As We Were Saying...

If you're a Canadian producer, I don't know how you're not screaming that you get treated differently than big American productions on new media rights, but whatever.

From Playback (by the way, Playback Daily rocks!):

Actors and producers have a deal -- again

ACTRA, the CFTPA and its sister APFTQ on Tuesday finalized terms on a tentative three-year deal to end Canada's first-ever actors strike.

As part of the revised IPA deal, producers may choose either Option A or Option B to pay ACTRA members for performances that show up on the Internet or other new media. Option A will see actors receive a full daily rate for new media work, and then earn 3.6% of gross distribution revenues after six months of initial use. For old media converted to digital media, including TV shows, ACTRA members will this time receive a percentage of revenues from the first dollar.

Producers can also choose Option B, which allows negotiating with ACTRA on a production-by-production basis, setting minimum fees for Canadian actors.

The catch is, productions choosing Option B must be guaranteed by an approved distribution guarantor --¬ in other words, must be a U.S. studio shoot, without being designated by name as such in the IPA agreement.

Full Playback article is here.

When I Heard About "Deal Or No Deal Canada" I Didn't Think That Meant Anything Like This...

From Playback:

Hollywood studio heads have balked at Friday's handshake agreement between Canadian actors and producers to end the ACTRA strike, leaving CFTPA and ACTRA representatives to find a face-saving formula on new media residuals for the major studios so a new IPA deal can be finalized this week.

Hollywood studio CEOs flinching over payments for Internet rights on Friday caused widespread frustration among the Canadian bargainers.

For months, the industry has questioned why humble Canada had to hammer out a deal on Internet compensation before Hollywood took a crack at it.

For weeks, ACTRA urged that the issue should be side-barred to a joint committee for up to a year, likely until the SAG talks began. But the producers insisted they needed certainty, and so pushed for a deal on new media residuals.

And when they had one, the studios balked.

Words just fail.

With that I bid adieu to Canadian TV for a week. Seriously. Cold Turkey. I'm busy working a script, it's all too depressing and frustrating, and my teeth are starting to hurt from the grinding. Until at least next Monday, only happy news about Canuck TV, if even that. Daddy's getting the monkey off his back, at least for a while.

Deal Reached in ACTRA Strike

Tentative.

Details -- as they become available - at Playback.

I look forward to the dueling press releases.

You may all now return to work.

Oh...you were working already?

Um. Then...uh...never mind.

UPDATE: several people forwarded me this email from ACTRA to its members about the agreement. Thanks to all who did so.

A tentative agreement was reached today on a new IPA.

ACTRA won its points on every issue being fought in the strike.

We achieved our full pay demand.

The agreement provides members with a 10 per cent pay increase over the next
three years -- the largest pay increase achieved by a Canadian film and
television union in at least seven years.

The internet won't be free.

Residuals will be due to performers on internet use from first dollar - the
first time ACTRA has achieved SAG-style residuals in a major use category
(with one exception: dramatic productions like webisodes, made specifically
for the internet, will have a six-month basic declared use period prior to
residuals. All other productions -- ie conventional productions sold through
the internet -- will pay residuals from first dollar).

A "reopener" provision will allow the parties to revisit these terms after
the Screen Actors' Guild has negotiated its next agreement. ACTRA will use
this clause to seek further improved internet terms should SAG achieve them.

Other key deal points:

* ACTRA adjusted its low-budget terms to promote independent Canadian
production.

* New terms are set out to make the agreement work better for "reality"
shows.

* Rules governing background performance have been better harmonized between
Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto. Cash background rates will rise by 13 per
cent over the term of the agreement.

The full terms of the tentative agreement will be posted and distributed as
soon possible.

PLEASE NOTE THAT ACTRA'S STRIKE WILL REMAIN IN EFFECT UNTIL THE TENTATIVE
DEAL IS SIGNED OFF BY THE PARTIES.

Voices From The Strike-That-Wasn't

One of the things that makes the choice of turning the comment filter on so hard is the thought of losing posts like this one, from Don. Don posts his reaction to the current ACTRA strike, and how it's being handled by both the CFTPA and ACTRA and The Government.

I would love to hear more of this. Call it "Voices of the Industry." If you've been affected by the ACTRA strike or the downturn in production in Canada, email me c/o this blog at the address at left (My Dirty Little Email Addy) and write up how. I'll run a selection as they come in.

