@Poorochondriac This is happening in your neck of the woods, is it not?
It is indeed, yeah.
The proposals from the Agency group were actively insulting. Their packaging fees come out of a show's budget and gross, and their "solution" to the conflicts of interest that arise in packaging was to offer percentage points of profit. Hollywood accounting has it so that the first Michael Bay Transformers movie is still in the red, despite launching a fucking franchise and making like a billion dollars, so offering profit percentage is literally offering no money. They also said that if we kindly kept letting them take unspecified amounts of money from studios in exchange for suppressing writer's pay, they would donate some money to diversity initiatives. A nice little soupcon of guilt-trip extortion to go with the insulting offer.
The way the firing is working is, for writers repped at agencies who won't sign the code of conduct, we're all signing form letters. The guild is collecting them, and will mail them en masse. A lot of writers (especially higher-level ones) are posting screenshots of their signed letters on Twitter. It is my hope that agencies will realize that they're about to receive a fuckton of termination letters, realize the mistake they're making by choosing venture capital investments over their clients' best interests, and pull their heads out of their asses.
I signed my letter this morning. I hope my agency comes around, because I really like my agent. He took a chance on me when he didn't have to, and he helped me land my dream job. I'd love to keep working with him. But if his bosses continue to not care about my best interests, I'm gonna have to take my work elsewhere.
It's not a particular pleasant time, and there's a lot of uncertainty about how it'll shake out. But I'm proud of my union for taking a moral stand.
Isn't his business just the contacts he has? Take your business elsewhere, and him with you if he's one of the good ones.
I genuinely don't know what contracts he might be under with his agency - agency politics are (intentionally!) obfuscated from everybody. I know that some places have clauses against poaching clients when leaving, but I'm not sure if that applies to clients who fire their agent.
I hope he's able to do something like that! He's a great guy, and I'd love to keep working with him if at all possible.
The fact that the big four agencies did this for so long is unbelievably shitty; it violates basically every code of business ethics laid down since the idea came into formalized existence! That they got away with it for so long is mind boggling, and truly speaks to the excessive greed of modern corporate middlemen. I hope they get fucking bulldozed by the states of California and New York.
Delivered some donuts to the stop and shop strikers, they were extremely nice even though they already had some. I got to pet a very friendly dog! The place looked pretty empty, which was nice. Hopefully the downturn in business hits hard enough to force a negotiation soon.
@Poorochondriac have you said the things to your agent that you said about him here? Maybe if the agents themselves hear about how you want them to make a deal, they can put their own pressure on their union to come around.
@Poorochondriac have you said the things to your agent that you said about him here? Maybe if the agents themselves hear about how you want them to make a deal, they can put their own pressure on their union to come around.
Yeah, I (and everyone I know who likes their agent) has said similar things directly
A lot of agents, especially mid-and-low-level ones, are pretty pissed about how their bosses are handling this. I would not be surprised to see some big shakeups and/or mass departures happening
When would a client ever want thier agent to have such a conflict of interest?
There must be times where it would make sense but the process just started getting abused and then the abusive practice became standard.
Kind of like contract work.
Did any of the agencies sign the pledge?
He's a shy overambitious dog-catcher on the wrong side of the law. She's an orphaned psychic mercenary with the power to bend men's minds. They fight crime!
I'd imagine lower-level agents get just as screwed as the clients because of things like no-compete agreements and such.
They're supposed to be looked after by their union!
The Association of Talent Agents isn't a union.
life's a game that you're bound to lose / like using a hammer to pound in screws
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
When would a client ever want thier agent to have such a conflict of interest?
There must be times where it would make sense but the process just started getting abused and then the abusive practice became standard.
Kind of like contract work.
Did any of the agencies sign the pledge?
48 agencies have signed, up from ~30 on Friday. The signatories are mostly small/boutique agencies, but there are a couple of lower-end-of-middle agencies in there. It's progress .
