Insurance -- the big discussion thread

Dan Holly · August 22nd, 2002, 10:54 AM

Excellent info from everyone..........

I do have one question that fingers off from the specific topic.

<Snip> All it is a document that says the subjects understands the circumstances of the shooting and that he/she agrees to them. I've had instances of people changing their minds about appearing in the show months after they've signed the appearence releases--and only few days before the show was to air! Because it's not a legally binding contract, the subjects have the right to change their minds<Snip>

How does this relate to your crew?
Our current project requires that our unpaid production crew sign something to the same effect.

Since there is zero dollars changing hands, how does this part of the law effect your crew who is not actually on film? Can they change their minds about compensation where it could effect shots (that made post) where they were on the crew?

We actually paid big bucks to our attorney for our form everyone signs that are on our production crew. We have a few regulars, but there is always someone on crew who is new and maybe is only on our set once.

Any insight to these potential issues?

August 22nd, 2002, 02:24 PM

You obviously need to consult on this issue, perhaps a labor relations lawyer. But in terms of a crew member who's not paid, my feeling is that they're getting something in return for their labor both behind the camera and in front, whether it's on-screen credit or production experience. Again, I don't think these specific scenarios have been covered by significant court rulings, so I would hesitate to venture a guess. I think what it comes down to is, how comfortable are you about your usage of his/her likeness in your program? How you portraying them in an unfavorable light? If so, are you defaming him/her? If he/she decides to sue you, on what grounds would it be? How would you feel about those grounds?

Again, our best defense is our own sense of fairness.

Dan Holly · August 22nd, 2002, 10:13 PM

Thanks for the input.

Dylan Couper · August 23rd, 2002, 12:01 AM

I don't know if this is a valid or not but...
What if you paid every one appearing in the footage one dollar at the time they signed the release. Then you could make it a contract since there is an actual exchange going on.

How 'bout it?

Dan Holly · August 23rd, 2002, 02:06 PM

We have (requested by our 2 of our regulars on crew) made DV Christmas cards for them to send home this year. I consider that a form of compensation, since we spent hours of company time(including post) to get them what they wanted.

Both of the cards we produced are quite comical since they used their own scripts(funny on purpose). I'll post them during the holiday season if they give the release.

Paul Sedillo · August 31st, 2002, 06:07 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Doug Thompson : I have all my equipment (both still and video) covered under the insurance plan of the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA). It's a good plan that provides full coverage and prompt reimbursement for all losses (you have to be an NPPA member to use it).

We aware that most home insurance policy riders usually cover only camera equipment for personal use, not professional or work related.

Doug -->>>

Doug,

I am also a member of the NPPA and need insurance. What is the cost for coverage?

Doug Thompson · September 2nd, 2002, 08:48 AM

Paul:

The rates vary, based on value, usage and whether or not you keep your equipment in a locked car trunk (there is a discount for that, which is useless for those of us with SUVs).

I pay about $5500 a year for coverage of $170,000 worth of equipment. There's a $1,000 deductible.

Doug

Paul Sedillo · September 2nd, 2002, 09:32 AM

Doug,

Will they cover my computer equipment also? I thought of this after my initial post.

Dylan Couper · September 2nd, 2002, 01:12 PM

Wow, $5500 seems expensive. It's more than I pay for insurance on my house, cars, and all worldly belongings, which probably ad up to a bit less than $170,000us anyway, but not too far off.

I'm sure the rate is justified, it just caught me off guard.

Jeff Donald · September 2nd, 2002, 03:07 PM

One of the big things in determining rates is if the equipment is used outside the place of business. There is a lot more risk if the equipment is outside the office. I tried association rates (the old ITVA) and switched to a Broker who found some companies more familiar with video and film production. My premiums were cut by more than half (better coverage, too). However, I only insured about $45,000 of equipment outside the office. If I was going to take more than the $45,000 on a shoot it was at my own risk or I could buy short term coverage.

Jeff

Paul Sedillo · September 2nd, 2002, 03:30 PM

Jeff,

Who is the company and do they possibly offer coverage in Texas?

Doug Thompson · September 3rd, 2002, 07:01 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Sedillo : Doug,

Will they cover my computer equipment also? I thought of this after my initial post. -->>>

Paul:

They cover any equipment used for photo, video and film production (including computers). My rates may be higher than some because I am in the field an average of 250 days a year. In fact, most of my claims over the past five years have been from damage or loss through airlines.

