Nice to see Image having people with dumbass ideas and using unions to cover it…

 

I think what’s missing in this conversation is some understanding of the other side. Imagine you’ve worked hard for a publisher you believe in, in an industry where no one is getting rich. You’re in it because you love the industry and love your job.

Then the publisher you’re working for goes into business with someone that’s clearly crossed a line. Someone you’re embarrassed to even have your name associated with. What do you do?

In that situation your choices are quit or try to make your case to your boss to change. And anything you’re likely to feel that strongly about is something you’d want a union to back you on. So that’s what’s happening here. A lot of crap has come to light recently on comics. It’s exposed abusive behavior and some down right slime molds in the form of humans. These are folks that will happily destroy the professional career of anyone that stands up to them, but whine like babies if anyone says a word against them.

If I were unionizing, and my industry had those problems then damn straight I’d want the tools to do something about it. And that’s what they’re asking for.

Unionizing in the first place is it’s own kettle of fish, and if they’re unionizing then it’s probably about more than just this issue. But they clearly think it’s important enough to include in their demands, so go for it.

I’d also say this is a pretty complex thing so it’s ok to have your own opinions on this. Ellis has come up in this conversation, and I’d say he’s a good example of how complex this is. Ellis, based on his work alone, is one the great comics writers. He didn’t do anything outright illegal as far as I’ve heard, but the allegations that have come out are numerous, detailed, and shady as all get out. He’s clearly an awful human being and shouldn’t be allowed to interact with another young woman ever. I can imagine getting pretty damn upset to find I’m working for a company that would even think of being in business with him.

Also on the topic: it’s hard to feel bad for Image here. They may have started over the issue of creator’s rights, but they’ve also had some shady things in their past on that issue. Watching Neil Gaiman and Todd McFarlane go at it about Angela was pretty disillusioning.

 

The other issue is, like I said, this is an attempt at unionizing the entire industry. Looking at it as an Image alone issue misses the bigger picture that these terms were written for. So, even if we take the Image FAQ as sacrosanct and assume there is no greater nuance to the actual process that would allow input from, say, their Sales & Marketing people when deciding on a book, that kind of thing absolutely happens at Dark Horse and IDW and Oni and on and on. So it's refining a process that factually already exists. This nonsense about "trying to turn publishers into gatekeepers" misses the point that publishers, by definition, are already gatekeepers.

 

They can only unionize the company they work at you can't have companies unionize at Walmart and have it affect Target employees. Also most of the rest of the industry is under freelance contracts which are different from salaried or hourly employees. Freelance and independent workers lack the specific benefit of workers’ compensation and many other group insurance types. They are contracted individuals.
Independent contractors provide goods or services according to the terms of a contract they have negotiated with an employer. Independent contractors are not employees, and therefore they are not covered under most federal employment statutes.

They are not protected from employment discrimination by Title VII, nor are they entitled to leave under the Family Medical Leave Act. Employers are not required to pay independent contractors overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act or provide accommodations for a contractor’s disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act. An employer is also not responsible for an independent contractor’s unemployment or worker’s compensation benefits and is not required to provide an independent contractor with a pension or other employment benefits. Plus, an employer does not have to pay employment taxes for an independent contractor.

If they want to pay a specific amount for delivery, a document, or whatever, they draw up a contract stating what they want, when they need it, and how much they are willing to pay to get it.
Then, the freelancer has the option of accepting or declining. They do not have the right to tell them, you can’t work on anything else while you are completing my project. That also means the contractors can't dictate work environment as they are responsible for that themselves.

You might be an independent contractor if:

• You are paid by the project instead of receiving an hourly, weekly or monthly wage;
• You provide your own tools, equipment or materials;
• You are free to perform services or work for other clients;
• You are free to work off-site and are not required to work during established hours;
• You are free to subcontract out some of the work to others; and
• You are free to complete the project at your own discretion and are not given specific instructions by the employer.

As an independent contractor, the terms and conditions of the work you perform are set out in a contract between you and the employer. Even though you are not considered an “employee” under federal labor law, you may still join a union. However, you should keep in mind that a unit of independent contractors is not subject to the same privileges and protections as a regular union bargaining unit. For example, an employer is not under the same obligation to bargain with a union regarding contract terms for an independent contractor that it is to bargain over issues affecting its regular employees. Also, an independent contractor who went on strike would not be protected from employer reprisals under the National Labor Relations Act.

So no matter what they say it really is mostly about the office workers and even if the freelancers were to unionize, the companies could just say employ other freelancers from France or Korea to replace them and they wouldn't be able to do much about it.

 

Comic Book Studios could do away with the independent contractor thing and just hire some creatives as house employees like animation studios do, even when they have a career going job to job. But I guess that's too much of a radical idea.

 

They tried that, the company went bankrupt
The Other Marvel: CrossGen Comics’ Short, Sad Life – The Hollywood Reporter
CrossGen - Wikipedia
The Tragic History Of CrossGen Comics

There may be more to it, but that is how it's usually presented.

 

I didn't say it happened like magic. But the stated goal of the Union is to create a framework that other comic workers can be folded into. Not every company needs its own union.

And no one mentioned freelancers and I've already pointed out they're not covered. That's irrelevant.

