We are pleased to let you know that last week the WGC negotiating team reached a deal with the Canadian producers' associations (CFTPA and APFTQ) on a new Independent Production Agreement that, when ratified, will take effect January 1, 2010. Our current IPA is set to expire on December 31, 2009. Given the economic environment and the level of uncertainty in the industry at the moment, all parties arrived at the table with a short list of issues and seeking a workable deal.
The tentative two-year agreement includes an across-the-board Script Fee increase of 2% in each of the two years. The deal also brings "story-editing summits" under the agreement. These sometimes days-long group story breaking and editing meetings (alternately called pitch summits) in both live-action and animation writing will now be contracted under the IPA and screenwriters will receive Insurance and Retirement based on fees paid. Full details will be included in an information and ratification package to follow soon.
At the WGC's request, the bargaining session began with a significant and engaging discussion about current fees and conditions for screenwriters working in animation. A working group of producers and screenwriters was established to meet regularly over the next two years to continue the dialogue.
An information and ratification package will be sent to those members who have worked under the 03-05 IPAs and/or the 06-09 IPA. The package will be sent by e-mail when available, and by regular mail for those members for whom we don't have current e-mail addresses. Please watch for it in the next week or two.
It may not be dramatic -- but I think it's probably the best deal that could have been secured under the current economic conditions, and especially with things in the TV industry being what they are now. (Full disclosure: I served on the bargaining committee that reached this agreement with the two Canadian Producers' Associations, the CFTPA and the AFPTQ.)
A couple of things to ponder as you wait for your ratification packages...
- As is true in the USA, pattern bargaining comes into play. ACTRA settled for 2% bumps in their fees, and nothing else. So securing something over that pattern, once it's established, is very difficult. But ACTRA also locked in a 3 year contract, whereas we got two. This is important, because it means that next time, we'll be up first. And that's where we want to be. Hopefully, the climate and some of the big regulatory questions will be settled by then and we'll be able to vigorously pursue some of the stuff that we need - like animation minimums. But don't kid yourself. The Producers are going to have a long laundry list of stuff next time, too.
- Bargaining dates are set well in advance. So it's just a trick of the calendar that we had to go in and negotiate one week after one of our two remaining private networks filed for bankruptcy. Not auspicious timing.
- This is a perilous time for Canada's producers, as well. There are issues that they need settled, like an ongoing compact with the Broadcasters (commonly referred to as "Terms of Trade") that gives them a baseline of rights that allows them to actually make programs. (Over the last few years the Broadcasters have been demanding -- and getting -- more and more rights for less and less of a license fee.)
- The ongoing uncertainty over the renamed and rejigged CMF, the ridiculous fight between Mommy Broadcaster and Daddy Cable over fees, and the yet-undetermined results of the license renewals of Canadian broadcast groups & CRTC review of the Broadcasting system means, well, nobody knows anything right now about where it's going.
UPDATE: A Hollywood Reporter story has more details, and a quote from both the WGC Prez and Rep from the CFTPA:
WGC president Rebecca Schechter said the latest IPA talks with producers were tailored for hard times as "all parties set aside larger issues in the interests of a unified creative community."
Schechter said a two-year deal, rather than the traditional three years, was done so that the WGC, the CFTPA and other unions and guilds can secure concessions from broadcasters, cable and satellite TV operators during upcoming industry and regulatory negotiations on a new Canada Media Fund, first-time fee-for-carriage revenue for broadcasters and station-group license renewals.
The CFTPA is also involved in terms-of-trade negotiations with broadcasters that will impact on Canadian writers and other creative talent behind indie production.
"The CFTPA believes this deal is a fair one and will bring added stability to the production sector as we enter a period of unprecedented transition," John Barrack, national executive vp and general counsel at the CFTPA, said.
5 comments:
"It's the best deal that we could get" is a phrase I've heard for years. Usually means we got nothing. And the argument was always - it's a bad time. I don't think there is ever a good time.
But I would have hoped for something on "Created By" in the IPA so we wouldn't have to hire lawyers to protect our rights. Does not require an increase in monies.