Doug

Doug Thompson · September 3rd, 2002, 07:05 AM

<<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : Wow, $5500 seems expensive. It's more than I pay for insurance on my house, cars, and all worldly belongings, which probably ad up to a bit less than $170,000us anyway, but not too far off.

I'm sure the rate is justified, it just caught me off guard. -->>>

Dylan:

I'm sure it is high compared to homeowners and car insurance but my house doesn't hang out of a helicopter at 1500 feet over a forest fire. We're talking business-related insurance versus consumer insurance. I've found the rates are always higher. However, all it takes is replacement of a Nikon D1H with an AFS lens and the insurance has paid for itself.

I don't know this for a fact, but I suspect that rates are higher for a photojournalist than they would be for, say, a wedding or commercial photographer. We tend to be rougher on equipment.

Doug

Paul Sedillo · September 3rd, 2002, 08:11 AM

Doug,

Well I have sent an email to the NPPA insurance carrier. It is good to know that they will also cover my compture gear. All told I am just about half of what you have covered, so I expect to be in the $2000.00 range.

Thanks for you responses on this topic.

Jeff Donald · September 3rd, 2002, 11:22 AM

Paul,

I don't have a need for that type of coverage and more (I sold my share of the post house back in '96). If you look in the back back of just about any of the trade journals you see insurance brokers listed. Call acouple and get some quotes. I'll bet you save some.

Jeff

August 22nd, 2002, 10:54 AM	#31
Dan Holly Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Anchorage, Alaska Posts: 336	Wow, someting to think about Excellent info from everyone.......... I do have one question that fingers off from the specific topic. <Snip> All it is a document that says the subjects understands the circumstances of the shooting and that he/she agrees to them. I've had instances of people changing their minds about appearing in the show months after they've signed the appearence releases--and only few days before the show was to air! Because it's not a legally binding contract, the subjects have the right to change their minds<Snip> How does this relate to your crew? Our current project requires that our unpaid production crew sign something to the same effect. Since there is zero dollars changing hands, how does this part of the law effect your crew who is not actually on film? Can they change their minds about compensation where it could effect shots (that made post) where they were on the crew? We actually paid big bucks to our attorney for our form everyone signs that are on our production crew. We have a few regulars, but there is always someone on crew who is new and maybe is only on our set once. Any insight to these potential issues? __________________ Dan Holly Anchorage, Alaska

August 22nd, 2002, 10:13 PM	#33
Dan Holly Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Anchorage, Alaska Posts: 336	Thanks Thanks for the input. __________________ Dan Holly Anchorage, Alaska

August 23rd, 2002, 02:06 PM	#35
Dan Holly Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Anchorage, Alaska Posts: 336	I was wondering the same thing We have (requested by our 2 of our regulars on crew) made DV Christmas cards for them to send home this year. I consider that a form of compensation, since we spent hours of company time(including post) to get them what they wanted. Both of the cards we produced are quite comical since they used their own scripts(funny on purpose). I'll post them during the holiday season if they give the release. __________________ Dan Holly Anchorage, Alaska

August 31st, 2002, 06:07 AM	#36
Paul Sedillo Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 607	<<<-- Originally posted by Doug Thompson : I have all my equipment (both still and video) covered under the insurance plan of the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA). It's a good plan that provides full coverage and prompt reimbursement for all losses (you have to be an NPPA member to use it). We aware that most home insurance policy riders usually cover only camera equipment for personal use, not professional or work related. Doug -->>> Doug, I am also a member of the NPPA and need insurance. What is the cost for coverage? __________________ Paul Sedillo Image::Studio http://www.image-studio.com Houston, Texas

September 2nd, 2002, 08:48 AM	#37
Doug Thompson Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Floyd, Virginia Posts: 99	Paul: The rates vary, based on value, usage and whether or not you keep your equipment in a locked car trunk (there is a discount for that, which is useless for those of us with SUVs). I pay about $5500 a year for coverage of $170,000 worth of equipment. There's a $1,000 deductible. Doug __________________ Doug Thompson http://www.blueridgemuse.com

August 22nd, 2002, 02:24 PM	#32
jxavierkim Posts: n/a	You obviously need to consult on this issue, perhaps a labor relations lawyer. But in terms of a crew member who's not paid, my feeling is that they're getting something in return for their labor both behind the camera and in front, whether it's on-screen credit or production experience. Again, I don't think these specific scenarios have been covered by significant court rulings, so I would hesitate to venture a guess. I think what it comes down to is, how comfortable are you about your usage of his/her likeness in your program? How you portraying them in an unfavorable light? If so, are you defaming him/her? If he/she decides to sue you, on what grounds would it be? How would you feel about those grounds? Again, our best defense is our own sense of fairness.

