Candidate for Council, Film/TV Streaming Sector
“As the landscape changes, new problems arise. When I’ve brought problems with solutions to our Guild, I’ve only been told why things can’t change. Benjamin is the first person who understood why they must. He’s insightful and has a deep capacity to listen, collaborate on ideas, and guide. His follow through is phenomenal. It matters to him that members feel connected, heard, and supported. We’re lucky that Benjamin Rosenblum is running for a council seat and we’ll be even luckier if we get him with your vote. If you don’t know him, reach out to him, and you’ll see what I mean.”
-Heather Maidat, WGAE Member
A top-down union will ultimately only serve the top. Whether it’s the highest income-earners, the most prominent members, or the leadership and union officials themselves, the interests of this small group of individuals at the top will always take priority.
A top-down union dictates from above, operating in an unaccountable and undemocratic manner. It stifles debate and discourse to maintain the status-quo. It governs and operates opaquely, using that opaqueness to justify its own expertise and autocratic governance.
A top-down union fosters an obsequious, uncritical, and conformist environment where members compete to ingratiate themselves with those at the top. This erodes true solidarity, dynamism, and creativity—crucial components for sustaining the union’s power and effectiveness.
In the end, a top-down union is antithetical to what a union should be. It becomes disconnected from the rank-and-file membership it claims to represent and fight for. It no longer serves the majority of its members, but only itself and those at the top.
Ironically, a top-down union resembles the very corporations it purports to oppose.
After serving on Council from 2021-2023 culminating in last year’s strike, and working closely with WGAE officials since 2014 as they’ve attempted to organize the nonfiction genre of TV and film that I work in, I can unequivocally say that the WGA East is unfortunately a top-down union.
It pains me to acknowledge this, as I am a proud Guild member and deeply respect our union’s storied history. But as the dust settles from last year’s hard-fought and inspiring strike where our rank-and-file members risked so much to preserve future jobs and decent living standards in our industry, why do so many of our jobs and living standards seem more uncertain and precarious than before? And yet, how are those at the top faring?
The current dismal state of the industry highlights the immense power we’ll need to overcome it. To confront the ever-powerful corporations as they unilaterally attempt to rewrite the terms of our livelihood, we must transform our top-down union into a member-driven one, grounded in true democracy, solidarity, and transparency for all our rank-and-file members.
I’m running for Council again to help us do that.
The aftermath of last year’s strike offers a critical lesson in power.
In my statement last year, I emphasized how the resurgent strike wave was an opportunity to understand and hold accountable the unjust structures of power that dominate our lives—from the corporations to our own union and the interplay between the two. Now, with the strike behind us, it’s essential to analyze how our union’s top-down structure may have influenced the outcome.
A telling comparison can be made between last year’s strike and the one in 2007. During the 2007 Writers Strike, the Guild took an ambitious stance. On top of improving its existing contract terms, the WGA pushed to expand MBA jurisdiction for writers in New Media, Reality Television, and Animation, thus aiming to broaden its power. Despite striking alone for 100 days and securing only New Media jurisdiction, the Guild’s assertive bargaining approach demonstrated power and forced the AMPTP’s hand. While the strike wasn’t perfect, the evident strength behind the Guild’s actions made a significant impact. This isn’t to say that the other jurisdictional demands shouldn’t have been continually fought for and achieved. Without full jurisdiction for Reality Television and Animation, our power remains weakened. Although I wasn’t a member in 2007, it’s plausible that the top-down nature of the WGA today also played a role in hindering those efforts back then.
In contrast, the 2023 strike demands were narrower, focusing on wage increases, minimum staffing, improved streaming residuals, and AI protections. The Guild adopted a more defensive posture over its existing turf, relying heavily on the solidarity of the joint strike with SAG-AFTRA to achieve these gains. Yet, despite this alliance, the strike was an uphill battle that lasted 148 days—considerably longer than in 2007. While many factors influence the length of a strike, a holistic assessment of the WGA’s individual bargaining power last year reveals that our failure to broaden our MBA’s coverage, or even to threaten such a move, has significantly undermined our strength, especially when measured against the immense force of the ever-growing corporations we face.
This isn’t to diminish the efforts, determination, and spirit of the WGA and the rank-and-file members during last year’s strike. It was truly an international inspiration. However, despite this apparent victory, the outlook for jobs in our industry remains grim, and our protections against AI are uncertain.
Of course, the conglomerates and studios would love for us to think that strikes are always bad and this result is why they should be avoided—but that is obviously not true. Strikes are the reason why our generally freelance workforce has sustained itself to this day—by striking, winning essential benefits, and increasingly broadening them to secure and bolster our bargaining power for current and future members.