The goliaths that are the big four are pretty damn goliathy, though.
When would a client ever want thier agent to have such a conflict of interest?
There must be times where it would make sense but the process just started getting abused and then the abusive practice became standard.
You would think that, but as with the source with many of these sorts of things the truth is that they were always meant to be abused. Let's take a look at the parallel case of Financial Planners and how they had to be told in no uncertain terms exactly where their fiduciary duty stood.
One of the first thing the Trump admin did was to roll back some fiduciary rules in the investment sphere that were updated at the very end, and I do mean the very end, of the Obama admin. It was something that had been in the works for some time. You may or may not have heard about them. It was over how financial planners had to put their clients ahead of their own situation. You would think that this didn't need to happen, but you would be wrong. In the last forty or so years, the situation with financial planners had become one where they were no longer strictly advisors to their clients but more salespersons for various other financial types. Disclosure wasn't happening or when it was happening, it was done in print so small and obscured that microscopes had to be used to find it. And it's not as if those financial disclosures weren't already filled with weaselly worded cya text already.
Despite the rules reversal, it would appear that one of the major certification bodies, the CFP, has gone forward with keeping it in place. It would seem that someone has enough sense to try and preserve their professional trustworthiness and standing against going for every dollar possible.
All opinions are my own and in no way reflect that of my employer.
+9
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Delivered some donuts to the stop and shop strikers, they were extremely nice even though they already had some. I got to pet a very friendly dog! The place looked pretty empty, which was nice. Hopefully the downturn in business hits hard enough to force a negotiation soon.
You are a hero.
And the afternoon shift picketers will be grateful for the donuts as well.
From somebody previously in that position, Thank you!
Delivered some donuts to the stop and shop strikers, they were extremely nice even though they already had some. I got to pet a very friendly dog! The place looked pretty empty, which was nice. Hopefully the downturn in business hits hard enough to force a negotiation soon.
You are a hero.
And the afternoon shift picketers will be grateful for the donuts as well.
From somebody previously in that position, Thank you!
Gonna do other deliveries as it goes on, maybe lunchtime pizzas, water, and trash pickup like you recommended.
If anyone is near a stop and shop I really can't recommend helping out like this enough. I am at the best of times super nervous in social situations and it was really easy to handle because everyone was so openly appreciative. Also the dog helped.
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
The agencies who don't sign on to this are going to end up fucking themselves so hard; I can't imagine SAG (and maybe even DGA) isn't going to side with WGA on this. Like, it would straight poison the well entirely if they sided with the agencies.
Nobody has "threatened" anything. The author of the piece has looked at the union bylaws. Any collective action requires the union to regulate participation in that action. Every union has similar rules - if you want the benefits of the union, you are agree to play by the union's rules.
But this article makes it sound like the union heads are grabbing members by the shoulders and threatening them, that the action is the result of coercion and extortion, when it's actually the followthrough on a near-unanimous union vote.
You know how the guild's been communicating internally? Through strike captains, and direct outreach. My strike captain sent out an email this morning reminding people that the guild needs the digital confirmation that we've followed through on our end of the collective action. That's it. A reminder, from somebody I know personally.
But that doesn't make unions seem like big scary bullies, so
A person at my old job tried to skip using sick days because they're also vacation days. They got a cold that progressed to pneumonia. In an office where a lot of people were 60+, it could have meant both them and a lot of other people getting sick to fucking death.
Any policy for sick days that isn't willing to accommodate how illness works is fucked up.
A few months ago I got really sick and though I had PTO, my coworkers get passive aggressive about using it on short notice, so everyone in the entire building ended up getting sick, I still ended up having to take 2 days off
The agencies who don't sign on to this are going to end up fucking themselves so hard; I can't imagine SAG (and maybe even DGA) isn't going to side with WGA on this. Like, it would straight poison the well entirely if they sided with the agencies.
