Actor per diem

BloodnGuts

BloodnGuts

I was wondering do you give an actor a per diem every day they are away from their home and working or just on the days they are away from their home and not shooting/working??

Just asking I have an actor asking about per diem
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Aspiring Mogul said:
For example, if a bunch of actors, DP's etc were to do work for free on your test pilot or whatever, and then you go on to make the film and make money, they will have a claim on ownership of the film and, hence, the profits. If I pay the agreed-upon rate, however, and we put our agreement in writing, they will have no claim.
Click to expand...
You're a lawyer. You're telling that even thought I (the producer) have
signed contracts with my entire cast and crew stating they have no
ownership of my film, that they worked as volunteers for no compensation
and they they are not entitled to any profits from any media they may
still have a claim on ownership of the film and, hence, the profits?

I have done more than a two dozen table reads with actors. They were not
paid (fuel and a nice meal only) and most of them were not hired to be in
the movie I made. Nothing in writing at all. You're telling me they have a
claim on ownership of the film and, hence, the profits?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
ahennessey said:
We would be housing the actors in some nice houses near the shooting location that are being generously provided to us. Since those houses have kitchens and we are generously stocking those kitchens and pantries with food, we do not have to pay per diem since we are providing food for the actors outside of the shoot times.
Click to expand...

Warning: dumb question ahead.

This is actually something I've wondered about. Is it considered unprofessional to, say, rent a huge house a put up all the actors and crew in it together (providing everyone has their own bed, of course)? I would personally not have a problem with that, but I could also see there being problems with it on a human/social level... also, what is a reasonable expectation of privacy? If I were to rent hotel rooms for actors, could I just 'assign' two actors (read: strangers) to share a room?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Not a dumb question at all.

It is not unprofessional. It happens on many low budget indie films. Remember, for some locations it is impossible to actually get any different type of housing. For instance, there might not be a hotel anywhere in a reasonable vicinity if you are shooting in a remote area.

However, yes, you should give people their own rooms with reasonable expectation of privacy. As has been mentioned on these boards many times, crew and cast are fine with inconvenience, as long as they feel that you are making every effort to make the best you can of the situation for them.

I know that as an actor that's always the way I've felt.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
directorik said:
You're a lawyer. You're telling that even thought I (the producer) have
signed contracts with my entire cast and crew stating they have no
ownership of my film, that they worked as volunteers for no compensation
and they they are not entitled to any profits from any media they may
still have a claim on ownership of the film and, hence, the profits?

I have done more than a two dozen table reads with actors. They were not
paid (fuel and a nice meal only) and most of them were not hired to be in
the movie I made. Nothing in writing at all. You're telling me they have a
claim on ownership of the film and, hence, the profits?
Click to expand...

No, that's not what I meant - I apologize if I gave the wrong impression. Let me explain.

1) If you have no contract, and they work for free, and, later, your short becomes the basis of a billion-dollar franchise, then they may have a claim.

2) If you have a contract, paying them minimum wage, and the same happens, then they have no claim.

3) The tricky question is if you have a contract, paying them nothing, and you get your dream franchise. Will they have a claim? I would think not, because they agreed to work for free. But put that in writing, so scenario #1 doesn't happen.

With that in mind, is #1 is not always the case. If they agreed to work for free, even if there's no written contract, and there are sufficient witnesses to convince the judge and jury, then they're out of luck. If, however, the terms were not clear, and there is a possibility that they wanted a cut, then YOU are out of luck. It all depends on the circumstances. The issue is NOT the written contract per se; it's proving the intent of everyone involved.

The other factor would be industry standard. IOW, if actors do table reads for free, is it an industry standard that they will get ownership? If not, then, again, they are out of luck. The tricky part will come when they do substantial work on your web series, which becomes the big-money franchise - then they will definitely have a very good chance in court.

That's why a lawyer ALWAYS gets things in writing, to prevent future problems.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dreadylocks said:
Warning: dumb question ahead.

This is actually something I've wondered about. Is it considered unprofessional to, say, rent a huge house a put up all the actors and crew in it together (providing everyone has their own bed, of course)? I would personally not have a problem with that, but I could also see there being problems with it on a human/social level... also, what is a reasonable expectation of privacy? If I were to rent hotel rooms for actors, could I just 'assign' two actors (read: strangers) to share a room?
Click to expand...
Agree - not a dumb question.

