• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

John August

  • Arlo Finch
  • Scriptnotes
  • Library
  • Store
  • About

John

Hollywood assistants have always been underpaid, but this is different

October 14, 2019 Assistants, Film Industry, Television

One of my first jobs in Hollywood was as an assistant. It was 1994. I was just finishing film school, and felt lucky to get a job working for two busy producers. I spent my days answering phones, reading scripts and making copies. It wasn’t glamorous, but it was exactly the position I knew I needed, learning how the business works.

My assistant salary ((I originally put this as $550/week — $952/week in 2019 dollars — but I’m now doubting my memory. Was it actually $425, or even lower? I don’t have any pay stubs or tax returns to check. Perhaps a better yardstick is rent: It was enough that I could afford to live alone in a 1-bedroom apartment in West Hollywood, which in itself seems incredible.)) was enough to pay rent, buy groceries, and see all the movies I could. I wrote on nights and weekends. Like every assistant I knew, I aspired to bigger things. I managed to get an agent, get some meetings, and eventually get hired to write a feature. In all, I spent about two years in assistant-dom.

Since then, I’ve had nine incredible assistants — all of them aspiring writers — so I want to believe I still have a connection to what that experience is like. But my sample size is obviously limited.

On a recent episode of Scriptnotes, we asked listeners to write in with their experiences as assistants, focusing on the impact of their low wages. To my surprise, we got by far the most mail we’ve ever received on a topic — more than 100 emails at last count. Scriptnotes producer Megana Rao made a 26-page reading packet for us that covered the highlights, from which we excerpted sections for the podcast.

In this post, I want to go into deeper depth on a few issues. As on the show, we’ve changed names and identifying characteristics in these emails.

Barry writes:

There is a widespread assumption that assistant jobs are for those “right out of college.” But in 2019, this is fundamentally not true.

Most of my friends who are getting their first staff writer jobs right now logged at least a decade in assistant positions. I became a WGA member and still had to keep taking assistant jobs for years after that, and so did many of my peers. Now of course, some folks get big breaks quicker than others, and move out of assistant jobs much faster — that’s always been the case. But for the vast majority of us right now, the days of being a writers’ assistant for one year and then getting a staff job are mostly over.

A staff writer job used to be viewed as an apprentice job (hence staff writers not getting script fees). Nowadays, showrunners are increasingly wanting experienced writers in those positions, often with multiple episodic credits already. There’s so much more competition now that showrunners can afford to set the bar that high.

However, if assistant jobs are still being paid like they’re for people who are “right out of college,” this becomes an enormous problem as assistants get older. It’s one thing to make such a paltry salary at 22, when you’re living the Ramen lifestyle, and have roommates, and are on your parents’ health insurance, and you’re maybe still driving their car, etc. But if you’re making basically the same amount at 32, when your financial needs have changed significantly, these jobs actually become MORE unsustainable the longer you’re in the industry and the more experience you have.

To me, this is the crux of the issue. Decision-makers — people in their 40s and 50s — imagine these jobs as being filled by their younger selves. What are they complaining about? they ask. I was an underpaid assistant, too!

These decision-makers are making two fundamental mistakes. First, they’re assuming that assistants are pretty much exactly like, well, me in 1994: white Americans just out of college with no kids and little debt who often have parents that can help out with expenses.

Second, these decision-makers are ignoring how much has changed since they were assistants two decades ago. A non-exhaustive list:

  1. Los Angeles has gotten much more expensive.
  2. Assistants stay assistants longer than they used to.
  3. Owning a car is still essential, and costs more.
  4. Medical insurance is pricier.
  5. Short seasons make it harder to advance.

This last point merits a closer look. Barry again:

I currently work on a successful tv show. I worked for five months on the first season, then we took nine months off, then I worked for five months on the second season, they we took AN ENTIRE YEAR OFF before the third season started.

It should be pretty clear why the folks who make the least amount of money — and have the fewest contacts, and don’t have agents/managers repping them for other jobs — are going to be hit hardest in a scenario where the new world order is that the majority of jobs only last a couple months. This is a huge difference even from when I started in the industry, where getting a job on a hit show would AT LEAST mean that you had a few years of steady work before you had to start looking again.

