- \n
- Prologue: 23rd Century – Men and Women, Leads and Supports<\/li>\n
- FairPay Alliance and the Question of Transparency<\/li>\n
- Wage Disparity in the Film Industry<\/li>\n
- The Policy Paper on Gender by the BFFS<\/li>\n
- Epilogue: 21st Century – Men and Women, Leads and Supports<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
<\/p>\n
Prologue: 23rd Century – Men and Women, Leads and Supports<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Fifty years ago, in 1966, the US TV series STAR TREK was broadcast for the first time. The core crew of the starship consisted of six men and one woman (Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scott, Sulu, Uhura <\/strong>and Chekov), the male-centred storyline is set in the 23rd century and the women generally wore very short skirts, if they occured at all… Just before STAR TREK the German Sci-Fi series RAUMPATROUILLE \u2013 DIE PHANTASTISCHEN ABENTEUER DES RAUMSCHIFFS ORION (Space Patrol \u2013 The Fantastic Adventures of the Spaceship Orion) was broadcast in 1965 which surpassed this by far, but that is a topic for another day. Let\u2019s get back to the USS Enterprise.
\nActor Walter Koenig mentioned in an interview with the Las Vegas Sun (published 30.7.14<\/a>), that Nichelle Nichols<\/strong>‘ wage f\u00fcr playing the part of Uhura <\/strong>in the original series was lower than his (as Chekov) and that of George Takai<\/strong> (Sulu). Leonard Nimoy<\/strong> (Spock) heard of this and stood up for equal pay:<\/p>\nKOENIG: Leonard<\/strong> (Nimoy, Mr. Spock) was always kind of unapproachable. But a very good man. Sound ethics and a good sense of morality.
\nLAS VEGAS SUN: How so?
\nKOENIG: When it came to the attention of the cast that there was a disparity in pay in that George<\/strong> and I were getting the same pay but Nichelle<\/strong> was not getting as much, I took it to Leonard and he took it to the front office and they corrected that.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nIn this context it is fitting to quote cameraman and member of ver.di FilmUnion Stefan Nowak<\/strong> laudatory speech when the special award \u201cStarker Einsatz 2014<\/a>\u201d (Strong Commitment) was presented to script writer \/ director Ulrike Grote<\/strong> and producer Ilona Schultz<\/strong>, founders of Fortune Cookies Filmproduction:<\/p>\n
\u201c(…) whoever stands up for reasonable compensation and humane working conditions is risking a lot. If worse comes to worse they are not hired any more. But at best reasonable budgets and working conditions can be achieved.\u201d<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
![\"StarTrek_3\"](\"https:\/\/schspin.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/08\/startrek_31.jpg?w=611\")
<\/a>Spock<\/strong>, Uhura<\/strong> and Sulu<\/strong> from the US TV series STAR TREK<\/p><\/div>\n
I read of a second situation where Leonard Nimoy<\/strong> stood up for \u2013 financially – disadvantaged colleagues, which occured during the production of the animated series of Star Trek (1973 – 74):<\/p>\n
NIMOY: There was also the case where George (Sulu) and Nichelle (Uhura) were not hired to do their voices in the animated series. I refused to do Spock until they were hired.
