Directors & Designers Resources

Awaiting payment as a freelancer can be stressful, especially if you’ve already nudged a client or collaborator. Members working in the sector sometimes express a fear of being assertive about late or non-payment, as they want to maintain good relationships with people and organisations they could work with again in the future. Nevertheless, you do have legal rights and protections.

If you haven’t agreed a payment date at the point of engagement or in the contract, the law says the payment is late 30 days after whichever is the latest of either:

• the customer (be that a producer, another creative who has booked you, school, local authority, theatre or other business) receives your invoice or
• you have provided the service (for instance: a workshop, model box, your work as a director, your completed design)

You should check contracts you have signed carefully to see what payment terms you have signed up to – Equity can advise on this if needed. 

Can I charge interest on a late payment?

Yes. The amount you can charge is called ‘statutory interest’ and is calculated as 8% plus the Bank of England base rate. The rate you can charge is set every 6 months on 1^st January and 1^st July. You can find the current, and previous interest rates that you can charge on this website here.

You can also charge a fixed sum for the cost of recovering a late payment on top of the interest; the rates are fixed and based on the amount of debt owed. These are as follows:

• For debts under £1,000 the fixed charge is £40
• For debts between £1,000 and £10,000 the fixed charge is £70
• For debts over £10,000 the fixed charge is £100

If you want to add late payment charges and interest to the money you’re owed, you should send a new invoice to the client.

Example: If you are owed £1,500 which should have been paid on 1st February 2023, the interest rate which applies to this debt is 11.5% pa (Set 1st January 2023 and applies until 30th June 2023).

• The annual statutory interest on this would be £172.50 (£1,500 x 0.115 = £172.50)
• Divide £172.50 by 365 to get the daily interest: 47p a day (172.5 / 365 = 0.47)
• After 80 days (eg. on 22nd April 2023) this would be £37.60 (80 x 0.47 = 37.6)
• Add the fixed charge of £70
• The total additional amount that you would be adding to your invoice at this point would be £107.60 (37.6 + 70)

You can make a court claim – which you might have heard referred to as taking someone to small claims court.

You can find out more about it here but get in touch with your Equity Official to see whether a claim would be suitable in your case, because when you have worked as a director or designer on an Equity agreement (so on the West End, with a UK Theatre venue/producer or an ITC Ethical Manager producer) we can intervene to get you your money without the need for a court claim.  

If you do end up needing to take a court claim, Equity can support you through this process.

You don’t have to add anything to your invoice about late payment in order to be covered by the legislation. However, some people and businesses do add clauses that flag to clients that they will expect prompt payment.

If you do include wording on your invoices, double-check it is accurate. For example:

NB: The Late Payment of Commercial Debts (Interest) Act 1998 applies to this invoice. If payment is not made within 14 days then interest will be charged at a rate of 8% above the Bank of England base rate at the date the payment fell due from that date until payment is made.

The statement includes the correct calculation for interest due, and references the correct part of the law.

However, according to the government’s own guidance, interest should be calculated from 30 days after the work was completed or invoice issued. You should also check the standard terms you have on your own invoices are agreed at the point of contract with the producer/venue you are working for.

Designers' open meeting

In July 2023, Equity hosted an open meeting for designers to discuss fees and their work in theatre. Notes from that discussion can be found below.

Survey results

• Received 380 examples in the fees survey across West End, Commercial and Subsidised. Additional responses from fringe/independent and associates and assistants.
• Background of wanting to undertake that work:
  • Value of the work, both in terms of labour and creative contributions, is currently underrated
  • These rates are used as benchmarks outside of the collective agreements, so are suppressing wages outside those agreements
• MRSL is determined by the capacity of the venue, revenue from bars cafes etc and are the bands for the rates on the Subsidised Agreement
• Off the West End, you can see that the combining of the set and costume disciplines has contributed to the depression on fees.
• One attendee noted the set and costume designers being shafted even more than lighting designers are with regards to pay, given they have the most amount of work within a creative team bar the director. The work that is done before rehearsals is not understood. Producers when A/V checking don’t provide the white card, model box etc dates - the date of the final performance isn’t a concern
• During the last set of negotiations, there was a suggestion that the fees be structured around a day rate, which didn’t work. No one is getting paid enough.
• What do these rates cover? What is the minimum work of work? E.g. a 2 hander with minimal design vs a 20 person elaborate piece, even if straight play, will command different amounts of prep, work and maintenance.
  • Not just scale but also the component design points

