Your experiences with stripper employee status in CA so far

Dude that sucks. I was planning LA trip here I’m a little bit. I’ll definitely try to ask some dancers about it.

Get the hell out of California

I will band together with all the other shit truck drivers and we will dump a load all over CA

That seems to be a disturbing trend, hopefully it doesn't spread beyond Cali.

Fuck them Politicians. Let's dym pk a load in their basements

Let's dump a load in their basements. Dam fat fangers

Seems like another headwind making it harder for SCs to thrive into the future

I like having my head blown.

I also wouldn't be surprised if some of these costs get passed down to the custies making it even less attractive for PLs to open their wallets

I would assume in clubs with good $$$ it may still be worth it for the dancers, but clubs/shifts with spotty $$$ it may not be worth it for many of the dancers

This model that Subra described makes no sense to me at all.

^ that's not saying much

Fuck you

What Subra describes here - clubs changing business model to make dancers employees instead of independent contractors (IC's) - is California specific. The change is forced on many industries due to a mid-2018 Cal Supreme Court decision that imposed a strict test on the distinction of employee versus IC. It's Calif specific because the court was interpreting guidelines issued by a Calif govt. agency, and the Calif guidelines were already more strict than the guidelines of fed govt and many other states. Cal clubs waited to make their move until another Cal court made the distinction even stricter in late 2018. Other industries big time affected are trucking and delivery (owner-operator truckers and subcontractor drivers for FedEx and other delivery services) construction trades, and gig economy businesses especially transportation (Uber, Lyft) and grocery delivery (Instacart, DoorDash) - all this is regularly reported in Cal business publications. It's probably not going to impact you PLs in more business friendly states like Texas, Florida, Nevada etc., especially not in short term.

Similar to Subra, I've heard all SF Bay Area clubs have made the dancers employees. I've heard same about the Sacramento / Rancho Cordova (RC) clubs. SF girls say they're paid $15/hour and RC girls say they're paid $11/hour (hourly wages, not salary) out of the first part of their daily earnings ($150ish), and after that earnings are split by % with club. I've done some clubbing in Reno recently and the Reno girls talk all about it, saying the NorCal dancers are heading to Reno clubs for weekend work when clubs are more crowded but not on weekdays when PL population is lower. I'm guessing same is true of Vegas, especially in slow winter months where Cal dancers head to Vegas clubs anyway. I haven't clubbed in SoCal since this all came down and so don't know if SoCal clubs have followed suit but probably yes since it's a Calif-wide thing.

What I've noticed in my few Cal club runs since this became a thing:
-The girls complain about it, not so much to make it crazy annoying, but you do hear it. The smart ones know the non-white knight regular doesn't want to burdened with it.
-Pressure for cash tips is higher.
-Girls that dance once or twice a week but don't depend on dancing for entire income are leaving, especially the hottest ones. Maybe that's a high self esteem thing or a reduced return on investment for the dancer thing, I don't know, but there's a few I hope will miss the $ and return even if the $ is less.

Not sure if this will make previously-OTC averse girls more open to it.

^
All girls who've mentioned it to me say the new wage and % split has reduced their income.

In SF:
-Dancer population is down during dayshifts.
-Dancer population is down during nightshift at clubs that already had slow nightshift.
-Has not significantly impacted nightshift dancer population during at clubs that were already hopping during nightshift anyway (like Gold Club near convention center) despite girls leaving because new girls are replacing them - the night sausagefest at busy clubs are not my thing, but that was my takeaway the one time I went at weekend nightshift.

All the CA clubs will have to change over to employees by Jan 1st. There are a few that are still holding out to the last minute as it means they now have to process and keep track of payroll more or face fines. Possibly means hiring an office person or a payroll service. CA minimum wage goes to $12 an hour in 2019, with SF being the exception with their citywide $15.
Of the ones that have changed over, most dancers hate it as they are taking home less money each night and have to hustle more for stage or lap dance tips. So plan on getting hit up to tip more or given a guilt trip.
The clubs now schedule the dancers to work certain shifts (usually 3 -4 nights per week), so no more coming and going the nights and times they please. It also means they can't work past 5 hrs without taking a 30 minute lunch, so clubs are scheduling them for 5 hr shift. The dancer can stay past her scheduled shift as long as she is making the club money selling dances.
That means if you are planning multiple VIP dances with a girl, she may have to stop in the middle and go to lunch. Their lunch time has to be off the floor or out of the building.
A dancer can work on a night she is not scheduled but has to give a larger percentage to the club that night. There does seem to be less dancers vs customers in the clubs and I think we will see a lot fewer of the part time dancers as they will go to Reno or Vegas to work for a few days instead.

