Actors’ employment is expected to expand by 5% over the next ten years, according to the BLS, which makes sense until you read the next sentence. Just 12% of members of SAG-AFTRA, the union that represents professional actors in movies and television, make more than $1,000 annually from performing. Not $1,000 a week. $1,000 in total throughout the course of a year. Most union members who meet the requirements to be classified as professional working actors make less than that amount.
A time should be dedicated to that number. It indicates that a significant portion of the industry’s workforce is employed in a way that is not sustainable by any standard metric. In order to be eligible for SAG-AFTRA health insurance, a minimum income is required. The majority of members don’t make it. While they wait for the employment that could alter the calculation, they continue to be members of the union, perform other jobs, and supplement their income elsewhere. There are those who wait a long time.
The numbers travel in an entirely different way at the other end of the spectrum. The average salary for top male actors in a movie is $11.9 million. The average box office receipts for top female stars with similar levels of fame are $6.6 million. This difference, which is about 44%, is quite consistent across similar career stages and experience levels. The salary gap at the top of the industry is now widely known; it was discussed in public when Jennifer Lawrence wrote about it years ago, and since the gap hasn’t closed, the talk hasn’t stopped.
This is made worse by the age factor. After the age of 34, women in Hollywood notice a decrease in their earnings per film. Men’s continue to grow until they turn 51, at which point they stabilize. This is a result of how casting decisions are made, the roles that are written for women at various ages, and the industry’s long-standing implicit beliefs about female bankability. It is not a natural law. The information highlights a problem that many professionals in the field face but that is difficult to measure externally.
The figures have changed somewhat, but not consistently, as a result of the streaming era. According to the UCLA Hollywood Diversity Report for 2025, women now hold 61% of main roles in streaming movies, which is a significant shift from ten years ago. However, according to the same research, women make up 37% of writers and 28% of directors. Although it hasn’t completely closed, the distance between who controls what shows on screen and who appears on it has shrunk. The data makes a clear distinction between being cast as the lead and having creative control on the decisions that define the movie.
There is more to the financial case for solving this than merely a moral one, and it may even be stronger when presented that way. According to industry studies, there might be an additional $12 billion to $18 billion in revenue each year if Latino talent were adequately represented in above-the-line roles, such as lead actors, directors, and producers. Globally, projects with diverse above-the-line talent currently outperform comparables with less diversity by more than 58%. In a quantifiable way, the market is ahead of the casting choices made by the industry. Due to the decision-makers’ incomplete understanding of what audiences are truly prepared to pay to see, money is being left on the table.
