2008Legal / Business Practices forum
Insurance requirements and box rental contract disputes between Steadicam operators and production companies
18 years old. Gear and prices may have changed since.
DisputedParticipants disagreed and reached no conclusion. Read the findings as positions, not as an answer.
What the thread found
- Production companies sometimes demand operators sign box rental forms that disclaim the production company's liability for damaged or stolen equipment, while refusing to provide certificates of insurance coverage.
- Personal equipment insurance typically covers gear only when it is on the operator's property or in transit, not while being used on a production set, making production company coverage necessary.
- Production companies can usually add an operator's equipment to their insurance policy within minutes, making the requirement straightforward to fulfill.
- Large production companies maintain dedicated risk management and legal departments that work to minimize the company's liability, while individual operators must manage their own risk protection.
- Some operators have successfully negotiated for certificates of insurance by standing firm and declining jobs that offer only box rental agreements without coverage.
- An operator added a written note to a signed box rental form stating the signature was made under duress and that the terms were not agreed upon.
- Some production companies cite past fraudulent claims from operators as justification for refusing to provide insurance coverage.
- Insurance systems differ internationally: in Europe, operators typically carry their own insurance and claim against production companies when damage occurs during jobs, while in North America, production companies are expected to add operator equipment to their coverage.
- Requesting a waiver of subrogation in addition to being named as loss payee and additionally insured provides operators further protection.
Depends on
- The discussion centers primarily on practices at one major network and does not establish how widespread these practices are across the industry.
- No legal precedent or court outcome was reported; one participant mentioned awareness of a case taken to court but provided no details.
- Claims about other operators accepting jobs without insurance certificates were denied or questioned by other participants.
- International perspectives (European and Australian) suggest different industry standards in other regions, limiting applicability of US practices.
- The discussion does not resolve whether production companies' concerns about fraudulent operator claims are statistically significant or merely stated as justification.