I want six months off too

October 30, 2008 1:53 PM

How do these TV reality contestants (i.e. Biggest Loser and others) get away from work for 5-6 months? Surely they are not all weathy enough to not be working people? Anybody know how folks do this?
posted by shaarog to society & culture (20 comments total)

They get paid to be on the show. Low end of Guild scale, I think.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 1:59 PM on October 30, 2008

It's a casting call. These people want to be famous.

The contestants for "Survivor", for example, are mostly out-of-work actors and then they find a regular person or two to make it seem like they are all real people. While that show is not scripted, they do follow a written plotline and the people hired for that show are given roles to play.
posted by Zambrano at 2:11 PM on October 30, 2008

While that show is not scripted, they do follow a written plotline and the people hired for that show are given roles to play.

Do you have a source for this?
posted by mkultra at 2:13 PM on October 30, 2008

I know that for Big Brother (US) contestants, participants each receive a $750/wk stipend in addition to any prizes/monies they win on the show. The majority of the people who participate usually leave their jobs to be able to do the show (which may last up to four months), and the stipend helps them defray accrued lifecosts for the duration of their involvement with the production.

In some other cases, contestants have been either self-employed or have received permission for an extended leave from their employers so they can participate. The most recent winner of Big Brother, Dan Gheesling, fits in this latter category; a coach and teacher at a Catholic school, Mr. Gheesling received advanced blessings from his higher-ups before entering the Big Brother house and will be returning to his teaching job in January.

As for the contestants on the Biggest Loser and other shows, I know not. I wouldn't be surprised, however, to learn that they also receive a set weekly sum to assist with any extended investment of time in the project.
posted by antisocialstudies at 2:14 PM on October 30, 2008

Compressed timescale. Almost all reality shows film in a month or so. For instance, Amazing Race is only about 28 days from start to winner. Survivor is about 5 weeks. The contestants are coached to say "last week" when they talk even though it may have been only two or three days earlier.

Biggest Loser may be one of the few exceptions, since you can't cheat weight loss as easily and the big gains are the main draw of the show.
posted by smackfu at 2:14 PM on October 30, 2008

The contestants are coached to say "last week" when they talk even though it may have been only two or three days earlier.

I don't think this is the case on Survivor or The Amazing Race, which seem to be pretty up front about the fact the one episode covers less than a one-week period (though it may be true on other shows).

OK, I haven't watched Survivor in ages, but at least in the early seasons they were open about each episode covering a 3-day period, with "Day NN" regularly shown on-screen.

In The Amazing Race, which I do watch fairly regularly, I can't recall any contestant saying "last week" to describe events of the previous episode. If anything, TAR occasionally gives the impression than it takes place over a shorter period than it actually does. The voice-overs at the start of the episode ("Teams arrived at the pit stop for a mandatory rest period. Matt and Jess, who were the first to arrive at 4:09 p.m., will leave at 4:09 a.m.") imply that the rest period is 12 hours. If you look at online comments from past contestants, this is usually the case, but occasionally the rest period is 36 or 60 hours instead.

But smackfu's basic point is correct about compressed timescale, at least for those two shows. Most episodes of TAR appear to take 1-2 days, not counting the rest stops, so the entire race can be done in a month.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:53 PM on October 30, 2008

I would guess that for the Biggest Loser they are either self-employed, have a spouse that can support them and get special time off from work. I have to believe that a large number of employers would allow them the time off (vacation + unpaid time) to lose the weight. If you watch you'll notice that a lot of the families on Biggest Loser have nice homes and seem fairly well-off. Maybe they can afford it. I'm sure they get a stipend which could cover basic expenses while they're gone. I think that the value of training time and healthy food is probably worth getting time off work/using your savings or credit to be on the show.

I also agree that a lot of contestants on other shows are actors and have free schedules. A friend of my sister's was on a dating show called 'Cupid' and he had to live at a house in LA for a while. He just made a special request for time off work. He was a consultant and I don't think money would have been a problem for 2-6 weeks.
posted by Bunglegirl at 3:08 PM on October 30, 2008

As stated above, most of the people on these shows are struggling actors who don't really have a steady job anyway. My friend was on "Amazing race" and they billed him as an SAT tutor from NJ, even though he had been an actor living in L.A. for five years or so.