In the old days of 22-episode season orders, it was not uncommon to promote a writer’s assistant to staff writer after the second or third season. At that point, the showrunner had plenty of experience seeing what that writer could do. But almost no streaming show runs for 40 or more episodes — and if they do, it would be after many years, with frequent breaks.

Christian writes:

I am a Writer’s PA (WPA). I have been working as an assistant in various executive and personal capacities for more than five years now. This is my third show as a Writer’s PA, though I’ve also been a Showrunner’s Assistant (SA) in the past.

You may be asking why I’ve been working for five years as an assistant, with SA experience, and am working as a WPA now. To keep a long story short, with streaming keeping rooms small and wrapping before production starts, there’s not a lot of growth potential for assistants on streaming shows. None of the ones I’ve worked so far have heard whether or not they’re getting renewed, and with wages so low, there’s only so long you can hold out on unemployment before having to take the next gig, even if it is a demotion.

Unintentionally or not, making sure assistants are not paid enough to build up a savings cushion between gigs is one of the ways in which the system benefits our employers. Many of us are so desperate to pay rent that we’ll accept the low-ball offer, because at least we’re getting paid. Those of us who try to negotiate are dropped from consideration for someone more desperate and ready to accept the low pay.

I’m still getting paid minimum wage. Because that is the “industry standard” for WPAs. Because being a WPA is considered an entry-level position, even when most showrunners are looking for–and receiving resumes from–assistants with experience.

What’s worse is that this production model of “room first, production later” is putting a LOT more responsibility on the Writers’ Room support staff. I’ve opened two rooms now, both without the help of a production office or production accountant. I’ve done the work of a production coordinator, office manager, and production accountant. I was the financial approver for the Writers’ offices on two of my shows, which meant any time we needed the studio lot where our offices were located to do something for us, I had to “approve” the studio charges.

The studio also made it VERY clear that they wouldn’t hire a Script Coordinator until production started (so after our rooms wrapped). Well, no surprise, there are script coordinator duties that have to be done the second writers start to write, so the burden to proof, distro, and handle contractual paperwork fell to me. Many times I found myself contemplating the ironies of being the lowest paid assistant on the show, stuck doing the highest paid assistant’s duties without title or pay bump. (Note: I was recently informed by an IATSE Union rep that this breaks union rules. I had no idea.)

Again: these are just two out of more than 100 emails we received on this topic. Then on Sunday, the #PayUpHollywood hashtag started trending with more horror stories.

I don’t know why the dam suddenly broke open, but my hope is that by engaging assistants, showrunners, agents and executives we can start to grapple with the inequities that are making assistant jobs unsurvivable for many folks who want to work in this industry. Both on the podcast and this blog we’ll be sharing more stories and solutions as they come up.

Casting a blind teenage actress

August 21, 2019 Directors, News, Projects

I’ve written a new movie that I’m planning to direct. It’s called The Shadows. It’s a thriller.

I wouldn’t normally announce something like this so far in advance, but casting is going to be a unique process that will require a major search.

The hero of the film is a 15-year-old girl named Abby. She’s stubborn, resourceful and anxious. She is also blind. I’m looking for a blind actress to play this role.

To learn more, you can read the casting announcement.

My Non-Candidate Statement

August 7, 2019 WGA

To My Fellow WGA West Members,

Two years ago, you voted me onto the Board of Directors. Thank you. I’ve taken the responsibility very seriously.

I co-chaired the newly-created screenwriting subcommittee. After a series of outreach lunches and an extensive survey of members, we focused on three urgent issues for screenwriters: free work, one-step deals, and late payment. Then we got to work.

We met with the heads of Paramount, Sony, Warners, Universal and Disney to explain how their practices were harming not only writers, but the creative process.

We launched the “No Writing Left Behind” campaign to remind both writers and executives that free work hurts everyone. I spearheaded the Start Button project as a way to help screenwriters get paid on time.

We organized feature writers working in animation to discuss how to get more of our work Guild-covered—or at a least approach parity at non-signatories.

Finally, we started the discussion on how to best think about credits in the 2020s, when the definitions of “theatrical” and “first writer” are increasingly murky.

I’m also a member of the negotiating committee for the agency campaign. I’ve spoken and emailed with hundreds of you. Thank you for your engagement on this crucial issue. I want to make sure we get a deal for writers that will still look good five, ten and twenty years from now.