\n(quoted by Anthony Pascale in TrekMovie. 31.7.14<\/a>)
\n<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\nPascale commented on both incidents in the following manner:<\/p>\n
The fact that Nimoy fought for Nichelle Nichols back in the 1960s shows a bit of bravery.<\/strong> Back then women\u2019s pay equity wasn\u2019t the same kind of \u00a0hot topic it is today. On top of that, while he was a lead, Nimoy was still just an actor in the show and didn\u2019t have the kind of pull he would eventually have when he went on to produce and direct for the Star Trek movies in the 80s & 90s. All in all, Walter\u2019s story just proves what we all knew, Leonard Nimoy is a mensch.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\u00a0<\/em>Some elementary essentials of a fight for fair wages become apparent: first and foremost the different pay situation must be (made) transparent. It also helps if priviledged advocates act in solidarity and ideally if a broad alliance is formed.<\/p>\n
FairPay Alliance and the Question of Transparency<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Such an alliance has become active in Germany recently, not only in relation to the film industry but rather to all professional areas that show a gender specific imbalance of wages:<\/p>\n
The alliance of the Berlin Declaration, working across all political groups, enters the next phase. We started (in 2011) with the aim to get more women involved in the decision making processes of the business world – on equal terms and with equal representation. The first big step was taken with the Law of Equal Participation of Women and Men in Leadership Positions. Our next aim: equal pay. We vouch for this with our FairPay Alliance<\/strong>. And we will have reached our aim when each and everyone is able to say on 365 days a year:<\/em>
\n TODAY I am being paid fairly.<\/em>
\n TODAY I am paying in a fair way.<\/em>
\n(From the Berlin Declaration of Equality on the Pay Slip<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n![\"FairPay-Banner_1\"](\"https:\/\/schspin.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/08\/fairpay-banner_1.jpg\")
<\/a>For the moment the campaign\u2019s website fairpay-heute.de<\/a> only exists in a German version. On it everybody interested can support the petition and the work of the alliance with their signature, find information on allies as well as statements by supporters – among them of three actresses. The core demands of the petition are as follows:<\/p>\n- \n
- achieve transparency for all<\/em><\/li>\n
- obligation to fix detected unequal pay situations<\/em><\/li>\n
- an upgrade of social careers<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Transparency<\/strong> is good for everyone. Some don\u2019t know for sure that they earn more than the others and how much. Or at least how little the others get paid, how badly they are paid for the same, equivalent or comparable work. And others often don\u2019t know that they get less and how much less.<\/p>\n
There is the real income distribution and the felt one. There is no connection between the two. Wealth<\/strong> starts at a net income of roughly 3.100 \u20ac per month (for singles, 4.600 \u20ac for pairs.) Only 8 % are above this threshold.<\/strong> People earning this much belong to a relatively small upper class. But actually most rich people believe that it\u2019s never about them when newspaper and tv talk about the rich.
\nKolja Rudzig<\/strong>. Reich sind immer die anderen \/ It\u2019s always the others that are rich. DIE ZEIT No. 40, 22. Sept. 16
\n<\/em><\/p>\nAt the Rio Olympics all German athletes who won medals got the same prize money<\/strong>, gender didn\u2019t matter, only the position in which they finished did: for a gold medal they were awarded 20,000 \u20ac, for silver 15,000 \u20ac and for bronze 10,000 \u20ac. The postions four to eight were awarded with 5,000 to 1,500 \u20ac. There were also standardized regulations for those competing in team events. The same prize money was given to German athletes competing in the Rio Paralympics<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
![\"schspin-gender-prize-gap\"](\"https:\/\/schspin.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/09\/schspin-gender-prize-gap.jpg\")
<\/a>Gender Prize Gap: When male athletes get higher prize money than female athletes.<\/p><\/div>\n
A completely different Gender Prize Gap is practiced by the German Football Association DFB<\/strong>. Some months ago the men\u2019s football Euro Championship was held in France, the German team got as far as the semi-finals, each player received a bonus of 100,000 \u20ac. Had they won the title they would have got 300,000 \u20ac. The female DFB players <\/strong>who won Olympic gold in Rio, in 2013 each received 22,500 \u20ac<\/strong> for winning the European champions\u2019 title, which was their fifth in a row. That is 7,5 %<\/strong> of the men\u2019s bonus they would have got 3 years later. I am expecting a distinct increase for the women\u2019s Euro next year in the Netherlands. Anything less than 300,000 \u20ac per player for the title would be inappropiate and anachronistic<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
These numbers are not very difficult to find, they are published by the German Sporthilfe (sports aid) and the DFB and also by the media. Other Gender Pay Gaps<\/strong> are not so easily detected since talking about one\u2019s earnings<\/p>\n
is still a taboo<\/strong> in Germany. However, breaking this taboo would have a positive effect on the wage gap and help close it. (…) Only those who know about salary levels can assess their own situation in comparison to others and are able to prove if they are paid unfairly.