Here's what Don says about the strike:

Soon, none of this will matter. It is most likely that there will be no production in Toronto this spring. If this goes much longer we will lose the summer. I don't know how many people can hang on for six months after a few slim years. I don't know how many crew members, writers, directors, or how many support businesses can hang on. Some people will move to Vancouver where it is busy. Some will leave the business. Some, I'm sorry to say, will land on the street. If you have children to support, if you want to save for their university eduction, if you want to save for your retirement, you will have burned through your reserves. The producers have no excuse, though I wonder how many Canadian producers still make drama. 8? 11? The strike means little or nothing to someone who makes reality based programming or documentaries. I would guess that this would describe most of the members of the CFTPA. There is almost no Canadian drama left. The actors are in a very different situation. Only a small percentage of ACTRA members make their living from their craft. It is easy to raise your fist in support of a cause if you step in front of the cameras only once or twice a year. I'm not sure how the tiny number (less than 10%, I"m sure) who rely on their ACTRA work to pay the bills might feel about all of this. It is my understanding that the Government of Ontario could force matters and legislate an end to the strike. We, the film production industry, are highly labour intensive. Domestic film and television adds to our country's culture, though I'm not sure if it generates more tax money than it uses - but that's okay, in fact, it is essential if Canada is to be a country in fact as opposed to a few lines on a map - just look at how important film and television are to Quebec. The real money spinner is production for export. The foreign production that shoots here creates lots of jobs, lots of tax dollars - much more than the money spent on tax incentives. If only our local politicians viewed film production as an essential part of the economy, like a car plant. They would not stand for this. I wonder, whose responsibility is it to inform them? Why is information on the strike buried in the entertainment section? Why isn't it front and centre in the business section? Tens of thousands of people are out of work. Isn't that a major business issue? Maybe even main stream news? Perhaps when the strike is over all of the unions and major businesses will fund Film Ontario (our lobby organization) and push our issues so hard and spin them so well that every single politician will understand how much a healthy film and television industry can add to our economy and even our culture? In B.C. they seem to get it. They do get it. Here, in Toronto, we don't get it. For example, did you know that the tax incentives are structured so that filming receives a bonus for NOT shooting in Toronto? (I worked almost exclusively in Hamilton this summer for only this reason.) We'll see. I'm scanning the want ads and trying to figure out if I can move to a career in Supply Chain Management.

Don, as I type this, I'm about to get in my car and drive forty five minutes so I'm outside "the zone" in Vancouver, too. Our offices for Blood Ties are in Maple Ridge, B.C. for the same reason. Though I appreciate the sentiment behind it -- try to spread production out of the cities and to some of the surrounding areas, the practical considerations make this stupid for domestic productions. You need those tax credits to make your budget. So all it means is that you have everybody driving all over hell's half acre to get out of the city, so you can shoot a show that's most likely set in a city. It is, not to put too fine a point on it, retarded.

We shot in Hamilton this summer too. And I can see the advantages for shooting there editorially. Unlike Toronto, Hamilton looks much more like a U.S. industrial city, mid 20th century. There's a totally different look. Parts of Hamilton can look like South Boston, or Detroit, or Cincinatti or Pittsburgh or Chicago in a way that Toronto can't. But having to go there just to make your budget is dumb, and, like everything -- is hardest on the people with the least power in the system: the hardworking crews who have to drive home after 13 hours making tv.

Strike One, Strike Two...

So. The CFTPA went to court to try and put the phooey on ACTRA's continuation letters and strike.

De-Nied:

From the ACTRA release:

CFTPA FAILS IN EFFORT TO STOP ACTRA'S STRIKE

January 30, 2007 - TORONTO - The trade association that speaks for Canadian producers lost its bid to stop ACTRA's strike in Ontario's Courts today. The CFTPA failed to stop ACTRA's strike and failed to get an injunction against the continuation letters that ACTRA is offering to producers as a way of ensuring stability in the industry.

The court sided with ACTRA and stated that there was no evidence the continuation letter strategy ACTRA adopted had caused ‘irreparable harm' to the industry or the CFTPA as the CFTPA had claimed.

The court also ruled that unspecified issues should continue to be litigated before an arbitrator. Arbitrations are often lengthy. Appeals are also possible.

ACTRA called on the association to stop wasting time and money and to settle the current strike instead.

The CFTPA got one thing going, though: the judge did tell both sides to get an arbitrator.

It's hard to see how the CFTPA can spin this as a win for them. ACTRA's continuation letters keep their actors working, and CFTPA has lost its bid to quash the strike spreading to other provinces.