Yeah, arent the directors and actors who are also packaged getting fucked by this deal? I assume not as fucked as the writers, but still its money out of their pockets.
It's more that for passover, food has more hoops to go through, and has more rules than just normal Kosher.
And when it's hard enough to find Kosher food to being with, finding Kosher for Passover is even harder tenfold.
Since for passover you can't/shouldn't eat anything leavened (bread, pasta, noodles, crackers, cookies) most things are made with potato starch and such, making them a bit more of a commodity.
So the food is still Kosher, and it's still in the store (two whole aisles!?!? My gosh I'm jealous beyond belief), but for now it sounds like the local community won't cross the picket lines.
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
Depends on who you ask, I guess. Later in the linked article: (non-mobile link)
Bashevkin said the strike and the decision of whether to cross the picket line is especially significant for Jews approaching Passover, Pesach in Hebrew, because the holiday is “about our rejoicing in freedom from enslavement but a message that we also need to free others and we’re eating this festival meal and we need to feed others.”
“The message of Passover is to me totally [that] you don’t celebrate your holiday at the expense of other people,” she said.
Rabbi Jon-Jay Tilsen of Beth El-Keser Israel said in an email, “Any food purchased by crossing a picket line or from scab workers is not kosher for Passover.” He said it is “a matter of well-established Jewish law.”
+18
Options
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
Depends on who you ask, I guess. Later in the linked article: (non-mobile link)
Bashevkin said the strike and the decision of whether to cross the picket line is especially significant for Jews approaching Passover, Pesach in Hebrew, because the holiday is “about our rejoicing in freedom from enslavement but a message that we also need to free others and we’re eating this festival meal and we need to feed others.”
“The message of Passover is to me totally [that] you don’t celebrate your holiday at the expense of other people,” she said.
Rabbi Jon-Jay Tilsen of Beth El-Keser Israel said in an email, “Any food purchased by crossing a picket line or from scab workers is not kosher for Passover.” He said it is “a matter of well-established Jewish law.”
Any more info on that? The article doesn't really go into that, but that sounds like it'd be a really interesting read.
A week into the Stop&Shop strike, LGM has an update. The strike is having an effect, with a good amount of shoppers refusing to cross the line, and store shelves slowly going bare as Teamsters refuse to make deliveries.
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
they picked a good time to strike.
sadly, the food store strike i was a part of was end of august in 2001. All that help I told about earlier, yeah that all stopped after 9/11. We were still on the picket line, but the community quickly turned against us.
The strike ended up going until the week before thanksgiving.
By that time a good third of our strikers had gone back to work, they couldn't afford to stay on strike with the measly $90/week we were getting from the union.
Basically, the Teamsters helping out will be immense for this. And I hope the community keeps supporting the strikers. It makes a world of difference when you don't have people throwing rotten food at you while you're on the picket line.
Nobody has "threatened" anything. The author of the piece has looked at the union bylaws. Any collective action requires the union to regulate participation in that action. Every union has similar rules - if you want the benefits of the union, you are agree to play by the union's rules.
But this article makes it sound like the union heads are grabbing members by the shoulders and threatening them, that the action is the result of coercion and extortion, when it's actually the followthrough on a near-unanimous union vote.
You know how the guild's been communicating internally? Through strike captains, and direct outreach. My strike captain sent out an email this morning reminding people that the guild needs the digital confirmation that we've followed through on our end of the collective action. That's it. A reminder, from somebody I know personally.
But that doesn't make unions seem like big scary bullies, so
More on this, in a similar vein.
Today, the WGA filed suit against the ATA over dereliction of fiduciary duties. The fuckin' editorial director of the Hollywood Reporter Tweeted this out when discussing the suit:
Sign ‘o the times: Eight writers decided it wasn’t enough for the guild to bring this suit, they wanted to be named plaintiffs.
