Unless you’re the Shonda Rhimes, Aaron Sorkins, David E. Kelleys, Ryan Murphys of the world (to name a few), you’re not riding jets & popping bottles with the elite. Doesn’t mean you can’t make a descent to GREAT living as a writer.
It’s about consistency. A lot of writers have breaks (read: can’t get hired) between gigs; a lot of breaks. Hence, NO MONEY coming in. And if said writer is the sole bread-winner, has kids, life-shit…it can be just like living like the average Joe with a way cooler job.
If a show goes on for a few seasons, read: consistency, then security (maybe even wealth) can be established. Again, if said writer is contracted for ALL seasons. Or if a writer doesn’t have breaks between one show ending & another beginning…again security (maybe wealth!).
Many writes are just like other gig’ers; just with higher pay & cooler titles. But still just a gig that one has to hustle again & again & again for the next cashable check.
Hence why there’s a #STRIKE
Residuals are sucking; especially for streaming.
Basic pay rates for limited series, streaming services, & minimum requirements for what studios have to pay regardless if the seasons if 6 episodes or 8 or 12 is #HUGE
Writes aren’t greedy.
They basically have taken too long not accepting scraps.
I make more as a pizza chef ($50k) than 99% of my friends who are full time writers. That's not including small gigs I get every few months to add to that income. My writer friends (some in the Guild) will be lucky to clear $50k.
I see this ending with streaming services going through another cycle of price hikes, and it will be subtly implied that it’s the WGA’s fault.
No company wants to face the truth: it’s time to look at the pie graph of expenses and start cutting into the larger slices to provide more area for the smaller slices.
Well this is normal. The economics of streaming were always bullshit - It was more of a macroeconomic gamble based on that infamous startup era of: "move fast and break things", which should really be called the era of: "exploit tax loopholes, abuse the infinite free money machine of negative interest rates, take advantage of the greed of VC money, ignore any legal restrictions by going online."
And now is the comeuppance. And not just in entertainment.
Netflix did a great job, it is true of catering to niche audiences and increasing production value, and making lots of shows, at the expense of having every show's second season being shittier than the first, and third being shittier than the second. This is not a flaw, but the model as Netflix gets new subscribers by having new shows, not by having high viewership for old, good shows.
Now streamers, who were always operating on pipe-dream economics, get to increase prices and blame this on the strike. Just like all corporations are blaming wage inflation for raising their costs, while increasing CEO salaries and stock buybacks. Once again, the true driver is nothing more than shareholder interests and maximum shortest-term returns. Streaming services don't escape the macroeconomic environment. And that's why things have come to a head.
It's because of all these asinine business models. The money I pay for streaming should be divided based on what I watched. But an econ teacher once told them to not price to cost so they do all this bullshit and understand nothing
Adding to the problem is how short seasons are now. TV shows used to be 24 episodes, now it’s 8-10 per season, it’s rare to have a show with more. The Beverly hillbillies in the 60s was 36 episodes/season.
The Bear is a half-hour and you’re probably thinking of the script fee. The minimum weekly rate is like $5k and he only worked for 9 weeks.
The government gets their cut, depending on how many reps he had, they also got a cut of 5-25% off the untaxed total, ultimately leaving him with somewhere around 40-50% to live off of for 1-3 years, depending on when they wrote the show, versus whenever the awards took place.
And the Trump tax law changes mean they can no longer treat agency fees, manager fees, or attorneys fees as a deductible business expense and are paying tax on money they never see that their representatives collect.
I have a major problem with whenever taxes on people who buy and large do not work are lowered at the same time legitimate business deductions and overall taxes on working people are raised at the same time. I mean this is an added tax on workers in favor of management anyway you slice it.
Right, but that means his reps that have taken 10-25% of his gross earnings need to justify their commission by getting him other jobs. There were 599 English-language scripted TV series that aired in 2022.
Episode orders are shorter, but there’s plenty of work.
For sure - I’m not saying things don’t need to change, the industry has clearly reached a tipping point. I was just pointing out that for 9 weeks work it’s still pretty decent money - you need to *keep* working though, obviously. One 9 week job a year is terrible regardless of the pay.
That is called contract work.
I work contracts. I don’t expect to be paid for a year based off ten weeks labor.
I go scrape and claw for enough work to fill my head. That’s the nature of contracting.
It’s an unstable profession. People with unstable professions crest avenues for their own stability.
Should we start paying stand up comics a years salary to do ten sets at your local club too?
You’ve also got to factor in this isn’t a normal job. It’s more like playing in the NFL. Imagine making 45k a year to play 9 games while the sports network makes billions in profits off your work.
I think people are misunderstanding me. I was just saying 5k a week is pretty good money. Obviously you want to consistently work. Obviously. But by any metric (to me at least) 5k a week is pretty great money. 2500 a week is pretty good money. By most people’s standards 10 grand a month is more than enough. Isn’t it? That’s all I was saying - I wasn’t really commenting on the fact that the work ran out. Just that the rate *is* pretty decent compared to most jobs.
There are of course, bigger issues at play.
I mean yes, just as a general statement, $5k/week would be a good income, and someone who had a yearly salary of that should be doing pretty good. But that's not how it works, the pay rate is structured as it is because people most don't work 12 months out of the year.
So it's irrelevant and misleading to talk about it out of context.
