A TV actor who reports late on the set stands to lose money
This is one of the clauses in the MoU signed between CINTAA and IFTPC that has upset telly actors and given more power to producers
AMemorandum of Understanding (MoU), signed between Cine and TV Artistes Association (CINTAA) and Indian Film and TV Producers Council (IFTPC) on May 1, has led to a rift between actors and producers. Actors are crying foul against certain clauses in the MoU. For example, it forbids lead actors from quitting a show for at least three years. There’s also a clause that makes it compulsory for actors to sign an attendance register. It empowers producers to impose penalties and deduct payments from actors who report late.
Producers say they fail to understand the hue and cry around the MoU because there’s nothing new about these terms. Explains producer Yash Patnaik, “They have been a part of agreements between actors and production houses for long. The MoU has simply formalised it. Also, nothing is forced on anyone. Negotiations always happen between an actor and production house before an agreement is signed. But you can’t leave a show once it becomes popular.” The MoU will ensure discipline, believe the makers. Says a producer requesting anonymity, “A lot goes into making a show popular. Everyone’s hard work goes down the drain when the lead face, synonymous with the show, decides to exit. Many shows have even shut down abruptly. What about those associated with it, from lightmen to spot boys? Why should they suffer because one actor wants to grab a bigger opportunity? Is it not right to expect them to give back what they have got from the show? A talented actor will never face dearth of good work.”
Producer Saurabh Tewari adds, “Agreed that good content will run irrespective of its lead face quitting or staying put. But several factors have led to this MoU. When shows wind up prematurely, the producer incurs huge losses and it filters down to the crew. A producer starts recovering his investment only after six months on an average. Is it wrong to expect the lead actor to cooperate? Also, many actors have signed exclusive contracts with channels and get paid handsomely for the days they don’t shoot. Then why do they quit once the show becomes a hit?” Producer JD Majethia says, “The MoU is basically to correct undisciplined actors. Sincere and disciplined actors need not worry.”
ACTORS SPEAK
‘THREE YEARS IS A LONG TIME’ Alok Nath: I
am completely against this MoU. How can CINTAA enforce such rules? It’s
meaningless to sign a contract that will not allow them to leave a show
for three years. I want CINTAA members to work in a daily soap before
making such rules.
‘IT’S UNFAIR ON ACTORS’ Karan Sharma: This
is encroachment of an actor’s freedom. I think it’s more in favour of
the producers. When many shows don’t last even for three months, how can
you bind an actor for three years? That too, when producers can give
marching orders to actors with a week’s notice period?
‘IT SHOULD BE MUTUAL AND FLEXIBLE’ Rashami Desai: The
three-year restriction is not viable unless both parties are happy with
the show. Serving a notice period should be fine as it gives ample time
to the production house to find a suitable replacement. What if the
show goes off air in six months? There is no clause to cover the actor.
‘WE WORK IN AN INSECURE ENVIRONMENT’
Shashank Vyas: Now, most daily soaps hardly last a year. We work in an insecure environment. We might have lot of offers today, but nothing tomorrow. There should be an understanding between an actor and producer. If an actor wants to take up another offer, he/she should be allowed to exit after serving a twomonth notice period. That time is sufficient for the producer to look for a replacement.
Shashank Vyas: Now, most daily soaps hardly last a year. We work in an insecure environment. We might have lot of offers today, but nothing tomorrow. There should be an understanding between an actor and producer. If an actor wants to take up another offer, he/she should be allowed to exit after serving a twomonth notice period. That time is sufficient for the producer to look for a replacement.
‘WE ARE NOT LABOURERS’ Tina Dutta: I
think no actor will be keen to abide by such rules. We are here to
perform and entertain people; we are not labourers. We slog day and
night the way the producers want us to. So, there should some
understanding between the two parties. Also, a daily soap is not just an
actor’s responsibility; it’s team work.
‘WHAT ABOUT OUR PERSONAL LIVES?’ Sharad Kelkar: Actors
also have the right to enjoy their personal life. We would also love to
have weekends off, but we make a lot of adjustments. You can’t make a
contract and apply it to all. So many parameters are involved in a daily
TV soap. At the end of the day, the interests of both parties have to
be taken into consideration.
