I wonder if the SC game is going to change w/ all these “Independent Contractors

No change. The business model transcends tax codes. You pay, dancers perform.

My gut feeling is there won't be any changes as far as the customer goes other than higher prices but the price of everything keeps going up.

There have been such law suits, that I know of, going back into the '80's in San Francisco.

Unless it gets to the point that SC's can't use contractor status, then nothing important will change. But I don't see this happening.

I think the most important thing now is just that SC's consult with attorneys experienced in this arena before starting. They need to establish what all their practices will be, and what contracts they will use, so that there are not likely to be lawsuits years later.

It will always be the former dancers, those not still making money, and usually not able to, who sue.

I advised the family which owns a Vietnamese Coffee Shop on some matters pertaining to avoiding law suits from waitresses years down the road. I told them, it won't be while she is working here, it will be after she has had a couple of kids and gained 50lbs.

The bigger issue is not contractor status of course, it is tax evasion. It is the dancer not paying income tax, SS tax, or the Self-Employment tax. The SC owner is also complicit with the SS tax, but it is really the dancers who are in total defiance of the law.

What concerns me is the set up they have at SF Crazy Horse, a reverse ATM machine. I feel that this could destroy SC's. All the dance money she has to fed into the machine.

Some customers think it is to prevent them from being over charged. Some have posted this in reviews. They don't understand. It is to make sure taxes are paid.

SJG

@Shadowcat: Prices are determined by the market, not the cost of doing business. Only a business where the cost is lower than the market price can survive, and if costs go up or down, I trust the SC industry will adapt to meet the demand on the indifference curve.

Strip club owners need to obey the law. If they want strippers to be classified as independent contractors, they need to treat them as independent contractors.

This issue is big in Atlanta as at least one club has paid big fees because of this. As many have said, it is the older fatter ones not making money who are complaining about the setup years later. It will take years to get all this settled.

From my experiance, the problem isn't with the system of stroppers being considered independent contractors, or strip clubs not wanting to pay the appropriate taxes, it with the stripper mentality itself. The fact that now they have to be responsible for proper taxes being paid, their own health care, etc is at issue. Most (but no all of coarse) of the girls are strippers because they make poor decisions and have a hard time being responsible adults.

I have a lot of appreciation for dancers. I think they deserve equal protection under the law (a constitutional right) and equal dignity to me or anyone else.

Strippers would hate being treated as true employees. Clubs would function poorly if they treated them as true independent contractors.

Everybody loses but the lawyers.

In any case, I don't really see the apocalypse potential. Clubs would either have to let dancers come and go as they please, many clubs do anyway. Or they would have to guarantee dancers $60 or so minimum take-home per shift. That would probably just mean that marginal dancers would be fired more quickly.

The reality is probably 98% of current dancers like the current system. Yes, the clubs are mis-misclassifying dancers but the dancers like iit that way.

Several yeas ago there was a lawsuit against one of the Michigan Deja Vu clubs that turned into a nationwide class-action suit. Corporate Deja Vu knew they would lose if the case ever went to trial so a settlement was reached. DJV agreed to pay-out over $11 million in "rent credits". Every dancer could get $1000 in credits against their house fees.

I have reliable information that almost none of the dancers from the original club took advantage of the $1000 credit. They knew "Jane Doe" and the circumstances that led to the lawsuit. And they did not want to be classified as employees. Never. Ever.

BTW, the law firm that settled the case walked away with several million dollars. Jester is right.

And, if you want further proof that I'm right, consider this.

After "Jane Doe" filed her lawsuit against the corporation, the club changed her status from "independent contractor" to "hourly wage employee". They began paying her minimum wage as requested. But she promptly quit. You see, that's not really what she wanted after all.

BTW, Jester is right. The law firm that filed the suit ended up walking away with millions of dollars from the settlement. They were the only real winners.

Any stripper worthy of the name considers minimum wage to be for chumps. Overbearing club rules are what piss them off.

Yeah, there's one club here that abuses dancers in terms of scheduling. They make the day girls stay until enough night girls are on the floor, even if there are no customers buying. But the better club in town truly lets girls come and go as they please, structuring house fees to incentivize the behavior they want.