Writers union unhappy Leno wrote jokes for show

[Praxius]

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/01/04/leno-strike-monologue.html

The Writers Guild of America (WGA), which has been on strike since Nov. 5, says late-night TV host Jay Leno broke the strike rules by writing his own jokes.

Leno's Tonight Show as well as several other late-night talk shows were all back on air Jan. 2. The shows returned without their writers except for David Letterman's Late Show and The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson, both owned by an independent company that forged a special deal with the union.

Leno revealed he had prepared a monologue he used on Wednesday night. The union says that's in contravention of its strike rules as Leno himself is a member of the WGA.

About 10,500 WGA members walked off the job on Nov. 5 in a dispute Hollywood studios and networks over how writers should be compensated for work that is distributed on the internet.

During his monologue, Leno said he was "on the side of the writers."

Union officials revealed late Thursday that WGA West president Patric Verrone had a talk with Leno on Thursday.

Guild spokesman Neal Sacharow described the conversation as "very amicable" and refused to call it a reprimand, reiterating that Leno had been a great supporter of the strike.

But there's some confusion about what the strike rules are.

Jonathan Handel, an entertainment lawyer and a former counsel to the union, said the guild's contract "is notoriously difficult to interpret."

Handel points out past contracts have allowed people to perform their own material. He doubts that Leno would be fined or be thrown out the union.

NBC issued a statement defending Leno, saying, "the WGA agreement permits Jay Leno to write his own monologue" for his show.

Meanwhile, fellow late-night host Jimmy Kimmel criticized WGA members for picketing Leno and NBC's Conan O'Brien.

"I think it's ridiculous," Kimmel said. "Jay Leno, he paid his staff while they were out. Conan did the same thing. I don't know. I just think at a certain point you back off a little bit."

Ratings for Leno and his CBS rival David Letterman bounced back as viewers flocked back to their TV sets.

Wednesday's Tonight Show broadcast averaged nearly 7.2 million viewers, up 2.2 million from Leno's pre-strike average.

Honestly now, if these guys can't write their own damn jokes for the show they're hosting, then what's the point of having them there in the first place?

I dunno, if I was making my own show, I wouldn't be paying someone to tell me what to say... if that was the case it should be their show, not mine.

Jay's monologue from what I understood was something he did while in his comedy runs before the show.... then of course doing the same thing every night, you're gonna need new material, so you get a writter to help out at times. But where do these people get off thinking that it's their right to hold that position and tell someone like Jay not to write their own material for their own show?

I mean I understand why Letterman took the route he did.... he's not even funny with the writters backing him up as it is.... without them, the show would have been in the crapper years ago.

If it was my job and my company, and I had writters bitching and moaning, or anybody bitching and moaning about their job under me, they can take a flying fok into a cactus... Plenty of other more talented people will be willing to work, and maybe it's due to my background in character animation, 3D animation, web design, advertising and all that, but I don't see writting for shows and movies all that difficult, let alone for some late night show where all they do is spout their personal comments of what happened that day.... frig anybody can do that. We do that here everyday.

 

[karrie]

This is why I'd never belong to a union. If I want to work, I'm gonna work dammit. No way am I going to be told to stifle my own voice over someone else's pissing match.

 

[Praxius]

agreed... Unions were all fine and dandy back in the industrial age where factory owners slaved their workers and payed them little, but I think their use has run out.

I certainly don't get how my father, being a teacher, has to pay Union Dues every month, how if one or two go on strike, everybody has to.... Unification I suppose.... Mini-Communism if you ask me.

Oh, but they all get to vote on if they go and strike or not Prax.... Really? There's no intemidation or pressure applied from those who want to or don't want to strike? There's no picket lines which can get violent against you if you cross it to do your job and put food on your table?

Oh but Prax, these people are fighting for their rights and a decent pay so they can feed their families and put clothes on their back.

Ok fair enough.... so is this other guy who can't sit outside by a fire pit for three months, holding up a sign and not getting paid just the same, compared to the guys who organized the strike to begin with who were already making more money then this poor sap.

Oh but Prax, they're trying to fight so this guy can get more money and get closer to the others who are paid more.

Um, ok... but wouldn't these managers and union reps also get an increase equally to this poor guy who already can't afford to miss too many days, thereby countering the balance?