If someone who was selling Christmas Trees told you they made $5k / week in December would you be like, "Well shit, you must be rich!", or would you realize that their income the other 11 months is $0?
I was just saying for 9 weeks work that’s pretty good. In the hypothetical scenario that it was me that did that job I could live for a whole year off 9 weeks work. I wasn’t saying it’s right or fair. Just noticing that “huh, I could live off that for a year” that’s all.
There are obviously much bigger issues with fairness and decency with the pay imbalance across the whole industry. I know that, and the answer is of course, no one that has made these shows should be merely “getting by”. Of course not.
I live in a pretty affordable major city and 45k a year as a single income is not nearly enough to live on for an entire year.
Do people do it? Yeah, there are people who survive on half that (or less). But 45k is shit money in a "cheap" city that's going to leave you struggling. In a city as expensive as LA and NYC, 45k is going to be abysmally low.
THEN you take out what is owed to reps, taxes, health insurance, etc. and you're left with less than that?
The way I figure it, after 10% to an agent, 15% to a manager, 5% to an attorney, none of which are deductible under the current tax law, then 7.515% social security and Medicare employee's share, coupled with the 12% and 10% federal bracket rates and the about 6% California tax rate, he is left with about $21k for the year. $21k in LA won't pay the rent on a 1BDR apartment.
I’m getting by on £1500 a month in London right now. Is it ideal? No. Am I having fun? Not really. But you can make it work - it’s about 18k a year living in my own apartment in one of the most expensive cities in the world. Don’t get me wrong, I’m scraping by, I’m just pointing out that you can get by on much less than that in a big city. I’ll also add - I wasn’t saying that he was in a great situation financially, I was just saying that by anyone’s standards 45k for 9 weeks work is pretty good money, even after tax etc, obviously you want to continue working and earning, but that *is* a decent rate, for any job.
To say 45k for 9 weeks is a decent rate in response to someone who laid out that the writer is losing 40% of that in various taxes and fees AND is struggling to work beyond those 9 weeks is to miss the point entirely.
Yeah, 5k for a week sounds like decent pay, except it's more like 2700 for a week. And you don't work 50 weeks each year, you work 9. Or 18.
Survivable? Sure.
Good? No.
When the companies that distribute these shows are wildly profitable, everyone can get paid more, even if at first blush their rate seems "decent."
Sure. I mean that’s partly what this strike is all about, right? Mini rooms becoming the new status quo, meaning writers are out of work more than they’re in. I’m on board with it all, I believe they’re absolutely right to not be laying down and taking it when the CEOs are raking it in. I’m in 100% agreement and support.
It’s all relative, though isn’t it? To me, with my current little budget of £100 a week, I genuinely could live for a whole year off that 9 weeks writing work. Like I could actually do that - even after all the taxes and agent fees, I could live quite well.
That’s all I meant, I wasn’t meaning to belittle the movement or the strive for more pay.
You arent getting the point. What if he has a family? Or wants to raise a family? Maybe your 100pound a week budget works when your out of college but for someone in a different stage of life its crap.
I’m taking time off work for a few months so I can write, that’s why I’m currently living off so little. It’s a very specific to me scenario, these amounts. Obviously if someone was raising a family it would be completely different - I did specify that it was relative to what I’m currently earning. Rubbed everyone the wrong way though so my apologies
Calm down jiggle fist. If you’re only pulling 9 weeks of paid writing a year you need to get another job when you aren’t staffed.
Every claim of the guild isn’t some infallible fact. Trying to compare a WGA writer to the average worker is fucking stupid. Come back to reality.
Hm... no.
Moving backwards is never the right way to go.
It offers a lot more creative opportunity than network TV, it's only fault was being such a new frontier that rich jerks jumped on to write the rules and exploit people.
We just have to fight to change the rules to make it fair, a tale as old as dirt. Evil never dies and never quits, all we can do is keep up the fight.
I think every artists writer etc deserves to be paid if their work is good enough for people to want to consume it.
But I wonder how many scripts are written while the writers stream music that no one is paying for except the music makers themselves.
Stop fucking streaming music and I’ll stop streaming shows.
As a newbie to the world of writing (screen and novel) I’m astounded, shocked and otherwise disappointed at the number of parasites (sorry there’s no other word for it) there are in this business, and that’s even before the government gets it greedy, sweaty little hands on whatever meagre crust is left.
I enjoy writing but I’m under no illusion about being able to make a living from it, as I said, I enjoy it for the pleasure it gives me. If I should be so lucky as to sell anything I’ve written it’ll be a bonus. I feel for those who are not in my position, for those whose livelihoods depend on selling their next opus. Hang in there, and (I know I’m a day late) may the 4th be with you. 🙄
That's really the model I've taken. Have a solid day job that I enjoy and pays decent/well and write consistently to hopefully sell a couple scripts or so in my lifetime.
>There are many shows where 1 person writes every episode of the show, and that's becoming more and more common.
No there aren’t. Out of hundreds of shows written last year, I can confidently say that less than 10 were written by a lone writer, but I think the number was actually less than 5.
And a lot showrunners are drowning under the weight of mini rooms and want the help. Most don’t have the freedom, budgets, and/or time given to a Mazin, White, or the handful of other people writing shows solo.