\n<\/em>(Source: Equalpaywiki)<\/p>\nWage transparency is possible as the example from Sweden shows<\/strong>, a state without tax secrecy. The taxable income of nearly all people (exceptions: the King and the Queen) are made public and can be requested by calling the Skatteverket<\/em> \/ tax office or by looking it up in the annual Taxeringskalender<\/em>. Is transparency the source of the smaller Gender Pay Gap in Sweden? And could this be a model for Germany? (read also: Taxes are an open secret in Scandinavia<\/a>).<\/p>\n
What would it be like if everybody in a film project knew how much you are earning and you knew what everbody else is getting? Or alternatively, if the average wages for women and for men for each team division and in front of the camera were published<\/strong>?<\/p>\n
Definitions:<\/h4>\n
Most of us have probably at one point or another encountered colleagues at work who take their time and chat a lot about private things during work, or who only pick the cherries from the workload \u2013 i.e. who work less than we do, in our subjective perception. But this is not about this type of \u201cunfair pay\u201d.<\/p>\n
- \n
- Unequal Pay<\/strong> is used for different wages, e.g. of women and men, for the same work.<\/li>\n
- Gender Pay Gap<\/strong> refers to the difference between the average incomes of women and men and is influenced by the types of jobs, part-time work and care responsibilities (read also: Gender Pay Gap: Government failing to take action<\/a>)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Wage Disparity in the Film Industry<\/h2>\n
There are no uniform wages in the film industry, neither among the divisions nor within each. The varying pay depends on several causes:<\/p>\n
- \n
- Film job<\/strong>: a lot of film salaries are regulated by collective agreements and differ a bit or considerably (see also: Filmcrafts: Some with Women, Some with Men? <\/a>from July 2014).<\/li>\n
- Type of production<\/strong>, i.e. wheter it’s for cinema or television, a blockbuster, indie or low budget film, broadcast in main or early evening programming etc.<\/li>\n
- Weekly or annual individual occupational scope<\/strong> (read also Cinema, Career, Children: Can the Film Industry be called a family-friendly Workplace? From May 2014)<\/li>\n
- Gender<\/strong>: wage differentials between women and men are also encountered in the film industry<\/li>\n
- Status<\/strong>: Some wages are freely negotiable and the sky\u2019s the limit, at least for some people in the film \/ tv industry.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
Quoting from Cinema, Career, Children<\/a>:<\/p>\n
Satzer (2007) determined an average annual pre-tax income of 38.878 \u20ac for male and 30.119 \u20ac for female film makers. So according to this \u2013 non representative \u2013 survey men earn 29 % than women.<\/strong> This gender pay gap is also confirmed by the findings of Buhrmann and Diersche in 2012. But why is the gap so big? Are typically female film jobs paid less? Do women negotiate worse contracts individually? Is it because women \u2013 maybe because of family committments \u2013 participate in less productions per year? Knowing about the pay gap, would part-time wages for mothers in film and television even be higher than the social benefits level?<\/em>
\nAnd what about women in film and television in front of the camera<\/strong>? According to the survey of B\u00fchrmann<\/strong> et al. (2010) 72 % of the women and 64,7 % of the men had an annual income of less than 30.240 \u20ac<\/strong> (from film, theatre and voice work). The survey also gives a more detailed classification of wages, in 5000 \u20ac steps, but that unfortunately does not differenciate between women and men. But the survey leaves another clue to the inferior situation for women: 18,5 % of the actors as opposed to 25,7 % of the actresses cannot support themselves from acting jobs<\/em>.<\/p>\n![\"Gender](\"https:\/\/schspin.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/09\/schspin-gender-pay-gap.jpg\")
<\/a>Gender Pay Gap: difference between the average incomes of women and men.<\/p><\/div>\n
It is also worth remembering that most people working for film and television aren\u2019t permanently or continuously employed, rather they work in projects for limited periods. The shooring periods get shorter, the shooting days get longer. The reconciliation of family and working life is very difficult, not only against this background. (at present only a small share of the men care for small children or elderly relatives).