Also, when i worked for a major corporation I had a co-worker who got selected for "Survivor." When they wouldn't give her a leave of absence to be on the show, she got angry and quit.
posted by drjimmy11 at 3:12 PM on October 30, 2008

They get paid to be on the show. Low end of Guild scale, I think.

I don't think this is true. Even the ones who are actors most likely don't have their SAG cards. I doubt they would use a SAG performer, because of all the contractual weirdness it entails, and because then anyone in Iowa can call up SAG and find out that person is a professional actor and not the All-American, wholesome profession they tried to pass him off as.
posted by drjimmy11 at 3:15 PM on October 30, 2008

Survivor is a bit unusual in that they pay the losers quite a lot. 2nd place gets $100k, but 5th place still gets $55k. Almost everyone would probably be considered well compensated, no matter when they go out. I think this is because it was the "first" big reality show, and they hadn't realized they could get away with just a big prize for the winner and fame for the rest.
posted by smackfu at 4:05 PM on October 30, 2008

They get paid to be on the show. Low end of Guild scale, I think.

I don't think this is true.

Of course it's true! It's not a lot for actors on scripted shows, but they're definitely getting a little something.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 4:12 PM on October 30, 2008 [1 favorite has favorites]

Just to add to this Guild scale thing... lots of shows use the Guild scale for payment. It doesn't mean you have to be a member of the Guild. I think talk shows and things like that use this method. If they required a SAG card from everyone one the show... I won't even bother to explain what a hassle that would be.
posted by Fuzzy Skinner at 6:12 PM on October 30, 2008

They ask their boss for the time off; unpaid probably. I recall hearing that one of the Apprentice cast members got in a bit of trouble with their employer after the company started advertising themselves with her image only to see her make unsavory statements about a pair of Jewish women halfway through the season. So it's not impossible to convince a company time off is in their best interests, but I imagine there'd have to be a lot of trust in your professional behavior these days.

But mostly, I figure they're actors willing to risk it to break into the industry.
posted by pwnguin at 6:19 PM on October 30, 2008

I can take up to three years unpaid leave from my job, perhaps they can too, and contestants usually receive a stipend to cover their ordinary living expenses while on the show.
posted by goo at 7:57 PM on October 30, 2008

A friend of mine is a Survivor winner. This person had enough money that they didn't have to work when they went on the show. I don't know about any other contestants.
posted by workerant at 8:04 PM on October 30, 2008

Do you have a source for this?
posted by mkultra at 11:13 PM on October 30 [+] [!]

Yes. Myself. I work for CBS.
posted by Zambrano at 8:09 PM on October 30, 2008

I downloaded the Australian Biggest Loser application form in the first season (which was incredibly long and had scary requirements, like the name and contact details of 10 friends, colleagues etc) and they did mention a minor payment (without saying how much it was) to keep you financially balanced during your run on the show.
posted by b33j at 8:19 PM on October 30, 2008

When they wouldn't give her a leave of absence to be on the show, she got angry and quit.

I've read stories about contestants for biggest loser, big brother etc quitting there job so they could be on the show, if their boss wouldn't give them time off. Also, have you seen some of the BB contestants? Not sure about the states, but here in Australia I'm sure many of them wouldn't have "full-time" jobs anyway, so not that hard to quit!

Also, I agree with the others, most of them get a stipend when they go on the show, and I also think runners-up etc get a payment (ie. second place big brother contestant gets $10,000 or something, third place $5,000 etc).
posted by ranglin at 1:13 AM on October 31, 2008

Some co-workers of mine were on the first season of Amazing Race. At the outset, it was announced that they were taking personal leave, and that was all that was said.

They also had some INCREDIBLE stories to tell about how heavily involved the "story editors" are, and how what happens on screen is sculpted to fit a pre-imagined story and is not at all reflective of what really happened.
posted by jbickers at 4:32 AM on October 31, 2008

I worked as a Production Assistant on Kid Nation.
It's different because it was kids, but they were paid for just being there - a pretty fair amount, if I recall. Ironically, this caused some legal problems, because they were kids, and technically "working" 24 hours a day.
posted by clcapps at 8:08 AM on November 1, 2008