News

WGA Screen Credit Proposals

June 11, 2008—New York, NY Sindy Gordon
In a letter from the presidents, the WGA West & East announced "informational meetings in LA and NY for writers to discuss the proposals with the Committee members and to generate ideas for additional amendments which we can put to a membership vote at a later date. We encourage all writers who care about the credit determination process to attend these meetings, submit a statement (whether pro or con) for inclusion in the ballot materials, and engage in further review and discussion of the process."

Credits Review Committee Statement

Fellow Writers:

Credit for authorship goes to the very heart of what we do. It is an emotional topic, and at times the debates over credits have created schisms where unity is desperately needed.

The Credits Review Committee comprises writers like you, who are keenly aware that our system needs improving. How to improve it has always been the difficult question. In the past, some Credits Review Committees struggled to find common ground between disparate groups of writers.

This Credits Review Committee is different.

Composed of WGAW and WGAE members, the Committee is a philosophically diverse group appointed to fairly represent all theatrical film writers with differing viewpoints on credits, the role of the first writer, the role of subsequent writers, the role of “production executives” and the manner in which credit arbiters perform their duties.

We are happy to announce three proposed changes to our Screen Credits Manual. This Committee has approved each of these proposed changes unanimously. Final approval rests with you. These proposals certainly don't solve all our credits issues, but we believe them to be a strong first step, and we're resolved that with your counsel and participation there will be more improvements to come.

The first proposal requires arbiters to consult with each other via teleconference in all cases where a decision is not unanimous. Currently, arbiters are not allowed to discuss their views with each other or communicate in any way. The Committee feels that by talking over their decisions in an anonymous, Guild- hosted teleconference, the arbiters will have an opportunity to give the reasons for their decisions to their peers and consider other interpretations of the material and the rules. The Committee believes this proposal will go a long way toward improving the quality of our arbitrations and decreasing the number of split decisions.

The second and third proposals may appear to deal solely with “production executives” (writers who are also directors or producers), but in many ways, these proposals are designed to fix rules that are, in practice, hurting the very writers they were intended to help.

Currently, if you are a first writer on an original screenplay, our guidelines afford you certain protections. You are entitled to an “irreducible shared story credit.” In addition, you are only required to demonstrate a contribution of more than 33% to the final screenplay to earn screenplay credit, whereas subsequent writers must reach a threshold of 50% in order to receive screenplay credit.

Unless...

If, as the first writer, you also direct or produce your own original screenplay, you lose much of your first writer protection. In such a case, according to a rule most members have never heard of, subsequent writers no longer have to reach a 50% threshold or even a 33% threshold. Rather, the Arbitration Committee may accord any other writer screenplay credit for “any substantial contribution” to the final screenplay.

The Committee is proposing that we eliminate the “any substantial contribution” rule. Instead, we propose that writers receive screenplay credit only if they can show a contribution of more than 33% as a first writer or a writer of an adaptation, or 50% if they are a subsequent writer on an original screenplay. In this way, first writers including those who take on an additional role on their project-will not lose their protection.

Similarly, we have a rule that states that where a subsequent writer is a production executive team (where one or more members of the team is a hyphenate), the team must meet a threshold of “substantially more than 60%” for screenplay credit-even if one of the writers isn't a production executive at all. We propose changing this threshold for production executive teams to more than 50%. The Committee strongly feels that if any writer or team proves they contributed more than half of a final screenplay, they deserve credit.

Today, many writers are becoming increasingly entrepreneurial in order to gain greater control over their material. Nevertheless, the Committee believes in continuing to protect writers who are not hyphenates. Hyphenates (and teams that include a hyphenate) will still need to meet a more than 50% standard as subsequent writers on adaptations and originals. Similarly, hyphenates will continue to trigger automatic arbitrations so that independent arbiters can ensure that the final writing credit is fair and accurate.

In short, these proposals still hold hyphenates to a higher standard while preserving the special privileges that recognize the unique efforts of the first writer. We know you'll have questions. Please come join us at one of the upcoming information meetings to discuss these proposals. The meetings will also be an excellent opportunity to pass along any and all suggestions for the future. Our committee's work never stops. Your input is both welcome and necessary to bring about the credit system we all deserve.

Best,



Robert King, co-chair, WGAW
Craig Mazin, co-chair, WGAW
Stephen Schiff, co-chair, WGAE
Peter Atkins
Neil Cohen
David Odell
Brian Koppelman
Phil Alden Robinson
Gloria Katz-Huyck
Garner Simmons
Eddie Pomerantz
Bob Schneider