-->"That means if you are planning multiple VIP dances with a girl, she may have to stop in the middle and go to lunch. Their lunch time has to be off the floor or out of the building."

This happened to me. Well, not stopping in the middle of multiple VIPs, but she dipped for 30 minutes.

I had forgotten to add: because the clubs do not want to pay overtime, nor have the girls considered full time employees, there are limits on how many hours a week they can work (I think it's 32, could be wrong) and at least in the clubs I went to, the common practice of doing double shifts (dayshift & nightshift on the same day) is now verboten (again, could be wrong about that, this is all from hazy alcohol-fueled memory)

Original Thread:
https://www.tuscl.net/app/discussion.php…

In my view, the money can be made to work. That is, there is enough money to go around, things can be adjusted so that it works out.

The real issue is a collapse of plausible deniability.

Using a talent agency goes back to Jim and Artie. And sometimes Erotic Dancer's Alliance was such an agency.

But here, the court ruling cuts into this Gig Economy badly.

So I say that the remedy is to set up some Exotic Dancer Services. They do not provide you employees or contractors. The dancers are already employees of the Service. So they provide you with those you have requested, according to a schedule, and for a stint. Then the club gets billed for this. You can request them by going thru a computer system, letting the dancer decide which requests she will service.

So the dancer is supplied for this Assignment. It is not a Gig, it is an Assignment.

If need be the club manager can suspend an assignment. Need to have the ability to enforce rules.

The dancers will have signed a sheet of rules with the Service, and with each club that they do Assignments at.

Chains which use different business models at their various clubs, can suggest to dancers when they would be better for a different club.

Best if the Territory Manager handles this.

So if LE ever says anything is wrong, just hold up the sheet of rules, and then say, "And a cop got her to do what?"

This way the club is not a target for LE, and basically LE just has to give up on it.

SJG

The Colorado Chamber Orchestra playing Markus Reuter's Todmorden 513 (excerpt)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mffn1EfR…

With the Affordable Care Act, if a person works more than 120 hrs per month over 12 months for a total of 1560 hours or more, the goverment considers them full time and the employer has to offer health care. No club wants that, so they will make sure they never work that many hours.

I didn't even think about these changes in California affecting neighboring states. Thanks for pointing that out. Glad I don't l live there.

I want to pimp some hoes in calofornia

fuck all of that, what a horrible change for the girls.

I get the reasoning behind it. Honestly, most clubs that categorize the dancers and independent contractors and then have the litany of rules they must follow is really treating them like employees, without the benefit of being an employee. BUT...in this industry it's going to hurt the girls more than help them.

That $150 going to the club to be reinversed to the dancer as her salary look fishy on the surface and perhaps challengeable - what if the club is dead and a dancer can't make the $150 or she's just not a good hustler?

I'm guessing she had to make her salary no matter what... But a girl who missed that 150 too often probably gets fired

Something’s gonna have to give. If the dancers want to leave, then the customers go. Clubs are next. I haven’t clubbed in SF yet but by stories and reviews, how on God’s green earth can it possibly get more expensive. If this spreads we are all fucked.

501 wrote: "With the Affordable Care Act, if a person works more than 120 hrs per month over 12 months for a total of 1560 hours or more, the goverment considers them full time and the employer has to offer health care. No club wants that, so they will make sure they never work that many hours."
____________
I was thinking about the healthcare aspects, too. Same thing applies to low-wage jobs in retail and fast-foods -- employer just limits the hours so that providing health insurance isn't required.

Dancer under 26 could stay under her parents' policy under the ACA.

Even if a dancer worked the requisite hours, the club only has to provide a very-high deductible plan (like $6000) and she'd have to pay a portion of the costs from her salary. Young, healthy, dancer would probably decline the coverage. Depending on how much she makes, it might be better to quit and take the ACA subsides.

I agree that this change sounds like it sucks for the girls. I know my CF, who had been dancing for almost a decade at the same SF club, up and left for Reno right around the time they made the switch. I haven't been to the club since then but I am very curious to how the vibe will feel now vs before this switch. If the best looking girls do leave my favorite clubs then I guess I'll just be back to doing my SCing only on out of town trips to good SC areas.