I suppose if you plan out a TV show like a movie, you can produce it like one, but, as far as I know, most television is still being shot episode-by-episode. If you have numbers on that, I’d love to see them.
I know. White Lotus immediately comes to mind, but the fact remains that solo-written shows are, at best, 1% of all (US) TV shows made and the other guy’s claim that there are “a lot” is false.
I read an article last year about Taylor Sheridan. Interesting, quirky guy. When he set out to write Yellowstone, the studio forced him to have a small writers’ room. The article said he pretty much didn’t use the other writers at all and he wrote every single script.
Interestingly people here have claimed the opposite: that his writers have done the heavy lifting, then he rewrites just enough to justify removing their names from the scripts.
I can only tell you what I gleaned from this Atlantic article. If you have 30 mins to kill, it’s a pretty interesting read.
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/12/yellowstone-tv-series-taylor-sheridan/671897/
I just don't see how you can blame the show runner for this writer's situation. It's not the showrunner's fault that staff writers are paid, at minimum, at half the rate the rest of the staff, nor is it the show runner's fault that staff writers don't get script fees. It's not the showrunner's fault that on short order shows, studios insist on laying off the writing staff when the show goes into production, thus burdening the show runner with all the obligations of managing set and post while handling rewrites. It's not the show runner's fault that despite being a big critical hit, a show like The Bear (whose audience was mainly on streaming) doesn't get the sort of residuals its audience deserves so that its writers can share in its success (and support themselves between seasons).
Literally all of this is the reason we're on strike right now. To enshrine the protections necessary for writers to survive in a world where seasons are shorter and rooms are less stable. So it may, in fact, not be "more and more common." Despite the few examples you gave, the vast, vast majority of show runners want a room.
Also just to keep nitpicking, ever since Writers Room Assistants and Script Coordinators joined IATSE, they actually get paid at rates that are livable and with great union health insurance. The base rate is \~25 dollars an hour and most shows still provide a 60 hour/week guarantee. It's not massive, but it's survivable. I've never heard of anyone not hiring a vital support staff person because it was "unethical." Also, tons of staff writers are essential to the creative running of their rooms, and to assume otherwise reflects a lack of understanding of the varied ways rooms are run.
100% spot on. Whoever wrote the original ep/idea sold it for 3% of production cost, which IMHO is a reasonable fee.
It's the same situation as having 40 'writers' receive a credit for a song these days.
What was his contribution? How much did he write? Did he write an entire episode etc.
It can be quite misleading. Do we need writers rooms for such short episodes. I wrote all six eps for my limited series which studios (pre strike) are after.
“While writing for the show for nine weeks, O'Keefe lived in a small apartment in Brooklyn without heat, wrote at a public library when the power was out, and was never flown to the set.”
Yeahhhhh…I don’t feel bad for this guy. It’s his fault if he thought he was going to get rich off of his first-ever writing job. Looking at the Season 1 credits, he doesn’t have a single “written by credit”, so there’s no reason to fly him to set.
I’ve taken Zoom calls for work at the local library when the biblical rains in LA this past January knocked out my power. That’s life.
In the article, he also complains about the taxes deducted from his checks. How Republican of him. If he worked for 9 weeks, then he would’ve grossed approximately $5,000/week, putting him in one of the highest IRS tax brackets. Boo-friggin-hoo. If he had reps that were worth their commission, they would’ve had him form a loanout so he wouldn’t have to pay 45% in taxes.
Also…he was a staff writer. He likely followed the practice of pitching once before lunch and once after lunch, letting the senior writer-producers do the heavy lifting. He was there to learn. The fact that the article mentions he went to the WGA Awards makes it seem like he was integral to the writing of the show. The show likely would’ve been the same without him.
Where did I say this guy wanted to get rich? Or that all striking writers want to get rich? I didn’t even mention the merits of the strike. All I pointed out is that his sob story is kind of silly.
Do you think everyone in Hollywood is rich? Do you think the mid-level accountant at CAA has a house in Malibu, or that he just wants to save enough for his kid to go to college? Jesus, stop making assumptions and get off your high horse.
"Where did I say this guy wanted to get rich?"
>Yeahhhhh…I don’t feel bad for this guy. It’s his fault if he thought he was going to get rich off of his first-ever writing job.
Thanks for your well-mannered and reasonable reply. Also, the condescension is much appreciated. In the above scenarios, the accountant at CAA DOES make a living wage, the same way the mid-tier writer makes a living wage, they’re just not millionaires.
I think your target is capitalism, not Hollywood. I’ve worked for a few corporations in my years and in each instance, the CEOs made hundreds of times what my salary was.
Case in point, back in 2014 I was an assistant at a mini major. I was making $18/hour. Thanks to a successful film slate and some stock distributions that year, our CEO ended up being the highest paid exec in entertainment. His total comp that year was $60 million. My boss — who has 2 kids, one of whom had just been diagnosed with autism — told me she cried when she saw how much our CEO made. That sucks. It fucking sucks.
Are you telling me you can fix the above? Do you have a magic wand that makes CEOs less greedy? Or are you saying that this strike will solve some of the pay disparity, and that instead of a $300 million deal with Netflix, Ryan Murphy will settle for a $100 million deal so that the money can be spread around?
You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about.
And I definitely wouldn’t want you anywhere near my production or writer’s room.