Whatever happened to just sitting down with the guy or girl who hired you in the first place and dealing with them directly about your rights, pay and comp?

Now besides having one or two bosses you have to deal with all the time, now you have a friggin Union and the Union Reps taking your money and pretty much forcing you to join their union if you wish to joing the company..... so now you have even more bosses to answer to..... wtf?

 

[Pangloss]

I belong to an entertainment union, and I've hosted radio and television shows where I've had writers working for me.

First, about using writers: On my last radio show, I did three hours (five days a week) of live current events interviews and commentary, plus phone ins. There are not enough hours in any day for one person to produce and prepare that amount of material every day, let alone be in any shape to host such a show. Even still, I worked from eight in the morning until usually ten at night - often much later. Weekends? Hah! I was reading books, taping interviews for later use, researching or doing promotions for the show.

Without writers and segment producers, there would have been no show. And despite my best efforts (including giving up part of my salary) they were paid crap.

Unions (especially entertainment unions): We work odd hours, under very odd circumstances, usually with producers and promoters who are not permanent residents of our city (this is true in every city - think touring theatrical productions and stadium rock shows). Without a union, our stagehands do not have any of a number of protections our union provides: WCB, Unemployment Insurance, group health care, industry-specific safety rules, pensions, and the biggest one of them all, a guarantee that we will actually get paid.

Too often non-union promoters come into town, do a show, and leave before anyone can collect from them. With a union, we get them to post a bond guaranteeing payment - this way we don't even have to argue with them. Everything is spelled out in the contract, costs are known, and everyone works to the same conditions.

Oh yeah - with the union, there is a guarantee to the promoter that all the stagehands are qualified and certified to do their jobs. Most certainly not the case with non-union gigs.

Pangloss

 

[Zzarchov]

I'd have to agree in this case, Im all for unions as they to me, are capitalism in its best example.

Its a group of people who have something someone else wants (their time) so they band togethor to get the best possible price and conditions for that asset. When I hire staff I do the same thing, I want to buy something from them (their time) and I try to get the best deal possible for me (ie, I don't overpay).

 

[Praxius]

Well fair enough, as I said, I understand the need for writers for movies and tv sitcoms and such, because they are based around a story being told... but something like Jay Leno, where it's usually him or someone else shooting their opinions on the daily events and then follows up with guest stars whom are asked the same questions over and over again, I don't see a major requirement for writters for them.

My above comment was mainly geared with my personal logic and what I was trained to do, which is to create a character, create a scene, situation, plot, everything either on my own, or with a select few other's. In my profession and training, I not only know how to write a scene and storyline, but I can also create it from scratch if need be... although takes a lot of man hours as you said.

But the main thing I have against unions are how they attempt to control everything.

Sure they can make sure the other people you are working with are certified and trained properly for their jobs, but I am as well.... why should I have to be forced to join a union if all I want to do is do the job I enjoy doing and I personally feel my pay is satisfactory? Why should I have to suffer if the majority of everyone else in the Union feel they are being treated unfairly?

I'm here to do a job.... a job I was trained to do and get paid to do it. I sure as heck am not rich by any standards and I'm just making ends me now.... but if I want a raise or an advance in my profession, I have no union I go and complain to, I got directly to my boss. If things don't work out, fine.... I got somewhere where I will be paid more and appreciated more.... that's a job to my understanding.

I'm not out on this planet to make sure everybody else who is in my profession is treated equally to me or vice versa... I'm here to do the job I was trained to do and do it as best I can.... if my best get's me a better pay or better job then someone else, or someone else isn't being treated as fair as I am.... that's life... Life isn't fair, and that's also Capitalism.

If a bunch of people want to join a union and go on strike to get what they want, fine... such is democracy, but it is democracy. If I feel I don't want to strike and I don't agree with the Union's views and I still want to cross their picket line and work, I should be able to do so without harrassment or threats by those in the Union on strike.

But that's just me.

 

[Zzarchov]

I can agree with that Praxius, unless such was a clause you agreed to with the union.

Even then, I don't think intimidation, I think you should pay damages to your coworkers. Same as the breach of any other form of contract.

 

[Pangloss]

In not one of my union jobs do I work for the union rate: I've negotiated better pay in recognition of the amount of training and experience I have.

