Like the DGA, the Writers Guild of America West doesn’t seem inclined to accept longer contract cycles with the major studios any time soon.
“I think, in this period of significant change, the notion of talking less or putting more years in between when the companies address changes and the needs of the workers strikes us as not exactly the right lesson to take away from 2023,” WGA West negotiating committee co-chair Danielle Sanchez-Witzel told Deadline during a conversation with leadership Tuesday afternoon.
In less than a week, WGA West leadership and their counterparts at the WGA East will enter the first bargaining cycle with the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers since its membership struck for 148 days to achieve its last contract in 2023. As has been reported for months and was confirmed by the WGA’s pattern of demands last week, addressing funding deficits in the unions’ health and pension plans will be the top priority this cycle.
However, WGA West leadership also makes it clear they have no plans to abandon other issues that they’ve identified as priorities for this negotiation. That includes strengthened AI protections, further adjustments to streaming residuals and backend compensation, employment measures and more.
In the interview below, Deadline spoke with WGA West President Michele Mulroney, Executive Director and chief negotiator Ellen Stutzman, and negotiating committee co-chairs John August and Danielle Sanchez-Witzel about the guild’s bargaining priorities, the state of the industry, and the internal state of the union amid its ongoing staff strike.
DEADLINE: We saw that you released your pattern of demands last week, but what else can you say about your overall strategy entering into negotiations this year?
JOHN AUGUST: Our priority is really focused on the career of film and television writers and making sure that’s sustainable, both for the individual writer and for the industry as a whole. So that includes healthcare, a health plan that actually can sustain a writer throughout their career, it includes AI protections and making sure that the money you’re bringing in as a writer is enough to sustain you in a career, job to job.
DEADLINE: You had a recent series of member meetings to discuss upcoming negotiations that were canceled due to the staff strike. How have you pivoted to communicate with members about their priorities?
MICHELE MULRONEY: We’ve put out a series of very detailed memos to the membership. They’re going to be seeing this week the excellent speech that Danielle and John were making at the member meetings that goes into a lot of detail about our agenda and our proposals. And of course, members are very good at reaching out directly to all of us and talking one-on-one. I can say that the board of directors has been asking and answering a lot of questions from members about our pattern of demands and about our goals for this negotiation. So we’ve taken time to do a lot of one-on-one outreach. I think we feel like members are focused and aware of what our agenda is.
DEADLINE: I’m hoping you can expand on that, because my next question is how you’ve developed these priorities since the last bargaining cycle? How have these issues emerged from membership?
MULRONEY: Some priorities sort of present themselves, like our health plan agenda, where the math is the math, and our members understand that. They understand that ensuring that our health and pension plans are shored up and they’re here for writers, it’s a very key part of protecting their career. So that’s, I think, pretty easy for our members to understand that we need additional contributions to the health and pension funds to ensure, as John said, that these benefits remain sustainable into the future. We’re freelance workers, and our ability to make a career and to make it through the ups and downs really relies on having the backstop of the benefits that we’ve fought so hard for over the years. So writers instinctively understand that, and they understand the math. It’s, as I think we’ve said for many months now, going to be one of the centerpieces of our agenda.
AUGUST: I would just build on that to say that we have to continue to build on all the gains that we made in 2023. So, in 2023, we started by addressing free work issues in features, including, we got a guaranteed second step for screenplays. But Michele and I and everyone knows that a screenplay isn’t done in one draft, and that means that currently a lot of writers are doing an unpaid rewrite. So we need to expand these protections on free work. Specifically, we want to go to the source of so many of those requests for free work, which is producers. If producers want to ask writers to do another draft, writers have to be paid for it.
DANIELLE SANCHEZ-WITZEL: I’ll just add that free work is a major problem on the TV side too, as the development has no calendar anymore like it used to. So, we need to protect writers working on pilots from being held exclusively and unable to find other work for long periods while the companies take their time making these decisions.