So what’s going on with our union, the AMPTP, and the industry at large then? Is the industry resetting, or is something deeper at play? After serving on Council and witnessing the unaccountable, undemocratic, and murky process for setting the MBA Pattern of Demands, it’s clear that our union’s top-down nature has weakened our bargaining power. The union’s efforts have been concentrated on safeguarding its existing privileges and power structures, rather than actively expanding its influence and building broad-based power with all TV and film writers. This occurs with little to no substantive debate and discussion from membership on the best way forward. Ironically, the union’s narrow focus on merely protecting what it already has has significantly eroded its capacity to do just that. What must be understood is that the pursuit of building power is a source of power in itself—one that can both protect what we already have and help us achieve even more.
A top-down approach might be justifiable during a strike—if the union were already democratic, transparent, and rooted in solidarity. But without these foundations, the strike’s demands may not truly represent the membership’s needs or cultivate enough power. And furthermore, leadership cannot truly be held accountable throughout the collective bargaining process. This is why we face much of the uncertain, troubling future that lies ahead.
As the industry and technology remain ever-changing, so too must our union. But first, it must allow for it.
How democratic is our union really?
While our membership directly elects Councilmembers—a core element of democracy—this alone doesn’t guarantee that our union is truly democratic. Democracy can be undermined through suppressive tactics, manipulative practices, and a lack of transparency—all of which have been evident within the WGA East. Moreover, some of the most consequential positions and committees in our union aren’t even directly elected by the membership; they are appointed through an undemocratic, opaque process from the start.
As I wrote in my statement last year, Council itself has proven to be an undemocratic governing body, dictated illegitimately by the Executive Committee’s assumed authority. Our entire governance is obfuscated from the membership. There is no clear indication of what happens in Council meetings, how votes are taken, or what is being discussed or decided upon. These meetings are entirely closed off, leaving no real accountability measures to assess the performance of incumbent Councilmembers during elections. The only minimal level of accountability comes from Candidate Statements published during elections, which typically only describe what candidates claim to have done or aspire to achieve during their terms.
But coincidentally enough, at the start of this year’s election, the Guild removed all prior candidate statements from its website for the first time in recent history. This decision, made by unelected Guild staff and allegedly upheld by an appointed Election Committee, highlights the severe lack of transparency and accountability in our union’s governance. Whether this action was taken for technical reasons or administrative efficiency, it underscores the haziness of our union’s leadership.
Since even the “top” of our top-down union is undemocratic, the actions, governance, and operations that stem solely from Council—such as appointments to crucial committees, the hiring or firing of the Executive Director, and other significant governing decisions—become exponentially undemocratic and unaccountable themselves, reinforcing the detrimental top-down nature of our union.
For example, the MBA Negotiating Committee, arguably our union’s most important committee, is appointed by leadership in this undemocratic fashion. Similarly, our Executive Director, a position that holds tremendous authority and autonomy, was replaced without any input from our membership. The Health and Pension Board, another crucial body with more influence than many members might realize, has trustees appointed through the same murky process.
In addition, the Guild has increasingly resorted to extreme suppressive and manipulative tactics to stifle dissent when its true nature is exposed. As I mentioned in my statement last year, while serving as a Councilmember, I advocated for strengthening the MBA by closing loopholes that permitted certain “scab genres.” Although a logical thing to do, and one that the Guild pursued itself in 2007, it challenged the current top-down status quo. In response, I was threatened, censured, and removed from important communication channels, groups, and activities, likely violating basic LMRDA rights for union members. Since leaving Council, I remain barred from those same communication channels and have been prevented from attending various meetings and activities by Guild staff.
Exposing these issues isn’t about me seeking pity or sympathy; it’s about shedding light on the WGAE’s actions and their potential impact on us all—impacts we are already beginning to see.
Earlier this year, Council approved a new repressive Code of Conduct that severely infringes on our rights as union members. It goes beyond typical union regulations against harassment or discrimination, into prohibiting members from engaging in “disrespectful,” “bullying,” or “unacceptable” behavior when interacting with any Guild members or staff, in any Guild-related location, physical or virtual. For a union to take such an action is absurd. It is infantilizing, arbitrary, and clearly designed to be weaponized against democracy and dissent, depending on the whims of those at the top. Beyond its blatant absurdity, this Code likely represents yet another violation of our free speech rights as union members.
The ability to dissent against the status quo is a vital part of a healthy democracy. Without it, things rarely change, no matter how dire a situation becomes. This doesn’t mean we must all agree with dissent or that all dissent is beneficial, but we must secure our ability to voice it. Otherwise, the issues we face may never substantially improve.
We need true reciprocal solidarity.
