Hollywood writers, agencies go past brink; mass firings begin
NOW IT gets real. And ugly.
Negotiations between Hollywood writers and agencies over an expiring agreement ended on Friday not with a deal but a fusillade of accusations. In a highly unprecedented situation, the writers have now been asked by their guild to fire their agents. A number of prominent ones say they will.
“Notify your agency in a written form letter that they cannot represent you until they sign the Code of Conduct,” the Writers Guild of America said to members, referring to the document that requires that agents no longer collect controversial fees.
“Despite our best efforts, today’s outcome was driven by the Guild’s predetermined course for chaos,” volleyed the Association of Talent Agents, which represents agencies, including the so- called “Big Four” of WME, CAA, ICM and UTA with which the WGA has its quarrel.
A number of writers — including Daniel Chun (“The Simpsons”), Chrissy Pietrosh (“Cougartown”), Nancy Kiu (“Castle”), David Simon (“The Wire”) and Jay Kogen (“Frasier”) — have already gone public with their agent firings.
“I’ve had the same agent for almost 20 years. I owe him a lot. But I owe the writers who came before me and the ones who are still to come, so much more,” Pietrosh wrote.
The sides have been unable to come to terms on a new franchise agreement, which grants agents the power to represent writers. That agreement expired last weekend. The WGA’s firing comes after a week of negotiating under a provisional extension.
“We agreed to the extension in the hope the agencies were serious about realigning their interests with ours,” David Goodman, president of the WGA West, said in an interview with
The Post. “But their proposals didn’t address the inherent conflict of interest. It became clear that the extension was not productive, not leading to a solution we could bring to members.”
The ATA’s executive director, Karen Stuart, was not available for comment, a spokeswoman said.
At issue are packaging fees, a cornerstone of agency revenue. Those fees come from studios, which pay a percentage of a show’s budget and profits to agencies that put together clients on a project. Writers say they create a conflict of interest that harms writers and their salaries. Agents say the fees benefit all parties.
The labour strife comes at a moment when the market for content is high thanks to new players from Silicon Valley. But the WGA says they are not being cut in on profits proportionally.
The parties have been on a collision course for months and particularly seemed destined to meet head- on when the writers agreed two weeks ago, in an internal guild vote, to require the code of conduct banning fees.
The code, which has been viewed by The Post, requires that “no agent shall accept any money or thing of value from the employer of a Writer,” essentially prohibiting packaging fees, which come from studios. It also requires that agencies divest of burgeoning production studios, another point of conflict.
Negotiations continued on Friday until about 3 pm Pacific Time. At that time, the two sides left without an agreement. Later on Friday, the WGA made available a customisable letter that writers could send their agents.
“Under WGA rules I can no longer be represented by you for my covered writing services,” it read. “Once your agency is again in good standing with the Writers Guild we can reestablish our relationship.
Goodman hailed the “solidarity of our membership, of people saying unless a new code of conduct is signed you can’t represent me anymore.”
In an ATA’s note on Friday released to the media, it decried the party on the other side of the table. “The WGA leadership today declared a pathway for compromise doesn’t exist.”
The group called the code of conduct a document that “will hurt all artistes, delivering an especially painful blow to midlevel and emerging writers, while dictating how agencies of all sizes should function.” No new talks are scheduled. Because there has never been a mass firing of agents in modern Hollywood, the consequences of the action are unclear.
Unlike the writers’ strike against producers initiated in 2007, writers will continue working. But the staffing of existing shows and the setting up of new ones are very often handled by agents, which means existing shows could see a slowdown in output while new series could reach the air more slowly.
The WGA has assured that this is not the case.
Some in Hollywood remain skeptical, though, saying agents are a key cog in the process, and without them writers will not be hired as quickly.
The WGA has also empowered showrunners to staff shows and also authorised lawyers and managers to negotiate as agents would.
But a letter from the ATA’s lawyers disputed the legality of the latter move.
“The WGA cannot delegate authority it does not have,” the letter, from the firm of Latham & Watkins, said in a message to WGA leaders. It cited California and New York laws requiring those acting as agents procure a licence.
A number of very small agencies have said they will sign the code. But mid-level ones below the Big Four — the kind that could attract a mass migration of Hollywood writers —have stood thus far in solidarity with the ATA.
It’s also possible some WGA members could take a demoted status at the guild, known as financial core, and refuse to fire their agents, though historically very few have done so.
That leaves very few options, insiders say. With no new negotiations, the odds of lawsuits, which both sides allow is possible, have increased. In the meantime, many in the business continue to debate which side is right — and, as of Saturday, not making writer deals with agents.