds.

- Steve