Writing careers in film and TV are uneven. A lucrative year can be followed by a year with no work at all, or at least, no paid work.
Residuals are one way that writers sustain themselves. And since 2000, the Writers Guild of America has also had a “points” system that allows them to maintain health coverage when they’re not employed.
“You can afford to take a year or two where you’re not necessarily bringing in current money, but you’re creating potential new shows, and in that time you don’t have to take a lesser job,” said Daniel Petrie, Jr., who was president of WGA West when the benefit was first negotiated. “It’s very hard to move up if everybody has to take whatever job they can get in whatever year in order to adequately protect their family.”
But in the face of rising health care costs and the industry contraction, that system is being significantly curtailed. The WGA agreed to a deal on April 4 that slows the rate at which points are accrued and increases the cost in points to maintain a writer’s current coverage.
“You’re essentially getting rid of the points system,” said Marc Guggenheim, a writer and frequent critic of the union. “It’s not just that the point system has been diminished as to almost be non-existent. It’s the fact that banked points are being devalued retroactively. That’s like paying into Social Security and not being able to draw a Social Security check.”
The deal must still be ratified in a vote that begins on Thursday and runs through April 24. There has been some grumbling about the health plan changes on writers’ private Facebook groups. The WGA negotiating committee is holding Zoom sessions with the membership to explain the coverage changes and answer questions.
“Change is always hard,” said Michele Mulroney, the president of WGA West, in an interview. “Our members need time to absorb these changes and get educated about them, and that’s what we’re in the process of doing right now.”
According to the guild, in a typical year about 400 writers would use their points to get health care. But during the streaming boom, a lot of writers accumulated a lot of points, and in the bust, found themselves needing to use them. Now some 1,200 writers are getting coverage from points.
The cost of the system has swelled from single-digit millions to nearly $40 million and rising — at a time when the health fund is running $50 million deficits.
“None of these changes were taken lightly,” Mulroney said. “But simply put, we can’t afford for the current system to continue.”
Currently, a writer who works steadily for 10 years would bank one to three years of extended Anthem coverage. Under the new system, those making more than $200,000 would bank about half that; those earning less, nothing.
Writers who have already banked points can still use them. But if they want to stay on Anthem, coverage won’t last as long as they expected. A writer previously eligible for 24 months will now get 15. Retaining 24 months requires switching to Centivo, a narrow network plan.
Mulroney said the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers wanted even greater changes. “We fought that off,” she said.
Writers who earn enough to be eligible for health coverage currently pay zero monthly premiums, and only $50 for a family. Those premiums are going up to $75 and $200, respectively, for Anthem coverage, or $25 and $75 for Centivo. The deal also includes higher deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums. In exchange, the companies agreed to put $321 million into the health fund to keep it solvent.
The WGA also reluctantly agreed to a four-year contract instead of the typical three. Danielle Sanchez-Witzel, co-chair of the negotiating committee, said the studios wanted to go to five.
“Keeping our health plan on a sustainable path was our top priority,” she said. “The longer deal was theirs. Agreeing to a four-year deal this time, we got more in new funding for health than we’ve ever gotten before.”
The longer term means an extra year without the threat of an industry shutdown, and after a bruising strike in 2023, the studios were willing to pay for stability. But that threat is also the writers’ primary source of leverage, and they don’t plan to make a habit of going longer than three years without it.
“By no means does this mean we are happy to stay at four years forever,” Mulroney said. “So, TBD on what the term of the contract will be next time.”
The longer term also means that the WGA will have to wait an extra year to address developments on artificial intelligence, which was among the key drivers of the strike. John August, the other co-chair of the negotiating committee, said that the companies did not try to roll back any of the AI protections won in the strike, and will continue to meet with the union to discuss the issue over the next four years.
The WGA wants writers to be paid if their scripts are used to train AI models. But there is, as yet, no licensing market for that — AI companies having generally taken what they want for free. If that changes, the studios and the WGA will talk over what sort of compensation writers might be entitled to.
“Do we expect that this is going to be a windfall for writers over the next term of the contract? Probably not,” August said. “But it’s important for us to have transparency into what these deals look like, so we know what this market is shaping up into.”
During the strike, the studios’ offer to hold AI meetings was seen by writers as a poor substitute for meaningful protections. But those meetings have actually gone well, August said, in a sign that the interests of studios and writers may be more aligned than it first appeared.
“That’s been incredibly useful and constructive,” August said. “So hopefully, over the next period of the contract, we’ll be able to keep up that dialogue and really have insight into what’s happening here.”
Leave a Reply