Exotic dancer suing D.C. strip club for wages

avatar for samsung1
samsung1
Ohio
To hear Quansa Thompson talk of her life as an exotic dancer, to listen to her describe how men offer cash as she sashays, gyrates and jiggles the night away, is to evoke a thousand titillating thoughts, not a single one having anything to do with the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

That is, until Thompson brings up the Depression-era law, which she discovered last summer after being fired by her then-employer, the House, a den of prurient entertainment on Georgia Avenue NW. Thompson is suing the House in U.S. District Court, alleging that the club pays dancers no wages, but ought to under the law. The club has denied the charge.

By her own account, Thompson -- or "Love" as she calls herself onstage -- had to overcome a good deal of self-doubt six years ago, when she started dancing alongside a veritable conga line of statuesque beauties with show biz names such as "Wild Cherry," "French Kiss" and "Wet."

She learned to feel the music, to move her hips just so, to smile with enough mystery that men in her audience leaned forward, hands extended, fingers offering up $20 bills, fifties, hundreds. The high-rollers, the "ballers," as she called them, "would make it rain," literally showering her with fistfuls of dollars.

"It's like you're a celebrity," the 29-year-old brunette said. "You hypnotize them."

In a given night, Thompson said, she could earn as much as $1,200, enough to inspire an arched eyebrow from the bank teller when she went to make the deposit. She said she made $80,000 to $100,000 a year, enough to buy herself a Grand Marquis, rent an apartment, take college-level classes, accumulate savings and fancy herself a budding Warren Buffett, whose biography she has read ("He's a hustler, just like me"). Not bad for a woman who grew up in group homes in St. Louis, has no immediate family and says she once spent eight months in prison for armed robbery.

Yet Thompson said that aspects of the stripping life bothered her. The House paid her and the other dancers $20 for showing up each day, with the understanding that they could keep their tips after they paid the management a couple of fees: $20 to the DJ, $20 to the bartender. If a dancer was late to the stage, Thompson said, the club charged a $10 penalty. The fine for missing a shift was $80, even if it was because of an illness, which is what Thompson claimed when she didn't show up for work one night last year.

" 'Why would I have to pay you when you know I'm ill?' " she recalled asking her boss.

Thompson said she began talking about trying to form a union to advance the notion of dancers' rights. When she threatened to sue the club's owner, Darrell Allen, he told her to "Get in line," she said. Allen barred her from the club, Thompson said, inspiring her research forays on the Internet, where she found that exotic dancers across the country have taken their employers to court.

Why couldn't she?

Thompson found a lawyer, Philip Zipin, who, after some research, concluded that the House, like a preponderance of strip clubs nationwide, classified their dancers as "independent contractors," as if they were plumbers, only without the tool belt (not to mention the shirt, pants and underwear).

Zipin said the House's practices -- its schedules, rules and fines -- amount to treating dancers as if they were employees, but without paying minimum wage. "This is exploitation," Zipin said. Thompson is seeking $75,000 from the House, an amount that includes the wages and overtime she said she would have collected had she been working full time.

Neither Allen or his lawyer, William Howard, responded to phone messages seeking comment.

Exotic dancers across the country have found success taking on their clubs on similar grounds.

"Unfortunately, it seems like a common practice not to pay dancers any wages," said Sonia Lin, a New York-based lawyer whose firm represents a performer who is suing the Penthouse Executive Club in Manhattan. "It's an unorganized industry, and there have been a lot of lawsuits. Because of the nature of the industry, it's slow to change."

Yet there are strippers who don't want full-time gigs, who prefer the freedom of floating from club to club. "There are advantages -- the write-offs, for one," said Lia Scholl, founder of the now-defunct Star Light Ministries, which counseled exotic dancers. "You can write off breast augmentation. You can write off mileage. They can determine their own schedules and be their own bosses."

The disadvantages of being an independent contractor include being responsible for one's own Social Security taxes and not being entitled to workman's compensation. "If you fall off the pole," Scholl said, "there's no safety net."

Whether potential lawsuits trouble club owners is hard to say since many are squeamish about lifting the veil on their operations.

"I don't want to say nothing about nothing," said Tony Sigalas, owner of Louis' Rogue, a club on K Street NW. A woman who identified herself as the administrator at Archibald's, which bills itself as "D.C.'s premier gentlemen's club," hung up when asked how it pays its performers.

Daniel Irving, the owner of Irving's, a Prince George's County club, said he treats dancers as if they were patrons, charging them $20 admission, then letting them keep whatever they earn without any additional fees. To hire dancers as employees, he said, would require record-keeping and check-writing. Headaches, in other words.

The dancers, he said, don't seem to mind his system. "There are always two or three girls who show up, maybe five," he said.

Since she stopped dancing at the House, Thompson has ruminated about returning to school or starting a magazine called Rare Chocolate, devoted to showing off beautiful women of color. "Cosmo for men," she said.

She'd be more than willing to return to the stage full time, if she were treated like a full-fledged member of the labor force, albeit one who awakes each day to get undressed for work. "It would be the best job," she said. "People would have more respect for it."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con…

Looks like a typical asshole ROB trying to blame everyone else for her problems. I hope she wastes thousands on legal/attorney fees and gets denied any settlement.