\nDanish actor Christian Tafdrup<\/strong> (known from the last season of the TV series BORGEN as the baddie TV1-programme director Alexander Hjort) mentioned at the screening of his directoral debut FOR\u00c6LDRE <\/a>\/ PARENTS at the Munich Filmfest this year that in Danmark you cannot shoot longer than 8 hours a day. Not only is this good knews for parents but it\u2019s probably also favouring creative work on the whole. Director Urs Egger<\/strong> \u2013 when receiving the Fair Film Award for the TV film DER FALL BRUCKNER – positively highlighted the fact that because children were involved in leading roles the shooting days were shorter than normal. But that is a topic for another day.<\/p>\nSo far I have been writing about wages and salaries, but actually a number of film people aren\u2019t employed \/ socially insured but are working free-lance, for example directors and directors of photography, so they have to take care of social insurance by themselves. There are no collective agreements for them, but e.g. again for directors, just recently an agreement between the ZDF (German Channel Two), the producers\u2019 alliance and the BVR directors\u2019 union was signed, in which a<\/p>\n
Basic Remuneration BVR <\/b>(directors\u2019 union) of 27.820 \u20ac<\/b> (was stipulated) . This is in accordance with the standard remuneration for script writers, even though it means some sort of advanced minimum fee for directors. Obviously experienced directors will receive more.
\n(Source: BVR und ZDF vereinbaren Gemeinsame Verg\u00fctungsregeln<\/a>, undated).<\/p>\nAnd this brings us back to the question of gender. Both diversity reports published by the BVR so far (2010-13 and 2014) show a structural discrimination of female directors<\/strong> (\u201ethey directed only 11 % of prime time TV minutes<\/em>\u201c) \u2013 so it is more difficult for women to gain experience that would raise their pay.
\nAs a reaction to the work of Pro Quote Regie<\/a> \/ Pro Quota Directing, to date several production companies have expressed their willingness to introduce minimum quotas for female directors, maybe pay equity will also become an issue \u2013 in accordance with the earlier mentioned demand of the Fair Pay Petition for Equity on the Pay Slip (TODAY I am paying in a fair way): obligation to fix detected unequal pay situation<\/strong>.<\/em><\/p>\nThe Policy Paper on Gender by the BFFS<\/h2>\n
The German association of actresses and actors BFFS first commented on unequal pay for women and men in public in August 2014 with their unfortunately still quite unknown Unequal Pay Campaign<\/a>. Now, two years later, the next step followed with a 1 page-policy paper on Gender (in German only, click here<\/a>). The full title is Policy Paper on the situation of actresses in German language film and TV productions<\/strong>. The paper starts with an inventory:<\/p>\n
The BFFS find the continuous discrimination of actresses unacceptable and commit themselves to do everything in their power that will result in equality for actresses in the workplace.<\/em><\/p>\n
The paper lists three demands and four strategies. The second demand deals with wage justice<\/strong>:<\/em><\/p>\n
2. Remuneration<\/b>: The BFFS wants gender equal unbiased wages and through these a balanced wage ratio between actors and actresses.<\/em><\/p>\n
The reasons for different annual incomes of actresses and actors among others can be found in the earlier mentioned wage disparity reasons occupational scope, gender and status:<\/b><\/p>\n
The possible OCCUPATIONAL SCOPE <\/strong>is influenced by the different quantity of roles<\/strong> for women and men (have a look at my findings in section \u201eFemale and Male Roles, Quantity and Age in NEROPA \u2013 NEutral ROles PArity: A Method for more Genderbalanced Casts<\/a> from 20.1.16) and the personal, e.g. family situation<\/strong>.
