The conditions in which post production work takes place have some unique features which can put the health and mental health of workers at risk. An industry culture of poor communications and reports of discrimination, together with a lack of breaks and rest time, compound the challenges faced by some of those working in it.
In January, the TV Industry Human Rights Forum published a report called “Let’s fix it in post: why broadcasters and production companies can and should address human rights risks in post production”.
This is the fourth related article that covers a key theme from the research. Please see parts 1 - 4 linked at the bottom of this page.
As post production comes at the end of the process, if budgets have been mismanaged or misallocated at earlier stages, post production may be left far less than is required and it becomes an option of taking the work below cost but in return for credits or turning it down altogether. This situation can have severe knock-on impacts for employees at post production facilities, who may be expected to work excessive hours for no extra pay, and for freelancers who may be expected to accept below minimum wage work or work for free.
Facility manager0“You are at the end of the pipeline so if the shoot goes over budget then there’s less left for you in the end.”
This article looks at three issues that characterise post production practices and which can have negative consequences for those that work in it: underbidding, outsourcing and lack of transparency.
The US writers’ strike and slowdown in UK commissioning in 2023 has had a delayed impact on post production, which saw insufficient projects in 2024. Where projects are available, budgets for post production appear to be static or reducing, even though overheads such as energy bills and rents continue to rise.
As a result, there is a ‘race to the bottom’ with facilities underbidding in order to win work or accepting drastic cuts to budgets, with no equivalent cut in expectation.
Facility manager0“There is high pressure to deliver to extremely high standards on an ever-decreasing budget that has never gone up with inflation. Budgets have gone down and rates haven’t gone up in the last 15 years.”
Our research identified three ways that post production facilities respond to this situation:
Many post production facilities already operate on low margins and have been forced to diversify away from the genres they specialise in and towards any work that might be available. If post production facilities were to put up their fees to reflect rising costs and to pay fairly for working hours, it may mean that work goes elsewhere and out of the UK – perhaps putting facilities out of business. This is the choice facing post production facilities if those commissioning work place insufficient value on the treatment of workers in post production, on healthy workplaces or on diversity.
Sound designer0“A producer’s remit is to make things as cheaply as possible – that’s what they build their reputation on. They push for a low price, but we have to sweat staff to do it. We are always on the edge of making money.”
Sometimes the work is already outside the UK because post production is an international business. Outsourcing to lower cost countries regularly takes place for some aspects of post production, with India, China, Indonesia, Latvia, Turkey and Australia all mentioned by interviewees. The UK is an outsourcing destination for other countries, particularly US projects that see UK post production as a cheaper alternative to US based facilities yet with compatible language and culture.
VFX is more commonly outsourced because of the high number of people needed. As one interviewee said, “Often you need to throw a hundred people at a task and off it goes somewhere to be churned out.”
However, people working in these outsourced jobs are often expected to work with the time zones of the client, with no consideration of potential impacts on them or their families. They are even further removed from the decision makers, who may have even less oversight of conditions than already is the case. One interviewee remarked that, “If you lift the bonnet, it’s a modern-day sweatshop.”
There are alternatives to the budget models outlined above. Done well, involvement by post production at an early stage can find cost savings, prepare post production teams adequately and provide realistic estimates of schedules and time needed. Post production is both a technical and a creative process that is essential for successful content, but post production facilities often have limited information about the production itself until the rushes arrive.
Post production coordinator0“Productions don’t engage the post houses early on. If we could get involved earlier we could help save money upfront.”
Examples given by interviewees included not knowing whether a project would involve lots of action and crowd scenes or be more dialogue-based or have not much sound at all. This makes it difficult to do an accurate estimate of the time needed and two hours of footage on one project could take three times as long on another, due to the content. Other challenges arising from a lack of transparency might be more technical. For example, a post production facility might have won a project only to find the rushes are not labelled properly, which they then need to address with no extra budget, and possibly without any available individuals to support the process.
Sometimes this lack of transparency might be because it has not occurred to productions how important it is for post production houses to have sufficient information in advance. Other times, interviewees suggested that there can be a culture of secrecy around projects that extends beyond necessary commercial considerations and makes it particularly difficult to tease out information.
Post production coordinator0“Transparency is not there and by the time things arrive at post, there is not a lot of money, time or patience left and post is hard stop before delivery.”
The expectation that issues with production can be ‘fixed in post’ is often not matched to the budget and time needed. Such pressures make it more likely that facilities will underbid in order to win work or that work will be outsourced to low-cost countries.
If broadcasters, commissioners and productions demand work to be delivered quickly, cheaply and to a high quality, with no compromise on any of these points, then they may be contributing towards exploitative practices and human rights harms that occur as a result.
As expectations increase on broadcasters to understand where human rights risks lie and to conduct effective human rights due diligence, they should see low bids as a red flag and also focus their attention on ‘outsourced’ parts of production supply chains.
To prevent some of these issues occurring in the first place, broadcasters and production companies should reset expectations about the amount of budget and time needed for post production work and to ensure that which is apportioned is able to cover the actual cost of work and adequate time. This includes ringfencing post production budgets so that they are not reduced by an overspend during production, and being transparent with post production teams to enable better planning upfront so that they can help to identify what is realistic and prevent problematic underbidding.
Broadcasters and production companies should also make good practice by post production facilities non-negotiable and reward those that meet higher standards with preferred supplier status. In addition, they should work with unions to ensure post production is a part of all industry agreements, including future changes to the PACT/Bectu agreement on scripted TV and support recommendations for a Government-appointed Freelancers’ Commissioner.
For more detail on the findings and recommendations, read the report at www.tvhumanrights.org/postproduction.