The Claim

• First priority is that the rates go up. This increase has to be reflective of three things:
  • Reflective of value (time and labour, as well as creative contribution)
  • Freelancer premium. This year, at ARC, D&D Committee put forward a motion that reflects lack of pensions, sick pay, studio costs and technical software
  • Cost of living crisis
• Work on greater clarity on what the fee is for. What elements of the job will require additional money from the producer?
  • Day rate approach: different types of fees for different aspect of productions (e.g. attending meetings, making and tech week)?
  • Model boxes can be used as a springboard for further work on expenses and assistants fees coming from the producer rather than designer
  • What will drives for more sustainable set and costume do in terms of additional labour and research? Should producers with those commitments increase their rates to reflect the additional time and sometimes cost involved to source green design components?
  • Terms about further exploitation and participation in the future life of the project after the initial run
• Important to create a parity between the regions and London with regards to pay – rates outside of London currently much lower
• Scene/Change have found that theatres and producers etc. accept the value of the work in 1:1, 2:1 etc. conversations, but can be resistant when engaging more broadly. Demanding a division of set and costume often ends up reveals the paucity and ridiculousness of the bundled up fee
• In dance, where there’s often not set, the design fee is split in half for just costume, which doesn’t include supervising etc.
• Question of devising new work and the additional work that takes vs coming on board a project with an established text and how to distinguish between those different types of work
• One designer described explaining to a mortified producer that they had never broken the tax threshold after ten years of working in the industry – due to the overheads being so necessary and so high, rather than any kind of creative accounting
• Within the subsidised sector, there is the ongoing problem of the decimation of public arts funding. At what point does the increasingly commercial minded NPO strategy (with capital projects geared towards enhancing the bar and café offers in venues to get more earned income) mean the difference between Subsidised and Commercial feels irrelevant?
• Arts Council England will publish its NPO decisions at the end of October.
• Some producers will say they “don’t need a model” and ask to go straight to drawings, despite it being an important step in the process – so worth being cautious around itemised breakdowns of work/a design ‘menu’ in case it creates a situation where more work becomes unpaid as standard
• Quantifying time in line with stage management might be a way of making the value of designers’ work more apparent: currently, the design budget is the line often squeezed first and fastest
• One way of helping show the value of design is to make the drawing work become part of the theatre via displays in the corridors or café bar areas or similar
• With regards to converting these fees to an hourly rate: employment status is separate from status for tax
  • The overwhelming majority of Equity members are self-employed for the purposes of tax and national insurance.
  • Performers and stage managers have ‘worker’ status.
  • Workers and employees have statutory entitlements to National Minimum Wage, holiday pay/payment in lieu/sick pay
  • Designers and directors are genuinely self-employed persons and therefore are excluded from those legal minimums and statutory protections
  • In one of the most recent Equity magazines John Hendy QC, a specialist in trade union law, wrote about his bill in the House of Lords to create a universal band of workers’ protections, rights and entitlements
• How to cost the ideas generation time in between the first time of reading the script and having ideas?
• The capping of expenses at rates that don’t cover costs in light of inflation means cutting into fee/not being able to access making due to not being able afford travel and accommodation
• Designers don’t just work in analogue models – digitised versions often come alongside analogue so doubling of work
• Bargaining: do experience rates come in with regards to minimums, or do more experienced designers have sufficient bargaining power to increase their fees? The minimums for design somewhere like the West End not being adhered to suggests that designers aren’t aware of this.
• Question: what is the dividing line between major musicals and musicals as categories?
• Props, video, puppetry should be included as some of the design elements beyond set and costume.
• Costume design fees often encompass WHAM grade work, which shouldn’t be the case – they are different disciplines with particular skill sets and this must be understood.
• Weekly rates vs block fee split into three or four payments before first night.
• Working solo means less information, meaning less power. Collective power much greater than individually.
• Costume design encompassing supervision and making.