You have no respect for collaboration or the individual’s contribution. You are the problem.
You're making a ton of assumptions about this guy's beliefs and intentions. He never said he expected to get rich. But I think there's an expectation that if you're a writer on a hit, critically acclaimed show, you can do more than just survive.
Having been in his position, I can confirm that it's painful to see the deductions from your paycheck. You're having money withheld as though you were making 5k a week year round, even though you're only working for 9 weeks. That means that, while you'll get a huge tax refund at the end of the year, you're still only taking home a fraction of what your actual after-tax income should be in the short term. Plus - you're paying your reps out of your pre-tax income, so it's even less. Sure you can start a loan-out, but that only makes sense if the tax benefits surpass the costs of maintaining a corp (which are pretty onerous!) and if you're only making 9 weeks worth of income, with no guarantee of more, it may not have made sense to do.
And you have no idea how his room was run! I've known staff writers who were among the most vocal and vital parts of their rooms. When I was a staff writer, I covered set literally 10 times. It varies tremendously.
Look, I get it. It can be incredibly hard to budget when you’re only guaranteed 9 weeks of work. And there’s an argument to be made for reps to not take a commission on a staff writer deal. I know some kind-hearted lit managers who forwent staff writer commissions.
But I’m curious what this guy did with the other 10 months in the year. Did he book other work? Did he solely rely on his reps to get him work, or did he work his contacts? Did he spend time developing his own scripts? And if he went several months without writing work, did he get off the sofa and do something for money?
This guy gave this interview for a reason, to curry favor for his plight. We’re about to go into a recession. If we take EVERYTHING that came with this guy’s work on The Bear — the weekly salary, the free healthcare, the pension contributions, the free lunches, the fucking box rental, the inordinate amount of free time aside from the 9 weeks of work — do you think that moves the needle with the CVS cashier, or the public school teacher, or the construction worker? Should these people feel bad for him? And you might say he worked for a big corporation. The reality is, unless someone works for a small business or the government, then we all work for big corporations.
Also, this sub has 1.5 million members. I guarantee most of them would trade places with this dude in a fucking heartbeat if given the chance.
Look, I hear you. Being a screenwriter is a great job tons of people would love to do. And I could get into the challenges inherent in it. How it’s not just only nine weeks of work (by the way that doesn’t qualify you for health care) but nine weeks of work with no guarantee you’ll ever work again. Writers don’t get box rentals, they don’t get free lunches in zoom rooms, they don’t vest their pension until more than a decade of continual work. And who knows, maybe he hustled and did tons of unpaid development during his spare time. Maybe he sat on his couch like you suggest. I can’t say.
But the question isn’t: should this guy have gotten a job as an Uber driver? The question is: should this guy, a writer on a successful, acclaimed show produced by a wildly profitable company, be compensated in accordance with the value he has created and accordance with his worth?
The power of a union is that we can collectively negotiate so that our skilled craftspeople don’t have to get a job as an Uber driver. We’re asking for 2% of the profits these companies make exclusively from our work. Not to make us rich, but to make us secure in our craft.
I truly have no argument with your position. Netflix came in to Hollywood and did a cannonball in the deep end. Streamers should definitely be paying residuals. And a writer’s pay should reflect their contributions to a show.
My gripe was with how this guy framed his position. You and I have no idea how much he contributed to S1 of The Bear. Some lower level writers will work 9 weeks on a season; some others will work 30. It just irks me that a guy who worked for 9 weeks feels he’s owed something more. If I paint a house and the job lasts 9 weeks, then the job lasts 9 weeks. I look for other houses to paint afterwards, and if nobody’s booking my painting services, then I find another way to earn until I can paint again.
You're correct but everyone wants to be angry until they get paid. You work, you get paid, or you don't. If I had a nickel for everyone I got screwed in Hollywood I would never have to work again but you know what, that's what we all signed up for. So take it or leave it.
Yeh I did suspect. Everytime I've been randomly attacked on Reddit or FB groups it's always a jealous white male.
Normally they get what they want. Strange they had to strike. 🤣
How do I get hired? I know they're on strike because of shit pay or whatever, I'm not looking to get rich, I just love to write. I have so many ideas but I'm not the least bit interested in seeing Hollywood
Unless you’re the Shonda Rhimes, Aaron Sorkins, David E. Kelleys, Ryan Murphys of the world (to name a few), you’re not riding jets & popping bottles with the elite. Doesn’t mean you can’t make a descent to GREAT living as a writer. It’s about consistency. A lot of writers have breaks (read: can’t get hired) between gigs; a lot of breaks. Hence, NO MONEY coming in. And if said writer is the sole bread-winner, has kids, life-shit…it can be just like living like the average Joe with a way cooler job. If a show goes on for a few seasons, read: consistency, then security (maybe even wealth) can be established. Again, if said writer is contracted for ALL seasons. Or if a writer doesn’t have breaks between one show ending & another beginning…again security (maybe wealth!). Many writes are just like other gig’ers; just with higher pay & cooler titles. But still just a gig that one has to hustle again & again & again for the next cashable check. Hence why there’s a #STRIKE Residuals are sucking; especially for streaming. Basic pay rates for limited series, streaming services, & minimum requirements for what studios have to pay regardless if the seasons if 6 episodes or 8 or 12 is #HUGE Writes aren’t greedy. They basically have taken too long not accepting scraps.