Our union sets base rates and conditions: everyone is free to negotiate a better deal, if they can.

And if someone wants to cross our picket line (in over a hundred years our local has yet to need to go on strike): go ahead. The strike will eventually end, that person will never, ever get into our union (and we're international), so I doubt they'll have much of a career. Promoters will rip them off, they'll have no pension or extended health benefits (in the US, no health care at all), safety rules will be, for them, non existent, the list goes on and on.

But, hey, the choice is always up to the individual.

Pangloss

 

[darkbeaver]

Anti-union eh, well have it your way, your kids will be back in the mines tommorrow.

 

[Pangloss]

DB:

It is an enduring mystery to me why people don't identify with their own class and do whatever they can to protect their interests and rights.

Pangloss

 

[darkbeaver]

DB:

It is an enduring mystery to me why people don't identify with their own class and do whatever they can to protect their interests and rights.

Pangloss

It shouldn't be a mystery Pangloss that was always the way of capitalists who offered "the wealth lottery" "the myth of personal power over collective effort" the lure of position, promise the carrot but apply the stick. There is a sucker born every minute, none are so dumb as to think they can go into the bosses office alone and emerge ahead of the company. Most people today have no idea what they owe the labour movement and that's an intended crime of the education system. The list of labour won rights and the battles fought to the death to get them is very long. Now we live and work in conditions not seen since before the second world war in many important areas of labour relations. We can thank Reagan and Thatcher for that, rot thier decadent souls. The labour movement is and always was anti-class, so where are we now, getting back to where we started a hundred years ago. Right now we work for thirty percent less than we did thirty years ago in terms of real earned wealth, but nobody believes that. And we can't raise familys because both parents have to have thier heads against the wheel. And the kids, well you might as well sell them for medical experiments, what else is left for them. That's the biggest crime in my opinion, the dismal employment future we have built for our children because we worship at the alter of Walmart. That new found wealth of the rich, guess where it came from, your pockets and the pockets of those kids.
The meanings of the terms "personal responsibility" and "individualism" "thinking outside the box(group)" as bastardised and reformed and applied by the neo-liberal globalist revolution. And we bought it hook line and sinker.

 

[Pangloss]

DB:

I understand and agree with what you've written; what I do not get is, since this is all fairly basic stuff, is why it hasn't percolated through to peoples' brains.

Pangloss

 

[Zzarchov]

Identify with their own class is rather ridiculous. We don't really have classes anymore. If I "Identified with my class" I'd be a dirt poor kid working as a seasonal farm hand. Instead I decided to use the opportunities around me and be part of a "different class".

Im all for collective bargaining, but this "class warfare" bit bothers me alot. You are only the class you allow yourself to be, if you really want to be wealthier, you can get there. Most people just don't usually want it bad enough to get it (lets face it, not everyone would sacrifice the ability to raise a family for "class" mobility)

 

[darkbeaver]

DB:

I understand and agree with what you've written; what I do not get is, since this is all fairly basic stuff, is why it hasn't percolated through to peoples' brains.

Pangloss

It's by design, try and find the histories of the labour movement in school curriculum, they are virtually nonexistant. Read praxis post, I know first hand where it came from, I dealt with it for years, exactly the same misunderstanding.

 

[darkbeaver]

Identify with their own class is rather ridiculous. We don't really have classes anymore. If I "Identified with my class" I'd be a dirt poor kid working as a seasonal farm hand. Instead I decided to use the opportunities around me and be part of a "different class".

Im all for collective bargaining, but this "class warfare" bit bothers me alot. You are only the class you allow yourself to be, if you really want to be wealthier, you can get there. Most people just don't usually want it bad enough to get it (lets face it, not everyone would sacrifice the ability to raise a family for "class" mobility)

Zzarchov believe me I know where you're coming from, reread your post, "we don't realy have classes anymore" but you decided to be part of a "different class" class is determined mostly by accumulated wealth these days instead of birth but that to still exists. "If you realy want to be wealthier you can get there" a very small minority can ever get to the top or anwhere near it, but many have wasted thier lives chaseing pie in the sky with nothing more than that old pipe dream in thier heads. As for your idea about not having classes anymore the elite laugh and laugh everytime they hear that.

