THE BIG LOOPHOLEComplications Ensue
Complications Ensue:
The Crafty Game, TV, and Screenwriting Blog


April 2004

May 2004

June 2004

July 2004

August 2004

September 2004

October 2004

November 2004

December 2004

January 2005

February 2005

March 2005

April 2005

May 2005

June 2005

July 2005

August 2005

September 2005

October 2005

November 2005

December 2005

January 2006

February 2006

March 2006

April 2006

May 2006

June 2006

July 2006

August 2006

September 2006

October 2006

November 2006

December 2006

January 2007

February 2007

March 2007

April 2007

May 2007

June 2007

July 2007

August 2007

September 2007

October 2007

November 2007

December 2007

January 2008

February 2008

March 2008

April 2008

May 2008

June 2008

July 2008

August 2008

September 2008

October 2008

November 2008

December 2008

January 2009

February 2009

March 2009

April 2009

May 2009

June 2009

July 2009

August 2009

September 2009

October 2009

November 2009

December 2009

January 2010

February 2010

March 2010

April 2010

May 2010

June 2010

July 2010

August 2010

September 2010

October 2010

November 2010

December 2010

January 2011

February 2011

March 2011

April 2011

May 2011

June 2011

July 2011

August 2011

September 2011

October 2011

November 2011

December 2011

January 2012

February 2012

March 2012

April 2012

May 2012

June 2012

July 2012

August 2012

September 2012

October 2012

November 2012

December 2012

January 2013

February 2013

March 2013

April 2013

May 2013

June 2013

July 2013

August 2013

September 2013

October 2013

November 2013

December 2013

January 2014

February 2014

March 2014

April 2014

May 2014

June 2014

July 2014

August 2014

September 2014

October 2014

November 2014

December 2014

January 2015

February 2015

March 2015

April 2015

May 2015

June 2015

August 2015

September 2015

October 2015

November 2015

December 2015

January 2016

February 2016

March 2016

April 2016

May 2016

June 2016

July 2016

August 2016

September 2016

October 2016

November 2016

December 2016

January 2017

February 2017

March 2017

May 2017

June 2017

July 2017

August 2017

September 2017

October 2017

November 2017

December 2017

January 2018

March 2018

April 2018

June 2018

July 2018

October 2018

November 2018

December 2018

January 2019

February 2019

November 2019

February 2020

March 2020

April 2020

May 2020

August 2020

September 2020

October 2020

December 2020

January 2021

February 2021

March 2021

May 2021

June 2021

November 2021


Thursday, June 09, 2005

Unfortunately I was in New York last weekend and missed meeting with the WGC's negotiating committee, who kindly flew in from Toronto to meet with the Quebec membership. But I'd like to second Doug Taylor's point about the biggest loophole in the IPA. (That's the WGC's agreement with the producers; equivalent to the WGA's Minimum Basic Agreement.)

Producers who sign the IPA -- basically all the serious producers -- are obliged to work only with WGC writers. If a writer isn't WGC, the producer is still obliged to sign a WGC contract with the writer. The writer can then join the WGC.

However, if the writer is not in the Guild, nothing prevents the producer from doing the contract through a subsidiary company that is not signatory. The writer can now be paid less than scale, because he's not working with a signatory producer, and has no way to join the Guild and demand scale.

Doug went through that experience with a large production and distribution company up here. He was not Guild, the prodco was WGC-signatory, so rather than paying him scale and doing a WGC deal, the producer had him sign with a "numbered company."

I went through it about a dozen years ago in LA. I had written a script on a project that was being bought, as a go project, by a studio. They had to buy the script, obviously. But I wasn't WGA. So rather than the studio buying the script, a company owned by the studio bought the script -- and presumably assigned all rights to the production entity, which licensed distribution rights to the studio.

Doug asks why the WGC -- and for that matter the WGA -- can't close this little Catch-22. You can't join either Guild without a contract with a Guild signatory company. But the company won't sign a WGC deal with you unless you're a member.

A simple fix would be to allow anyone to join the guild, at least temporarily. It does not hurt the Guilds to have additional members. It only strengthens them. Producers generally accept that they have to sign WGA or WGC deals with WGA and WGC members. Is there some kind of legal reason (ahem, Craig) why the Guild can't allow people in when they have a pending, but uncompleted deal? If there is a cost associated with each member (one that's not already covered by the entrance fee), then the new Guild member could be given a provisional membership that doesn't give him benefits -- other than the obvious benefit of salary protection.

The alternative would be to insist that producers agree not to buy or commission scripts through non-signatory subsidiaries. (The legalese would something to the effect that signatory corporations, and their assigns, are not allowed to receive cinematic or allied rights derived from any script written by a non-member. Or something like that.) But that would require negotiation, while changing our own membership rules shouldn't be anyone else's business but our own.

The loophole doesn't just hurt the wanna-be member, though personally, it cost me around $35,000 at the time. It hurts the Guild, because it allows producers to think they can end-run around the IPA (and in the States, the MBA).

How about it, guys?

UPDATE: Doug talked to the WGC. Their response was a tad defeatist: "We'd have to strike to get this." And of course, no one wants to strike for the sake of non-members. But it's not just for non-members. It's for making it harder for signatory prodcos to hire people off-IPA. And we wouldn't have to strike. We just make it easier to join the Guild. No?



The WGA MBA states that if a company is partially owned by a signatory (can't remember the percentage...possibly 33%?) then the sig must oblige their subsidiary to adhere to the MBA.

The way around this loophole is simple, BTW, for us in the states. If you're in the WGA, you can't work for a non-sig.

By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:50 AM  

"the sig must oblige their subsidiary" -- Then how was it that the studio that bought my script was able to do a non-sig deal through a non-signatory company?

By Blogger Alex Epstein, at 12:06 PM  

Post a Comment

Back to Complications Ensue main blog page.

This page is powered by Blogger.