But wait a second...then there's this:

Provincial mediator Vince Ready has scheduled three days of negotiations between bargainers for the actors union and producers led by the Alliance of Motion Picture & Television Producers, which reps Hollywood studios and indie prodcos.

See, apparently new media ISN'T a sticking point in the B.C. negotiations. If there's a quick settlement of their strike, that kind of leaves ACTRA twisting in the wind. With SAG and WGA strikes possibly on the horizon next year over the same issue, and U.S. producers looking to stockpile material before that in a place where they can shoot...Vancouver looks like it's gonna get really busy.

I'm reminded of the Prince's last lines in Romeo & Juliet:

"All are punish'd"

ACTRA: No Actors' Strike Yet

ACTRA returned to the bargaining table. Two more days of talks, but if there's no deal Wednesday, they'll call a strike for Monday at Midnight.

By which point I'll be in B.C. where there's another contract that doesn't lapse til the end of March.

Funny old world.

That's gonna be one good looking picket line.

CBC story is here.

More Labour Pains

Further to the post directly below, commenter Caroline made a lot of good points below. So I'm exercising Executive Privilege and promoting them to post-status.

See what I did there? Got a day's free content? Hey, this broadcasting thing is easy!

Caroline writes:

I think the producers are pushing back because they're getting squeezed harder than ever before by the broadcasters, who won't put up full budget and most are looking to recoup their investment in first profit position in order to greenlight a show. And because the broadcast landscape has centralized so much here, producers are forced to make bad deals and cut corners. I think your point about companies who got fat on service work is valid, but maybe 40% of companies did foreign service work so it isn't fair to tar and feather them all as fat cats.

I sympathize with ACTRA but have also found first-hand that their negotiators are less than, well, flexible, and if you want to be treated like a partner you'd better treat others that way, too. I've always found that the compromise position with everyone feeling they gave a little is the best course, but they won't give. I also figured that a small piece of any pie is bigger than none and again, that argument didn't fly with ACTRA.

I've worked on treaty co-pros where we made up our points on everything but actors and never hired an ACTRA performer in the production.

For a long time, I think all the unions have been at cross purposes. If they spent more time working together to lobby, they would be more effective as a whole, not just with the CFTPA/AFTPQ, but also in raising their concerns to higher planes like the CRTC.

And for the record, I've been following the press release chain on the negotiations this round and all sides have conducted themselves shamefully.

I can't really quibble with any of those points. So I won't. No quibbler, I.

Labour Pains

It's amazing how, after a while, when you have to read lots of outlines in a row, everything seems to become boring or unoriginal, even when it's not.

This flattening of experience and judgement really makes me both feel for and fear Network executives and Readers who have to do this stuff all the time. It makes me think that the critical disease -- where something, anything that's different stands out, sometimes undeservedly, is one of the greatest problems facing continued storytelling in this medium. Between out there and one-in-a-million and Been there, done that, bought the t-shirt, there's a huge middle ground of solid, interesting stories that might be getting hosed just cause, you know, we've all read too much of this stuff in one sitting.

It's also humble-making, because I'm reminded again that no matter how good a teleplay or an outline may be, it's still just a blueprint, not a whole work. It's important to keep that top of mind, always.

Anyway, I was all set to hiatus for a bit more. There's the list of the next three topics I want to blog about all on sticky-note -- and this post isn't one of them. But suddenly the call I thought I had got pushed, and I've got a bit of time, and a commenter below asked a really interesting question in regards to my post on the looming possibility of a Canadian actors' strike:

The offer, according to other sources was actually 1/2/1, same as agreed to with the WGC, albeit with a year freeze on 10 out of 10 drama (which I guess would make it 0/1/2). Two questions: as a writer, would you be willing to take less of a raise than the performers? And working on a 10/10 show, would a freeze help spur more Canadian drama?

This is the problem with Canadian TV. Eventually it always comes to this -- arguing over formulas and arcana. It's our version over the endless, useless, fruitless fight over the possessory credit in the WGA.

I happen to think that the last contract for the WGC was a pretty good one, not stellar, but certainly okay to good. Most other WGC members agree with me, since it passed by a wide approval margin. Also, the thing to keep in mind was that the main issue for writers in Canada in the last negotiation wasn't necessarily wages. MOW wages got a bigger bump, and more insurance contributions, and that's great. But one of the main things we were going for was one unified agreement between the two producer's unions in Canada -- the CFTPA and APFTQ (which covers Quebec.) It was a pain in the ass, and it delayed the agreement, but it went through.