 

[Pangloss]

Identify with their own class is rather ridiculous. We don't really have classes anymore. If I "Identified with my class" I'd be a dirt poor kid working as a seasonal farm hand. Instead I decided to use the opportunities around me and be part of a "different class".

Im all for collective bargaining, but this "class warfare" bit bothers me alot. You are only the class you allow yourself to be, if you really want to be wealthier, you can get there. Most people just don't usually want it bad enough to get it (lets face it, not everyone would sacrifice the ability to raise a family for "class" mobility)

Ohhh Zzarchov, you kooky Ayn Rand Thatcherite throwback you (tousles Zzarchov's hair, waits for sofa to be thrown across room)!

You say the funniest things!

Pangloss

 

[Zzarchov]

I don't deny some people are born lucky, with a lot shorter and easier road to get wealth (often as simple as not dying).

But anyone can move up if they want it bad enough. What makes most people fail is the old russian proverb "A hunter who chases two rabbits goes hungry". Most I see who fail try and juggle too many goals. They want to be wealthier, and have a family life, and have time to themselves (ie enjoy their wealth). It doesn't work that way. But you if you and your kid work really hard with ****ty family lives your grandkid may be the next Paris Hilton. Good times.

 

[Pangloss]

There always has to be room for a few to get up. . .and a few always do. I'm the first in my family to finish university, for example.

Ok, so point given.

This doesn't change the fact there will always be more at the bottom than the top - and those at the bottom need to protect their rights.

Collective bargaining is one of the most effective tools available.

Pangloss

 

[darkbeaver]

I don't deny some people are born lucky, with a lot shorter and easier road to get wealth (often as simple as not dying).

But anyone can move up if they want it bad enough. What makes most people fail is the old russian proverb "A hunter who chases two rabbits goes hungry". Most I see who fail try and juggle too many goals. They want to be wealthier, and have a family life, and have time to themselves (ie enjoy their wealth). It doesn't work that way. But you if you and your kid work really hard with ****ty family lives your grandkid may be the next Paris Hilton. Good times.

No anyone cannot move up even if moving up is all they want, while application, industrious virtuous persuit and a solid work ethic can (can) get you up in the world there are many factors designed to keep you down, don't believe that there isn't, Paris Hilton is a ****head, who in thier right mind would want to emulate that, she never worked a day in her life and possibly can't feed herself. I know lots of people who wanted all thier lives to move up, they had skills they had motivation they had oportunity but what they didn't have were street smarts (common sense) I saw them kiss the bosses ass for decades taking pats on the head and promises of advancements that were just arround the corner, well that was thier mistake they stayed because they had invested in thier positions in the mistaken belief that thier loyalty would some day be rewarded, they were wrong, if you'll work for a pat on the head and a smile from the boss and an ocasional hand full of candy for five years you'll do it for ten and if you'll do it for ten you'll do it untill they're finished with you and then you discover it's all over and you're an advanced middle-ager with a huge pot belly and a easyboy habit, don't believe me have a look arround the planets covered with them. Don't be one.

 

[Zzarchov]

@ Pangloss: I am all for collective bargaining, I think it is essential and for someone to throw that away is stupid. Those will wealth want to buy your time for as little as possible, why you would throw away a chance to sell it for as much as possible is beyond me. To me it would signal you don't care about wealth (which is fine if thats for you).

@ Darkbeaver: Yep, Paris Hilton is the quintessential Eloi. And the perfect example of what Im talking about. Don't hate her for being wealthy, her ancestors worked hard to get where to that point, passing down wealth for generations so they could have retardedly useless offspring (who will then lose said money, bringing back to square 1).

And while there are many forces working against you rising up, so what? Thats why its called rising. If you bank on loyalty to your bosses then that is just gullibility and thats just a bad move. As I said, if you really want to focus on increasing wealth then you have to actually make that your primary goal. If its not thats fine, it may even make you a better person than everyone else but you can't complain you didn't get wealthy if you didnt' really try.

If you are offered a better wage, be proffessional, but take it. Explain to your current employer what your market worth is, ask them if they want to pay the new price. If not, give them a firm handshake and wish them well. If they could afford to double your salary but didn't need to they wouldn't. If they could hire someone as good as you for half as much they would infact give you your severance pay (as they should, your wage is unrealistically high then). So taking less money in exchange for "loyalty" is your own fault.