A five day working week in the rehearsal period

These notes are a summary of two open meetings held over Zoom in May 2023 for directors and designers to discuss upcoming joint work between Equity and UK Theatre/SOLT on a five day working week in the rehearsal period. Individual contributions have been anonymised.

Committee intro

In recent negotiations over the performer and stage manager agreements, Equity and UK Theatre/SOLT have agreed to form a working party on developing best practice guidance for a five day working week in the rehearsal period, with trials already agreed in six subsidised venues between now and Christmas 2023. We are holding these open meetings in advance of starting discussions with UK Theatre/SOLT to ensure that the needs, concerns and working patterns of directors and designers are included in planning the trials in the subsidised sector, and upcoming discussions about the West End and commercial theatre.

We’re also aware that there are a number of examples where a five-day working week is already the norm – and we want to ensure that best practice from members experiences of working in this way is incorporated into our discussions. Planning the trials and conversations with UK Theatre/SOLT has not yet begun, so if you have further thoughts to share you can email us: directorsanddesigners@equity.org.uk

Practicalities

For people working away from home, a five day working week in the rehearsal period would mean it’s possible to get home for two full days – good for work/life balance and seeing family. But needs to be properly planned with clear days off from the start of your involvement because if you’re holding days that then don’t happen, it becomes too late/too expensive to book travel home and could result in more time to kill in a place you don’t know by yourself rather than meaningful time off.

Key differences between directors and designers here so need to ensure both working patterns are included. The director will be in the rehearsal room all the time, but a designer will be in and out. Potentially a more meaningful change for directors than for designers?

In a low-fee environment, is a chaotic and moveable schedule better for a designer because they can work on more productions simultaneously?

Directors will require key information from producers earlier so they can shape the process properly and work with other members of the creative team to maximise everyone’s time efficiently. A clear day, specifically for planning how to maximise the time – would need to include making sure that costume fittings take place close to the rehearsal space so the director doesn’t lose people for hours in travel time, on top of the time required for fittings.

For designers, sometimes working on a Saturday is preferable because you’re working on another show in the week.

Working five days a week instead of six means people are better rested in the room and makes rehearsal time more productive.

Important that the hours normally done in six days are not just squeezed into five.

Need to ensure that those involved in the subsidised trials are recording the rehearsal schedules as they actually are, not just as they were planned to be.

Importance of robust feedback mechanisms to both the producer and the union for creative team, and actors/stage management.

Tech sessions – how many should people be doing in a day? Good model has been two session day and a plotting session planned in too rather than a three session tech day. Makes a more efficient tech and people are less tired.

Need to know everybody’s N/As well in advance for proper planning to be possible.

If total rehearsal period is extended then the creative team fee must increase to accommodate the extra time spent on the project. There is a clear mechanism for overtime payments for actors and stage managers because they are workers, not genuinely self-employed – but cannot have a situation where the only people not getting additional payments if the time is extended are the creative team.

Increase in directors doing a lot of work beyond usual prep – “pre-directing” – before they’ve even set foot in the rehearsal room. Cannot squeeze this still further by reducing the overall weekly hours they can call actors. Creates further problems because if someone has a good idea there isn’t always time to try it out.

Quality control – director and designer both need sufficient time to ensure the work is of a sufficient standard.

How to accommodate evening work for the creative team in this?

Minimum fees open meeting

These notes are a summary of two open meetings held over zoom on 10th February 2023 for directors and designers to discuss what ‘ minimum rate’ means, how to negotiate above the minima and what guidance is needed from Equity to support creative team members to be able to achieve higher rates. Individual contributions have been anonymised.

Committee Intro

• We know from info gathered from the designers’ fees surveys and the directors’ surveys we’ve done that the minimum rate on the West End is what people are actually paid in a vanishingly small number of cases (contrast with performers and stage management where a significant number are on the minimum).
• In commercial and subsidised theatre people are much more likely to be paid at or around the minimum rate - so purpose of this exercise is to unpick in what circumstances the minimum rate is - and is not - an appropriate amount to pay a director or designer.
• These are minimum terms agreements - they set the floor through which nobody must fall, not a ceiling through which nobody must rise, but particularly in subsidised theatre that floor is getting stickier and stickier. Other factors at play here e.g. huge cuts to arts funding meaning subsidised venues, in the main, simply have less cash than they used to. But! Not to say we shouldn’t still push for as high as possible rates both collectively through increased minima, and individually through contract negotiation
• What information or guidance do people need from the union to help them better negotiate over fees?
• What better or different language could we use to talk about these rates?