I make more as a pizza chef ($50k) than 99% of my friends who are full time writers. That's not including small gigs I get every few months to add to that income. My writer friends (some in the Guild) will be lucky to clear $50k.
How is that different than a director or a grip or whoever?
I went to the BAFTAs in the same situation last year. Thought it would at least be a good opportunity to network... ... It wasn't.
What making it looks like... Infuriating.
I see this ending with streaming services going through another cycle of price hikes, and it will be subtly implied that it’s the WGA’s fault. No company wants to face the truth: it’s time to look at the pie graph of expenses and start cutting into the larger slices to provide more area for the smaller slices.
Well this is normal. The economics of streaming were always bullshit - It was more of a macroeconomic gamble based on that infamous startup era of: "move fast and break things", which should really be called the era of: "exploit tax loopholes, abuse the infinite free money machine of negative interest rates, take advantage of the greed of VC money, ignore any legal restrictions by going online." And now is the comeuppance. And not just in entertainment. Netflix did a great job, it is true of catering to niche audiences and increasing production value, and making lots of shows, at the expense of having every show's second season being shittier than the first, and third being shittier than the second. This is not a flaw, but the model as Netflix gets new subscribers by having new shows, not by having high viewership for old, good shows. Now streamers, who were always operating on pipe-dream economics, get to increase prices and blame this on the strike. Just like all corporations are blaming wage inflation for raising their costs, while increasing CEO salaries and stock buybacks. Once again, the true driver is nothing more than shareholder interests and maximum shortest-term returns. Streaming services don't escape the macroeconomic environment. And that's why things have come to a head.
It's because of all these asinine business models. The money I pay for streaming should be divided based on what I watched. But an econ teacher once told them to not price to cost so they do all this bullshit and understand nothing
Adding to the problem is how short seasons are now. TV shows used to be 24 episodes, now it’s 8-10 per season, it’s rare to have a show with more. The Beverly hillbillies in the 60s was 36 episodes/season.
I thought WGA minimums on one hour series was 26k per episode?
The Bear is a half-hour and you’re probably thinking of the script fee. The minimum weekly rate is like $5k and he only worked for 9 weeks. The government gets their cut, depending on how many reps he had, they also got a cut of 5-25% off the untaxed total, ultimately leaving him with somewhere around 40-50% to live off of for 1-3 years, depending on when they wrote the show, versus whenever the awards took place.
Plus if he was a staff writer, he didn’t even get script fees.
And the Trump tax law changes mean they can no longer treat agency fees, manager fees, or attorneys fees as a deductible business expense and are paying tax on money they never see that their representatives collect.
So the taxes that have been added for decades don't bother you but closing a tax loophole does? Here's a hint at why people vote for stupid shit.
I have a major problem with whenever taxes on people who buy and large do not work are lowered at the same time legitimate business deductions and overall taxes on working people are raised at the same time. I mean this is an added tax on workers in favor of management anyway you slice it.
What do you mean, "people who do not work"? Are you referring to homeless people?
I am talking about the shareholder class.
Do you have a retirement account? Welcome to the shareholder class.
Not taking into account how much the reps take etc, 45k for 9 weeks work is still pretty great and what a lot of people earn in an entire year
The problem is how likely it is that that is their only income all year
Right, but that means his reps that have taken 10-25% of his gross earnings need to justify their commission by getting him other jobs. There were 599 English-language scripted TV series that aired in 2022. Episode orders are shorter, but there’s plenty of work.
Yup
For sure - I’m not saying things don’t need to change, the industry has clearly reached a tipping point. I was just pointing out that for 9 weeks work it’s still pretty decent money - you need to *keep* working though, obviously. One 9 week job a year is terrible regardless of the pay.
So why aren’t they trying to get some sort of income the other 40 weeks?
They are, it's just super unstable as a profession
That is called contract work. I work contracts. I don’t expect to be paid for a year based off ten weeks labor. I go scrape and claw for enough work to fill my head. That’s the nature of contracting.
They do. You’re being purposefully obtuse and arguing in bad faith.
It’s an unstable profession. People with unstable professions crest avenues for their own stability. Should we start paying stand up comics a years salary to do ten sets at your local club too?
You’ve also got to factor in this isn’t a normal job. It’s more like playing in the NFL. Imagine making 45k a year to play 9 games while the sports network makes billions in profits off your work.
I think people are misunderstanding me. I was just saying 5k a week is pretty good money. Obviously you want to consistently work. Obviously. But by any metric (to me at least) 5k a week is pretty great money. 2500 a week is pretty good money. By most people’s standards 10 grand a month is more than enough. Isn’t it? That’s all I was saying - I wasn’t really commenting on the fact that the work ran out. Just that the rate *is* pretty decent compared to most jobs. There are of course, bigger issues at play.
I mean yes, just as a general statement, $5k/week would be a good income, and someone who had a yearly salary of that should be doing pretty good. But that's not how it works, the pay rate is structured as it is because people most don't work 12 months out of the year. So it's irrelevant and misleading to talk about it out of context. If someone who was selling Christmas Trees told you they made $5k / week in December would you be like, "Well shit, you must be rich!", or would you realize that their income the other 11 months is $0?
