Stripper Army Suing Rick's Cabaret for Stiffing Dancers

THe question of whether or not a stripper is an employee or a contractor has been contentiously argued for years and apparently is a gray area in the law.

It seems to me that a strip club with a good lawyer could write a contract which clearly forced the stripper to accept status as a contractor. Let me give an analogy. When you go to Walmart, it is impossible for you to tell who are the employees and who are renting space from Walmart to peddle their wares. Some of the specialty services inside a Walmart, such as vision, prescriptions, photography, flowers, etc. are actually independent contractors. I assume this varies from store to store and over time. Likewise, some SCs will have "house girls" who are being paid an hourly wage to show up on the company's terms and work the hours specified. House girls do not necessarily get to keep all the money they collect from customers. The same strip club may encourage other women to come in, pay a fee (often called a tip-out) and make as much money off the paying customers as they are capable of.

The plaintiff says the strippers were faced with termination if they didn't pay illegal "house fees". But house fees are NOT inherently illegal. If Rick's can provide an environment where a motivated and qualified stripper can make hundreds of dollars (or more) a night then it seems like Rick's has a moral as well as a legal right to charge the stripper a fee, just as Walmart would charge a vendor a fee to operate his business inside the Walmart store.

The fact that there is a class-action lawsuit in place shows this employee/contractor dichotomy is not simple or clear-cut. But just because a lawsuit gets class-action status doesn't mean that the plaintiffs will win. I predict that Rick's will either win this outright, or eventually reach an out-of-court settlement for FAR less than the lawyers are seeking.

Worth following up on if you are interested in The Law.

I agree with arbeeguy that it is a gray area. I have to wonder how many strippers would actually want to be classed as employees? If they were, then they would have to abide by work hours and schedules.And a lot of other rules that independent contractors to not have to live by. My favorites like being able to pick when they work, etc.

So, (I apologize if I'm reinventing the wheel here), how'd the "independent contractor" designation ever come about for strippers? Why weren't they called or considered employees from the start?

In addition to not having to pay them, another consideration is probably because the house can claim ignorance of most illegal activities, If they can show that they took precautions.

i've always thought that it was ridiculous for clubs to charge the girls a "house fee". after tip out to mgr, dj, bouncers many of the dancers have told me that they start out as much a $100 in the hole. add on fines for being late, leaving early or a 100 other things and you can see how much could cost to even go to work. clubs would draw very little business if they did not have the dancers. compromise would be to drop all the fees in return for not having to pay wages. girls are contractors but don't have to pay to work. just follow the rules and make $$$

I wonder if we as customers would have to end up paying larger cover charges if the club had to start paying the dancers as employees?
A lot of the time when businesses get stiffed with fines, rules, fees, etc. they end up passing it along to the customer in some way.

Management may have less liability with ind contractors as opposed to employees. If they had to pay employees, mabe there would not be so many fuglies.

"So, (I apologize if I'm reinventing the wheel here), how'd the "independent contractor" designation ever come about for strippers? Why weren't they called or considered employees from the start?"

I am also curious about this...I don't have a great answer for you but I found this in the wikipedia article for Lap Dance
"Lap dancing clubs are a development of the earlier strip clubs, in which strippers danced on stage and were paid a wage. In the 1970s, New York's Melody Theater introduced audience participation. The Melody Theater became the Harmony Theater and operated in two locations in Manhattan for over 20 years until it was closed down in 1998.

In 1980, San Francisco's Mitchell Brothers O'Farrell Theatre changed its policy so that customers could have dancers come to sit naked on their laps for a $1 tip. The practice quickly spread.[2] It suited club owners, because it brought in more customers and it meant they had to pay less to the dancers. Sitting on customers' laps evolved into lap dancing."

Thanks all.

Sam, I've been to Mitchell Bros. VERY expensive place!!! And they don't sit on your lap for a $1 anymore. Now if they think you're okay, they grab your crotch and offer services. Very expensive services. Maybe for some guys the price is okay... but for most of us I'm guessing not.

Good for the Rick's Cabaret strippers!

"So, (I apologize if I'm reinventing the wheel here), how'd the 'independent contractor' designation ever come about for strippers? Why weren't they called or considered employees from the start?"

It's a basically a tax dodge for almost all involved. If strippers ever get wise & form more unions, this practice will likely end entirely. There are, of course, things that each side will lose if this comes to pass.

"I wonder if we as customers would have to end up paying larger cover charges if the club had to start paying the dancers as employees?"

Maybe, but most strip clubs make a TON of money off selling drinks to begin with & that money wouldn't be touched at all by making strippers employees.