I’m not running for re-election this cycle because I’m planning to direct a movie. But I remain committed to making sure the Guild serves all its members. In that spirit, these are the candidates I believe can best deliver on the Guild’s promise. (I’ve included links to their candidate statements where available.)

DAVID GOODMAN (President)
The job of president requires empathy and experience. I saw both of these firsthand with David Goodman. He listens to members and knows how to get things done.

An example: Just a week into the job, I came to David with concerns that colleagues on Twitter had raised about submission packets for late night and variety shows. It felt like free work. David convened a group of late-night/variety showrunners and writers to hammer out a set of best practices to make sure writers were protected, then coordinated with WGA East for shows based in New York.

It wasn’t flashy. It wasn’t something he campaigned on. But it was protecting writers, and that’s the job of the Guild and its president. Time and again, David Goodman has done it.

MICHELE MULRONEY (Secretary/Treasurer)
Michele co-chaired the screenwriting subcommittee, and deserves the lion’s share of the credit for what’s been achieved. Her experience and dedication are unmatched. And with three feature writers leaving the board (me, Andrea Berloff and Zak Penn), Michele is more essential than ever. link

It’s been my pleasure to serve with the following incumbents, each of whom has shown remarkable insight and commitment on issues ranging from sexual harassment to the agency campaign. They’re ready for whatever the next two years bring.

MARJORIE DAVID (VP) link
ANGELINA BURNETT link
LUVH RAHKE link
MEREDITH STIEHM link
NICOLE YORKIN link

While these incumbents’ experience is crucial, it’s also important to welcome new voices. In my two years on the board, I’ve keenly felt some missing perspectives. Here are four writers I’m excited to see join the board:

LIZ ALPER
Recognizing a need, Liz created the #WGASolidarityChallenge Grid and the Comprehensive 2019 Staffing Grid. I can’t wait to see what she does next. link

ROBB CHAVIS
A former attorney, Robb rose up through diversity writing programs and can speak to both the promise and pitfalls of these efforts. link

DANTE W. HARPER
Dante is an experienced feature writer. We’ll need him on the board this coming term. link

ZOE MARSHALL
Zoe organized a series of five staffing and development mixers for more than 750 writers, showrunners and executives. She didn’t ask for permission; she asked for results. link

No matter which candidates you support this election cycle, let’s remember that the Guild needs to represent all of us because the WGA is all of us. Unity does not mean uniformity. Lively discussion shows an engaged membership ready to face the challenges ahead. Let’s get there together.

With thanks,

John August signature

The Myth of “No Negotiation”

August 5, 2019 WGA

For the past two years, I’ve served on the WGA board of directors and the negotiating committee for the agency campaign. I’ve spoken with hundreds of members in person, on the phone and via email.

Some are strongly in favor of the Guild’s action; some are vehemently opposed. That’s fine! A union doesn’t require uniformity of opinion. But it does need a common set of facts.

In that spirit, I want to address a pernicious myth that’s being amplified by some of the candidates running for office this cycle: that the WGA refuses to negotiate.

I hear this idea repeated so often that some very smart friends have stopped questioning the premise. It’s become a straw man, a false argument set up just to be knocked down.

Here’s Phyllis Nagy:

In refusing to negotiate with the ATA, current leadership has effectively refused to negotiate with the Big 4. Stalemate. That benefits no one.

Here’s Bill Schmidt:

But leadership is not negotiating. They refuse to negotiate until the Big Four end packaging and eliminate affiliated production companies. They cite as our biggest weapon the lawsuit filed on behalf of eight writers.

Here’s Jason Fuchs:

I want to win this fight, but we cannot win a game we refuse to play.

The solution these candidates offer is so reasonable as to seem obvious: just start negotiating!

The reality is that the WGA has never refused to negotiate. In fact, it never stopped negotiating.

But! But! What about back in June, when David Goodman put out a statement saying that we were going to stop negotiating?

Except he didn’t. Here’s what he actually said:

The truth is, the agencies in that ATA room are stuck. Agencies that have no financial interest in producing, and very little in packaging, are having their futures tied to entities like WME, which has gone into the IPO business and is currently committed to changing nothing. There is virtually no negotiation occurring, except for the concessions the Guild has made. Two months after our last meeting, they have now made us an offer that, as I indicated earlier, moved very little, and in some ways is worse.