\nThe factual occupational scope<\/strong> is also connected to the individual\u2019s market value<\/strong> however that is determined or rather built, and the individual\u2019s experience<\/strong>. Those who have been in more films are more likely to be cast than colleagues with a shorter c.v. \u2013 this applies to smaller roles as well. The BVC (Association of German Casting Directors) organized a panel discussion at this year\u2019s Munich film festival called \u201cFocus Casting: who is suitable for which role and why?\u201c and there we heard that even the number of followers in social networks are taken into account when determining the person\u2019s market value. A high market value is said to be synonymous to a great audience and high tv ratings.
\nThere is something else that negatively influences the possible occupational scope<\/strong> of less famous acting people: To save money some productions of public TV are transferred abroad and shot in East European countries<\/strong>. As a result there is less work for film people based in Germany who work behind and in front of the camera. The leading roles are cast in Germany and maybe also a handful of supporting actresses and actors. All others are hired locally for lower wages and possibly with additional regional funding. This makes the shooting a bit more difficult as the main cast will speak German and the others in their languages (and will be dubbed later). And also of course this results in fewer possible roles for German based actresses and actors.<\/p>\nGENDER<\/strong>: Not always but still sometimes women and men are paid differing daily wages for comparable roles. This may concern the two leading roles in a 90 minutes cop drama as well as secondary characters with similarly large (or small) roles. In Germany not many actresses go public with such discriminations, this was one of the reasons behind the BFFS Unequal Pay Campaign.
\nBut of course we know of similar situations in other countries<\/strong>. Robin Wright<\/strong> and Kevin Spacey who played the equal leads Claire <\/strong>and Frank Underwood <\/strong>in the Netflix series HOUSE OF CARDS originally weren\u2019t paid the same. Robin Wright was able to end this injustice because of transparency<\/strong> \u2013 she knew of this unequal pay \u2013 and her privileged situation<\/strong>. Her main character was more popular according to several audience surveys. So she threatened to go public \u2013 which she did in the end of course after she\u2019d been successful with her demand. I don\u2019t know if the unequal pay she\u2019d received was also compensated in retrospect. So this was a clear example for Unequal Pay<\/strong> \u2013 but also for the Gender Pay Gap<\/strong>, as Wright<\/strong> mentions the connection between her lower market value and her family time:<\/p>\n\u201cBecause I wasn\u2019t working full-time, I wasn\u2019t building my salary bracket. If you don\u2019t build that \u2026 with notoriety and presence, you\u2019re not in the game any more. (…) You don\u2019t hold the value you would have held if you had done four movies a year like Nicole Kidman and Cate Blanchett did during the time I was raising my kids. Now I\u2019m kind of on a comeback at 50 years old<\/em>.\u201d
\nThe Guardian 18.5.16 Robin Wright says she had to fight for equal pay on House of Cards<\/a><\/p>\nAnother aspect of unequal pay of female<\/strong> and male leading roles<\/strong> could be their different occurence in the film<\/strong>. Maybe the man of a leading pair of cops has his own recurring subplot and the woman doesn\u2019t. So the actress on top of receiving the smaller daily wage also has fewer shooting days. (of course it could also be that the actor has fewer shooting days, that remains to be analysed).
\nThe Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media recently introduced the Geena Davis Inclusion Quotient GDIQ<\/b>. This is a software tool for automatically analysing audio and video content in regards to the screen time of characters (see An Automated Analysis of Gender Representation in Popular Films<\/a>).
\nIt will be really great to see how this works out because obviously it would spare the analysts from time consuming work with stop watch and note pad in front of a monitor.
\nBut of course it is also possible to analyse the roles by statistically evaluate the script<\/strong> before a production starts (e.g. the number of spoken words and the number of scenes in wich the characters appear). This ways has the great advantage that it enables a corrective intervention before shooting starts<\/strong>, in case the main couple is a bit lopsided. And in the digital era this evaluation should be no big deal.<\/p>\nSTATUS<\/strong> as a third reason for Unequal Pay among actresses and actors it has less to do with Gender and more with the level of recognition, market value and (non-)exchangeability of the acting people.