So desperate are the trade rags to paint writers as greedy that this dude is pretending that lawsuits don't need plaintiffs. The avaricious, venal writers have signed on to the suit solely to enrich themselves, and not because, y'know, lawsuits need fucking plaintiffs.
God, the colossal dipshittery.
I saw a writer Tweet something a few days ago, down in a reply chain. Can't find it now. But he said, "You can tell where loyalties lie by the fact that newspapers always have a 'business' section and never have a 'labor' section."
Nobody has "threatened" anything. The author of the piece has looked at the union bylaws. Any collective action requires the union to regulate participation in that action. Every union has similar rules - if you want the benefits of the union, you are agree to play by the union's rules.
But this article makes it sound like the union heads are grabbing members by the shoulders and threatening them, that the action is the result of coercion and extortion, when it's actually the followthrough on a near-unanimous union vote.
You know how the guild's been communicating internally? Through strike captains, and direct outreach. My strike captain sent out an email this morning reminding people that the guild needs the digital confirmation that we've followed through on our end of the collective action. That's it. A reminder, from somebody I know personally.
But that doesn't make unions seem like big scary bullies, so
More on this, in a similar vein.
Today, the WGA filed suit against the ATA over dereliction of fiduciary duties. The fuckin' editorial director of the Hollywood Reporter Tweeted this out when discussing the suit:
Sign ‘o the times: Eight writers decided it wasn’t enough for the guild to bring this suit, they wanted to be named plaintiffs.
So desperate are the trade rags to paint writers as greedy that this dude is pretending that lawsuits don't need plaintiffs. The avaricious, venal writers have signed on to the suit solely to enrich themselves, and not because, y'know, lawsuits need fucking plaintiffs.
God, the colossal dipshittery.
I saw a writer Tweet something a few days ago, down in a reply chain. Can't find it now. But he said, "You can tell where loyalties lie by the fact that newspapers always have a 'business' section and never have a 'labor' section."
Normally, reading the comments is bad, but not in this case. Belloni is getting torn apart by everybody who is replying.
Nobody has "threatened" anything. The author of the piece has looked at the union bylaws. Any collective action requires the union to regulate participation in that action. Every union has similar rules - if you want the benefits of the union, you are agree to play by the union's rules.
But this article makes it sound like the union heads are grabbing members by the shoulders and threatening them, that the action is the result of coercion and extortion, when it's actually the followthrough on a near-unanimous union vote.
You know how the guild's been communicating internally? Through strike captains, and direct outreach. My strike captain sent out an email this morning reminding people that the guild needs the digital confirmation that we've followed through on our end of the collective action. That's it. A reminder, from somebody I know personally.
But that doesn't make unions seem like big scary bullies, so
More on this, in a similar vein.
Today, the WGA filed suit against the ATA over dereliction of fiduciary duties. The fuckin' editorial director of the Hollywood Reporter Tweeted this out when discussing the suit:
Sign ‘o the times: Eight writers decided it wasn’t enough for the guild to bring this suit, they wanted to be named plaintiffs.
So desperate are the trade rags to paint writers as greedy that this dude is pretending that lawsuits don't need plaintiffs. The avaricious, venal writers have signed on to the suit solely to enrich themselves, and not because, y'know, lawsuits need fucking plaintiffs.
God, the colossal dipshittery.
I saw a writer Tweet something a few days ago, down in a reply chain. Can't find it now. But he said, "You can tell where loyalties lie by the fact that newspapers always have a 'business' section and never have a 'labor' section."
Normally, reading the comments is bad, but not in this case. Belloni is getting torn apart by everybody who is replying.
It's almost as if writers are quick and eager to write stuff. Almost as if their career depended on it.
Nobody has "threatened" anything. The author of the piece has looked at the union bylaws. Any collective action requires the union to regulate participation in that action. Every union has similar rules - if you want the benefits of the union, you are agree to play by the union's rules.
But this article makes it sound like the union heads are grabbing members by the shoulders and threatening them, that the action is the result of coercion and extortion, when it's actually the followthrough on a near-unanimous union vote.