So, we think it is time to start negotiating individually with the nine remaining agencies who represent a significant amount of writers, rather than with the ATA. The nine agencies are UTA, CAA, ICM, WME, Gersh, Paradigm, Rothman Brecher, Kaplan-Stahler, and APA. We are willing to meet with every agency that is willing to meet with us. We’ll reach out to each of them individually again in an attempt to hear their specific concerns with our proposals.

Spoiler: That’s what actually happened.

In the past month, the first of those nine agencies (Kaplan Stahler) broke from the ATA and signed a new negotiated agreement. I stress negotiated because members of the negotiating committee — including me — spent hours discussing and debating which compromises made sense, both for this deal and going forward.

Since then, the Buchwald Agency signed a deal, as did a new agency formed by leading agents who left Abrams.

In each case, the negotiations were quiet. The town didn’t know they were happening until the results were announced.

A July 20th LA Times article picked the wrong person to interview:

“There is no back-channeling going on,” said an agency leader who was not authorized to comment.

Whoops!

Not only was there back-channeling going on, there were active negotiations between agencies and the guild. The discussions were focused on specific issues. For example, in response to agency concerns, we clarified language on reporting requirements and increased the length of the deal to five years.

None of the announced agreements have been with big four agencies, nor do they offer concessions on producing or packaging fees, other than a one-year sunset clause.

In order to get the big four, Phyllis Nagy argues the WGA needs to return to the room with the ATA:

Yes, the conflicts and abuses of both [packaging fees and producing] have to be tackled head on and greatly curtailed or eliminated. That requires focused negotiation followed by presentation of terms to the entire membership for approval. It’s worth repeating — none of this will happen without rolling up sleeves and getting back to the negotiating table.

The Nagy plan will involve sitting at the negotiating table with forearms bared and then — what exactly? As far as I can tell, the checklist is:

  1. Sit down at the table with ATA
  2. (TBD)
  3. Present deal for membership vote

In contrast, the current Guild leadership has explained exactly what they intend to do: negotiate individually with each agency, with special emphasis on agencies 5 through 9, to hammer out specific issues. The WGA explained why: the different agencies have different needs and agendas.

Having been in the sausage-making room, I believe the process of reaching a resolution with the big four agencies is likely to be frustrating and exhausting, with multiple false starts, dashed hopes and occasional breakthroughs. It’ll take more than one shot. I think we can get there, but my hunch is it’s going to be a slog, because it’s been a slog. This is sloggy business.

That’s not the kind of statement a candidate can run on (“Vote for the Slog!”), but fortunately I’m not running for reelection. I’m only speaking as someone who’s spent hundreds of hours on this and wants my guild to come out of both this agency campaign and election season with clear eyes, compassionate differences of opinion, and a common set of facts.

« Previous Page
Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Newsletter

Inneresting Logo A Quote-Unquote Newsletter about Writing
Read Now

Explore

Projects

  • Aladdin (1)
  • Arlo Finch (27)
  • Big Fish (88)
  • Birdigo (2)
  • Charlie (39)
  • Charlie's Angels (16)
  • Chosen (2)
  • Corpse Bride (9)
  • Dead Projects (18)
  • Frankenweenie (10)
  • Go (29)
  • Karateka (4)
  • Monsterpocalypse (3)
  • One Hit Kill (6)
  • Ops (6)
  • Preacher (2)
  • Prince of Persia (13)
  • Shazam (6)
  • Snake People (6)
  • Tarzan (5)
  • The Nines (118)
  • The Remnants (12)
  • The Variant (22)

Apps

  • Bronson (14)
  • FDX Reader (11)
  • Fountain (32)
  • Highland (75)
  • Less IMDb (4)
  • Weekend Read (64)

Recommended Reading

  • First Person (87)
  • Geek Alert (151)
  • WGA (162)
  • Workspace (19)

Screenwriting Q&A

  • Adaptation (65)
  • Directors (90)
  • Education (49)
  • Film Industry (489)
  • Formatting (128)
  • Genres (89)
  • Glossary (6)
  • Pitches (29)
  • Producers (59)
  • Psych 101 (118)
  • Rights and Copyright (96)
  • So-Called Experts (47)
  • Story and Plot (170)
  • Television (165)
  • Treatments (21)
  • Words on the page (238)
  • Writing Process (177)

More screenwriting Q&A at screenwriting.io

© 2026 John August — All Rights Reserved.