strike?
The writers' strike led to an impasse, with management walking out of the negotiations. The DGA stepped in and made a deal, a better one than they would have made without our efforts. That deal has unofficially been offered to the writers. End of story.
But, sadly, for many, it's just the beginning. I'm getting deluged by emails, urging me to hold firm. The DGA set a decent template, they say, but it's just the beginning. Now we need to make a deal that works for us.
I can't tell you how deluded I think this is. At some point in any negotiation, you take the best possible deal. In this case, we have a convenient way of knowing what that deal is. The DGA got it. If it wasn't the best possible deal before, it is now. And we helped set the preconditions that made it happen. That is a real accomplishment.
But the false bravado of those who are acting like now's when we roll up our sleeves and really start to negotiate makes me cringe. It's the battle cry of the impotent.
But, sadly, for many, it's just the beginning. I'm getting deluged by emails, urging me to hold firm. The DGA set a decent template, they say, but it's just the beginning. Now we need to make a deal that works for us.
I can't tell you how deluded I think this is. At some point in any negotiation, you take the best possible deal. In this case, we have a convenient way of knowing what that deal is. The DGA got it. If it wasn't the best possible deal before, it is now. And we helped set the preconditions that made it happen. That is a real accomplishment.
But the false bravado of those who are acting like now's when we roll up our sleeves and really start to negotiate makes me cringe. It's the battle cry of the impotent.
Labels: strike
posted by John Levenstein at
10:28 AM
10 Comments:
At this point, do the writers have any voice in whether you hold firm or take a DGA-like deal? At what point do you next get to tell your leaders what you want them to do? And are they bound to the rank-and-file's wishes, or do they do what they want?
Can you vote them out?
Don't do anything until Nikki has returned refreshed!
voting them out shouldn't be necessary. if management makes a "last, best offer" i'm pretty sure leadership is obligated to let us vote on it--it might even be labor law.
The economy's not looking up, is it?
Good Lord. I just read the latest Nikki Fink posting where she rips Patrick Goldstein for a "settle the strike" article he wrote in the LA Times. Her post read well, and I was impressed, until I read the Goldstein article. It's nothing like what she says; Goldstein makes a well-reasoned and polite argument. She might not like his position or agree with him, but calling it a "venomous screed"? And Goldstein does not "compare" Verrone to Arafat. Please.
Robert, I agree with you about Nikki. Once again her royal "Toldja-ness" has told us how great she is by extolling the virtues of her writings and bashing those of another. She is nothing if not consistent in her self aggrandizement and delusion.
I do disagree about the Arafat part. He did, in my opinion, clearly draw that analogy. He ends the article with it. And by addressing the letter style article directly to Patric Verrone up top -and mentioning him again by name in the article- it's clear he was telling Patric to not be like Arafat and blow the deal.
That said, I happen to completely disagree with the analogy. In the case of Arafat he had everything to gain by undermining negotiating with the Israelis. His stranglehold on power in the West Bank and Gaza was predicated on turmoil and tension ruling the day between Israel and the Palestinians. The minute peace had a chance to rear it's not so ugly head, he would've been rendered impotent. A rebel without an intifada. Verrone, conversely, has nothing to gain by undermining negotiations with the AMPTP. Especially not after the DGA deal has closed. The membership is tired and ready for a deal, and if Verrone were to pull an "Arafat" and not "miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity" there would be serious consequences. Unity would begin to erode, and you'd see a fractionalized guild rebelling against its leadership and demanding accountability and change for poor leadership.
Again, I do agree 100% on Nikki. Just the name now when I see it irritates me. The two "k's" sitting there so smugly between the two "i's" as if to say, "Hey look at us we're in the "k"now." Bleh.
Chris, you're right that Goldstein's comparing Verrone to Arafat. What I should have written is that Goldstein compares Verrone's negotiation position to Arafat's negotiation position (though yes, perhaps inaccurately), but Fink makes it sound like Goldstein compares their characters.
As for the extra "k": maybe she borrowed the one Patric Verrone's not using?
I'm going to go against all the rules of cool bloggerdom and give you a hearty "HA!" on that "k" thing. Me like that long time. Funny observation.
You should consider becoming a writer. The entry fee into the WGA is pretty low now. Like, if you can hold a sign dude... you're in.
I'm really bad at holding signs. :(
I like the Nikki/Patric joke enough that I just sent it to Nikki Fink. I said the joke's been "going around", which isn't really all that true.
The premise of the joke is better than the execution though.
Post a Comment
<< Home