strippers as club "employees"

THis is happening all over the country including in Mass. where I am. I don't actually know a single dancer that is in favor of becoming an employee. The trade-off for working for what in most cases is a server's wage of less than $3 an hour is not worth it. House fees etc are a pain but a good dancer can pay those fees and still earn a good living. The girls who start these lawsuits are almost always already retired from dancing and just plain bitter.

It would be a mistake to assume that the girls have any club owner by the balls. There will always be new girls walking through the door to work. Most club owners look at their establishment as a bar with tits. The bar is where they make most of their money. The tits can belong to any woman willing to show them.

Going strictly by legal definitions of "employee" versus "independent contractor" and what constitutes each, there is no question that under GA law the dancers fit the legal definition of "employees." It's not even a close call, at least not here in GA with how the clubs operate.

Now, the question of whether it is to the dancers' benefit or detriment to be labeled as one or the other is another issue entirely.

Here is the article:

https://www.tuscl.net/postread.php?PID=2…

I agree with Yoda that most of these are started by ex dancers and the real winners in all of this are the fucking attorneys.

Now in some cases where the clubs dictate hours of work and charge dancers for being late, etc are the real culprits.

If PLs often complain about lazy and unmotivated dancers whom are currently on what is basically 100% commission; how much more lazy and unmotivated would they be if they were getting paid a guaranteed salary (unless a beneficial compromise b/w salary and commission could be arranged – but even then; if they were guaranteed a certain amount of $$$; it may make them less motivated)

I think this is all coming to light because of the new health care law. think of it. The girls don't want to pay for it or get fined/taxed. So they will now want to be employee's. So if a girl works 4 -8 hour shifts they will need to be covered. The establishment just needs to have 50 full time employees (30 hours or more) so think of it. That classifies most bigger clubs. So the club will be on the hook for health care.

I also agree with the fees can be high but like others have stated the good dancers make those fees in 2 hours of work and the rest is in their pocket....CASH. So Uncle sam only knows a portion of what they make. ;-)

I find the wage girls to be most lazy on stage. They got nothing on the line, but they are quick to ask for a free drink, or offer super secret extras.

Most strippers who I know don't report their income on their taxes. I know one who works a second job because she has to show income for legal reasons so she works part time in addition to stripping. Because they officially earn $0, strippers are eligible for Medicaid and they won't have to pay for health insurance or pay the fines/taxes for not having health insurance.

Legally, many clubs treat strippers like employees. Financially, strippers are much better off as independent contractors than as employees.

canny.... that is exactly what I am talking about. Think about it that the bad ones who work other jobs want insurance. They might get Medicaid or they might not. So they want the sure thing. So now why not say you are an "employee" and get covered insurance.

The good dancers don't want to show income or know how to work the system and get it covered elsewhere.

I've never seen the current dancers get anything but screwed by these deals. And, it fucks things up for the customers also, because the club has to re-arrange the fee structure in order to get at least the same amount they were getting before. Usually, this is part of the exit strategy of some girls, who aren't concerned about how it impacts current dancers.

Some clubs that are charging north of 50% of dance/vip sales plus fees and shit where dancers can actually owe $ at the end of a shift deserve to be pissed on.

However, none of the SC business modes ("bar with tits", BYOB, etc) are going to work without there being some cut of dance/vip sales. How are dancers supposed to sell dances/vip time if the club isn't providing the infrastructure?

And the SC business model is really fucked if dancers can show up, collect $10/hr wage and not sell anything. How's a club supposed to stay in business with that kind of cost structure compared to alternative sources of enjoyment?

I would guess it's more about fines than minimum wage. I don't think employers are allowed to fine employees.

Forcing them to be employees is the first step to shutting down all clubs because if a girl/dancer is an employee it makes the employer responsible for her actions while on duty. If she offers extras and gets caught LE will also charge the owner. Take Cheaters in Providence for example: they had an underage girl working there that had used a false ID and propositioned an under cover cop, plus another girl working there did the same thing although she was not underage. The club was busted and they tried to charge the owner but since his manager had only hired the girls as contract workers and rented stage and private room space to them only the underage part stuck and he was fined and his cabaret permit was suspended for a couple of months. If they were employees he could have been held and charged for their actions while in his employ and he would have had to prove they were acting against his policies and he would have been responsible to police them. The same as if a truck drive drinks on the job and injures someone they come at the employer.

@TiredTraveler: It's not that cut and dried. They can get the club owners on permitting or profiting from prostitution charges, depending on laws, whether the girls are employees or not.