HuffPoster John Ridley Among Those Called Out By Writer's Guild
I just received this email, and it's clear the WGA has thrown down the gauntlet. They are definitely playing old school hardball. They're circulating a list of scab writers who crossed the 100-day strike picket line; that is, writers who decided they would cash in while their fellow scribes marched and went without checks. One of the names may be familiar to Huff Posters, it's John Ridley. John, what's up with that?
Friends of the Hollywood Community,
To keep you updated on the WGA Contract news, here's the latest news from the presidents of the WGA East and West about those who went financial core during the strike and the list of scabs writers is below their statement.
David W.
_____
April 18, 2008
Dear Fellow Members of the Writers Guilds East and West:
During our 100-day strike, the extraordinary solidarity you demonstrated on the picket lines and the courage and dedication with which you committed yourselves to our cause were not only an inspiration but also the key to making our actions successful.
In the face of enormous personal and financial hardship on the part of many, you sacrificed in the knowledge that your refusal to work would reap benefits not only for yourselves but countless others in the creative community, now and in the future. Your stalwart resolve paid off.
Yet among the many there were a puny few who chose to do otherwise, who consciously and selfishly decided to place their own narrow interests over the greater good. Extreme exceptions to the rule, perhaps, but this handful of members who went financial core, resigning from the union yet continuing to receive the benefits of a union contract, must be held at arm's length by the rest of us and judged accountable for what they are - strikebreakers whose actions placed everything for which we fought so hard at risk.
While others forfeited paychecks to stand in unity with their fellow Guild members, many who went financial core continued to collect salaries. Without concern for their colleagues, they turned their backs and tossed the burden of collective action onto the rest of us, taking jobs, reducing our leverage and damaging the Guilds for their own advantage.
Even in cases of deep financial distress, there were other options, including generous no-interest loans from our strike funds, which would have sustained them until the end of the strike and beyond. That's what unions are for.
Those who went financial core did not share in the adversity; and should not share in our victory. They cannot vote in our elections, run for Guild office, attend Guild meetings and other events, or participate in the Writers Guild Awards. Further, it has been determined by the National Council of the Guilds West and East, and affirmed by Guild East Council and the Guild West Board, that we send this joint letter with a link to a list on respective websites of those who went financial core during the strike. To view it now and for future reference, you can find it at: http://www.wga.org/subpage_member.aspx?id=2828.
The rest of us are all in this together.
Sincerely,
Patric M. Verrone
President, WGAWMichael Winship
President, WGAEMembers who elected financial core
Arena, Maria
Clark, Marlene Poulter
Cosgrove, John F.
Cwikly, Paula F.
Egan, Clem
Esensten, Barbara J.
Grunwell, Jeanne M.
Higley, Dena
Higley, Mark Christopher
Kelly, Meg
Lisanti, Michelle Poteet
Meurer, Terry A.
Morrison, Shawn
Reilly, James E
Ridley, John
Sheffer, Hogan
Smith, John F.
Thomas, Darrell R. Jr.
Tomlin, Gary
Vogelaar, Janeen A.
Wolf, Garin
Read more at Reny Monk's blog.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Please note that it is NOT a list of scabs.
It is a list of people who went fi-core during the strike.
There is overlap, yes, and neither group is particularly sympathetic, but there's a difference.
Please print a correction, Ms. Monk.
Ms. Monk -
Please correct your text. This is not a list of SCABS, it is a list of people who went FI-CORE during the strike. They are easily confused, and there is some overlap, and I'm not particularly sympathetic to either group, but there is an important distinction. A scab works during a strike, whereas to go fi-core is simply to become a dues-paying non-member. Some individuals go fi-core in order to work during a strike, i.e., BECOME a scab, but the two terms are not interchangeable, and as you can see from the preceding comments, your confusion of the terms has breeded more.
I urge you to rectify this in the interest of accuracy and fairness to those on the list.
Thank you.
I'm sure that John Ridley is sick of the accusation that he and other black people who take a conservative stance are somehow inauthentic and insincere. (As suggested by some commenters).
And I'm sure that William Ayers is sick of the accusation that he and other white people who worked for civil rights are somehow inauthentic and paternalistic. (As suggested by John Ridley).
