I think they have a leg to stand on and hope they win this one.

Now it is getting really weird! As Shadowcat mentions the lawyers are the winners here.

Wonder what my Papi_Chulo thinks of that "conserve their figure" rule?

I agree with your last statement

Most clubs violate the "contracted worker" rules for dancers, but that's a separate issue. My question is would dancers rather pay upfront fees or have the house take a larger % of the dance revenue? Obviously the losers would pick the % and the successful dancers the fees.

We can't kill them but we can be pleased when horrible things happen to them. They will live in mansions and drive fancy cars and our clubbing prices will go up.

Lawyers are parasites. Anything for a quick buck.

Lawyers are the reason many strip clubs are as good as they are. Without good lawyers to defend them, conservative idiots would shut the clubs down. This is about greedy dancers, not greedy lawyers. The lawyers are just meeting a demand in the market place, just like most of us in our jobs.

Che, you should look up the context in which that quote was used. It does not support an argument against lawyers.

as soon as the dancers file these lawsuits, any money they hope to make will be taken by the IRS.

^^^true...

I hope the strip club wins and many others take note of how their contract is written and cover themselves accordingly.

Well, I have done a lot of contracting, which these SC supposedly hire their dancers as...

I have never paid company employees out of my money. The purpose is for them to pay me!

I have never paid a late fee for coming into work late. Simply didn't make the money for that time. The same as a dancer would have to deal with.

If she is too out of line, just fire her. (Which admittedly, finding a woman to take her clothes off for a large group of men is probably hard to find.)

I think the safest bet is to give her two weeks off instead of a fine.

I don't care one way or the other, as long as no one fucks up having clubs AND dancers!

I love how so many people pass judgement on cases like this where they haven't even read the contracts between the parties. Geez, guys. Without reading the details of the contracts, and the laws that apply in that jurisdiction, you're just blowing smoke based on your own biases.

The only facts we know are these:

1. Lawyers suck. They always have sucked, and they always will suck.

2. You can pretty much assume that strippers have no clue what their contracts say or even mean, nor do they have any clue about local laws, so clearly somebody coached them.

3. You can also pretty much assume that the club owners and their lawyers know exactly what the contracts say, and the local laws in that jurisdiction. And it's a fairly safe bet that whatever policies they had in place were legal.

Other than that, who the fuck knows who's right. If I had to bet on it, I'd assume that one of the strippers had a customer or a boyfriend who was a lawyer and he had an idea on how to make some money.

I can't speak for other states, but in Georgia it doesn't matter at all if the contract says you are an "independent contractor"---what matters is whether the employer maintained supervisory control over the person's actions. A true "independent contractor" in Georgia comes and goes to work as they please and are not subject to all the petty fines and other BS that clubs pull on dancers.

There's a reason why all these cases in Georgia are settling or are resulting in favorable verdicts to the dancers--it's because the clubs are in clear and blatant violation of the employment laws when it comes to "independent contractor v. employee" status.

I don't know why so many people here are so hostile to the dancers (and their lawyers) just for seeking the restitution that the law says they are entitled to. If you found out you were legally entitled to a bunch of back pay from your job would you turn it down?????

Yes, there is hostility to dancers and lawyers...and on the other hand you are ASSUMING that the dancers and lawyers are "just seeking the restitution the law says they are entitled to". Why do you assume that? Do you know what the contracts and local laws say? I'm guessing you don't, but you have a bias for the dancers for some reason.

The bias here against dancers and lawyers is for a very obvious reason. Our experience with both has shown them to both be totally dishonest, and a bunch of other bad stuff. That doesn't mean that business owners are always clean and honest. However, the business owners are risking a LOT in doing illegal stuff, while the strippers risk nothing.

So yeah, nobody knows who is right in this case because nobody has read the contracts, and nobody knows the local laws. However, it's also not unreasonable to look at strippers and lawyers with a very negative bias.

Jerikson, I'm not assuming anything--go back and re-read my 1st paragraph. I know of which I speak.....

I'd be willing to lose SCs if it meant we got to kill all the lawyers.

Any contract can include performance clauses and work requirements, but there is usually some base pay associated with a contract that includes such clauses. If a contractor is not paid at all by the other contracting entity I don't see these requirements as holding up as the contractor is really working for those that pay them. If they are really "renting dance space" and are really independent contractors then the club can not dictate hours, dress, or many aspects of conduct without the dancers being considered employees. As tipped employees the clubs can pay a lower minimum wage, as restaurants do with waiters, but they do have to cover their share of social security, medicare, etc and abide by federal and state law as it applies to employees.

That said the only reason to work as a tipped employee has always been that you get pid largely in cash and can avoid a lot of taxes based on what you declare. With waiters you are taxed based on your sales and the tips you are assumed to have made as a percentage of those sales. Strippers may be tracked based on VIP room and logged dances at many clubs, but there is a whole lot more opportunity for making free untaxed cash. They should be careful what they wish for in some cases.

Federal labor law determines who is or isn't a contractor, not any contract.

Folks lets remember the real "regulation" problem in most of the US: it's way too hard to open a strip club. Both custies and dancers would be better off if existing clubs had more competition. Nobody sheds a tear for dancers when the system hurts them, so more power to them if they work the system when it helps them.

These kinds of law suits are very common. It is always the former dancers, now retired. It happened in San Francisco.

Someone just needs to study the law and set it up so it is right and fair from the beginning.

SJG