See WGA’s Documents Filed With NLRB

COMMENTS (28)

• Keep it going! We can’t back down!

  Comment by JBB — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 6:20pm PST  Reply to this post

• These are things of beauty.

  Comment by Caitlin — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 6:30pm PST  Reply to this post

• This is obviously NOT a frivolous complaint — on its face it’s completely legitimate, given the pretty-much undisputed facts that the AMPTP really did break off negotiations with an ultimatum. There’s a lot of evidence to confirm what happened — for example the “Airtalk” program on KPPC when the AMPTP spokesman emphasized their unwillingness to bargain until the Guild took jurisdiction off the table.

  I’ll bet this action causes real trouble for the producers….

  Comment by Apollo — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 6:36pm PST  Reply to this post

• Love it!

  Great scoop, Nikki.

  I wonder how the AMPTP pigs are going to weasel out of this one.

  Comment by Sherilyn — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 6:44pm PST  Reply to this post

• For those interested in the law itself, you can find it here: http://www.nlrb.gov/nlrb/legal/manuals/rules/act.pdf

  I’m no lawyer, but pages 7 to 12 look to be particularly interesting as they deal with unfair labor practices and the definition of what it means to bargain collectively.

  Comment by Gil — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 6:46pm PST  Reply to this post

• Time to start mentioning the A & M words. ANTI-TRUST and MONOPOLY.

  Comment by ReelBusy — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:07pm PST  Reply to this post

• And this helps us how when the NLRB reports that they will schedule an investigation sometime in the spring? And if this is such a powerful move by Pat and Dave, why didn’t they unleash it IMMEDIATELY upon the AMPTP walking away? It took them six days to come up with this?

  Folks, we were all sold a bill of goods by Pat and Dave. Their arrogance and ignorance have shifted the focus from our valid issues to this sort of crap.

  What do you all think will happen if the AMPTP is forced back to the table? They can sit ther and say the same thing in person. ‘Take this off the table.’ We say no. ‘Take this off the table.’ We say no.

  Welcome to the living, breathing, talking ultimatum.

  I’ve known from the beginning that I’m in the minority since I do not subscribe to the philosophy that the collectivist lemming approach is a healthy strategy as our guild is driven off a cliff. Our leaders are arguing over a future that, in ten years, won’t matter. Distribution will be open to anyone with guts, creativity, and a fat digital pipe.

  We’re destroying lives and futures and careers because our leaders want a piece of a disappearing pie, when we can be baking the damn things ourselves in the very near future.

  Go ahead. Flame away.

  Comment by longtime WGA — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:17pm PST  Reply to this post

• Wow! This is huge!

  The AMPTP have really been sticking the knife in and this is the WGA pulling it back out and giving them a great kick in the balls.

  If the Director’s Guild back the WGA the AMPTP are really going to feel the pain.

  (((WGA)))

  Comment by bodnotbod — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:18pm PST  Reply to this post

• Where’s Gavin Polone on this one. I would certainly be interested in hearing his psychobabble insight (or lack thereof) on this latest development. Could it be that:

  Gavin Polone -

  Wrong on “My Super Ex-Girlfriend”…

  Wrong position on the Writer’s Guild strike…

  WRONG for America.

  Comment by Sloop John B — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:18pm PST  Reply to this post

• And there was doubt that our team knew what they were doing? The AMPTP walked right into this! They even provided a LETTER admitting to exactly what the law prevents! Read the letter again. And their press releases. God, this is beautiful.

  Comment by Ed WGA — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:19pm PST  Reply to this post

• I’m somewhat surprised we didn’t include a complaint about the unfair bargaining which caused the Strike, that is, the agreement between Parties that if we took DVD residual increase demands off the table they would offer us a fair deal on new media.

  That of course never happened and the Strike took effect.

  One other note: If indeed we can open Federal and CA State Investigations against them for this and Unfair Labor Practices, it could halt any movement on their proposed rollback of FCC Regulations which would further create a stranglehold Monopoly for them.

  I can’t fathom ANY Politicians who would push this bill in the light of Pending Investigations against them.

  It may end up being a stroke of genuis which could cost them billions more for their myopic strategy.

  Comment by PJ - Writer — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:21pm PST  Reply to this post

• God bless America!!!

  Comment by muststaystrong — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:35pm PST  Reply to this post

• Hmmm. There’s Nick Coulter’s telephone and FAX number. I wonder if about ten million fans are interested in sending him a fax to tell him how much they disapprove of him. Hmmmm.

  Comment by tentoes — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:35pm PST  Reply to this post

• HEY NICK COUNTER – EAT MY TOM SHORTS!

  Comment by muststaystrong — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:40pm PST  Reply to this post

• Traditionally, the entertainment industry stays far, far away from the NLRB, so this is a bit of a surprise. But even if there is a finding of unfair labor practices the only remedy is the Board telling the AMPTP to go back to the table. Best scenario is that the AMPTP will restart negotiations on their own before any ruling is made (which may take months or years).

  Comment by Anonymous — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:51pm PST  Reply to this post

• AMPTP.org has been revamped

  I guess that’s one way to dodge the ridicule that descended on these idiots. Come on AMPTP.com, keep up!!

  Comment by Venice — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 7:55pm PST  Reply to this post

• “longtime WGA”. Seriously, could you be more obvious? I say again, you guys really suck at this.

  Comment by Ed WGA — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 8:30pm PST  Reply to this post

• Any way you slice it, it makes ‘em look bad. Network TV advertisers be ware — the AMPTP has only their own best interest in mind, no one else’s. I believe this to be all a part of a string of prompts to get them back to the bargaining table.