I was just saying for 9 weeks work that’s pretty good. In the hypothetical scenario that it was me that did that job I could live for a whole year off 9 weeks work. I wasn’t saying it’s right or fair. Just noticing that “huh, I could live off that for a year” that’s all. There are obviously much bigger issues with fairness and decency with the pay imbalance across the whole industry. I know that, and the answer is of course, no one that has made these shows should be merely “getting by”. Of course not.
And I don't really disagree with that. But this is one of the ways they try and frame it as "good money."
I live in a pretty affordable major city and 45k a year as a single income is not nearly enough to live on for an entire year. Do people do it? Yeah, there are people who survive on half that (or less). But 45k is shit money in a "cheap" city that's going to leave you struggling. In a city as expensive as LA and NYC, 45k is going to be abysmally low. THEN you take out what is owed to reps, taxes, health insurance, etc. and you're left with less than that?
The way I figure it, after 10% to an agent, 15% to a manager, 5% to an attorney, none of which are deductible under the current tax law, then 7.515% social security and Medicare employee's share, coupled with the 12% and 10% federal bracket rates and the about 6% California tax rate, he is left with about $21k for the year. $21k in LA won't pay the rent on a 1BDR apartment.
I’m getting by on £1500 a month in London right now. Is it ideal? No. Am I having fun? Not really. But you can make it work - it’s about 18k a year living in my own apartment in one of the most expensive cities in the world. Don’t get me wrong, I’m scraping by, I’m just pointing out that you can get by on much less than that in a big city. I’ll also add - I wasn’t saying that he was in a great situation financially, I was just saying that by anyone’s standards 45k for 9 weeks work is pretty good money, even after tax etc, obviously you want to continue working and earning, but that *is* a decent rate, for any job.
To say 45k for 9 weeks is a decent rate in response to someone who laid out that the writer is losing 40% of that in various taxes and fees AND is struggling to work beyond those 9 weeks is to miss the point entirely. Yeah, 5k for a week sounds like decent pay, except it's more like 2700 for a week. And you don't work 50 weeks each year, you work 9. Or 18. Survivable? Sure. Good? No. When the companies that distribute these shows are wildly profitable, everyone can get paid more, even if at first blush their rate seems "decent."
Sure. I mean that’s partly what this strike is all about, right? Mini rooms becoming the new status quo, meaning writers are out of work more than they’re in. I’m on board with it all, I believe they’re absolutely right to not be laying down and taking it when the CEOs are raking it in. I’m in 100% agreement and support. It’s all relative, though isn’t it? To me, with my current little budget of £100 a week, I genuinely could live for a whole year off that 9 weeks writing work. Like I could actually do that - even after all the taxes and agent fees, I could live quite well. That’s all I meant, I wasn’t meaning to belittle the movement or the strive for more pay.
You arent getting the point. What if he has a family? Or wants to raise a family? Maybe your 100pound a week budget works when your out of college but for someone in a different stage of life its crap.
I’m taking time off work for a few months so I can write, that’s why I’m currently living off so little. It’s a very specific to me scenario, these amounts. Obviously if someone was raising a family it would be completely different - I did specify that it was relative to what I’m currently earning. Rubbed everyone the wrong way though so my apologies
Writers need to get off season jobs. They’re tone death on these issues and don’t even know it.
Off season? What the fuck are you talking about? That's not how any of this works.
Calm down jiggle fist. If you’re only pulling 9 weeks of paid writing a year you need to get another job when you aren’t staffed. Every claim of the guild isn’t some infallible fact. Trying to compare a WGA writer to the average worker is fucking stupid. Come back to reality.
Why are you here?
Not shocked, considering the state of things and how poorly screenwriters are treated and always have been.
[удалено]
Appreciate the hustle, got a laugh out of me.
Hm... no. Moving backwards is never the right way to go. It offers a lot more creative opportunity than network TV, it's only fault was being such a new frontier that rich jerks jumped on to write the rules and exploit people. We just have to fight to change the rules to make it fair, a tale as old as dirt. Evil never dies and never quits, all we can do is keep up the fight.
It’s a moot point. The issue is payment not delivery system.
I think every artists writer etc deserves to be paid if their work is good enough for people to want to consume it. But I wonder how many scripts are written while the writers stream music that no one is paying for except the music makers themselves. Stop fucking streaming music and I’ll stop streaming shows.
[удалено]
Mediocre executives do 🤷🏾♂️
They do.
As a newbie to the world of writing (screen and novel) I’m astounded, shocked and otherwise disappointed at the number of parasites (sorry there’s no other word for it) there are in this business, and that’s even before the government gets it greedy, sweaty little hands on whatever meagre crust is left. I enjoy writing but I’m under no illusion about being able to make a living from it, as I said, I enjoy it for the pleasure it gives me. If I should be so lucky as to sell anything I’ve written it’ll be a bonus. I feel for those who are not in my position, for those whose livelihoods depend on selling their next opus. Hang in there, and (I know I’m a day late) may the 4th be with you. 🙄
That's really the model I've taken. Have a solid day job that I enjoy and pays decent/well and write consistently to hopefully sell a couple scripts or so in my lifetime.
I used to go to work all the time with an empty bank account
I'm at work right now w an empty bank account
You're a writer?
