When an 8-hour shift meets the spotlight: Yami Gautam’s view on working hours in film

When an 8-hour shift meets the spotlight: Yami Gautam’s view on working hours in film

In a recent interview ahead of the release of her film Haq (which is set to hit theatres on 7 November 2025), Yami Gautam shared her take on the growing discussion in the film industry about limiting actors’ work-days to eight hours. 

The debate was reignited partly by reports that Deepika Padukone opted out of a project directed by Sandeep Reddy Vanga (the film titled “Spirit”) due to this very issue of work-hour limits not being honoured. 

Yami’s perspective

Yami acknowledged that while in other professions a fixed eight-hour shift is the norm, the film business operates differently. She explained:

“While we may desire a time limit like in other professions, our industry operates differently. There are various factors such as locations, permissions, and the involvement of other actors and technicians. Therefore, the idea of a time limit is quite subjective and relies on the collaboration and understanding between an actor, a producer, and a director.” 

She also touched on the subject of motherhood, saying:

“To begin with, once a mother, always a mother. Regardless of whether you are employed or a stay-at-home parent, every mother is unique and does everything possible for her child. No one holds more importance to a mother than her child.” 

While this remark may seem tangential to the work-hours topic, it underscores how Yami views the actor’s life as layered—professional demands co-existing with personal responsibilities.

Director’s view: alignment & agreements matter

Director Suparn Varma (of Haq) also weighed in:

“This has been a longstanding issue. Some actors work only eight hours a day, five days a week, and avoid night shoots. This arrangement is agreed upon in advance by the director, producer, and actor. So why has it become a problem when a female actor raises this concern? Ultimately, we are all human beings creating art and expressing emotions under challenging conditions. Therefore, I see no issue in discussing time constraints if they align with the production’s needs. If it works, they proceed, if not, they don’t.” 

Varma makes the crucial point that it’s not just about demanding an 8-hour cap per se, but about negotiation and alignment between all stakeholders: actor, director and producer. If everyone agrees up-front, the model can work—but the key is clarity and prior arrangement.

What this tells us about the film industry

From this discussion, here are some insights:

• Film schedules are inherently fluid. Unlike a traditional 9-to-5 job, filming often depends on location availability, lighting conditions (day/night), weather, coordinating large crews, securing permissions—all of which complicate a rigid time-cap.

• Work-hours become negotiable terms. The idea of an actor saying “I will only work 8 hours a day, no night shoots” is not new, but it must be agreed in advance, and may require project-specific concessions (e.g., fewer scenes, alternate shoot plans).

• Gender dynamics in the debate. The director’s commentary touches on a sensitive point: the idea that it becomes “an issue” when a female actor raises the concern. It signals the continuing conversation about gender, equity and expectations in film work-culture.

• Personal & professional roles overlap. Yami’s reference to motherhood reminds us that many actors juggle demanding work with personal lives. Effective scheduling, respect for boundaries and mutual understanding become critical.

• Flexibility vs. standardisation. There’s a tension between the desire for standard labour-norms (eight-hour cap) and the creative industry’s unpredictable nature. The solution lies somewhere between a rigid rule and free-for-all.

Why it matters

For actors, technicians, producers and even fans, this discussion reflects deeper concerns: how sustainable are film-set schedules? Are individuals being looked after in terms of rest, well-being and work-life balance? By speaking out, actors like Yami signal that the conversation is evolving, not just about star-power and glamour but about the human side of filmmaking.

Takeaways & possible moves forward

• Pre-production clarity is critical. Making the working-hours terms part of contracts/agreements can avoid surprises and conflict later.

• Flexible models vs. one-size-fits-all. Some productions may operate well with 8-hour shifts; others (e.g., requiring complex night-scenes or remote location) might not. Being flexible while respectful is key.

• Promote transparency and dialogue. Open conversations between actors, directors and producers help ensure everyone’s needs are considered.

• Well-being must not be sidelined. While creativity often demands long hours, ensuring rest, safe working conditions, and honoring personal lives fosters healthier outcomes for all.

• Gender & fairness lens. Recognising how demands and negotiations may differ for female and male actors ensures fairness and helps in building inclusive work-culture.

Final word

Yami Gautam’s comments around the eight-hour shift debate remind us that the film world is unique. While the ideal of an eight-hour working day is appealing, the reality on set is far more complex—logistics, creative demands, schedules and people all interplay. What emerges then is not a fixed rule, but a negotiated practice: one where boundaries, respect and clear communication matter just as much as the time-clock.

As audiences, we often see the final polished product. But behind the camera? There’s a human story of coordination, compromise and creative effort. By bringing the working-hours conversation into the open, actors like Yami help shine light on those hidden dimensions.