I would have hoped for script fees that were less along the poverty line, but that will never happen as we get our 2% increases - that translates this year into $291.44.
I would have hoped to see that series with over a ten episode order be required to hire an episode from a writer outside the story department. Preferably a new writer. Does not require an increase in monies paid.
Would have loved to see bibles paid at a rate that reflects per story minimums if the producer or broadcaster asks the writer for stories and not just episode ideas.
There are always many changes one wishes to see and never does.
Forever disappointed. Disillusioned and cranky.
I understand, Deb. But there's also a point where the disillusioned becomes a way to dodge in and of itself.
There were elements on your list that were brought up, and that couldn't be agreed to. Part of it takes on a different character with the two unions thing...in Quebec they have Status of the Artist legislation with teeth that makes some of those terms difficult. The couple of times where the WGC had to conclude different agreements was disastrous, so there's a problem with that.
You may not think that 2% in this climate is enough. I would love more too. But try getting people to go on strike for more. Try.
It also bears repeating that the Producers didn't come to the table with anything they wanted this time, because it's judged that we are a better ally now with Terms of Trade and such. Believe me there is stuff they want. And the "does not require an increase in monies" thing is not the easy sell you think it is.
Forgive me, I don't know the history, so I really don't know if you've ever been involved in a Labor Negotiation. The minute you go in and open up the language of an agreement, there is NO change you're going to get without giving something up. So what do you want to give up?
The stuff the Producers would be happy to take away is nothing you would probably want taken away.
You want "created by?" You want to know what they'd like in return? You won't like it -- that I promise you...
I'm not saying this is you -- but the amount of complaining from the sidelines in this business by people who won't step up in even the smallest ways is maddening sometimes.
On the other hand, the positive example I can give of good things that happen when people put themselves out and get involved beyond their complaints is the discussion by animation writers this time out. They instigated that; they came to Council, they organized and pushed for an animation committee in a way that they hadn't ever done before.
They did so because they wanted minimums, and moreover, because they wanted to stop the rates from falling, and to share in more of the agreement wins that other writers have.
This time, it led to discussion, and a committment for a working committee to look at the issue in the next couple years over the life of the agreement. Producers and Writers will keep talking about animation. You might think that's useless.
But being a guy at that table, if you had asked me if animation minimums were in the cards at any point in the next several years, I would have said no. Now I don't know if they'll happen, but I know that I am not prepared to say that they won't.
Considering the unlikelihood of writers striking in this country, I think that any gains we make are simply by being prepared, and making a good argument, backed up by as many facts as we have. We have to be smarter and better and more convincing. That's the only reason we ever gain anything at the table. But that is a whole heckuva lotta work.
I'd love to talk to you more about it next time I see you. There's stuff that one can't say in a comment on a blog.
There are so many cases where I'm right there with you in the reflexive cynicysm. But not always. It's a bit of a trap sometimes. And I feel strongly -- this is one of those times.
Being a dinosaur, trust me when I say that we've been around this pool table before. And we did try to go on strike, twice. We couldn't get a consensus among the members.
And I served on various committees to try to change certain issues of payments - also to no avail.
Don't misunderstand DMc, I applaud anyone who sits on these committees for their time and commitment.
But I remain concerned about what is not in the agreement and have for many years voted accordingly.
I think Denis is pretty much on the nose when he describes the nature of the relationship between the three parties.
I would imagine that the likelihood of a strike is about equal to that of a lockout and therefore the leverage each side has in negotiation is directly connected to how much they value the relationship they have with the other. Considering the current climate, I would guess that these relationships are valued higher than maybe ever before (and certainly higher than when there were two IPAs) and the value of this relationship, albeit obscure, can and does help out the working writer.
To the agreement, I don't know the details, but two points is two points and stability and alliance, particularly with a short term, can't be a bad thing.
As far as animation is concerned, they used to say that 'committees are where stuff goes to die', but if the animation writers can make real strides, then maybe it will lead to a way for the other changes to be accomplished in a similar manner.
These days, for an Agreement that largely works, it doesn't seem like a bad deal at all.
Agreed: the money's an improvement, as is getting the more active involvement of the animation people. Something to build on.
Post a Comment