Drake Bell Criticizes SAG-AFTRA After Losing Health Coverage

Drake Bell has publicly criticized SAG-AFTRA after learning that he did not qualify for coverage under the performers’ health plan. The former Drake & Josh star shared a screenshot of his eligibility notice on Instagram Stories and urged followers not to pursue acting or join the union.

The notice said Bell’s covered earnings from July 2025 through June 2026 did not meet the plan’s minimum requirement. According to the figures visible in his post, he had earned $17,480.53 in covered work and needed another $11,452.47 to reach the $28,933 eligibility threshold.

Bell directs his frustration at union leadership

Bell tagged SAG-AFTRA and its president, Sean Astin, while arguing that a career spanning 35 years should have counted for more. His posts focused on the gap between long-term union membership and the earnings test used to determine current health-plan access.

Neither the union nor Bell’s representatives had issued a substantive response when the initial reports were published. The available notice does not say that Bell was expelled from the union; it concerns eligibility for a specific coverage period based on reported earnings or other plan rules.

A broader concern for working actors

Bell’s complaint arrives after other performers described similar difficulty maintaining coverage. Variety noted that Jack Haven and Heather Matarazzo recently discussed the need to secure enough qualifying work before their own deadlines. Haven later said new work allowed them to clear the threshold.

The episode underscores a recurring reality of entertainment labor: public recognition does not always translate into continuous union-covered income. Bell became a familiar television figure through The Amanda Show and Drake & Josh, and he later performed voice roles including Spider-Man in several animated Marvel projects. His more recent work has also included music.

For Bell, the dispute is both personal and structural. His post framed the health-plan decision as evidence that longevity offers little protection when annual covered earnings fall short, while the published eligibility message shows the decision was tied to a defined financial threshold.