HP & DH Movie

[Carol]

Sandy:
>  
> As reluctant as I am, I have to jump in on this, and I  have to side
with the writers.
>  
> I am a Union employee and I and my fellow co-workers  missed going
on strike by 45 minutes back at the end of October. I have to tell 
you that going on strike would have been totally devastating for me
financially,  but I was totally prepared to do it, and, jn fact, I
still believe we should have. <snip>
  
> I think it's a shame that unions have to exist and  strikes have to
occur, but they are unfortunate neccessities in corporate America. <snip>
>  
> If what Kemper said in a post upthread is true, the  writers are
asking for peanuts, but it would cut into profits and management is 
not going to go for that if they can at all prevent it. They are not
hurting right now so they will try to wear the writers down because
they are. Corporate greed is an ugly thing. <snip>

Carol responds:

The trouble with strikes, IMO, is that they hurt the very people who
are asking for "peanuts," depriving them and their families of needed
income, customers of needed services (in the case of teacher's
strikes, depriving students of an education if the strike is
extended), and, in the case of the writers' strike, extending to
people in related industries. All for the sake of a complicated,
Internet-related problem that, IMO, ought to be resolved without a
strike. The writers are not helping themselves or anyone else by
striking because they can't earn an income when they're on the picket
line, and they can't even write at home, as I understand it, without
violating their union contract.

Surely, a writer's rights include the right to write. That's what they
do. That's how they earn their living. And, regardless of the validity
of their claim to the use of their work in new, technologically
related ways, that sort of complication seems to me to be a problem
for lawmakers, not producers, to resolve.

As for the idea expressed by Kemper that failing to honor the strike
is "treachery," I think that word is more than a bit strong,
especially if they have no other means of earning a living. (Ever try
to live on unemployment benefits? Are strikers even entitled to them?)
If the strike keeps up, the phrase "starving writer" might be
something more than a cliche.

Carol, more concerned about the writers' right to eat and pay their
bills and put their kids through college than about their rights to
subsidies that would only marginally increase their income