advice to laborer: 5-14-2023 post

https://www.film-shorts.tv/wpress.cfonseca160/blog/2023/05/14/labor-advice-to-strike-or-not-to/
Today’s post, is about labor disputes (in general); is also about censorship, and about the writer’s strike in California this year (specifically).

I want you to think about the potential advancement and the potential further demise (decline) of worker’s rights, in each labor dispute that we have seen.

“Organized” labor (as it is defined), has been an aimed solution to increasing clout, comfort, and wage, ever since workers first became disgruntled in history. Whether that be in agricultural farming, factory/manufacture, school-house, hospital, practice, or writer’s den (to name a few), “organized labor” has been a political construct and design worldwide, based on protest in larger than fewer numbers.

Based on a timed and coordinated stoppage of work-output, the economic disruption is used as a tool to stop the profit-potential of the management.
But, let’s examine a few present-day circumstances and realities:

A. Stoppage of work can actually have the effect of making a coveted product more rare than it otherwise would be; thus, inherently more valuable and valued after it is later produced and show-ready.
B. Stoppage of work is a respite, a luxury, a vacation. But, not one that all can afford (as income is halted). A strike can be an act of attrition.

A teacher labors, by dispensing useful information to students. A teacher-strike has the “unintended” consequence (adverse side-effect) of punishing an innocent student who must and who wishes to learn information. Similarly, censorship of a news organization (or in publishing), is an imposed tactical disruption. Again, the innocent audience is then also harmed. Sometimes, the adversary is a government, sometimes it is a marketplace competitor of a company, and sometimes it is perpetrated by a collaboration of both (or more) in the spirit of totalitarian sabotage.

How about a driver, or a pilot? A driver may not be able to negotiate fair working conditions; because, the managers already imposed contract terms that were accepted. And, if there are so many drivers, then one can easily be replaced without much consequence to the company’s bottom line.

Labor disputes attempted to be remedied through “strike” (a.k.a. not laboring) rather than by law-suit, are mini-revolutions in a professional-sector which drag the productivity of the nation down; and, which weaken the national defense in the global community. Strikes of this kind also bring competition into the sector, further diminishing the competitive strength of the workers who have earned their tenure. That has some good effect, arguably; however, mostly, the stoppage of work manipulates natural and timely competition in real time, in favor of manipulation… as the labor union examines and exerts its increase of control over you – the worker.

How about a writer? When a writer submits to a labor-strike, he or she is sacrificing Constitutional liberty and personal right. Like a teacher, he or she is not “speaking”; not “writing”. By that act, the writer punishes him or herself even deeper than what the management has already inflicted – by way of already not improving the pay and other work conditions.
If you are a writer for a newspaper, your boss can fire you for poor performance. There must be justification for such action. While a newspaper writer, sports journalist, editor, opinion-piece writer, broadcast journalist, field-reporter, advertisement writer, comic-strip producer, movie writer, podcast writer, TV-show writer, poet, lyricist, novelist, or whatever kind of writer you might be (or might aspire to be), you are utilizing your free speech. The United States Constitution protects that right, whether or not you are your own boss. And, so, you cannot be denied that right which you have. There are global standards which protect that right which you and I have.

However, there is no promise that your use of such right will be financially compensated. As a result of that, when engaging in writing (as an employee), you are advised to have a good lawyer who can protect you when labor conditions are sub-par. In the case that you are censored, as a writer, by way of labor-strike blocking your productivity; or, by discrimination and bias, or “blacklist”, then international law and/or local lawsuit can be a good idea. Much bolder, than depending on your union to save you, in this particular profession (unlike any other profession) is your reliance upon the Bill of Rights and on the US Constitution. And, upon international laws.

When one signs the labor contract of an employer, one is already at a serious disadvantage. As a writer, I encourage other writers to use business proposals of your own when approaching job market. “Standard” contracts given to writers are often the most egregious and pernicious ones of all. The fact that they are all the same “standard” is of no consolation to a worker if they are all equally “bad” terms. No matter how good your work might be, the contract might turn you away from the opportunity (as has been the case for me in my own career).

A strike, merely satisfies the management’s favor to: (1) take a little break from work themselves – and not read your work, (2) to spy on particular writers’ who have been chatted about in private and noticed, (3) to find cause, by your strike, to make you even more subservient to increasingly stringent timelines on future projects, (3) re-cycle old content and air those inexpensively, during that time; and, make additional revenue from older content (“reduce”, “re-use”, “re-cycle”), (4) figure out who their competition is, so that they can achieve censorship of them, (5) strategize how to replace content with programming of their own, later. A strike is a “pause” for managers. One, which most laborers cannot afford.

Labor disputes for professionals whose professions are based on Constitutional Rights, are almost impossible to win by way of a strike. The strike might achieve, (1) short-term gains, (2) allow the public to briefly see the faces of those who are suffering; garnering some sympathy for the cause, (3) increased competition, (4) increasingly stringent productivity expectations upon you as you fall “behind schedule”, (5) Delayed release, which also means that many “below the line” do not get paid – as many writers depend on post-“box-office” sales revenue.

The best way for writers to fight and win in working condition and pay disputes, is to fight against censorship. “Soft” power, is exercised by managers who allow strikes to happen and to vent. “Hard” power use, is when a writer resort to free-speech protection. Free speech is not merely rooted in “being able to speak freely”; rather, it is also rooted in being able to do so without opposition/without contempt/without negative recourse or reprisals/and for pay. Moreover, if it is one’s profession and trade, after study and work in it, then not being compensated for that service is a direct violation of that writer’s civil right. This profession, is structurally protected by a labor union for certain types of writers. However, for many writers the labor union is their “real” employer… guiding their decisions. And, anytime the “boss” asks you to strike (a.k.a. demands it), forces you to not accept other job promotions elsewhere, they’re really giving you the pink-slip during that time and disrupting your development. It is a kind of slavery.

As the labor union(s), and the studio, production-company, agency, or “boss” (in most specific and vague term) work out your contract, they’re really also using that time to figure out how they can keep you marginally satisfied – but still under their thumb – without losing their worker(s) (you) in that process.

Your best option might be to walk from the job and to hire a labor-dispute attorney, free-speech attorney, civil-rights attorney, Constitutional lawyer. That can be done individually, or by class-action. But, be prepared to lose your job, face potential “black-listing”, “censorship”/”cancel-culture”, and/or your union membership.