Attendee Comments

Use of language

• People rarely/never see ‘Equity minimums’ used rather ‘Equity rates’ which can be misleading as per the first point under Defining rates
• When creatives are negotiating without an agent and a producer comes in with the minimum straight away but is then very quick to up the fee it can be very demoralising for the creative, as it sets the tone for the value the producer initially thinks the creative’s work is worth. A change of language could help with this in addition to an increase in the starting fee
• Education for producers about the difference between agents and creatives and what this means for negotiation skills
• ‘Starting rate’ as language to use instead of minimum
• ‘Standard rate’ – starting allows engagers to take advantage of entry level directors working on big shows, or e.g. ‘starting’ rate used for someone on 1st West End job whey have years of commercial/subsidised/etc. experience
• If people put ‘Equity minimums’ in applications for funding they’re often then bound by that so can’t change the rates, a change of language could go some way to resolving this

Defining rates

• Many producers call minimum rates ‘Equity rates’ which indicates that they don’t know these are the minimum rates and can (should!) be increased according to the expectations/scale of the job
• Understanding required by producers as to what minimum fees are based on as what is often asked of the creative isn’t the minimum amount of work. The majority of engagements mean that the work being put in far exceeds what the minimum rate should reflect Directors & Designers Committee Open Meetings – Minimum Fees
• It was noted the separation of the roles of Costume and Set designer within the current submitted claim. This separation necessitates two separate fees for two separate job roles and the work that they both require
• A rate based on experience could be a grey area and difficult to quantify – perhaps restructuring fees would be better e.g. one fee for being on site and a fee for the work done before that point
• Ensuring prep work is included in rate definitions
• The disparity between Employees and Freelance, particularly how those who work on a secure, salaried role have better terms and conditions and ultimately pay for the same (or less!) workload – without mentioning the entitlements for pensions and holiday, sick,
  maternity pay etc.
• Suggestion to split fees into weekly or daily rates, this could help to quantify the amount of work put in before and during an engagement and being paid in 4 installments rather than 3
• Work towards formalising prep fees, how it’s quantified and how it should be paid
• For Directors when an extra audition day is called this is often just incorporated into the fee without taking into consideration the additional work/travel etc.
• Hierarchy issues with Directors fees being negotiated first and then designers following, this means that if two separate fees for set and costume, when combined they’ll exceed the Directors rate which means Producers are less likely to go for it Information and guidance from the union
• Signposting to guidance already available about minimum amount of work for minimum fees
• Creation of clear guidance of roles of Director, Costume Designer, Set Designer etc. that are easily referenced and simple to understand
• MRSL rates are confusing and feel outdated. Easy to understand fees and rates
• ‘How to hire’ guides for each discipline which act as a checklist for producers (including what’s being asked of them, when they’re required etc.)
• Information on clauses under the agreements and what they mean
• How to disseminate information about the differentiation of job roles (e.g. set and costume) and providing clarity about the different fees
• Acknowledgment of how useful the Directors and Designers email is and a good space to push further information about supportive guidance.
• Suggestion about using Instagram as a way to take our key clauses in the agreement and give easy to understand definitions of what they mean and how they can be applied
• Producers often dismissive of costume and use ‘modern dress’ to imply both set and costume can be one role, education materials around this and why there should be two separate fees
• Equity meetings in the workplaces – directors and designers *are* welcome at these, but not always in Equity’s control what time they happen (e.g., often called at the same time as production meetings)
• Minimum fee is not adequately defined on the agreements which is what the current claims seek to address. Once claims are settled, Equity will produce a clear clause by clause explainer for both director and designer agreements. That clarity will enable people to say “’ok you want to pay in line with equity agreement,’ which means you’re buying X from me. You want more than that then you pay more”