15 comments

Jump to latest
avatar for sinclair
sinclair
15 years ago
She makes $80k-100k a year, tax free, and she is bitching. Her claim of exploitation is inconsequential and should not be heard in court.
avatar for sanitago
sanitago
15 years ago
an interesting problem. on the one hand, the dances can make a ton of money. the flip side is that dancers, like any other profession that is tied to how the person looks and can move (models come to mind) have a limited 'shelf live', so their "window of opportunity" to make that money is not very long. an accident or unforeseen illness can put them out of work very quickly. for myself, I wonder at the club, which, on the one hand, is claiming that they are not "employees" entitled to the considerations any other worker is, and on the other, fining them if they miss work for any reason. to impose that sort of punitive measure implies by itself that the dancer is expected to be there and working, i.e. a "regular employee". if they weren't fining the dancers they might have a case, but as it stands, I think she's got a pretty good chance at taking them (justifiable, IMHO) to the cleaners.
avatar for SuperDude
SuperDude
15 years ago
A federal district judge in Washington, DC may have the opportunity to issue a legal opinion that will change the "hiring" practices of the SC industry.
avatar for Dudester
Dudester
15 years ago
In the end, it's going to take a US Supreme Court ruling to settle this once and for all, even if it's in line with their recent tendency to leave states to settle it-making it a state to state issue.
avatar for sanitago
sanitago
15 years ago
gods, I hope the Supreme Court doesn't step in! those people have their heads about five feet up their own butts of recent, IMHO.
avatar for Clubber
Clubber
15 years ago
Dudester,

Most issues should be state to state. The Constitution gives little power to the federal government. Unfortunately, liberal courts have "found" things in the Constitution that do not exist.
avatar for SuperDude
SuperDude
15 years ago
Remember, it was Rehnquist who wrote the decision about the "secondary effects" of strip clubs and property values. That case created a whole new cottage industry of demograzphers, zoning experts and sociologist trying to figure out the impact, if any, of a strip club on residential property values and "community stability." There's nothing in the Constitution about this.
avatar for MisterGuy
MisterGuy
15 years ago
"Daniel Irving, the owner of Irving's, a Prince George's County club, said he treats dancers as if they were patrons, charging them $20 admission, then letting them keep whatever they earn without any additional fees. To hire dancers as employees, he said, would require record-keeping and check-writing."

Wow...what a guy. Now imagine if *none* of the dancers showed up to work...there goes your $20/person admission fees! Oooooo..."record-keeping and check-writing"...and learning the ability to read & write as well I guess...sounds really "scary"...not...

"I hope she wastes thousands on legal/attorney fees and gets denied any settlement"

...and I hope that she wins! The real ROBs here, IMHO, are the owners & operators of these strip clubs. Heck, all they would have to do is treat the dancers like they were any other tipped employee (like a waitress). They would pay them some miniscule hourly rate (well below the minimum wage for regular, non-tipped employees), and then guarantee that they would earn the equivalent of what the regular, non-tipped minimum wage is per week if the dancer's tips don't make up the difference. Many, many, many businesses have no problem making money off of this scheme right this very second.

-----------------------------

"She makes $80k-100k a year, tax free"

I missed where she said that she never paid any taxes. Sure, most strippers don't pay taxes, like a lot of people that are basically paid under-the-table.

I'm telling you guys...it's only a matter of time before strip clubs are going to be forced, one way or the other, to treat ALL of their employees fairly.
avatar for sanitago
sanitago
15 years ago
hell, clubber, I don't remember the Constitution saying anything about corporations having the same rights as you and me, but the current court seems to think they do. are they a "liberal" court?
avatar for MisterGuy
MisterGuy
15 years ago
Don't bother sanitago...he *never* has any facts to bring to the table, ever.

BTW, the Supremacy Clause is, in fact, in the U.S. Constitution...Article VI, Clause 2. So much for "finding things in the Constitution that do not exist"...lol...
avatar for samsung1
samsung1
15 years ago
They updated the washington post link to include her picture.. She is not that hot and she is 29 yrs old working in air dance DC. I am more surprised by her $75k earnings than her lawsuit.
avatar for chi_sam
chi_sam
15 years ago
Oh, fer cryan' out loud... I want to launch a magazine for strip club patrons called 'Abundant Wasp'. Who can I sue for the start-up costs?

She'll get her money one way or another. Based on her pic, I think she ought to explore a trans-gender discrimination angle.
avatar for steve229
steve229
15 years ago
This case was the talk of the club tonight. One dancer had read the article in the post and told the other girls about it and they were all discussing it and debating whether they should sue.

Something else interesting - the dancer said she signed some kind of contract when she was "hired", but she didn't get a copy. Now she's asked for a copy, but the club refuses to give her one.
avatar for MisterGuy
MisterGuy
15 years ago
"the dancer said she signed some kind of contract when she was 'hired', but she didn't get a copy. Now she's asked for a copy, but the club refuses to give her one."

Exactly. A lot of clubs have their dancers sign on to a set of rules of conduct and/or a listing of potential fines for violating the house rules. Rarely have I seen dancers get copies of what they signed after the fact. It's just another way for the clubs (and the dancers to be fair) to have their cake & eat it to when it comes to the issue of being an employee vs. being a "private contractor".
avatar for CTQWERTY
CTQWERTY
15 years ago
Sue The Paper Moon?!? GO FOR IT!!! Gag (or jump) sir DJ too! GO GIRL POWER!!!!!!!
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now