>> "That $150 going to the club to be reinversed to the dancer as her salary look fishy on the surface and perhaps challengeable - what if the club is dead and a dancer can't make the $150 or she's just not a good hustler?"

Seems like it's just a way for the clubs to shake out to the girls who are actually worth having in the club versus the crack hos who just linger and manage to squeeze out $80 for the night. Since the clubs would be forced to pay minimum wage and at least some benefits, all girls working at the clubs initially will get the bare minimum $150. Any girl who can't make at least that will be costing the club money and they'll get the boot. I get that it will reduce the overall number of girls floating around a club but it also means the ones nobody would want to spend money on will disappear, which leaves more $ for the remaining girls who can actually make money.

Right now I think the way it works is it doesn't cost the club anything to have as many girls as possible on a shift, those girls even have to pay a fee of some sort one way or another to be allowed to walk around to make money off the customers. This is actually just as much of a problem, as customers going to clubs have to deal with lots of bottom-of-the-barrel options roaming around who can't do the math to realize they'd be making more money working at McD's.

The hotter girls and the girls who can hustle will make out better, but they too will have to hustle more or better because the clubs will not want to pay to the point of the girls being full-time status or passing some point of being eligible for benefits. So the clubs will charge them a premium (bigger % cut for the club) on any extra shifts the girls will want to take.

I can see the dancers being more pushy, and less patient with PLs that want to talk for some time b/f deciding on dances

Just another great example of the government "helping people"

The only impact that I have seen here in LA so far is from the DV chains. The one in the COI has been hit especially hard due to it already facing problems from having to switch from nude to bikini dances. This latest change will no doubt be the final nail in it's coffin.

There's been alot of chatter about this here but we'll see after Jan 1st how the other LA/OC clubs are impacted.

@DC9428 - I think you are right that in your words "there are still guys who go for those bottom of the barrel girls". However clubs have to keep their hiring standards high because the average guy who goes to the SC once a year wants to see hot girls on stage. That average joe customer is super important to the business model of the club.

I think there's a few things to keep in mind:
- That $150, and the overall worse deal as far as fee cuts, gets all the girls annoyed. And the girls with lots of options -- that is, the hottest girls -- leave disproportionately. We've seen this through several waves in SF: when things go to shit, girls of all attractiveness levels leave the area (to go to places like Reno or Vegas) or the business entirely (to try hooters, to be a bottle service girl, etc), not just the ugly girls

- In real clubs, it feels to me like things work more like what DC is describes: guys going to strip clubs have different tastes, and the girls I think are 5s and 6s, are often taken up by guys who now aren't competing with me for the 7s&up. The way it is now, the last few shifts have had just 5 girls total -- I'd say Jefftuscl's prediction that the shift overall will be prettier is true, but now there's just 5 girls instead of usual 12 (literally, the change is this stark). The customers almost always outnumber the girls, when it used to be the reverse. Things were way better when the 6s were keeping guys busy, so my 8.5 had no other options in the club but me

Overall, the experience is worse (which is saying something), at least for my 3-4 trips I've done since the change

@DC9428 - This is probably a better discussion for a whole new thread. In my area the clubs don't take any cut of what the girls make so the club makes almost nothing from hardcore PLs. Where as a guy who comes in a few times a year and gets bottle service makes the club a massive amount of profit. A club manager has to balance a ton of competing needs, what dancers want, what PLs want, what bottle service guys want, and what once a year guy wants are all different. But a big part of that is keeping people coming in the door and to do that you want hot girls on stage.

This constant line that many clubs will hire any girl that will pay a house-fee is a misnomer - even dives will reject plenty of girls either bc of their looks or just needing to put a cap on the # of girls based on the size of the club/crowd

As much as the bottom-dwellers occupy the girls many wouldn't want - if they want those bottom-dwellers and that goes away, then they go away too. Removal of bottom-dwellers also means when you're trying to grab the attention of girls you want, you don't get rushed by them and get cock-blocked. I'm far less likely to get blocked by some other PL than I am by dancers I'm not interested in jamming in my face.

Jeff: that definitely explains your perspective. I find shooing away girls I'm not interested in to be effortless and stress-less; but I'm also happy speaking for a few minutes with (almost) any girl. Between my black belt level shooing skills, and the fact that I'm the happy idiot who doesn't mind socializing for a few minutes with fuglies, all of this is a non-issue. My bigger problem is that I enjoy 3-5 hours of non-stop drinking with my stripper of choice, and that doesn't happen as often when the ratio is too far off.

