Here's another issue that needs to be addressed and one of which I was totally ignorant of, namely the lack of representation for Producers. with thanks to LESA BABB, for sending me the link to this article on IndieWire.
Brent Emery is quoted in the article:
“We’re trying to get producers to be recognized with the same benefits that everybody else has pretty much above or below the line,” Emery said. “As producers have become employees of AMPTP members, we have been left holding the bag. We have to abide by the negotiations that we have no say in, and we don’t get afforded the same pension, health care, and residuals that every other union is getting and fighting for a fair shake right now.”
Are you a Producer affrected by this? Please share your thoughts below.
https://www.indiewire.com/news/business/producers-union-interview-amptp-petition-1234891772/
3 people like this
I've known Brent Emery for years and this is a great article, that makes total sense. The studios are NOT the producers. Producers develop content for years upon years, sometimes even using their own money. We take on that challenge to make great content for the viewers.
1 person likes this
John W. Beach well said, John. So something has to change big time, in the industry. It seems that the WGA and SAG-AFTRA are talking to the wrong people!
3 people like this
Geoff Hall, well.... The studios/networks are the buyers and, sometimes, the platform for which our content will live. So, we need to studios/networks, but they need us too!
3 people like this
Being a storyboard artist, and not being locked into the other divisions out there, I'm always surprised by the bits and pieces of new knowledge that I learn by articles such as this. Some things, you just take for granted.
3 people like this
Thanks for sharing, Geoff Hall. I saw an article the other day about Disney VFX artists wanting to unionize. One artist said he quit after having to work really long hours and skip breaks. I think it's a great move for producers and Disney VFX artists to unionize. It protects them and gets them fair deals.
2 people like this
John W. Beach Hi John, I’d argue that we only need the Studios if that’s who we are releasing our film with, but there are more ways for alternatives these days. My hope is that as Indie filmmakers, we’ll develop ways of distributing our films without the Studio juggernauts.
2 people like this
Rick Lundeen agreed, Rick. I was totally unaware of this issue until I saw this article. It’s good to be informed!
2 people like this
Geoff Hall I agree, kind of... this is precisely how we've come to the situation we're in with the strikes/streamers. We need a stable business, for both indie and studio film/tv, that pays creatives fairly. To that point, sometimes indie films defer payment for creatives, which is fine, but in the long run, these filmmakers rarely get paid for their hard work. So, a pro and a con for both indie and studio/network projects...
2 people like this
First I've heard of this effort. Thanks for sharing!
1 person likes this
John W. Beach true John, but the Studios have become the architects of their own downfall. Is Indies we need to stand together and create a more equitable industry for Producers and all who are above and below the line.
1 person likes this
Seriously, the "producers union" concept is misguided at best, actually absurd. The PGA is the original failed "producers union" - formed to be a union (not actually a guild) in ~1954 - and failed because of course, producers are MANAGERS & OWNERS by definition. Who are they going to bargain with - themselves? The PGA's bid to be a collective bargaining organization was refused by the government for that reason, and their subsequent court application failed for the same reason. In other words, whether there can be a producers "uinion" or not is already settled law in California - and it cannot be. This also is the position of the Independent Producers Guild, on which I am among a number of directors with more than two decades of experience each.
2 people like this
Shadow Dragu-Mihai, Esq., Ipg Hi Shadow, so what are differences between a guild and a union, in terms of their responsibilities to those who work in the industry. How does the IPG work to protect/represent its members?
3 people like this
Producers should definitely be dropped from AMPTP -- I honestly do not know of one producer who is in support of the AMPTP right now. Deadline's strike talk has tackled this thoroughly. Here's a couple of links that look at this issue specifically (chronological from early on in the strike to last week).
https://deadline.com/2023/06/strike-talk-podcast-billy-ray-todd-garner-1...
https://deadline.com/2023/08/strike-talk-podcast-week-14-lilly-wachowski...
https://deadline.com/2023/09/strike-talk-podcast-week-18-billy-ray-jenni...
2 people like this
Laurie Ashbourne thanks for sharing the links, Laurie. I’ll check them out when I get a chance.
