UPDATE: Many thanks to everyone who has kindly offered advice on my silly little internal debate. After discussion it has been jointly decided that the budget just won’t stand for one performer to be paid so highly.
We are now actively looking for another performer to fill the role, and who will be paid the same as everyone else. Which makes me much happier.
Sablesword hit the nail on the head for me by pointing out that it was not in fact a moral dilemma: there’s nothing immoral about paying the market rate for something. It’s not a moral issue at all. So it would have been perfectly OK to go ahead.
Nonetheless I’m happier to be able to continue the idyllic, idealistic, utopian nonsense we’ve built with RE over the years for just a little longer. I LIKE working in a collegiate, partnership-of-equals way. And that’s fine, it’s just my personal preference.
In case you hadn’t guessed, yes, I am naive and a bit of a dreamer as well as being a scientist, photographer and dominant. I like it that way.
Original Post:
Now there’s a thing.
I’m on the verge of turning down a project because of moral scruples.
Without wishing to go into details, the project involves casting multiple actors who will all be on set all the time for the duration of the film. The thing is, one person is likely to be paid much more than the others.
I realise there are legitimate reasons why this is so- that person is a bit higher profile.
This situation has pertained in previous projects, for sure.
But I was never the producer- I was never responsible for organising a shoot under those conditions, and for paying out the money to people knowing that one person was going to be getting significantly more cash for doing almost exactly the same job.
Furthermore, this is my “me” work- it’s fetish-related, not a mainstream film, which shouldn’t make a difference but somehow does. I don’t feel like the hired hand, even though technically speaking I totally am, I’m not paying the bills but it still feels too personal for me to be comfortable with this.
I know stars are paid more money. I know a skilled carpenter can charge more per hour than an apprentice, and think it is right that they should do so.
And yet- I just don’t know if I want to put myself in the position of knowingly paying people radically different amounts for doing the same job on set with me.
The pragmatic side of me says “Oh for the love of God, Hywel, it’s a paying job, it is the customer’s call anyway as they are paying for it all, get over yourself”.
But this little voice inside is screaming at me that this is wrong, and I don’t want to do it. Maybe I’d rather retain the “Fair Trade” stamp in my head and pass up the opportunity.
I know it is naive and stupid. But I’m really struggling.
What should I do?
It’s very thoughtful of you that you feel the dilemma, but I don’t think there is a problem. Go ahead.
Why is it different because the performers are on set at the same time? I am sure you hire models at different rates and I am sure you keep all equally busy. Come to think of it, I have a shoot in a couple of months when I will have two models together. I will pay them what they ask, which I believe to be different.
And don’t think different pay rates are special to creative industries. My wife and I have both worked in offices where colleagues doing essentially the same job were paid vastly different amounts. It’s business.
Andrew
Thanks Andrew.
It’s different because I DO usually pay everyone the same for the same job, as far as I am able.
I have a standard rate for models.
I used to have a standard rate for crew.
These days I don’t always pay the crew- I wish I was still in a position to do so, but I’m not. I nearly stopped working with people on crew as a result until the people concerned reassured me that they were more than happy to come along on shoots for fun and would rather continue to come and have fun and not be paid than not come.
I pay very local people slightly different rates because my standard rate includes travel; from time to time I’ve paid a few models who have come a very long way slightly more, too. And Ariel obviously is on a separate arrangement these days because she works on many different roles (often all on the same day) and we are, after all, married.
I know this probably seems comical to anyone who has worked in the real world any time in the last 15 years. It’s just that I have been lucky enough to be able to conduct my business mostly the way I want to and it is stressing me out a bit!
Thanks and OK, revised comment.
I think there are legitimate distinctions you can make. You say you are not making the decisions on payment, nor is it your money.
That said, your health/peace of mind is the most important thing. While it may be business, it is only business. It is not worth stressing yourself excessively over. I have experience there too but won’t share it on an open Blog. So if that means saying No, say No.
Andrew
Hywel, you have moral qualms. You’ve written why others wouldn’t find it a problem, and reasons why it’d be fine for you to go ahead, but you are still left concerned.
If you asked the performers, and they consented to it, would that ease your concerns?
Would that be an option? If it was “all out in the open” would all the performers be able to work together?
I don’t have the answer for you, just wondering if that was an option for helping you to find your answer……
HI Badg1 yes, I think that may well be the only way forward for me to feel comfortable with it.
It’s not a moral dilemma, but rather an aesthetic one: The sponsor puts a higher value on the performance of the “star” than on the performance of the other actors, and you don’t. This value is a matter of taste and de gustibus non est disputandum. It’s like you being asked to make a video of something the sponsor finds hot but that leaves you cold, or that you even find to be squicky. It’s not morally wrong to make such a video, but…
Thanks, Sablesword. You are right. It ISN’T a moral dilemma; there’s nothing immoral about paying the market rate for something or in this case someone. I’ve got no problem with that person charging more for their time- I appreciate and understand that they have a larger following and the opportunity cost is higher for them, because they could get another similarly-paid job that day where the other performers maybe couldn’t.
That is very helpful: at least if the shoot goes ahead I will have a clear mind that I’m not doing anything immoral.
I’ve written to the customer explaining my dilemma; this may well have talked me out a job. It’s interesting how much of a relief that would be. If the customer is happy with me doing so, I will write to the performers and explain the situation. If they are all OK with it, we will go ahead. Otherwise I will honour the bookings with the people I have already confirmed dates and rates with and shoot something for myself with them instead (so they’re not going to lose out on work as a result of my strange attitudes).
In my opinion in the subjective realm of art each performer and performance are unique which gives an aesthetic quality. Likewise the remuneration can be individualized as long as the the minimum is provided the sky is the limit as long as someone pay for it.