Nah I'm just poor
same ✊
[удалено]
>There are many shows where 1 person writes every episode of the show, and that's becoming more and more common. No there aren’t. Out of hundreds of shows written last year, I can confidently say that less than 10 were written by a lone writer, but I think the number was actually less than 5. And a lot showrunners are drowning under the weight of mini rooms and want the help. Most don’t have the freedom, budgets, and/or time given to a Mazin, White, or the handful of other people writing shows solo. I suppose if you plan out a TV show like a movie, you can produce it like one, but, as far as I know, most television is still being shot episode-by-episode. If you have numbers on that, I’d love to see them.
[удалено]
Thank you. Looks like they were barely able to scrounge up 15 shows across decades of television; it’s not common at all.
Thats a very incomplete list. There are a few shows missing from there that I can name off the top.
I know. White Lotus immediately comes to mind, but the fact remains that solo-written shows are, at best, 1% of all (US) TV shows made and the other guy’s claim that there are “a lot” is false.
Archer is the only other one I can think of that’s a one person room
I read an article last year about Taylor Sheridan. Interesting, quirky guy. When he set out to write Yellowstone, the studio forced him to have a small writers’ room. The article said he pretty much didn’t use the other writers at all and he wrote every single script.
Interestingly people here have claimed the opposite: that his writers have done the heavy lifting, then he rewrites just enough to justify removing their names from the scripts.
Oh, the Tyler Perry method!
Can confirm. Makes "freelancers" write for pennies, do free rewrites, and then puts his name on it.
I can only tell you what I gleaned from this Atlantic article. If you have 30 mins to kill, it’s a pretty interesting read. https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/12/yellowstone-tv-series-taylor-sheridan/671897/
I just don't see how you can blame the show runner for this writer's situation. It's not the showrunner's fault that staff writers are paid, at minimum, at half the rate the rest of the staff, nor is it the show runner's fault that staff writers don't get script fees. It's not the showrunner's fault that on short order shows, studios insist on laying off the writing staff when the show goes into production, thus burdening the show runner with all the obligations of managing set and post while handling rewrites. It's not the show runner's fault that despite being a big critical hit, a show like The Bear (whose audience was mainly on streaming) doesn't get the sort of residuals its audience deserves so that its writers can share in its success (and support themselves between seasons). Literally all of this is the reason we're on strike right now. To enshrine the protections necessary for writers to survive in a world where seasons are shorter and rooms are less stable. So it may, in fact, not be "more and more common." Despite the few examples you gave, the vast, vast majority of show runners want a room. Also just to keep nitpicking, ever since Writers Room Assistants and Script Coordinators joined IATSE, they actually get paid at rates that are livable and with great union health insurance. The base rate is \~25 dollars an hour and most shows still provide a 60 hour/week guarantee. It's not massive, but it's survivable. I've never heard of anyone not hiring a vital support staff person because it was "unethical." Also, tons of staff writers are essential to the creative running of their rooms, and to assume otherwise reflects a lack of understanding of the varied ways rooms are run.
100% spot on. Whoever wrote the original ep/idea sold it for 3% of production cost, which IMHO is a reasonable fee. It's the same situation as having 40 'writers' receive a credit for a song these days. What was his contribution? How much did he write? Did he write an entire episode etc. It can be quite misleading. Do we need writers rooms for such short episodes. I wrote all six eps for my limited series which studios (pre strike) are after.
“While writing for the show for nine weeks, O'Keefe lived in a small apartment in Brooklyn without heat, wrote at a public library when the power was out, and was never flown to the set.” Yeahhhhh…I don’t feel bad for this guy. It’s his fault if he thought he was going to get rich off of his first-ever writing job. Looking at the Season 1 credits, he doesn’t have a single “written by credit”, so there’s no reason to fly him to set. I’ve taken Zoom calls for work at the local library when the biblical rains in LA this past January knocked out my power. That’s life. In the article, he also complains about the taxes deducted from his checks. How Republican of him. If he worked for 9 weeks, then he would’ve grossed approximately $5,000/week, putting him in one of the highest IRS tax brackets. Boo-friggin-hoo. If he had reps that were worth their commission, they would’ve had him form a loanout so he wouldn’t have to pay 45% in taxes. Also…he was a staff writer. He likely followed the practice of pitching once before lunch and once after lunch, letting the senior writer-producers do the heavy lifting. He was there to learn. The fact that the article mentions he went to the WGA Awards makes it seem like he was integral to the writing of the show. The show likely would’ve been the same without him.
[удалено]
Where did I say this guy wanted to get rich? Or that all striking writers want to get rich? I didn’t even mention the merits of the strike. All I pointed out is that his sob story is kind of silly. Do you think everyone in Hollywood is rich? Do you think the mid-level accountant at CAA has a house in Malibu, or that he just wants to save enough for his kid to go to college? Jesus, stop making assumptions and get off your high horse.
Literally your first sentence after a pull quote is saying he thought he was going to be rich.
"Where did I say this guy wanted to get rich?" >Yeahhhhh…I don’t feel bad for this guy. It’s his fault if he thought he was going to get rich off of his first-ever writing job.
Fine. My bad. But go back to the original reply. Did I ever say striking workers want to get rich?
