Strippers Win $13 Million Class Settlement

The simple fact is that Spearmint Rhino and others got greedy. A simple way around this is to write out a contract spelling out fees and responsabilities.
Stage Fees = $$
VIP Room Fees to house per dance = $$
Champagne Room fees to house = $$
Contract dancer agrees to be on stage up to X times per Shift
Contract may be terminated at any time for any reason by either party with out notice or monitary recompence
Etc.
that way the dancer know up front what she has to pay and the club knows how much they will get

Holy habeas corpus!

@Tiredtraveler - Based on the law degree I purchased on-line, i believe your interpretation is incorrect.

According to the IRS, "the general rule is that an individual is an independent contractor if the payer has the right to control or direct only the result of the work and not what will be done and how it will be done...You are not an independent contractor if you perform services that can be controlled by an employer (what will be done and how it will be done). This applies even if you are given freedom of action. What matters is that the employer has the legal right to control the details of how the services are performed."

The contract you describe would, in fact, be an employment contract, and prima facie evidence that the dancer was, ip so facto, an employee and not an independent contractor.

I noticed that the attorneys cut of the pie was missing from the article. Not surprising since the news source is an attorney trade publication.

Who's in favor of underground clubs free from the chains of greedy club managers owners and snakes..., er I mean lawyers.

Steve is correct. All these fees and half of this and that, these are actions taken on a sales person. Sell a drink, the club gets half - that's a sales person. That's an employee.

I have said that if one hires dancers as contractors, it is much like renting a stage. They pay their stage fee - whether they get on it or not... "that's up to the band." Of course, if a "band" doesn't perform they probably won't have access to the stage very long. :)

Same with "tipping" security and the DJ. Either they are provided by the house or they are working for the contractor (aka, the dancer.) If they are splitting revenue, the money should go to the manager who then divides it up to the house workers.

Wow. I'm going to have to see if this will affect any of the clubs that I frequent.

Underground may well work.

I wonder if they will SHARE their wealth. LMAO

I still say this will bite dancers in the ass in the longterm.

^^^ yes. I agree with jester

"I'm going to have to see if this will affect any of the clubs that I frequent.'

@ lowpaw - Yes, it'll be interesting to see what the ramifications of moving away from the independent contractor model will be:

Will clubs raise their dancer hiring standards?

Will dancers be more or less motivated as employees?

Will the chance to be "partners or shareholders" result in more Ivy-League educated strippers?

Will strip club 2 AMers drive up workman comp insurance rates?

Will dancers continue to ignore jerikson40 for hours on end?

I think this is more a decision about misplaced pseudo-feminism than about employment law. If a set of wealthy middle-aged overweight musicians who performed rock songs were suing the music venues in the same city, for the fact that the stage owners treated the musicians like sub-contractors and over-charged them fees and denied them benefits like the dancers claimed ... I bet a court wouldn't go for it. "Hey, old man, you knew you were playing there one night a week, you knew you didn't have a right to the bartender's tips because there was a tip-jar FOR THE BAND on the stage, right? You're a sub-contractor!" Also, the rock music venues probably aren't as derided by the local Fundamentalist Churches as the strip clubs are, so, an elected judge would be more likely to fall for anything that goes in favor of the strippers and therefore goes against the strip club owners. See, the court was swayed by sympathy for the poor downtrodden and a need to get votes. I don't think this is a clear example of jurisprudence setting valid precedent. In fact, I bet the clubs will be demanding that the dancers behave as employees (criminal record checks; STD tests; withholding social security and worker's comp pay), and the dancers will promptly sue to be treated like sub-contractors all over again. And the court will go for that, too.

The decision is accurate as I understand it.

It's just a matter of money. Lawyers telling strippers that they can make money suing for not being treated in a manner that they never would have wanted to be treated in the first place.

clubs are idiots regarding this law. This has been such an obvious misrepresentation of the definition of an Independent contractor, the clubs should have known they would lose. The fact that clubs receive a cut of dances, and also take $ on fees for fines, is a joke. They should have paid a small hourly wage and then charge the customer for the dance. The dancer would get anything over that as a tip, and they could claim that as income (or more likely unreport it). This also would be abenefit for the customer because you can bet the tips would be where extras would be done...

steve229 -

1. Probably
2. No more than usual
3. Doubtful
4. Unlikely
5. DEFINITELY

My Magic 8-Ball has been very busy today.