DEADLINE: Ellen, did you have something you wanted to add?
ELLEN STUTZMAN: I was just gonna say … every bargaining cycle, the guild surveys the membership to ask them about their key issues and their employment and, of course, our negotiating committee has been working since November, meeting and taking in all that feedback and all the varied experience and voices that the committee brings together to build a full agenda that meets the goals that John outlined, of a sustainable career for writers who make this business possible.
DEADLINE: I’m glad you mentioned the health fund. You mentioned in a memo to members that the screen contribution limit hasn’t been raised from $250,000 since 2004. Can you tell me more about how you’d seek to increase current contribution caps?
MULRONEY: Yeah, I mean, that’s one of the many things we’re going to be asking the companies to step up on. Yes, you’re right. They make contributions up to certain caps, and some of which they’ve refused to increase for more than 20 years now. So, we’re very overdue to get an increase there. And of course, as you understand, that’s deprived the fund of millions of dollars every year, and that’s one of the reasons we’re in the position we’re in. They do make contributions on some TV residuals, and they have for a very long time, but they don’t contribute any thing to the fund on features residuals, and it’s really time for that to change. Just generally, it’s really important to note that writers already paid tens of millions of dollars into the health fund over the last 12 years. Four percent of our current 13% contribution rate came from diverted or foregone minimum increases to writers. In other words, instead of money going directly into writers’ pockets, that money diverted for minimums, and it accounts for 30% of health funding each year. So that’s about $64 million annually. So writers, in other words, are doing their part. Now, we need the companies to step up and do their part.
DEADLINE: We previously reported that the AMPTP is considering offering an infusion into the guild’s health and pension plans in exchange for a longer contract term. Is that something that you all would be willing to consider — either tied to healthcare or not?
SANCHEZ-WITZEL: I think, in this period of significant change, the notion of talking less or putting more years in between when the companies address changes and the needs of the workers strikes us as not exactly the right lesson to take away from 2023. If the companies want stability, that can always be achieved by being willing to bargain and address the very real concerns of writers.
DEADLINE: I know that you’ve often said that it’s not necessarily the guild’s job to try to create more jobs but to protect the ones that exist in the industry, but employment is a very real concern for your members presently. In what ways do you think the guild can and should address the current employment issues at the bargaining table?
STUTZMAN: I think we always look to protect the jobs that exist in this industry. And, of course, a major gain of 2023 was ensuring that writers rooms would continue to exist and that writers will be involved in making a show from beginning to end. We’re looking to build on that. There are ways to improve that and make sure that there are enough writers working on the series that the companies do make. That’s a very important protection that didn’t exist before 2023. There was no requirement to have a writers room, and now there is, and you better believe that’s an important thing for the guild.
DEADLINE: So, when you say “improve terms for TV series employment” in your pattern of demands …?
SANCHEZ-WITZEL: The overwhelming majority of shows continue to staff above the minimum, which is really great. So, we’ll continue to improve on those provisions by looking at targeted changes in development rooms and rooms with larger episode orders, and in production where our current requirements actually exclude too many shows.
DEADLINE: On the residuals front, first I’m curious if you can give an update on the streaming performance bonus enacted in the last contract?
STUTZMAN: I’ll just say, it was a great outcome of 2023 to get the companies to factor in viewership in paying residuals for series and films made for subscription streaming services. Writers have always participated in the success of their work, and bringing that framework to streaming was critical. So that’s been a great thing for writers to see it come in, and we’ll be looking to improve on the formula in this negotiation in terms of the amount paid and how many projects qualify.
DEADLINE: And in terms of AI, what are you hoping to address?
AUGUST: In 2023, we were the first union to fight for and win these fundamental protections for writers against the encroachment of generative AI, and those protections have held up very well. What we are noticing is that as companies like Disney make their deal with Sora, the companies are going to look for ways to use their IP for AI, and that is reuse of material that writers have created. Traditionally, that is a thing that we get paid for. So, that’s a thing that we will be seeking in this negotiation.