I'm with Subra on this. I have no problem saying no. I like a high ratio of dancers vs customers and dont like being in clubs where you have to compete to get a dancers attention because they are so busy.

Not all the girls need to be 9 and 10s. Depending on my mood, sometimes I might feel like trying a dancer that is normally not my type but something about her sparks my interest. Could just be her confidence or or attitude.
I've had fun nights just hanging out with 5's drinking and watching and tipping the stage show together.

Heard from an old friend working in LA area clubs now. She said effective Jan 1st, they will be employees. Hours per shift and per week will be limited to keep them from getting benefits.

She's nervous the new structure will be a big hit tinder financially.

But if there's one thing we all know..... strippers are a resourceful bunch. Itll all work out.

Most strippers join SA at some point or other during their careers, but hoping for a new wave of stripper signups this January :)

I get easily intimidated by petite (and large) young ladies parading around in skimpy, revealing attire.

^^^^^ I love it!

SJG

Something I noticed already is no recent overlap of girls from day shift to night shift, based on roll calls. Sometimes I make a decision of going to a club if at least 2 or 3 dancers I have interest in are on the day shift, knowing that at least 1 or 2 of them are going to spill over into the night shift. Now it's a guessing game until the night shift roll call is updated, or it's a presumption that if they are on the day shift they most definitely will not be on the night shift. This is annoying - I work for a living, I can only go nights mostly.

Jeff: ya, strictly no-double-shifts-allowed policy at the clubs I've been going to

I'm glad we have underground clubs!

SJG

Did this all start based on a few no-other-option-in-life dancers wanting to turn their stripper work into a 9-5 with benefits? I wonder now how many dancers (I would be the majority) are now pissed because of this?

Some who used to be able to do 2-3 days to pull in all their money doing double shifts 2 or 3 days in a row now have to string out their shifts across most of a week. Based on the distribution of time most guys have (like me), that means less likely overlap where preferred dancers will be on a shift when the guy is available to go to the club. Also for "specials" days where some girls are used to having a larger influx of guys, her ability to pull money on those days is cut in half.

I think in the short term this will shake out poor earners and leave the hottest girls and ones who can hustle to reap the rewards but with the schedule compromise and other factors, this will become a lousy situation. How many of these girls will want to lose more days of their week prepping to go to the club and staying up til 2AM working more days of the week? The ones that used to only do nights when their shift spilled over (and simply leave early on the 2nd shift) will now rarely or never do nights.

How did we get to such a point to allow government interference on practically every aspect of our lives?

Playing devil's advocate, the Cal Supreme Court ruling applies to all industries. Why should a stripper be considered an independent contractor? She goes into a brick-and-mortar establishment and obeys the rules of the owners, just like millions of other employees. Why should she be denied health insurance if she works the requisite number of hours? How about other benefits that employees take for granted like workman's comp, short- and long-term disability, state unemployment, protection under discrimination laws?

Strippers get to keep their tips, and club owners can decide what is a tip is a what isn't. If the owners are too stingy, they won't attract any talent. Gorgeous girl isn't going to dance if they're treated like a Walmart employee. Supply and demand.

Health insurance would probably be the most costly item for clubs. But dancers under 26 may be covered under their parent's policy. And a young, healthy, dancer probably won't pay the $400/month cost-sharing for a $6500-deductible plan; more likely she'll just decline coverage.

Give it a chance to shake out and this may not be a death knell for clubs.

RM: my skepticism comes from years of seeing what happens. Every time I've seen a lawsuit -- either from the girls themselves (usually retired girls looking to cash out) or sex industry advocate groups that don't really understand stripping -- end with the girls winning, it's the current working girls who have gotten fucked, and invariably the clubs have gotten a little worse. Keep in mind that there are many reason that SF has gone from one of the best SC cities in the country (with arguably the best American SC ever) around the 2000s to one of the worst (including closing down of said best SC), but you can track each downward drop with another lawsuit. Specifically, MBOT's status went from "best club ever" to absolutely shithole, after the 2007-ish consent decree when the girls became employees, and from what I've read, it's that structure that eventually led to going out of business -- even in a city full of crappy clubs, they couldn't balance the limitations on their business structure vs profits vs providing a decent club experience.

