Equity vs. Non-equity shows

[lovepuppy]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 12:28pm

Hey--

Does anyone have info on how much the pay scale differs between an Equity Show and a non-Equity show? Are most travelling shows non-E and Broadways shows always E?

Let's start with: Equity principal role $ vs Non-E principal role, and Equity ensemble role $ vs Non-E ensemble. Thanks!

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 12:34pm

Salaries are all over the place. You can be non-eq and make more money than an equity person who is doing the same show. It all depends on how you negotiate it.

But, if you need a generalization, equity folks make more money and tend to be more talented than non-eq folks (although this is HARDLY always the case).

[Enjolras77]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 12:38pm

Most of the Broadway touring companies are Equity shows...however, there has been an increase in non-Equity shows in recent years which has caused quite a controversy.

[galindaba]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 12:39pm

That's a tough one, because it really depends on the production. Most of the time regional and touring productions are non-eq, but of course there are exceptions to that. More and more equity national tours are coming out (i.e. Wicked, Spamalot, Rent is going union).
There are different levels of equity production and each level has a different basic pay rate. So a lower level union tour could get away with paying actors $450 a week, whereas a first national tour pays around $1400 a week.
When it comes to non-union theres no required pay scale so regional pay usually starts at around $200 and can even go as high as about $800 (occasionally more) if it's a big tour.
All of this information is from friends both on broadway or on tour, and from my own personaly experience.

[Enjolras77]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 12:42pm

That is interesting information Galindaba. Thanks for the post.

[lovepuppy]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 12:48pm

Thanks galinda, interesting information. So, for example, a touring production of "Rent" is starting again after the first of the year (I believe it hasn't started yet), and I read somewhere that it's Non-eq. Do you know what the pay for something like that would be? Also do the examples you give go for everyone in the whole cast? I'd think principals would make more per week than ensemble. I'm wondering what, if any, the differential is.

[Fosse76]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:08pm

It's also somewhat wrong. While it is true that lately there have been many non-equity touring productions, those have been exceptions, not the rule. Most shows have ALWAYS gone out as Equity, but with larger casts and rising healthcare and the cost of housing, producers, LATELY, have been pursuing the non-equity route. The main difference is healthcare. Most non-equity productions do not provide healthcare, and often times, the sets look cheaper than they should normally look. But the new Equity contract has provided a pricing scale for large-cast shows that might be tough sells on the road. In other words, Wicked would have no problem getting an audience, so there's no way Equity would have allowed them to use the new scale. Avenue Q, should it tour, has low production costs and a small cast, so it is unlikely they would need to use the new rules either. Something like Fiddler, on the otherhand, might need some help, considering it can't even get an audience on broadway. It all depends very much. But again, for Equity, the minimum is a little less than $1400 per week, with a $700 per diem (I think). Of course, non-Equity has no such minimum: they can pay them whatever they want.

[galindaba]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:09pm

I know for a fact that principals on the broadway national tour of rent made around $2500 a week including per diem. On Broadway the pay was like $2000 (because you dont get per diem on broadway).
Unfortunately since the tour went non-eq the people are making around $500 a week including per diem. Which sucks, especially when you know what the union people were paid. But never fear, rumors have been circulating that they're making the rent tour union again very soon.


p.s. All the information I have is from friends who have done these shows. My word is not law.
Updated On: 12/8/05 at 01:09 PM

[lovepuppy]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:20pm

Ok so to sum up: Non-Eq pay is up for grabs depending on the situation. If it's Equity you guys haven't said it's different pay for main cast members vs ensemble, so they all get paid scale, generally speaking? Just trying to hear you correctly. Thanks!

ps--Non-E gets per diem too? Wonder how that's calculated as an addition to the salary.

[galindaba]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:26pm

Sorry for not being clear. There IS different pay for principals and ensemble. Like I said, my friend who played Maureen was making $2500, and the ensemble were at about $1800 (both incudes per diem).
Most non-eq tours give per diem but its a lot less that equity tours give you. And so far as I know they tell you the pay rate and then tell you the per diem and whether they are providing housing after that.

[lovepuppy]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:28pm

Thanks. Sorry to sound ignorant on the subject (I kind of am, I guess, but am considering auditioning in the future), but it sounds like union and non-union shows both get per diem? That's cool. What is it actually designated for...just to say they're not paying people below poverty level (in some cases), a tax write-off for the production company, or housing or...?