DEADLINE: From a scheduling standpoint, why did you opt to go second this bargaining cycle, especially given that your contract expires first? Do you think, after a pretty contentious negotiation in 2023, that six weeks will be ample time to make a deal?
STUTZMAN: Well, I think we remain in conversation and have been with our sister unions about bargaining and priorities. We typically look to go in this period. This is generally when the guild bargains, as it gives us enough time to make a deal before expiration. So [we’re] just looking to stay in that window, and of course, very happy for SAG to want to be negotiating early and hoping that they get a deal that addresses their needs. We expect the companies to come to our negotiations and be ready to address writers needs.
SANCHEZ-WITZEL: I mean, this negotiation comes, as you know, off of the 2023 strike, where it took these companies 148 days to realize that they could negotiate a fair deal that addressed the very real needs and concerns of the writers who make this industry possible. So, we sincerely hope that the lesson learned from 2023 is to come to the table to bargain a fair deal right from the beginning.
MULRONEY: To build on what Danielle and Ellen just said, it’s very clear to us that they can afford what we’re going to ask. That’s the case every cycle, and it’s certainly the case here.
DEADLINE: I do have a couple of questions about the ongoing staff strike. First, I’m curious if you could speak to leadership’s perspective on where the disconnect is?
STUTZMAN: Well, I think, let me just say that, obviously, first contracts can be challenging. We have bargained in good faith. We’ve offered a fair deal, and I think that’s clear from what’s been communicated. We’ve reached out to the WGSU. I think there’s always a desire for an agreement, but I just want to say that the writers are here today to talk about their MBA and their critical negotiations. So, I think that’s the extent of what we have to say about the WGSU.
RELATED: L.A. Writers Shrug Off WGA West Award Ceremony Cancellation From Staff Union Picket Line, Urging Leadership To “Treat Our Staff Members With Respect”
DEADLINE: Leadership has tried to assure membership that the strike will not affect negotiations. From a process standpoint, that may be true, but I wonder if you can acknowledge how it might look to be entering negotiations with these internal tensions ongoing?
MULRONEY: I just want to say, Katie, that it’s important that we reinforce that this MBA negotiation is about writers and the leverage that we bring to bear, period. That’s the core of what we’re doing here. Yes, it can seem uncomfortable to have this strike going, but of course, we support the union’s right to strike, and we support all unions. But we don’t see this negotiation period as a crisis. We see it as a back and forth. And as Ellen said, the membership of the guild is confident that our WGA management team has been engaging in very good faith, and we look forward to the union having a deal.
DEADLINE: I think we’ve made it through just about every newsy topic du jour … except mergers. The WGA has already come out against any sale of Warner Bros. Discovery, but I am curious now that we seem to know which direction this is headed now, how do you think about that when you enter negotiations this year?
MULRONEY: I mean, we have been very much on the record that we believe this merger would have a detrimental effect on writers and everyone in the industry. The consolidation of two major studios, two major streaming services, two of the biggest employers of writers, would inevitably mean layoffs, fewer jobs for writers, less diversity of films and series, pressure on compensation for workers and higher prices for consumers. So for these reasons, we think it must be blocked, and we’re working diligently to get that message out there.
DEADLINE: Is there anything else you want to add before I let you go?
AUGUST: I would just circle back to say that this negotiation really is about making sure that the career of writing film and television is sustainable and that the protections that we’ve won in previous negotiations on healthcare and on AI and on fundamental writing conditions and payments can be built upon in this negotiation.
SANCHEZ-WITZEL: And I’ll just add that it’s ultimately to the benefit of the companies who rely on us to create the films and series that bring them billions.
MULRONEY: I’m hoping that the companies come to the table ready to make a fair deal, and also, recognizing that we’re not a union that gives away our power.
