Dennis, I think you are wrong for historical reasons:
I will explain:
In a previous post I wrote: "1) Everyone who cares about the Southern California labor movement should care about the outcome of this strike. The WGA has often been a pivotal union with-in Hollywood and the Hollywood unions have often been a focus for what has always been a very anti-Union climate in Southern California. I have written at length on this here and at my journal and don't need to repeat the history."
Now I partially quote what I wrote at my journal:
"First, of course, the writer's strike is important to the union movement in Southern California. It should be obvious to all people who know the history of the labor movement that the Southern California union movement often follows in the wake of the successes or failures of the Hollywood unions. This has been the case since the 1930s. At first, this was so, because the organization of the Hollywood unions was the big break for the union movement in an area of the country that was open shop, anti-union, and a locus for brutal union busting by the metropolitan authorities. Later, Hollywood workers' organizations were often a model for union success or for union failure in other industries. But one of the biggest reasons that Hollywood union success can spur on success in the Southern California region is because the Hollywood labor force includes among their members representatives from all important crafts in the economy as a whole -- carpenters, electricians, painters, designers and skilled workers of all sorts. Thus, for example, if painters organized a union with-in the studios in the 1930s this organization often spread to other painters in Southern California outside of the studios. If carpenters get a raise in the Hollywood unions this puts pressure on employers of carpenters through-out the region to raise wages.
"What is not largely recognized, at least by those outside the industry (and unfortunately by many IATSE members), is that the writers' union has always been a wedge union in Hollywood. It was a target of the studio bosses in Hollywood's classical period, it was a major target of blacklisting in the '50s, and it has often been the union that the corporate bosses first took aim at when intending to undercut "below the line" unions. In the immediate post-war years below the line unions showed the potential to form an industry wide union. It was the SWG, among all of the creative unions, which was most supportive of below the line militancy, and paid the heaviest price for their support. In the vision of those days the IA progressives and the SWG were united in a perspective for an industrial union that would include the creative workers, from writers to painters. In this fight against an industrial wide union the bosses considered the SWG a major threat to the moguls' creative control. The leadership of the SWG was the most militant supporters of the striking carpenters and painters at the heart of the struggle.
"It is important to know why the bosses have targeted the writers' union in the past, and are doing so now. Writers are at the heart of the central contradiction of the Hollywood system. Creative work is necessarily a free-flowing process that does not follow the rigid rules of business management. At the same time business management insists upon standardization and labor discipline. The prime motive of the business managers is profit and control. The prime motive of writers is often enough to create something that compels them. Writers, whose skills are not bounded by the specialties of screenwriting and television writing, are at the same time necessary to all forms of story-making of the movie and television industries. This often makes writers the weakest link in the business manager's plans. It is my contention that all members of the entertainment industry suffer from this same conflict between craft and creativity, on the one hand, and the effort of the owners and managers to impose labor discipline, on the other hand. For the managers and the owners of the Hollywood industries, the writers are at the heart of this conflict, and thus the writers' union has often been the main target of the Hollywood bosses."
(Quoted from "The Social Economy of a Hollywood Strike")
By the way, many writers have recognized that there needs to be something like an "industrial wide union" that will cover all workers in Hollywood. If this were ever to happen I think this will necessarily lead to a larger recognition of the creative contribution of "below the line" workers, which in my view is necessary if we are to end the artificial divide between "creative" and "below the line" workers.
Also, what is not well known about this strike is that the current WGA leadership, which has been red baited by the moguls time and time again, has done more than many more powerful unions to support the wider union movement... bringing people (sometimes "stars") out to picket lines of maintenance workers at hotels, issuing orders that unorganized hotels should not be visited. The current WGA strike has greater support of South. Cal. unions (minus the usual strike-breaking IATSE leadership) and they look upon it as their strike. Don't expect this to be reported in Variety or the New York Times, but if you read about the South. Cal. union movement you will see some of it.
Finally, if this strike is lost massively, then I think there is a big possibility that it will have an effect in California, that could spread to other parts of the country, that the smashing of PATCO had in the early 80s. On the other hand if the strike is won massively (which only could happen if the WGA holds out long enough to win other unions over to a strike strategy) then it could be a spur for an industry wide union in Hollywood, which would be significant in and of itself. But could have many spin-offs to the rest of South. Cal.
Most likely, the strike will end inconclusively, with a mixture of both victory and defeat. The DGA for instance doesn't give a damn about organizing the unorganized and is perfectly happy with the despicable "No Strike" clause, and the WGA is the first union that has been serious about striking for the unorganized in a long time.
I have to say, either an inconclusive end of the strike or a defeat for the WGA would be partially our fault on the left. We didn't recognized the significance of this strike early enough or with enough enthusiasm to provide support in our small, but significance ways.
Jerry
___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
-- Jerry Monaco's Philosophy, Politics, Culture Weblog is Shandean Postscripts to Politics, Philosophy, and Culture http://monacojerry.livejournal.com/
His fiction, poetry, weblog is Hopeful Monsters: Fiction, Poetry, Memories http://www.livejournal.com/users/jerrymonaco/
Notes, Quotes, Images - From some of my reading and browsing http://www.livejournal.com/community/jerry_quotes/