Contents
Skillset/UK Film Council Feature Film Production Workforce Survey 2008
The survey asked respondents to indicate their total gross income from working in the audio visual industries in the past twelve months and their income from feature film work only during that time. This section also looks at respondents' usual weekly or daily rate for feature film work and their mode of payment.
4.1 Gross annual income from audio visual work
The pattern of earnings from audio visual work was similar to that reported in the 2005 survey, although there was a small drop in average income over this period. Just under a quarter of the sample with income from audio visual work (22%) earned £50,000 a year or more. The majority of those earning money from audio visual work (77%) earned between £20,000 and £49,999. A minority of all respondents (6%) earned no income from audio visual work during the previous year.
Gross annual incomes of those working in feature film production were higher than were found in the audio visual workforce as a whole. 54% of the 2005 Audio Visual Industries’ Workforce Survey respondents reported a gross annual income of £30,000 or less (compared with 48% of the film survey respondents), and only 11% of the 2005 Audio Visual Industries’ Workforce Survey respondents reported incomes of £50,000 or more.
Taking the mid-point of each salary band used in the questionnaire and excluding the no income category, we can estimate a mean annual gross income for the film workforce of £33,726, a lower figure than was reported in the 2005 film production workforce survey (£37,276).[1] This is higher than the 2005 Survey of the Audio Visual Industries’ Workforce estimate of £32,239 per year,[2] and is higher than the average gross annual pay of UK full-time employees - estimated at £29,331 by the 2006 Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE).
The first film production workforce survey highlighted a considerable difference between the annual gross audio visual income of men and women, and this still persists. While 54% of women had earned less than £29,999 in the past year, this was true for only 45% of the men. And 27% of men had earned £50,000 or more, compared with only 15% of women.
Further analysis revealed that women were significantly more likely to earn less audio visual income than male counterparts in the same age and occupational group.[3] The analysis also found that age had a stronger effect on the level of total audio visual income than gender, and the difference in age composition between men and women in the workforce exacerbates this inequality in income between the genders (as shown in Table 2.3.1, 67% of men were aged 35+ compared with 47% of women). In particular, the lack of older women in the workforce prevents women as a group from achieving the higher level of income that older workers would expect to receive across the board (see, for example, the pattern of earnings by age given in Table 4.1.1).
Figure 4.1.1 Gross income from audio visual work in the past year (by gender)
Base: £1-£19,999 = 303, £20,000-£29,999 = 181, £30,000-£39,999 = 183, £40,000-£49,999 = 110, £50,000-£74,999 = 131 and £75,000 or more = 92.
On the whole, income increased with age: nearly all 16-24 year olds (84%) earned less than £20,000 a year (or no income at all) from audio visual work, compared with 38% of those in aged 25-34, 15% of those aged 35-49, and 17% of aged between 50 and over.
The proportion of workers earning £50,000 or more in the past year increased from 8% of those under 34 to 32% of those aged 35-49 and 28% of those aged 50+.
Table 4.1.1 Gross income from audio visual work in the past year (by age)
| 16 - 24 | 25-34 | 35-49 | 50+ |
| % | % | % | % |
No income from audio visual work in past year | 7 | 3 | 8 | 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
£1 - £19,999 | 84 | 38 | 15 | 17 |
£20,000 - £29,999 | 7 | 24 | 12 | 18 |
£30,000 - £39,999 | 1 | 18 | 20 | 16 |
£40,000 - £49,999 | - | 9 | 12 | 15 |
£50,000 - £74,999 | - | 6 | 18 | 16 |
£75,000 or more | - | 2 | 14 | 12 |
|
|
|
|
|
Mean income (£) | 9,033 | 26,505 | 42,315 | 39,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
Base (n) | 81 | 371 | 445 | 165 |
Note: mean income was calculated using the mid point value for each income band. A figure of £75,000 was used for the £75,000 or more band.
After taking into account the different age and gender profiles of ethnic minority film industry workers and those describing themselves as white, there is no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of their gross annual audio visual income.[4] However, this finding is to be expected given the low number of respondents from ethnic minority groups.
Table 4.1.2 Gross income from audio visual work in the past year (by ethnic background)
| White | Ethnic minority |
| % | % |
No income from audio visual work in past year | 6 | 5 |
|
|
|
£1 - £19,999 | 29 | 27 |
£20,000 - £29,999 | 17 | 24 |
£30,000 - £39,999 | 17 | 9 |
£40,000 - £49,999 | 10 | 20 |
£50,000 - £74,999 | 12 | 11 |
£75,000 or more | 9 | 4 |
|
|
|
Mean income (£) | 33,823 | 31,846 |
|
|
|
Base (n) | 1,000 | 55 |
Note: mean income was calculated using the mid point value for each income band and excludes the no income category. A figure of £75,000 was used for the £75,000 or more band.
[1] For the purposes of this calculation the figure of £75,000 was used for the category of ‘£75,000 or more’ as no mid-point was available.
[2] This mean annual gross income covers the following sectors: Broadcast, Independent production for TV, Facilities including post production, digital special effects and studio equipment hire Interactive media (including web and internet and offline multimedia), Computer games, Corporate production and Commercials Animation Transmission.
[3] This analysis is based on an ordinal logistic regression employing a proportional odds model with all three factors (age, occupational group and gender) included as main effects with no interaction terms. The adjusted odds ratio for women to be in a higher income band than men is 0.75 (95% CI, 0.58-0.96, p-value=0.025). See Appendix 4 for an explanation of an odds ratio.
[4] This analysis is based on an ordinal logistic regression employing a proportional odds model with two factors (age and ethnic group) included as main effects with no interaction terms. The adjusted odds ratio for ethnic minority workers to be in a higher income band than their white counterparts is 1.02 (95% CI, 0.64-1.62, p-value=0.94).

