One We Missed
An interesting comment from Steve Diamond on the succession at the AMPTP now that former AMPTP chief negotiator Nick Counter has passed away.
“his replacement, Carole Lombardini, likely does not have the same ability to hold the Producers together as a collective bargaining group and at the same time she may prove a more aggressive opponent as she will be likely under pressure to prove herself.”
Personally, I think the guilds would be better off to decertify AMPTP as bargaining partner, and end the perverse situation of pattern bargaining being used against unions instead of as a weapon in their arsenal. It also allows for the possibility of targeted strikes, which would really increase the competitive pressures on the targeted company(s). Misery loves company –being alone enhances paranoia about ones putative allies and creates its own imperative to settle as projects and ad dollars go to those “allies” instead, and the board and shareholders start clamoring for something to be done.
In my view, AMPTP was a more rational choice for a bargaining partner in a long era of incremental change. Well, change isn’t looking so very incremental at this point, and I seriously question whether an entity as large and diverse as AMPTP is capable of putting together a large enough cross-section of its plankholders to really consider and implement significant change if bargained with as a group. Vision very rarely happens by committee, and the bigger the committee, the less likely it is to happen at all, or be recognized and supported by the majority if it does.
I don’t think the guilds have the ability to “decertify AMPTP as bargaining partner.” As long as the studios have authorized the AMPTP as their multiemployer bargaining representative, the refusal of SAG or any other affected union to bargain with this representative would be deemed an unfair labor practice for violation of the duty to bargain in good faith.
Nothing requires all the studios to keep their bargaining authority with the AMPTP, of course, and an individual studio could pull out and cut a separate deal with the various guilds. There are some strict rules on withdrawing from multi-employer bargaining units, particularly where funding levels of the P&H plans might lead to imposition of an “exit fee.” But it’s not beyond the realm of possibility.
VG
I think you’re wrong about the legal situation, tho possibly you make a good point about complexities of p&h contributions.
My understanding is that under anti-trust law it is only the affected unions voluntary agreement to bargain with a multi-employer entity that makes it legal in the first place. Otherwise it would be a violation of anti-trust law for the companies to do so, to share the the costs, to share the information and bargaining strategies, etc.
And that, as such, each union has the right to withdraw that voluntary agreement at any time and return to bargaining company-by-company.
Of course, there are costs to the unions of doing so as well, and perhaps now is not the best time with other fish to fry like perhaps making an effort at SAG/AFTRA unification.
If the feeling on the union side is that the technology/market situation hasn’t ripened enough and gained enough clarity to make a really big change in the status quo yet, then perhaps now is not the time. If the feeling is that another “log-rolling” contract with another sunset clause is the way to go, with perhaps a tweak here and there, then I think AMPTP is still a reasonable partner for that kind of thing.
But if a real revolution is to happen at some point in the future, I think AMPTP is not up to that by its very structure, whenever that “future” is felt to be imminent/arrived.
Oh, if you’re wondering about how I came by that legal understanding, it was from some back and forth with Ted Elliott on the old United Hollywood board during the WGA strike. Those of you who are familiar with Ted’s views on the labor situation in Hollywood will know that Ted has never been a fan of the Patric Verrone/Alan Rosenberg wing, and is well respected for his command of detail and history on these issues.
http://www.nlrb.gov/nlrb/legal/manuals/outline_chap14.pdf
It seems the main limitation is that neither union nor individual employer may withdraw from a multiemployer bargaining situation *during negotations for a contract* except under particularly unusual circumstances. It may not be used as a tactic to impact ongoing negotations. However, there’s nothing stopping either side from withdrawing right after negotiating one contract and well before negotiations on the next contract would commence.
How can Steve D say that Carole “likely does not have…”?
On what basis is he making such a statement?
She has been in the game for 27 years and knows all the players.
If they didn’t have faith in her they would have gone outside to look for someone new. If they didn’t like sticking together, even with their different ideas, they would have said by by long ago.
I think that things will stay as they are. She will fight hard for her side–we will fight hard for ours. And as long as everyone promises to listen we will continue to make more money with every contract and the producers will continue to make more money with every movie and every TV show.
If you’re coming from an incremental place, that’s a reasonable thought process. And frankly, I haven’t seen a ton of evidence proving that the “new media” model has proved itself since the signing of the DGA deal to the point where a majority of guild members would feel comfortable just “blowing up” a generation worth of structures in search of a revolution. It seems to me that a lot of detoriation we’ve seen the last year is economy-driven rather than business-model driven. And time and bandwidth (for both leadership and membership) is starting to run short. It’s less than a year now to when SAG is obligated to start negotiations on the next contract. It might be just too late for the next cycle already to start thinking in a revolutionary direction.
“Log rolling” (with another sunset clause and some tweaks) probably seems like a much safer course to many –maybe even a majority.
Tho it is also worth considering that the next contract will run to 2014, and it is at least a little worrisome to me to think how the landscape may have changed by then, particularly for broadcast television.
Here’s another flyer. . .tho I think it would work best if done across all the guilds.
How would you feel about all the guilds writing AMPTP a letter in the near future offering to extend all their contracts (including the sunsets) by one year at the current terms?
We are in a disinflationary period, if (hopefully) not a deinflationary one. I can’t see that such an arrangement would materially harm the guilds by forgoing COLA type increases right now.
That might be a reasonable way to buy everyone some time without changing the status quo or locking anyone into longer-term arrangements.
I can’t find Steve Diamond’s “take” on String Theory? Can someone help?
I’m fairly sure it mocks the moderates position on string theory, while noting the disquieting connections to David White’s ties to what’s-his-name the sleazeball and mentioning in a footnote in one point font that White has not yet been convicted of anything as of yet.