A major Indian film union has formally boycotted superstar Ranveer Singh, a move that has sent tremors through the global entertainment industry and drawn anxious eyes from London to Los Angeles.
The Federation of Western India Cine Employees (FWICE) announced the ban late Tuesday, citing Singh’s alleged breach of contract and unprofessional conduct. Sources confirm the decision was unanimous, with union leaders accusing the actor of walking out on a production after accepting an advance payment.
Ranveer Singh, 39, is one of Bollywood’s highest-paid performers, with a string of blockbusters including "Padmaavat" and "Gully Boy." His endorsement deals with global brands make him a linchpin of India’s multi-billion-pound film economy.
The FWICE’s prohibition means no union member can work with Singh on any future project. In practice, this halts production on his upcoming films, costing studios millions. A source within the union told me: "This is not about one star. This is about accountability. If we allow this behaviour, the entire system collapses."
But the ripples extend far beyond Mumbai’s film lots. UK creative industries, already battered by Brexit and rising production costs, are watching with alarm. Singh was slated to star in a major British-Indian co-production, a film backed by a London-based studio. That project is now in jeopardy.
One British producer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said: "We were relying on Ranveer’s star power to secure financing. Now we’re scrambling. The Indian film unions have enormous power. If they decide to shut someone out, it affects every co-production agreement from Soho to Scotland."
Documents obtained by this reporter show Singh’s camp had been in advanced negotiations with Netflix for a series shot in the UK. That deal is now frozen. The streaming giant declined to comment.
The boycott also raises questions about the opaque, often feudal structure of India’s film unions. Critics argue these bodies operate like cartels, with little transparency and a history of strong-arm tactics. Yet here, the union has acted against one of the industry’s most powerful figures. Is it a sign of reform or a symptom of deeper dysfunction?
Singh’s representatives have not responded to repeated requests for comment. But leaked internal memos from his management company reveal a sense of victimisation. One memo, dated two days before the boycott, warns of "a conspiracy by vested interests."
The timing is particularly damaging. The Indian film industry is recovering from the pandemic, with box office revenues still below pre-Covid levels. A prolonged boycott risks turning Singh into a cautionary tale, scaring off international investors who crave stability.
The UK’s Film and TV Production Finance Office told me they are monitoring the situation. A spokesperson said: "We encourage fair labour practices across the industry. Any disruption to major co-productions is a concern."
But behind the diplomatic language, industry insiders admit this is a crisis. The UK’s creative sector contributes over £100 billion annually to the economy. Co-productions with India have been a growth area, fuelled by the British government’s tax reliefs and India’s vast audience.
If this boycott solidifies, the message is clear: no star is bigger than the union. And that might be a warning global studios cannot ignore.
Watch this space. The countdown has begun.
