TV Watercooler

Not sure if anyone else has posted this, but this popped into my inbox today:

Subject: Please help decide Shooting People's policy on unpaid work postings

Dear Shooters - I need your help.

For over ten years, Shooting People has facilitated independent filmmaking, helping thousands of you find the people you want to work with on projects of all shapes and sizes. We’re proud of what we do.

As you know, Shooting People members often post to the Daily Bulletins looking for cast and crew to collaborate with either for free or for very small payment on independently produced work. We encourage members to be thoughtful about what their collaborators are entitled to. We maintain a comprehensive guide to low budget pay scales called 'How Much Should I Pay? How Much Should I Earn?'. Our moderators often send postings back to members if they think that the offer isn't clear or is unfair: see the Posting Guidelines.

I know, I know – we’ve been talking about this for years, going - it seems - around in circles. But the issue not only isn't going away - it's becoming a crisis. Debate has raged in the Bulletins (just try searching for 'BECTU' here!) about the recent Employment Tribunals ruling on expenses only engagements. We know that some of you feel very strongly that minimum wage rules should be applied as strictly to a low-budget independent job as to a TV commission (and have been writing to other members to tell them). We also know that others of you feel equally strongly that independent creative work should be exempted from the regulations and that every Shooter has the right to decide for themselves if they want to work for free.
So: we need to know what the majority of our members think. We are here to represent your needs and interests. Please complete this quick poll before next Tuesday.

Also feel free to leave any comments. We'll publish the results, making sure that BECTU, Skillset, UK Film Council, BFI, Regional Screen Agencies, NPA, Director’s Guild, PACT and more are told what you, the UK's biggest network of independent filmmakers think.
Your voice will then help us to frame what our policy towards accepting unpaid postings should be going forward - something we can discuss with you in the bulletins once the poll has closed.

Thanks in advance for your participation.

Best wishes.
James Mullighan. Creative Director. Shooting People.

Hi Dolly

Many thanks for that - it had in fact been posted already, but in an existing thread - viewtopic.php?f=3&t=52 - on the third page.

In fact, clearly Shooting People towers have been advised of its existence, since Jess Search has already paid us a visit!

"Your voice will then help us to frame what our policy towards accepting unpaid postings should be going forward - something we can discuss with you in the bulletins once the poll has closed."

So Shooting People are going to decide whether or not they will feature adverts for illegal unpaid work, based on what their members think. And this likes to think of itself as some kind of mainstream organisation.

Always worth remebering that it was Shooting People itself that featured the advert for the illegal unpaid work that resulted in the industrial tribunal which concluded that the work was ilegally based and must be paid:

(From Shooting People July 2008)

Runner with car (London)
From: Chris Pheasey
Card: http://shootingpeople.org/cards/chrispheasey

Runner with car for UK feature film produced by London Dreams Motion Pictures.
The UK feature, currently "Untitled LDMP Project", is a romantic-comedy of our time, set in London. For further information on the project, please see the website: www.london-dreams.co.uk
Principle Photography is scheduled for mid-August for 4 consecutive weeks in various Central London locations.
When applying please include the make, model and condition of your car.
Please mark applications with "London Dreams Runner" in the title field.
Expenses only.
Please send a copy of your CV to Chris Pheasey: chrispheasey*at*yahoo.com

I bet the lawmakers are quivering in their boots.

On a more sobering note, how can an organisation that gets public funds from the UKFC and has an Equality and Diversity policy be delivering on it when it unpaid work clearly favours the rich and affluent?

I'm not really sure what this means.

Are we to assume that when (for surely it will be when, not if) the Shooting People membership votes in favour of working for free, that Shooting People will campaign on their behalf to get the law changed? Or does it just mean they will continue to ignore it?

why don't Shooting People just accept the law?
would they be asking their members to take a vote on whether to submit their tax returns, or pay their council tax??
jeezis

Well I put my two pence in against working for free, but it looks like 75% would work for free.

Maybe, but because they asked the wrong question we don't know how many of those are self-employed and would be able to anyway.

I would hope that Shooting People do campaign to get the law amended. I doubt that they will succeed, but it's the way they should go. Especially when the enevitable poll results show that a vast majority of SP subscribers believe the law is badly applied to their situation. That's what interest groups do, they lobby to change/modify laws and regulations.

Shooting People have got a real problem here, and I can't see how they are going to get out of it. If they put a stop to all free work postings then they could see large numbers of people migrating away, if they don't then they will be villfied by many sections of the induistry for aiding and abetting alledged exploitation.

Welcome back bill368