What else would you expect form a man of color who would willing reduce himself to temporary token for Joe Scarborough when they trying to clean up their image after the Imus controversy? What else would you expect from a man who is part of community with deep scars from communist witch hunts of its actors and writers to now suggest that Senator Obama should be subjected to the same type of witch hunt because he has to prove he's not a secret muslim plant or black radical trying to take over the country? Do you think a person with this sort of mindset would value loyalty and integrity?
Why is everybody focusing on Ridley? It is the WGA email that should be questioned. Why did Verrone and Winship make such a petty and abhorrent choice to list those names. We do not know why they went ficore? Despite the highly touted WGA low interest loans that doesn't account for other potential personal catastrophes. Some of these people may have had very legitimate reasons to sadly make this decision, while others may have just been lazy and self-serving. But this email, in essence, is BLACKLISTING. And it is disgusting and it was totally and completely unnecessary.
And hadn't Mr. Verrone himself said that he would respect the decision of someone who went ficore if it were under extenuating circumstances? Well at least a couple of people on that list are, and I think he owes them and apology. I'm nauseated.
Nobody's jumping on George Clooney.
I lifted this from another site that was shocked at the gall of the WGA to not only send this out but also to encourage its mass distribution. The strike ended 2 moths ago, why now, why ever? Does Verrone crave publicityt so much that he can no longer begin to determine the difference between right and wrong? Maybe the Muppets should throw him a party to make him feel important again.
PART ONE
"I am an editor and have been for 10 years. My first unemployment longer than a few weeks was during the writer’s strike. I’m married to a wga member and we suffered through it. I am horrified at the pettiness of this list and the tone of the email. My wife’s best friend is on that list, she has had to put her home on the market (yup) and move in with her elderly parents, who she helped support with her writing.
She is so afraid that she will never work again and that she will lose her home and not be able to take care of her parents. She is filled with shame and deeply embarassed and the horror is, she walked the picket lines every single day, she kept a strike positive blog and spoke to future wga members all during the strike at various schools around town. She cooked for picketers when she broke her ankle, stepping off the curb at FOX.
PART TWO:
She even had a wednesday night potluck at her place all during the strike. Last word was she thinks she needs to go and talk to the union leadership and explain why she did it and beg forgiveness. To tell them personally why she did it.
She thought she could honor her guild commitment and the commitment she made to care for her parents. I am pissed that we have to tell her that her guild does not care about her or her parents.
That they feel blacklisting her and others is necessary and right. That possibly ending her writing career makes sense to some guy who has never said Hello to her, some guy who does not know her story."
Huffington Post should not stop John Ridley from posting because he is a scab, or angry and irrational most of the time; after all many right wing and/or deliberately obtuse people get to post here, but one thing that has always mystified me is why he continues to get front page billing on Huffington Post, and indeed regularly occupies the Arianna slot atop the masthead. Many posters with logical, well-reasoned and interesting articles never make it to the front page. I don't see why an anti-democratic scab with racial and anger issues should be promoted over those with worthy things to say.
[Part One of Two]:
"Bureaucracy"? That's not a very precise term for "union", if that's the intended referent-- the word does, however, carry a low-voltage pejorative connotation which may be sufficient to distract the reader from the weakness of the argument.
But consider, instead, the term and concept of UNION. Without checking the dictionary, I'll simply point out that it means an association of persons, er, unified in pursuit of a particular goal: achieving collective bargaining agreements that are economically just and benefit workers. Obviously, the history of labor unions is rife with instances of corruption, collusion, and crime, but that doesn't invalidate the concept.
The underlying ethic is "one for all and all for one", just like the Three Musketeers. But the Ridleys of the world either keep their fingers crossed, or silently amend the motto to "one for all and all for one, until crowded by circumstances".
[continued]
It's no shock that John Ridley is a scab because in his postings about the Presdential campaign he has revealed himself to be a bootlicking Uncle Tom imprisoned by his own slave mentality. Ridley rarely misses an opportunity to take a cheap shot at Obama.
Ridley is truly pathetic.