 

This is what you said. Your stating ideals and dreams and they are coming into contrast with the reality of how the business works. Or your not explaining yourself well. When you say things like unionizing the entire industry, people who understand the law are going to explain how that wouldn't be able to work.

They are the only ones currently forming a union and they are the ones the discussion was about. Also the stuff they talk about would only apply to Image in any contract negotiations , no matter their intent.

 

  I feel pretty confident the context of my post was clearly "other companies' employees" and not "non-employees ineligible to join a union in the first place."

 

Other companies employees can't join a Union for Image comics. They could start their own unions, but they would have no obligation to follow the guide lines Image Comics unrecognized union is trying to set up.

This is what you said, This is what I responded to.

 

A union that covers a kind of employee would negotiate individual contracts with individual employers, but that doesn't mean every employer needs its own union. That's an important distinction. For example, CWA is backing CBWU and it has 700,000 members spread across different companies. And its easier to win things in negotiations with a new employer that you've already won with a previous employer because it sets a standard for the workers. It's about setting up a framework. Like I said.

And, yes, "the entire industry" meaning just "all the employees." You're being needlessly argumentative on that point. I mentioned freelancers weren't covered back on Monday.

 

The fact that the backbone of the industry is the freelancers and contractors that seem ineligible to join any union brings us back to an earlier opinion on this thread; maybe an industry that operates this way deserves to burn down to the ground and start over.

 

They can join a union, but the company that employed them would have no official reason to have to listen to the union and could just ignore them and hire other workers with no legal repercussions.

As I said.

As an independent contractor, the terms and conditions of the work you perform are set out in a contract between you and the employer. Even though you are not considered an “employee” under federal labor law, you may still join a union. However, you should keep in mind that a unit of independent contractors is not subject to the same privileges and protections as a regular union bargaining unit. For example, an employer is not under the same obligation to bargain with a union regarding contract terms for an independent contractor that it is to bargain over issues affecting its regular employees. Also, an independent contractor who went on strike would not be protected from employer reprisals under the National Labor Relations Act.

 

It's an interesting conundrum because the people who needed the protection of unionization most are the creators from the pre-Image days when Marvel and DC ruled the newsstands and whose work is now source material for big corporations to mine. I don't have hard numbers, but my guess is that most freelancers these days own what they create. There are so many companies that publish creator owned work or avenues for self-publishing that WFH comic work would have to now be the minimum. And while there are some horror stories from creator owned stuff - like the recent Action Lab kerfuffle - freelancers working in creator owned books might not all be getting rich, but they're not being exploited at the same levels.

 

Not if they created them at Marvel or DC. They may get creator credit, but the characters will be owned by Marvel and DC. Same would go for Archie Comics and anything created under license like Transformers or Ninja Turtles.

 

Yes, obviously. I didn't say otherwise.

For crying out loud.

 

This.

In other threads people have talked about how modern creators don't really care about the established characters or their history. They're there to tell the story they've wanted to tell since they were 6, establish enough of a following to publish a creator owned book, and get out. The fact the industry is built on freelance work is why this is happening. It makes no sense to get invested in the history of Superman as a creator if DC is going to fire me as soon as the new flavor of the month comes along. Tell the story you want to tell, blow the barn doors out, and slide sideways to substack, kickstarter, Image, or Dark Horse and do your own thing.

If you had house artists and writers, then you'd get some continuity. If I know I'm likely to stay at Marvel for a decade or more, I'm going to be a lot more invested in the universe, the history, and where the future should go.

Any yeah, Crossgen failed, but if the industry can't operate under a model like this, maybe it doesn't deserve to survive.

 

Keep in mind up till the 90's comic artists made enough that they could survive on their income and even do well. Comics also sold far better than they do now at much cheaper prices. The amount of issues they sell per book now would be considered numbers that would get books canceled back then. The artists didn't get insurance through the company, but they got paid enough they could afford to buy it if they wanted to. Marvel artists on the popular books for instance in the early 90's were making around $1000 a page with 22 to 24 page issues. The other artists got around $500 with newbies getting trials at $200 per page. Typically they drew a comic a month. That was how all those Marvel artists could afford to found Image. After the crash the pay per page got cut in half and by the 2000's got slashed again. Now it's more like 100 to 200 per page for most regular artists on a book. Though some super star artists still get more than that. Comics no longer sell enough issues to generate the better pay rates they used to. But freelance work didn't used to mean barely earning enough to get by. As more long time readers have been driven away from floppies page rates have dropped, and since that is what kept most artists getting regular income, this new trend toward graphic novels isn't helping as they don't come out as often, they are still only being paid the same page rates, and they don't get a large percentage back if a graphic novel sells a lot. They just get the per page rate and some small residuals that might as one artist I know said be enough to go out to eat one meal on maybe once a month. So you are seeing many artists going independent or moving to other industries if they can.

 

Image as I said it would, doesn't voluntarily recognize the union.

Instead, though, Image has opted to bring the National Labor Relations Board in as a third party.
Image explained that it would like to hold a secret ballot vote overseen by the NLRB to determine whether the Communications Workers of America union should represent them.

Image Comics Refusing to Voluntarily Recognize Its Workers' New Union

 

Todd McFarlane Launches Own NFT Marketplace, OddKey, With Steve Aoki