You know how the guild's been communicating internally? Through strike captains, and direct outreach. My strike captain sent out an email this morning reminding people that the guild needs the digital confirmation that we've followed through on our end of the collective action. That's it. A reminder, from somebody I know personally.
But that doesn't make unions seem like big scary bullies, so
More on this, in a similar vein.
Today, the WGA filed suit against the ATA over dereliction of fiduciary duties. The fuckin' editorial director of the Hollywood Reporter Tweeted this out when discussing the suit:
Sign ‘o the times: Eight writers decided it wasn’t enough for the guild to bring this suit, they wanted to be named plaintiffs.
So desperate are the trade rags to paint writers as greedy that this dude is pretending that lawsuits don't need plaintiffs. The avaricious, venal writers have signed on to the suit solely to enrich themselves, and not because, y'know, lawsuits need fucking plaintiffs.
God, the colossal dipshittery.
I saw a writer Tweet something a few days ago, down in a reply chain. Can't find it now. But he said, "You can tell where loyalties lie by the fact that newspapers always have a 'business' section and never have a 'labor' section."
Normally, reading the comments is bad, but not in this case. Belloni is getting torn apart by everybody who is replying.
It's almost as if writers are quick and eager to write stuff. Almost as if their career depended on it.
Also they have a lot of fun finding creative ways to really let loose with the insults
+8
Options
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
Nobody has "threatened" anything. The author of the piece has looked at the union bylaws. Any collective action requires the union to regulate participation in that action. Every union has similar rules - if you want the benefits of the union, you are agree to play by the union's rules.
But this article makes it sound like the union heads are grabbing members by the shoulders and threatening them, that the action is the result of coercion and extortion, when it's actually the followthrough on a near-unanimous union vote.
You know how the guild's been communicating internally? Through strike captains, and direct outreach. My strike captain sent out an email this morning reminding people that the guild needs the digital confirmation that we've followed through on our end of the collective action. That's it. A reminder, from somebody I know personally.
But that doesn't make unions seem like big scary bullies, so
More on this, in a similar vein.
Today, the WGA filed suit against the ATA over dereliction of fiduciary duties. The fuckin' editorial director of the Hollywood Reporter Tweeted this out when discussing the suit:
Sign ‘o the times: Eight writers decided it wasn’t enough for the guild to bring this suit, they wanted to be named plaintiffs.
So desperate are the trade rags to paint writers as greedy that this dude is pretending that lawsuits don't need plaintiffs. The avaricious, venal writers have signed on to the suit solely to enrich themselves, and not because, y'know, lawsuits need fucking plaintiffs.
God, the colossal dipshittery.
I saw a writer Tweet something a few days ago, down in a reply chain. Can't find it now. But he said, "You can tell where loyalties lie by the fact that newspapers always have a 'business' section and never have a 'labor' section."
Looks to me like this trade mag is ripe for unionization, in the vein of contemporary digital mags a la Gizmodo and co. Methinks they'll change their tune once they realize the benefits collective bargaining brings.
Unless the whole magazine is just cynical shills for the powers that be within the entertainment industry, in which case that will of course not come to pass.
I will not link it because of the Kickstarter rule but there's now a Stop and Shop strike fund. Donate what you can and you'll be helping out a lot of people who need it!
I will not link it because of the Kickstarter rule but there's now a Stop and Shop strike fund. Donate what you can and you'll be helping out a lot of people who need it!
I can't imagine that strike funds are kickstarters
+6
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
Eh, I figure that "link to a thing that you toss money into" kind of counts? Point is this helps even more than buying folks bagels. Although still buy them bagels!
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
+31
Options
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
Because the Globe's website is trash, here's an excerpt with the relevant details:
As in most modern-day labor disputes, the standoff was largely over rising health care costs and reductions to pension plans.