During the Writer's Strike, Ridley's posts made me sick. They were all about how much smarter he was than anyone else, how clairvoyant he was and how the AMPTP were only poor billionaires trying to get by. He was so hung-up on his own brilliance and ego that I haven't read him since. And it turned out he was wrong all along the line about the strike and its outcome, so I don't worry that I'm missing anything of importance when I skip his ego-inflated insights into the world of today. Bloviating, ego-mad, and wrong. Why is he still on the Huffpo?
I am not surprised to learn the Riddley is a scab. I stopped reading him may months ago. He hates liberal whites, he hates black leaders and I even think he hates black people or wants to be perceived as such. I do not know why people read him as I never perceived anything insightful in his writings.
He has always been a scab.
the scabs from crossing a picket line are a lot like the Herp virus
you wear that badge for life
My brain isn't working yet today. He IS a scab (not has).
After Ridley's despicable recent article, in which he used the Rove/Hillary muckraking technique of trying to paint Obama as guilty of some mystery crime because of his vague association with Ayers, I am not the slightest bit surprised to find out he has a scab, because he is clearly ethically challenged.
First of all, I don't give a tin whistle whether Mr. Ridley is a Conservative in Liberal clothing. When a fella has to feed his kids, fuck the beauracracy.
If he didn't agree with the strike, he's certainly entitled to go against it. And if WGA is unhappy with his decision, they can revoke his enrollment. He is not a conscript and this isn't the Russian army.
It's appalling to see my fellow Liberals castigate a man for make his own decision. Since when are we all about group-think?
UV
I agree with a lot of what you say - Mr Ridley has every right to make whatever decision, for whatever reason he chooses. However, we part ways on being "appalled" at the castigation. Just as Mr. Ridley is free to make a choice, the Guild is free to react as they did. Both are exercising their freedom of choice. As a grownup, Mr. Ridley must have understood there would be consequences to his choice, and here they are.
Those of us in the Guild who believe in the principle of solidarity are obliged to castigate the decision - if not the man who made it. This isn't "group think." It's called "collective bargaining
It's a union. When wasn't it about groupthink?
And note all of your enlightened liberal brethren calling for him to be blacklisted.
Only enlightened opinions they agree with will be tolerated, and all others will be banned.
[Part Two of Two]:
[continued]
... Of course, necessity is the first defense of scabs. But frankly, in this kind of labor dispute, I am skeptical that any union member suffered financial loss that cut to the bone of subsistence. Besides, the union letter addresses this "cornpone problem'.
And it's absurd to claim that scabs should be spared consequences for their treacherous actions. It's not at all what's meant by "groupthink", BTW. And it's definitely not a "no harm, no foul" situation. Every scab undermines the union's power and strengthens management's hand. And remember, these "scabs" aren't proud rugged individualists or some kind of conscientious objectors to participating in unions; these are MEMBERS who jumped ship when the going got rough.
I'm not sure if the "blacklisting" refers to the union's letter, but that's another canard. Certainly the union is within its rights to shun and criticize scabs, and impose whatever sanctions are available. How could it responsibly do otherwise without foolishly alienating its loyal base by rewarding disloyalty?
The implication that scabs ought to be respected according to liberal values, e.g. freedom of individual conscience and thought, is simply misplaced. Perhaps the Angels' Union prospers on the principle of letting bygones be bygones and turning the other wing, but no earthly union can.
I just have to know a bit more about unclevanya. What does he do for a living ? How can a self-described " Liberal " be so ignorant of labor unions? His thinking would set working people back into the sweat shop era.
--"the only people getting f**** by that attitude are other writers struggling to feed their own families-- and with the kind of royalties and work mr. ridley's had, if he cant make it through a few months like the rest of the writers, he is either living beyond his means or or unwilling to make some adjustments for the good of others. The fact that under 20 writers out of 12,000 chose to go fi-core demonstrates that it was not a choice of necessity, but of indifference-- or greed.
I don't know how the guy lives with himself, honestly-- I have many friends who lost good money because of the strike-- and they chose to get other jobs, take the free loans from the union, or dip into savings. Without the rest of us, Ridley would be a pawn of the corporate studios. Our only hope for fair treatment is if we stick together.
Ridley voted for Bush. Twice.
(He even admits it.)
Nuff said.
He has struck me at times as being a conservative.
This drives it home.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