3 people like this
Geoff Hall Today we tend to use the term "guild" and "union" interchangeably, but that's because there are very few actual guilds left. But they are very different. The DGA is a true guild for directors, and a union for ADs& PMs. The WGA is only a union. SAGAftra is only a union. A true guild establishes best practices, procedures and qualifications for membership, being concerned with the efficacy of it's profession and the perceived reliability of it's members from the perspective of the public. For example, the Medical Board could be considered a kind of guild, as are bar associations. These organizations work to represent the broad interests of the profession - and to support them in their function and in working to advance their interests in the business environment. A union, on the other hand, is concerned with collective bargaining for employees. One downside of union is that many of them prohibit their members from taking non-union work. A guild may or may not set appropriate compensation rates, but it does not exert control where or for whom a member may work. The Independent Producers Guild is creating finance, distribution and skills acquisition paradigms for independent producers so that they can be effective and profitable on their own outside of the mainstream cartel. For producers (apart from those who are simply given the name for whatever nonfunctional reason), we are all managers and owners, and the function is entrepreneurial even in mainstream. So there is literally no rationale for a "producers union". When you ask about "protecting" our members, that's nonsensical within the workplace because the producer is the one in charge of working conditions. And the producer negotiates their own contract often with the assistance of legal counsel). The IPG is concerned however with the business economy and access to paying audience, which as every independent filmmaker has learned the hard way, the MPA/AMPTP has effectively gained exclusive control over. In this regard, we support the WGA's recent call for a RICO investigation of the studios and their subs.
Again, collectively another important and intensified discussion. For now I will highlight Geoff Hall's reply to Shadow Dragu-Mihai, Esq., Ipg's first comment and of course the significance of Shadow's related comment. However, "what's the difference between services, function and organizations" generally, are amongst very important questions that should be asked and clarified, as in many cases (business generally) circumstances tends to divert attention, one to the other and vice versa. Hope I'm clear enough for now!
1 person likes this
Please check out my podcast that dropped today THE HEART OF SHOW BUSINESS. I interview indie producer Jonathan Vanger and we expose all challenges of indie producers and how we are not being treated fairly by the Unions and the Streamers. Jonathan has produced films with Michael Caine, Paul Walker, Gary Oldman and Jessica Chastain. It's INSIDER INFORMATION!
2 people like this
https://www.theheartofshowbusiness.com/holllywood-hustle-what-you-did-no...
Thank you for the info, I wasn't aware of that...
2 people like this
The producers that I know who are in favor of a producer's union are line producers, who are middle managers. They work for more executive producers and often have lousy working conditions. They have as little control over the working conditions as the rest of the crew does. Still, Shadow Dragu-Mihai, Esq., Ipg is correct: the law is settled on this matter. Their only recourse seems to be to move up to be more executive producers and then run their businesses in a much more sane, efficient and sustainable way. I'm a DP, but I produce occasionally and know it can be done.
2 people like this
@Don Starnes - as a producer, line producer and executive producer myself (with 30+ years in the industry), I have literally NO SYMPATHY for the working conditions (allegedly poor - I have never experienced or seen that, ever, ever, ever) of those who want to have the job of a producer. If they want to be a boss, they have to pay the cost, and generally speaking they are more than adequately compensated for the work they do. The PGA nonsensically published a short article "supporting" the SAG strike early on - yet we should all understand that it's their members who are actively working with the MPA/AMPTP on what to ask for and how to negotiate with the unions (you CANNOT get into the PGA without having been in a production by a MPA/AMPTP member) Because... optics. And perhaps a perverse sense of humor. I am just pointing out the business facts in this environment. Producers are in charge of working conditions. Producers are in charge, at first instance, of profitability on a production. So in no world can they be a labor union, and in no world will they be nicer people when they become Executive Producers - because then they have even more pressure in having to answer to investors and financiers, who DGAF about the conditions. It's not really any different in any other industry.
Shadow Dragu-Mihai, Esq., Ipg thank you for your reply, Shadow, that is really helpful. As fast as the AMPTP goes, how would that change to lose the last P from the AMPTP, look like?