The tentative, three-year agreements between Stop & Shop and the five United Food and Commercial Workers union locals representing the workers offers increased pay for all the workers, as well as continued health care coverage and retirement benefits, both sides said.
The UFCW, in its statement, said the agreement also maintains time-and-a-half pay on Sundays for current members.
“Under this proposed contract, our members will be able to focus on continuing to help customers in our communities enjoy the best shopping experience possible and to keep Stop & Shop the number one grocery store in New England,” the UFCW said.
The agreements are subject to ratification by members of each of the five unions, the company said.
A vote on the tentative deal will take place as soon as possible, the union spokesman said.
“Today is a powerful victory for the 31,000 hardworking men and women of Stop & Shop who courageously stood up to fight for what all New Englanders want — good jobs, affordable health care, a better wage, and to be treated right by the company they made a success,” the union statement said.
This is really encouraging - workers' rejection of management's attempt to divide more-longstanding employees against new hires, as with the ploy to grandfather existing workers into benefits like shift differential for working Sundays, demonstrates a level of solidarity and forward-thinking strategy that may well have been impossible a year ago.
+26
Options
OrcaAlso known as EspressosaurusWrexRegistered Userregular
I was one of those second tier employees and it was BULLSHIT. I’m glad they’re starting to deal with that crap.
Posts
The fact that the big four agencies did this for so long is unbelievably shitty; it violates basically every code of business ethics laid down since the idea came into formalized existence! That they got away with it for so long is mind boggling, and truly speaks to the excessive greed of modern corporate middlemen. I hope they get fucking bulldozed by the states of California and New York.
Yeah, I (and everyone I know who likes their agent) has said similar things directly
A lot of agents, especially mid-and-low-level ones, are pretty pissed about how their bosses are handling this. I would not be surprised to see some big shakeups and/or mass departures happening
They're supposed to be looked after by their union!
There must be times where it would make sense but the process just started getting abused and then the abusive practice became standard.
Kind of like contract work.
Did any of the agencies sign the pledge?
The Association of Talent Agents isn't a union.
fuck up once and you break your thumb / if you're happy at all then you're god damn dumb
that's right we're on a fucked up cruise / God is dead but at least we have booze
bad things happen, no one knows why / the sun burns out and everyone dies
ohhhh
OK this thing makes a lot more sense to me now
48 agencies have signed, up from ~30 on Friday. The signatories are mostly small/boutique agencies, but there are a couple of lower-end-of-middle agencies in there. It's progress .
The goliaths that are the big four are pretty damn goliathy, though.
You would think that, but as with the source with many of these sorts of things the truth is that they were always meant to be abused. Let's take a look at the parallel case of Financial Planners and how they had to be told in no uncertain terms exactly where their fiduciary duty stood.
One of the first thing the Trump admin did was to roll back some fiduciary rules in the investment sphere that were updated at the very end, and I do mean the very end, of the Obama admin. It was something that had been in the works for some time. You may or may not have heard about them. It was over how financial planners had to put their clients ahead of their own situation. You would think that this didn't need to happen, but you would be wrong. In the last forty or so years, the situation with financial planners had become one where they were no longer strictly advisors to their clients but more salespersons for various other financial types. Disclosure wasn't happening or when it was happening, it was done in print so small and obscured that microscopes had to be used to find it. And it's not as if those financial disclosures weren't already filled with weaselly worded cya text already.
Despite the rules reversal, it would appear that one of the major certification bodies, the CFP, has gone forward with keeping it in place. It would seem that someone has enough sense to try and preserve their professional trustworthiness and standing against going for every dollar possible.
You are a hero.
And the afternoon shift picketers will be grateful for the donuts as well.
From somebody previously in that position, Thank you!
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Gonna do other deliveries as it goes on, maybe lunchtime pizzas, water, and trash pickup like you recommended.
If anyone is near a stop and shop I really can't recommend helping out like this enough. I am at the best of times super nervous in social situations and it was really easy to handle because everyone was so openly appreciative. Also the dog helped.