  Exceedingly bad press + legal documentation + very pissed off fans and advertisers = negotiation resumption

  Comment by Lisa — Thursday December 13, 2007 @ 8:51pm PST  Reply to this post

• “The AMPTP walked right into this! They even provided a LETTER admitting to exactly what the law prevents!”

  Guys? Who appoints the NLRB? And is it more likely that he’d appoint sincere, qualified individuals who want to uphold the law or hacks who willfully disregard the law and make it up as they go? And if they do disregard the law and rule against us, we’ll take a tremendous PR hit. I really hoped we looked into the backgrounds of the current board members carefully before we filed.

  Comment by Anon — Friday December 14, 2007 @ 12:02am PST  Reply to this post

• Quotations from the South Shore Hospital case referenced by the WGA:

  During the first eight months of negotiations, the Hospital took the position that the Union’s non-economic proposals and the Hospital’s initial proposals should be discussed and hopefully resolved before wages and other economic benefits would be addressed. Consistent with that stance, and despite Union requests, the Hospital repeatedly declined to discuss wages or to make a total economic offer. Indeed, the Hospital did not present a wage proposal until the eighteenth session on March 22, 1978, approximately nine months after negotiations had commenced. By then, both sides had made certain compromises which had led to agreement on many, but not all, of the Hospital’s original proposals. Remaining unresolved were the Hospital’s proposals on call to work, leave of absence, and access of Union representatives.

  “I find and conclude that Respondent Hospital violated its statutory obligation to bargain in good faith with the Union by its repeated refusals during the course of some 18 bargaining sessions over an eight-month period to submit to the Union wage or economic counterproposals or to discuss with the Union wages or economic benefits. Respondent Hospital, during this extended period, persistently and adamantly refused to bargain in good faith with the Union over wages and economic benefits which had been proposed by the Union unless and until the Union agreed to reductions in certain existing employee benefits as proposed by the Hospital. Respondent Hospital, by its conduct, was not dealing with the Union `in a serious attempt to resolve [their] differences and reach a common ground.’ [Citation omitted.] Instead, . . . the Hospital was `rigidly and unreasonably fragmenting the negotiations * *’ and `giving the Union the runaround while purporting to be meeting with the Union for purposes of collective bargaining.’
  …
  Under the National Labor Relations Act, the Board is “authorized to order the cessation of behavior which is in effect a refusal to negotiate, or which directly obstructs or inhibits the actual process of discussion, or which reflects a cast of mind against reaching agreement.”

  This sounds pretty damn on topic to me. Almost exactly so, right down to the language about refusing to make economic proposals. The only problem of course is whether Bush’s flacks on the NLRB have any interest in doing their jobs the way they were intended.

  Comment by Simon — Friday December 14, 2007 @ 1:09am PST  Reply to this post

• As for the NLRB hacks, remember that the AMPTP, i.e., the studios and networks, are generally regarded as Democratic bastions (exceptions, of course, for Rupert et. al.) — and they’ve retained Dem PR consultants — so I’m not so sure the Repub NLRB will swing too heavily in the producers’ direction as far as the party politics are concerned –

  Comment by Apollo — Friday December 14, 2007 @ 6:39am PST  Reply to this post

• Does anybody know if the NLRB has been so packed with ultra right, extremist pro business Bush cronies that nothing will get done?

  Comment by nonewriter — Friday December 14, 2007 @ 9:11am PST  Reply to this post

• No use looking at past NRLB decisions for guidance on how they might rule – they don’t have to follow their own precedents. I know, shocking, right? But that’s how it works, a system separate from the US legal system.

  And don’t get me started on how the hearings are run. It’ll make you lose faith in democracy.

  And about the current Board – Bush appointees. Enough said.

  Don’t look to the Board for help. Best bet is that this will make the AMPTP come back to the table voluntarily, rather than facing the possibility of being ordered to.

  Comment by Anonymous — Friday December 14, 2007 @ 11:13am PST  Reply to this post

• “longtime WGA” states “Our leaders are arguing over a future that, in ten years, won’t matter. Distribution will be open to anyone with guts, creativity, and a fat digital pipe.”

  We don’t know what the future will look like. It’s entirely possible that distribution will be as you claim. It’s more probable that, as always, Big Media will still be in control of the pipeline, especially if they conquer net neutrality. (Don’t know what net neutrality is? Look it up. It’s important.) Want proof? Look no further than News Corps acquisition of MySpace.

  So, bringing in the NLRB? Good move. Especially since the AMPTP is providing such a handy dollar ticker on their website, indicating how much their non-gotiations and ultimatum have cost the writers. I say the NLRB use that figure as the basis for a fine. $111 million at last count? Sounds good to me.

  Comment by Eric — Friday December 14, 2007 @ 11:29am PST  Reply to this post

• “so I’m not so sure the Repub NLRB will swing too heavily in the producers’ direction as far as the party politics are concerned –”

  Don’t be so sure. The AMPTP bigwigs may be mostly Democrats, but they’re trying to destroy our unions. That’s something Bush’s NLRB will be more than happy to help them out with. Bipartisanship at its worst. They’re rich guys trying to screw their workers, and I’m quite sure they’ll throw a ton of cash the Republicans’ way if the NLRB plays ball which they’re ideologically disposed to do anyway.

  Comment by Anon — Friday December 14, 2007 @ 12:13pm PST  Reply to this post