August 23rd, 2002, 12:01 AM	#34
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	I don't know if this is a valid or not but... What if you paid every one appearing in the footage one dollar at the time they signed the release. Then you could make it a contract since there is an actual exchange going on. How 'bout it?

September 2nd, 2002, 09:32 AM	#38
Paul Sedillo Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 607	Doug, Will they cover my computer equipment also? I thought of this after my initial post. __________________ Paul Sedillo Image::Studio http://www.image-studio.com Houston, Texas

September 2nd, 2002, 01:12 PM	#39
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	Wow, $5500 seems expensive. It's more than I pay for insurance on my house, cars, and all worldly belongings, which probably ad up to a bit less than $170,000us anyway, but not too far off. I'm sure the rate is justified, it just caught me off guard.

September 2nd, 2002, 03:07 PM	#40
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	One of the big things in determining rates is if the equipment is used outside the place of business. There is a lot more risk if the equipment is outside the office. I tried association rates (the old ITVA) and switched to a Broker who found some companies more familiar with video and film production. My premiums were cut by more than half (better coverage, too). However, I only insured about $45,000 of equipment outside the office. If I was going to take more than the $45,000 on a shoot it was at my own risk or I could buy short term coverage. Jeff

September 2nd, 2002, 03:30 PM	#41
Paul Sedillo Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 607	Jeff, Who is the company and do they possibly offer coverage in Texas? __________________ Paul Sedillo Image::Studio http://www.image-studio.com Houston, Texas

September 3rd, 2002, 07:01 AM	#42
Doug Thompson Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Floyd, Virginia Posts: 99	<<<-- Originally posted by Paul Sedillo : Doug, Will they cover my computer equipment also? I thought of this after my initial post. -->>> Paul: They cover any equipment used for photo, video and film production (including computers). My rates may be higher than some because I am in the field an average of 250 days a year. In fact, most of my claims over the past five years have been from damage or loss through airlines. Doug __________________ Doug Thompson http://www.blueridgemuse.com

September 3rd, 2002, 07:05 AM	#43
Doug Thompson Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Floyd, Virginia Posts: 99	<<<-- Originally posted by Dylan Couper : Wow, $5500 seems expensive. It's more than I pay for insurance on my house, cars, and all worldly belongings, which probably ad up to a bit less than $170,000us anyway, but not too far off. I'm sure the rate is justified, it just caught me off guard. -->>> Dylan: I'm sure it is high compared to homeowners and car insurance but my house doesn't hang out of a helicopter at 1500 feet over a forest fire. We're talking business-related insurance versus consumer insurance. I've found the rates are always higher. However, all it takes is replacement of a Nikon D1H with an AFS lens and the insurance has paid for itself. I don't know this for a fact, but I suspect that rates are higher for a photojournalist than they would be for, say, a wedding or commercial photographer. We tend to be rougher on equipment. Doug __________________ Doug Thompson http://www.blueridgemuse.com

September 3rd, 2002, 08:11 AM	#44
Paul Sedillo Major Player Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 607	Doug, Well I have sent an email to the NPPA insurance carrier. It is good to know that they will also cover my compture gear. All told I am just about half of what you have covered, so I expect to be in the $2000.00 range. Thanks for you responses on this topic. __________________ Paul Sedillo Image::Studio http://www.image-studio.com Houston, Texas

September 3rd, 2002, 11:22 AM	#45
Jeff Donald Warden Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Clearwater, FL Posts: 8,287	Paul, I don't have a need for that type of coverage and more (I sold my share of the post house back in '96). If you look in the back back of just about any of the trade journals you see insurance brokers listed. Call acouple and get some quotes. I'll bet you save some. Jeff