\nLeading roles <\/strong>have the most shooting days and the highest daily wages in a production even though they don\u2019t all earn the same. Secondary roles<\/strong> have (far) less shooting days and mostly also lower daily wages. Those shooting less often can even be downgraded in their regular wage for public TV. Character A and character B can act together in an important scene, be equally present and even be cast by acting people from the same agency and yet be paid very differently \u2013 because character A only has a total of three shooting days and character B is the lead and was cast with a public favourite.
\nI call this the Status Pay Gap<\/strong>. The next drawing shows a proportion of 3 to 1, of course the ratio for daily wages can easily be much higher.<\/p>\n![\"schspin-status-pay-gap\"](\"https:\/\/schspin.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/09\/schspin-status-pay-gap1.jpg\")
<\/a>Status Pay Gap: Gradient for daily wages.<\/p><\/div>\n
Director Thomas Stuber<\/strong>, who was on the panel of the above mentioned BVC event \u201cFocus Casting\u201c: \u201cOnly five to eight women are eligible for female leads in ZDF (channel two) productions. The names change every now and then. It\u2019s not a certain type of woman<\/em>\u201c. He didn\u2019t talk about the pool of possible male leads, but it will most probably be bigger. Casting Director Anja Dihrberg<\/strong> added \u201cThe TV channels say \u201cThis works for us\u201c. There are no 10.000 people who can act the leading parts.\u201c<\/em> Casting director Clemens Erbach<\/strong> thinks that the problem with casting a film basically is<\/p>\n
\u201ctoo complex to be explained with few words\u201c. He is getting fed up with this same old tune about a handful of actors and actresses taking away the roles from the others. Maybe some people really are better than others, he says provokingly, and of course he would request people of whom he is convinced more often. However, this is only a question of quality.\u201c
\n<\/em>Source: J\u00f6rg Seewald<\/strong>. Immer die gleichen Gesichter im TV<\/a> \/Always the same faces on TV. Der Tagesspiegel \u2013 23.2.16<\/p>\nSo the bulk of acting people has to make do with small\/er roles. Of course, not all actresses and actors of a certain age or type who provide the skills needed for a character won\u2019t be equally good or equally well suited. But there will be more than 25<\/strong>, the training and the talent situation in Germany is not that bad after all. And the TV and cinema audience don’t oppose variety as strongly as those in charge might think. But that is a topic for another day.
\nIt remains to be said that the wage gap between bigger and smaller roles in a production diverges considerably, this status pay gap could easily be up to a factor 40, as shown in this detail:<\/p>\n![\"schspin-status-pay-gap-detail\"](\"https:\/\/schspin.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/09\/schspin-status-pay-gap-detail.jpg\")
<\/a>No, that\u2019s not true, we only see a factor 20<\/strong>.<\/p>\nLisa Basten<\/strong> comments on this in her book (in German) WE CREATIVES! THE SELF-IMAGE OF AN INDUSTRY (Frank& Timme. Berlin 2016): \u201cIt is interesting to see how the image of the poor artist works even though at the same time it is accepted that some with big names earn an exorbitant amount<\/em><\/strong>.\u201c<\/p>\n
But back to the Policy Paper on Gender<\/strong> of the BFFS. The first demand reads:<\/p>\n
1. Casting<\/strong>: the BFFS demands a balance in the casts at a qualitative and quantitative level. For the total of fictional productions commissioned by a channel as well as for the sum of publically funded cinematographic works the total number of female (leading) roles and the total number of male (leading) roles should provide a balanced picture.<\/em><\/p>\n
So, all productions (over which period?) should have just as many female as male leads<\/strong>, the same for the supporting roles, so that the overall figures are even.
\nThis aim is very important and statistically speaking can only be reached if more female biased films are produced, as we already have a large number of male balanced projects (see here<\/a>). But this is not the topic for now, let\u2019s get back to pay equity. Only this much: more female roles than at the moment will lead to a higher overall income for the entirety of actresses \u2013 and at the same time to a decrease for the overall income of <\/strong>actors \u2013 and therefore the total remunerations of the sexes will get closer.