[Natalie 2]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:31pm

Lordy lordy, we're having this conversation again? Per diem for non-equity tours covers just food for the week, so naturally it is lower. Per diem for equity tours covers hotels and food, so it is higher. Frankly, I enjoy being on a non-equity tour because then I don't have the hassle of finding my own hotel room in every city. I do have health insurance provided by my non-equity touring company as well as workers comp. Our sets and costumes were based off of the Broadway production, and (just like the equity tour) had to be downscaled because they had to be made compatible for travel. As for the talent comment...I guess you just need to see a non-equity show and an equity show so you can truly compare. Talent is subjective and varies from show to show regardless of the Equity/Non-Equity status. Hope this helps!

Updated On: 12/8/05 at 01:31 PM

[galindaba]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:33pm

Per diem covers food and basic day to day needs like that. It can be pretty sweet cuz if you get a good per diem and your housing is paid on tour then you can live off that money and sent your pay check home every month. Thats how people make bank doing tours and come home to thousands of dollars. My friend on rent came home and basically had money to pay her rent for a year. lol. Good times.
And dont be worried about sounding ignorant. You have to learn about this stuff at some point anyway. Happy to help.


Updated On: 12/8/05 at 01:33 PM

[lovepuppy]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:53pm

Haha, sounds good if you can get it! OK, so (hopefully for you, probably) this is my last question. Well, 2 questions: everyone gets a contract, principal or ensemble, union or non-union? And--can you negotiate a contract for only a certain amount of time or certain cities? I suppose it depends how long they want you. But then again...what if you get a contract for a few months and you or the prod company decides it's no longer working for you...what are the ways you can get yourself out of the contract, or for them to release you? (Oops, suppose that's 3 questions now. :) THanks for the help.)

[Fosse76]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 1:58pm

For non-union and Equity, the contracts are usually pre-determined for a specific period of time. They aren't going to want to be casting every three months. Usually tour contracts are a year.

[BwayTheatre11]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 2:07pm

Talent has NOTHING to do with Equity and non-Equity...

[touchmeinthemorning]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 2:32pm

Everything is negotiable. Pay, hotel, rooming, cities, length of contract, Outs, etc. Just keep in mind that many roles (particularly the chorus roles) are set at scale -- so, making more is not a real option.

I will say this about talent -- the average equity actor is slightly more talented than the average non-equity actor. HOWEVER, just because someone is non-equity doesn't mean they won't win a Tony Award next year, and just because someone is Equity doesn't mean they will ever work a professional job again in their life (let alone have any talent). So, there are tendencies, but no rules. There are tons of non-eq folks who are better than most equity folks. And tons of equity folks who are worse than any non-eq person.

Also, as a correction, not all non-eq tours provide your hotel. It all depends on who is producing, and how you negotiate your contract.

[lovepuppy]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 2:49pm

Too bad that they don't always provide hotel. They should, considering you can barely subsist on $2-400/wk plus per diem! If you'd have to use the per diem for food and hotel that would suck.

[Musical Director]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 3:03pm

that's what per diem is for--food and lodging! If your production company throws in hotel, you are lucky. Equity per diem covers both.

[Natalie 2]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 3:17pm

I know I have been lucky to be working with a non-equity company that does take care of its employees...not always the case, I understand.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 5:46pm

BwayTheatre11--

Thank you for that. Let me piggy-back on what you said: It is silly to make the generalization that Equity performers have more talent than non-Equity ones, as it really is all over the place. Here in Chicago, there are non-Equity actors that are as good as anyone on Broadway. I also know that there are a lot of Equity actors that suck.

However, it is true that generally speaking, Equity actors are more EXPERIENCED than non-Eq's, because unless you're a dancer (that is, a chorus boy/girl by type), if you have any sense you won't get your Equity card until you know that you're in a position to get a steady stream of work.

[Danielm]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 6:32pm

Regarding the talent issue, I do have to say that the recent tour of 42nd Street which I believe was either non-equity or a modified contract and the tour of Music Man which was non-equity were both terrible. It's not that the chorus were untalented but they were unseasoned and just seemed like smiling chorus people rather than characters. I think there are a lot of good things about being in equity, the benefits etc..., most people touring I know would rather be equity because they tend to be treated better as well as paid better.

[Natalie 2]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 7:17pm

Danielm...did you just say that because you saw that I was in the current tour of 42nd Street? If so, shame on you...if not, tell me why you thought it was "terrible." Where did you see it? When did you see it? Did you think it was "terrible" just because you knew it was non-equity? I'm eager to hear your full review...

[BwayTheatre11]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 7:20pm

*hides in the corner*

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 12/8/05 at 7:49pm

(Danielm places foot firmly in mouth)

Seriously though, I agree that many of the non-Equity tours I've seen have had bad casts with people who were either too young or simply not good enough for their roles. However, as I said, there are many outstanding non-Equity actors out there who choose not to join Equity simply because they get more work that way (although sometimes they get paid so little it hardly qualifies as "work," lol).