Nobody has "threatened" anything. The author of the piece has looked at the union bylaws. Any collective action requires the union to regulate participation in that action. Every union has similar rules - if you want the benefits of the union, you are agree to play by the union's rules.
But this article makes it sound like the union heads are grabbing members by the shoulders and threatening them, that the action is the result of coercion and extortion, when it's actually the followthrough on a near-unanimous union vote.
You know how the guild's been communicating internally? Through strike captains, and direct outreach. My strike captain sent out an email this morning reminding people that the guild needs the digital confirmation that we've followed through on our end of the collective action. That's it. A reminder, from somebody I know personally.
But that doesn't make unions seem like big scary bullies, so
A few months ago I got really sick and though I had PTO, my coworkers get passive aggressive about using it on short notice, so everyone in the entire building ended up getting sick, I still ended up having to take 2 days off
Yeah, arent the directors and actors who are also packaged getting fucked by this deal? I assume not as fucked as the writers, but still its money out of their pockets.
https://www.nhregister.com/news/amp/Jews-face-having-to-find-Passover-foods-without-13763250.php?__twitter_impression=true
It's more that for passover, food has more hoops to go through, and has more rules than just normal Kosher.
And when it's hard enough to find Kosher food to being with, finding Kosher for Passover is even harder tenfold.
Since for passover you can't/shouldn't eat anything leavened (bread, pasta, noodles, crackers, cookies) most things are made with potato starch and such, making them a bit more of a commodity.
So the food is still Kosher, and it's still in the store (two whole aisles!?!? My gosh I'm jealous beyond belief), but for now it sounds like the local community won't cross the picket lines.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
That's Cool!
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
Any more info on that? The article doesn't really go into that, but that sounds like it'd be a really interesting read.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
sadly, the food store strike i was a part of was end of august in 2001. All that help I told about earlier, yeah that all stopped after 9/11. We were still on the picket line, but the community quickly turned against us.
The strike ended up going until the week before thanksgiving.
By that time a good third of our strikers had gone back to work, they couldn't afford to stay on strike with the measly $90/week we were getting from the union.
Basically, the Teamsters helping out will be immense for this. And I hope the community keeps supporting the strikers. It makes a world of difference when you don't have people throwing rotten food at you while you're on the picket line.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
More on this, in a similar vein.
Today, the WGA filed suit against the ATA over dereliction of fiduciary duties. The fuckin' editorial director of the Hollywood Reporter Tweeted this out when discussing the suit:
So desperate are the trade rags to paint writers as greedy that this dude is pretending that lawsuits don't need plaintiffs. The avaricious, venal writers have signed on to the suit solely to enrich themselves, and not because, y'know, lawsuits need fucking plaintiffs.
God, the colossal dipshittery.
I saw a writer Tweet something a few days ago, down in a reply chain. Can't find it now. But he said, "You can tell where loyalties lie by the fact that newspapers always have a 'business' section and never have a 'labor' section."
Normally, reading the comments is bad, but not in this case. Belloni is getting torn apart by everybody who is replying.
It's almost as if writers are quick and eager to write stuff. Almost as if their career depended on it.
Also they have a lot of fun finding creative ways to really let loose with the insults
Looks to me like this trade mag is ripe for unionization, in the vein of contemporary digital mags a la Gizmodo and co. Methinks they'll change their tune once they realize the benefits collective bargaining brings.
Unless the whole magazine is just cynical shills for the powers that be within the entertainment industry, in which case that will of course not come to pass.
On my sleeve, let the runway start
I can't imagine that strike funds are kickstarters
This is really encouraging - workers' rejection of management's attempt to divide more-longstanding employees against new hires, as with the ploy to grandfather existing workers into benefits like shift differential for working Sundays, demonstrates a level of solidarity and forward-thinking strategy that may well have been impossible a year ago.