\nThe already cited second demand reads:<\/p>\n- \n
- Remuneration<\/strong>: The BFFS wants gender unbiased equal wages<\/strong> and through these a balanced wage ratio between actors and actresses.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
What exactly is meant by \u201cgender unbiased equal wages\u201c, should the leads earn the same sum or have the same daily wages<\/strong>? Will those earning less at the moment get as much as those with more or will they meet in the middle? Will the demand be fulfilled when female and male leads ear the same and the supporting roles are paid less but again women and men there get the same (per day or in total)? More on that in the final subchapter.<\/p>\n
As mentioned the policy paper on gender also points out the strategy<\/strong> of the BFFS:<\/p>\n
- \n
- Mandatory monitoring for TV channels and funding bodies (appointments. total remuneration)<\/em><\/li>\n
- Change of Germany’s Federal Film Subsidies Act (FFG) (more women in awarding bodies)<\/em><\/li>\n
- Role descriptions<\/em><\/li>\n
- Acting wage agreement and collective agreement respectively (parental benefits, film contingency insurance)<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
The item role descriptions<\/strong> <\/em>needs some explaining. Here is the full paragraph:<\/p>\n
Supporting roles should always have a full name and be cast on basis of parity: roles whose gender has no significant meaning for the plot should have a real name (e.g. \u201cLaura M\u00fcller\u201c) instead of a general, usually male description (\u201eTaxi driver\u201c \u2013 that\u2019s male in German). Parity should be ensured<\/em>.<\/p>\n
This is the most direct of all listed strategies and it describes \u2013 you will probably have recognized it already \u2013 my casting tool NEROPA<\/strong> Neutral Roles Parity<\/a>. This makes sense of course, it\u2019s a low-threshold offer with which the share of female roles in the cast can be increased immediately and without fundamentally changing the script and the plot<\/strong>. I am very happy that my association BFFS plans to advocate this path. Less pleasing is the fact that NEROPA<\/strong> is not mentioned by name, this is quite a careless handling of the work of a colleague, especially by an association that champions solidarity and the protection of copyrights. However I guess it\u2019s only a small oversight and I hope that NEROPA Neutral Roles Parity<\/strong> will be added to the policy paper on gender soon, maybe even as the heading of that item \u2013 since \u201crole descriptions\u201c is not really a gender political strategy. If all roles had a name there would be not one female character more than before<\/strong>. And if role names really make sense other than for acting c.v.’s or whether this decision should be left to the script writers is a topic for another day.
\nWith NEROPA<\/strong> of course ALL roles in a production should be checked<\/strong>, including the main characters, not only the small nameless ones. So NEROPA<\/strong> can help to level out the role imbalances at all levels.<\/p>\nEpilogue: 21st Century – Men and Women, Leads and Supports<\/strong><\/h2>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s a fact that we want a supportive society. We are in favour of those who have more, partially including ourselves, giving something up for those that have less.\u201c <\/i><\/p>\n
This quote from BFFS board member Julia Beerhold<\/strong> (cn-interview 2009<\/a>, in German) is from a slightly different context – social insurance and temporary employees – but it fits today\u2019s text as well and the image of the film industry as a community of solidarity is quite nice.<\/i><\/p>\n
Captain Kirk from the Star Trek<\/strong> series mentioned something else at the beginning of each episode, that might be a suggestion: \u201c
- Change of Germany’s Federal Film Subsidies Act (FFG) (more women in awarding bodies)<\/em><\/li>\n
- Mandatory monitoring for TV channels and funding bodies (appointments. total remuneration)<\/em><\/li>\n
- Type of production<\/strong>, i.e. wheter it’s for cinema or television, a blockbuster, indie or low budget film, broadcast in main or early evening programming etc.<\/li>\n
- Gender Pay Gap<\/strong> refers to the difference between the average incomes of women and men and is influenced by the types of jobs, part-time work and care responsibilities (read also: Gender Pay Gap: Government failing to take action<\/a>)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
- obligation to fix detected unequal pay situations<\/em><\/li>\n
- achieve transparency for all<\/em><\/li>\n