A union’s power lies in its workers’ ability to collectively withhold their labor. When workers consciously harness this collective power with agency to help every member achieve much more than they could achieve individually, this is true solidarity.
Although a more superficial form of solidarity can be helpful and important, such as joining someone else’s picket line or expressing support for other workers’ strike actions, it is not necessarily a substantial form of power we need to face the struggles against the immensely powerful international corporations. We need tangible, true reciprocal solidarity, and we must keep building it in the most effective and rational ways possible. True reciprocal solidarity benefits us all.
I’m running for Council to transform our top-down union into a member-driven union motivated by true reciprocal solidarity. However, this election isn’t about me or my own individual power; it’s about building power for all of our rank-and-file members. Achieving this will require a dedicated, independent effort, which is why I’m excited to be launching a new democratic rank-and-file led initiative to help us do so—the Writers Guild Autonomous Rank-and-file Caucus (WGARC).
I encourage you to reach out if you’d like to learn more about this new member-driven effort to transform our union from the bottom up.
How I will address our top-down union in Council.
If elected, I will work directly with our rank-and-file members and the WGARC while on Council to fight for crucial changes to transform our top-down union into the member-driven union we need.
We Need True Union Democracy, Transparency, and Power for our Rank and File.
I will fight to fix the murky, undemocratic governance and operations of the WGAE, including working in Council to limit the Executive Committee’s overreach, and giving more power and transparency to our rank and file so that leadership can actually be held accountable and act on behalf of all dues-paying members. I will fight to institute consistent membership meetings for our rank-and-file to voice their ideas and concerns, and have the ability to democratically participate in and observe the functioning and operations of our union.
We Must Eliminate Loopholes That Prevent MBA Coverage for Various Genres.
The AMPTP has gotten away with using loopholes to avoid MBA coverage for certain television and film genres for far too long, and I’ve found in Council that our current leadership has unfortunately been doing nothing to fix this. This inaction by leadership undermines our own power, solidarity, and the security that the MBA provides. In Council I will continue to fight to integrate the writers and writer/producers of our vastly under-organized genres of television and film onto the MBA, including nonfiction, animation, game shows, comedy/variety, and others that may be in a similar situation. Preventing these loopholes will not only provide uncovered writers with necessary benefits, but it will allow for us to build greater negotiating power so that all MBA-covered writers can win even more during strikes in a much quicker timeframe. It will also provide our union with a substantial increase in dues revenue to help bolster our Guild’s financial stability, increase our strike funds, and support all members with sufficient resources.
The WGAE Must Stop Creating Tiered Access to MBA Benefits for F/T/S Writers.
We must fight to eliminate and prevent tiered access to MBA benefits among those Film/Television/Streaming writers and writer/producers with similar job classifications so that we can build true reciprocal solidarity. We must also end the current WGAE practice of organizing writers and writer/producers of underrepresented F/T/S genres like nonfiction television and film under a sub-tier category that restricts access to the MBA’s benefits entirely. This practice is self-sabotage and hurts all WGA members by allowing for certain genres to act as unintentional “scabs” during a strike, which undermines true solidarity and our own union’s power. In Council I will fight to build true reciprocal solidarity among all of our film and television genres by securing MBA coverage, benefits, and appropriate parity for all writers and writer/producers in film/television/streaming. Uniting on the MBA with the ability to strike together will help give us the power we need against the ever-growing corporations.
Together, we will strengthen our union’s power from the bottom up.
I am a proud WGAE member and only want the best for our Guild and all members, which is why these critiques are necessary. Without acknowledging and addressing these real issues within our union, we risk remaining in a vicious cycle of demanding and obtaining less and less, stuck in a constant race to the bottom. Despite the serious issues with the way our union currently functions, it’s important we remember and draw from our Guild’s resilient and proactive history to achieve meaningful empowerment and lasting change.
I look forward to continuing our fight as we work together to transform the WGA East into the truly transparent, solidaristic, and democratic union we need to face the struggles that lie ahead.
_______
You can find out more info about the new Writers Guild Autonomous Rank-and-file Caucus here: www.wgarc.org
You can connect and stay updated with our grassroots nonfiction organizing movement here: www.nonfictionworkers.com
You can endorse me, find a list of my current endorsements, and stay updated with my campaign communications here: www.benjamin-rosenblum.com/wgae
Endorsements
Justin DiLauro, John Helmuth III, Heather Maidat, Mark Ramirez, Joseph Randazzo, Ruth Reiss, Benjamin Trueheart
WGAW: Micki Boden, Chip Proser, Adam Toltzis
Endorse Benjamin Rosenblum for Council
Note: WGAW members who wish to endorse a candidate may follow the process outlined in section G.1.B of the 2024 Election Policy.