A few things to consider when proposing this option: the experience of
the people involved. As you point out, you would not have a problem
with this - it's kind of a community "slumber party". However, people
who are crew and actors for a living may not see it that way. A private
room with a few hours of alone time after a 12 hour shooting day can
be really, really needed.

Aslo the length of the shoot comes into play. A week? No problem. Two
weeks? That's potentially 14 nights. A three week or longer shoot? Living
in a huge house for 21, 28 (or longer) days can really get on people
nerves - people who are also working closely together 12 (or more) hours
a day. A little private time becomes really, really important. Having a
roommate in a nice hotel for a long shoot can be a little easier, but it still
gets old, fast.

This is one reason why lower budget films must use local people - that's
a lot of money spent that does not end up on the screen. And you can
now see why bigger budget films can cost a lot.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Aspiring Mogul said:
1) If you have no contract, and they work for free, and, later, your short becomes the basis of a billion-dollar franchise, then they may have a claim.
Click to expand...
Okay, I understand being cautious and getting things in writing, however
a little bit of harsh realism should also come into play. At no time in the
history of cinema has a movie made with free labor turned into a billion
dollar franchise.

And c'mon; if it does happen, throwing the people who worked for free a
percentage of the billion dollars seems like the right thing to do. I get it
that a lawyer won't not feel that way, but filmmakers do. And there is
precedent of it happening.


Aspiring Mogul said:
The other factor would be industry standard. IOW, if actors do table reads for free, is it an industry standard that they will get ownership? If not, then, again, they are out of luck. The tricky part will come when they do substantial work on your web series, which becomes the big-money franchise - then they will definitely have a very good chance in court.
Click to expand...
First, there is no such thing as "industry standard".

There are two different kinds of table reads; the kind where a writer gathers
some actors and they read the script so just to get the script fleshed out. These
are not the actors hired to be in the project. Then there is the table read after
the actors have been hired. In the second case there is already an employment
contract. The actors who do "substantial work on your web series" should have
a full employment contract. The actors who help out with a table read to help
get the script fleshed out have not done "substantial work".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
directorik said:
Okay, I understand being cautious and getting things in writing, however
a little bit of harsh realism should also come into play. At no time in the
history of cinema has a movie made with free labor turned into a billion
dollar franchise.
Click to expand...

I may have exaggerated about the franchise being worth a billion dollars, but the point is still valid. And consider a certain chain of events - a bunch of people help the mogul for free initially, helping him develop his idea. The mogul then takes the idea and gets funding for his movie, which becomes a major franchise. That initial bunch can have a claim.

Consider a second chain of events. A bunch help him initially, and, even after he gets funding, they continue to help him for free or at a discount. You guessed it - they could then have a claim on the franchise.


directorik said:
And c'mon; if it does happen, throwing the people who worked for free a
percentage of the billion dollars seems like the right thing to do. I get it
that a lawyer won't not feel that way, but filmmakers do. And there is
precedent of it happening.
Click to expand...

Agreed, but, considering the chain I mentioned above, that should be up to the aspiring mogul, not them. And, if you do any litigation, you'll know that EVERYONE wants half the pie.



directorik said:
First, there is no such thing as "industry standard".

There are two different kinds of table reads; the kind where a writer gathers
some actors and they read the script so just to get the script fleshed out. These
are not the actors hired to be in the project. Then there is the table read after
the actors have been hired. In the second case there is already an employment
contract. The actors who do "substantial work on your web series" should have
a full employment contract. The actors who help out with a table read to help
get the script fleshed out have not done "substantial work".
Click to expand...

Then the issue turns to the standard in those two kinds of reads. In the first kind, do they get paid? In the second, do they get paid extra? And, in both cases, would they have a claim on the franchise, billion-dollar or otherwise?

In the end, they probably won't win in court, especially if there's been a substantial length of time between the initial pro-bono labor and the pre-production, but any lawyer would tell you to play it safe. If you don't believe me, why don't you take my responses and ask an entertainment lawyer for his opinion?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top