Why is that important? Well, ask the actors. They've got multiple agreements right now. The B.C. performer's union doesn't expire until March 31. That has implications for films that might have filmed elsewhere in Canada. So long as they can get them lensed by the end of March, suddenly Vancouver looks way better than Toronto right now.

The WGC also got all animation writers covered, and we got the producers to agree to WGC jurisdiction over things like webisodes, mobisodes, blah blah blah.

That's part of what ACTRA's fighting for. I'm going to lay aside the "I heard through sources" since I'm just going with what was reported. But to your first question:

as a writer, would you be willing to take less of a raise than the performers?

This is my opinion only, but I'd give that a qualified yes. Why? Well, honestly? I think if you can write, you're actually already further ahead than most actors. I think you also probably have a longer average career.

There are way more actors than writers, and way, way, way, way less of them are going to be working at any one time. As much as we complain about their outrageous and borderline personalities and insatiable egos, I do sometimes think that the average actor gets a rawer deal than the average writer. I feel sorry for them when they come in and audition. It's hard. And so few of them make any money doing it. And every time they do something, it's up there forever and they have the burden of being typecast.

On the other hand, having the actors set the agenda for the industry isn't necessarily the best strategy either. You hint a bit at that in your second question, which I'll get to in a minute. But I tend to look at it in terms of writers vs. the crew unions.

NABET/CEP and IATSE have been at war in Canada for the last few years, fighting over turf on shoots. And for the longest time, their crew agreements were tailored to the service productions that came up from the USA. Most of the crew agreements really spoke to those kinds of shows. The WGC members, who were locked out of that kind of work, were kind of lone-ily talking about the domestic industry, and getting drowned out because there were way more people working crew (or acting) than writing.

Writers were the canary in the coalmine for the downturn in the Canadian business. We got kicked first. Things sucked for us way before they dried up for the actors and the crew people. So, you know, it shouldn't be surprising that our issues as writers are a little different. We're playing a different game.

And working on a 10/10 show, would a freeze help spur more Canadian drama?

Again. My opinion only, your mileage may vary. I doubt it would do so on its own. There is a way that the Producers' have a point here, though. If you can't raise all your money domestically (which you can't) then you have to have something to deal with. And one of those things you might have some leverage on is casting an American star (or British, point is, a "name.") If you could do that, and still be 10/10, then maybe you could raise that last bit of money. I have sympathy to that position, which is something ACTRA is dead set against. I'm not sure ACTRA is totally realistic on that point.

Then again -- there are lots of sleazy dodges that the producers have pulled on writers, too. One of the reasons why we have a dearth of Canadian showrunners is because there was a fast and loose push to "certify" a lot of American guys who'd fly in and be the top Exec on a show here. They'd use courtesy credits to back door in on a 10/10 show and the real decisionmaking power wouldn't be in the Canadians' hands.

Or what about all those shows a few years ago that were shot in Toronto, but had their writing rooms in L.A., employing L.A. based writers with Canadian passports? That flouted the spirit of the agreement, but it was pretty commonplace. Labour is Labour and Management is Management, and traditionally, the adversarial system does tend to go to the "if they give a centimetre, they take a kilometre." (We're in Canada. We're metric. Deal.)

I think probably it would be good to help out the producers a little. I believe them when they say they need a bit more flexibility with casting if they're going to sell the project abroad.

Just don't give away the store.

But none of that has to do with the fact that the Producers have, for some reason, decided that they're going to go in ultra hard line and not give away anything to the actors this round, because their business is so hard. Well, it is hard. But then again, where were they when they were growin fat off all those service jobs in the 80's and 90's?

Suddenly they woke up and decided that TV is hard. And they want everyone else to pay. Well, you know what? You guys are the producers. Produce. Sweat a little.

No one's going to get anywhere in this country by screwing a group who's supposed to, ultimately, be your partner. See: CBC Lockout, Employees, Ratings, One Year Later...

Zero Zero One

There's not too often that I find myself agreeing with a bunch of actors, but the title of the above post is what the Canadian producers offered to Actors for a 3 year deal. One percent in the third year. No wonder ACTRA got a 97.1 percent strike mandate from its members.

I hate it when people play games with my livelihood. I'm with the actors on this one. Now, we may be days away from an Actors strike everywhere but B.C, which is under a separate agreement. That agreement expires the end of March.

This freaks me out a little, because I'm actually heading out to work in B.C. This is probably the first time in my life that timing has somehow worked out for me. I may, in fact, be asleep right now. That would suck.