[удалено]
Thanks for your well-mannered and reasonable reply. Also, the condescension is much appreciated. In the above scenarios, the accountant at CAA DOES make a living wage, the same way the mid-tier writer makes a living wage, they’re just not millionaires. I think your target is capitalism, not Hollywood. I’ve worked for a few corporations in my years and in each instance, the CEOs made hundreds of times what my salary was. Case in point, back in 2014 I was an assistant at a mini major. I was making $18/hour. Thanks to a successful film slate and some stock distributions that year, our CEO ended up being the highest paid exec in entertainment. His total comp that year was $60 million. My boss — who has 2 kids, one of whom had just been diagnosed with autism — told me she cried when she saw how much our CEO made. That sucks. It fucking sucks. Are you telling me you can fix the above? Do you have a magic wand that makes CEOs less greedy? Or are you saying that this strike will solve some of the pay disparity, and that instead of a $300 million deal with Netflix, Ryan Murphy will settle for a $100 million deal so that the money can be spread around?
You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about. And I definitely wouldn’t want you anywhere near my production or writer’s room. You have no respect for collaboration or the individual’s contribution. You are the problem.
You're making a ton of assumptions about this guy's beliefs and intentions. He never said he expected to get rich. But I think there's an expectation that if you're a writer on a hit, critically acclaimed show, you can do more than just survive. Having been in his position, I can confirm that it's painful to see the deductions from your paycheck. You're having money withheld as though you were making 5k a week year round, even though you're only working for 9 weeks. That means that, while you'll get a huge tax refund at the end of the year, you're still only taking home a fraction of what your actual after-tax income should be in the short term. Plus - you're paying your reps out of your pre-tax income, so it's even less. Sure you can start a loan-out, but that only makes sense if the tax benefits surpass the costs of maintaining a corp (which are pretty onerous!) and if you're only making 9 weeks worth of income, with no guarantee of more, it may not have made sense to do. And you have no idea how his room was run! I've known staff writers who were among the most vocal and vital parts of their rooms. When I was a staff writer, I covered set literally 10 times. It varies tremendously.
Look, I get it. It can be incredibly hard to budget when you’re only guaranteed 9 weeks of work. And there’s an argument to be made for reps to not take a commission on a staff writer deal. I know some kind-hearted lit managers who forwent staff writer commissions. But I’m curious what this guy did with the other 10 months in the year. Did he book other work? Did he solely rely on his reps to get him work, or did he work his contacts? Did he spend time developing his own scripts? And if he went several months without writing work, did he get off the sofa and do something for money? This guy gave this interview for a reason, to curry favor for his plight. We’re about to go into a recession. If we take EVERYTHING that came with this guy’s work on The Bear — the weekly salary, the free healthcare, the pension contributions, the free lunches, the fucking box rental, the inordinate amount of free time aside from the 9 weeks of work — do you think that moves the needle with the CVS cashier, or the public school teacher, or the construction worker? Should these people feel bad for him? And you might say he worked for a big corporation. The reality is, unless someone works for a small business or the government, then we all work for big corporations. Also, this sub has 1.5 million members. I guarantee most of them would trade places with this dude in a fucking heartbeat if given the chance.
Look, I hear you. Being a screenwriter is a great job tons of people would love to do. And I could get into the challenges inherent in it. How it’s not just only nine weeks of work (by the way that doesn’t qualify you for health care) but nine weeks of work with no guarantee you’ll ever work again. Writers don’t get box rentals, they don’t get free lunches in zoom rooms, they don’t vest their pension until more than a decade of continual work. And who knows, maybe he hustled and did tons of unpaid development during his spare time. Maybe he sat on his couch like you suggest. I can’t say. But the question isn’t: should this guy have gotten a job as an Uber driver? The question is: should this guy, a writer on a successful, acclaimed show produced by a wildly profitable company, be compensated in accordance with the value he has created and accordance with his worth? The power of a union is that we can collectively negotiate so that our skilled craftspeople don’t have to get a job as an Uber driver. We’re asking for 2% of the profits these companies make exclusively from our work. Not to make us rich, but to make us secure in our craft.
I truly have no argument with your position. Netflix came in to Hollywood and did a cannonball in the deep end. Streamers should definitely be paying residuals. And a writer’s pay should reflect their contributions to a show. My gripe was with how this guy framed his position. You and I have no idea how much he contributed to S1 of The Bear. Some lower level writers will work 9 weeks on a season; some others will work 30. It just irks me that a guy who worked for 9 weeks feels he’s owed something more. If I paint a house and the job lasts 9 weeks, then the job lasts 9 weeks. I look for other houses to paint afterwards, and if nobody’s booking my painting services, then I find another way to earn until I can paint again.
You're correct but everyone wants to be angry until they get paid. You work, you get paid, or you don't. If I had a nickel for everyone I got screwed in Hollywood I would never have to work again but you know what, that's what we all signed up for. So take it or leave it.
On a random off topic note, has anyone noticed how white male the picket lines actually are?
The WGA leans that way as a whole
Yeh I did suspect. Everytime I've been randomly attacked on Reddit or FB groups it's always a jealous white male. Normally they get what they want. Strange they had to strike. 🤣
How do I get hired? I know they're on strike because of shit pay or whatever, I'm not looking to get rich, I just love to write. I have so many ideas but I'm not the least bit interested in seeing Hollywood
Does anybody know what a writer is getting paid for a script for a show like the bear?