You're right -- maybe this will be great, who knows. Your advice to "give it a chance" is something we don't have a choice about. But the past few months experience are pretty much exactly as expected: the girls have gotten fucked, they are paying their own salaries, their hours are strictly limited specifically to prevent them from being fulltime employees with benefits. The club experience has taken a noticeable turn for the worse already (at least to me). It is indisputable that many girls have left the SC business entirely in SF; many apparently headed to Reno and Vegas.

We shall see what happens. I've heard there's an SC industry legal challenge to this -- I'm rooting for it.

I talked to a few dancers on my visit to Trop Lei today. Yeah most are worried about the money situation between them & their clubs, but it's the paper trails and the W-2 forms and all the other documents that they will have to have as employees that is really freaking them out. I guess they'll find out soon enough.

This is just the beginning to be sure. Once these girls are statutory employees, they are afforded a variety of workplace protections. I have no doubt that there will be lawsuits galore coming down the road relating to sexual harassment, hostile work environment, age discrimination, racial discrimination, etc., etc. The employer-employee model simply doesn't work for strip clubs. Shit, even Hooters is sued all the time and their employees don't get naked and give lapdances.

Good point rickdugan. This is going to be a huge learning curve for the clubs. They now have to deal with how their managers are treating their "new" employees. For small clubs, it's probably not something they are thinking about, but for chains like Deja Vu with multiple clubs in CA, it could open them up to class action lawsuits if they don't deal with issues quickly.

There is also now the issue of workplace injuries and workmans comp if a dancer gets hurt on stage. Although I'm not sure if most dancers would file a claim as most employers require you get drug tested if you seek medical treatment for a workplace injury. If you have drugs in your system, the claim could be denied.

^ I don’t know if it will be as bad for the large conglomerates, along with granting employee status, there will be some protections, built into the system, like there is in the worker compensation that blocks employees from filing certain types of lawsuits, I’d be willing to bet that the larger employers find ways to use this for corporate gain.

The money can be worked out. But the issue is plausible deniability, letting the women do what they want, while being able to say that it is all being kept within limits.

Otherwise, the club patron's will be getting ripped off.

SJG

I don't get the requirement of employee status on 100% of dancers working in a club. I can understand the implication of requiring establishments to offer it as an option but forcing every dancer into employee status in order to be able to work in the club seems beyond legal. We have multiple employees at my work who are contracted but work almost 40 hours weekly, and they prefer this for various reasons. Who are we to override their preference? I believe that the clubs are doing the math and realizing that although they don't have to force employee status, if even just some of their dancers want this then they can't manage the club by treating some dancers one way and other dancers another - that will be drama and chaos as most dancers have no education or ability to understand workplace concepts, they just care about making the most money possible for the least effort.

I am still curious if people can comment on if the clubs are dead in CA. Are the girls all going into another line of work or they going to the next nearest places to dance w/o employee status?

I know there's a class action suit for back wages lol

Anyways dancers have been fighting to be employees for years. Its not like it just happened overnight.

The new status just means you're a tipped employee with a reduced minimum wage. So basically dancers are paid like the waitresses now. Its not a huge deal moneywise but offers protections independent contractors don't have. that's the huge plus.

Hmm...

"At the clubs I've been to, the scheme seems to be this. First $150 the girl makes goes to the club (I do not think this counts stage tips and other tips). Or, in other words, the strippers are paying their own salaries -- the club takes their first $150, and returns it to them as salary, minus taxes. The next $XXX ($200, maybe?) goes 60% to the club, 40% to the girls. Any money after that, 40% to the club, 60% to the girl. "

^idk that above just seems like a shitty deal? Unless you girls have enough money flowing in the clubs that you don't really care about having to wait for the paycheck and kicking back a large % of what you make. Maybe I just don't get it. Are a lot more girls going to Vegas now? Are they on a schedule b/c of this employee status?

I have no desire to dance in that state, but curious if this is going to affect the next nearest spots...

Thanks!

*are the girls in california really working a schedule? I know vegas is no schedules lol! Sorry if that was confusing.

I just don't know very many strippers that want to work a schedule unless they are making some x minimum $ they are ok with. Or the work conditions/location otherwise makes up for it somehow.

My experiences remain consistent: the vast majority of strippers don't want to be employees and this is something that has been thrust upon them by well-meaning but lacking-in-understanding advocates, and the labor commission. They are vehemently against it, and it impacts their take-home, so far without any payback. It is a fact that there was an exodus of at least a noticeable number of strippers from the clubs I've been to, a number seeking greener pastures in Nevada.

The lineups at the clubs I've been to remain as I described: smaller than they used to be, the girls are not allowed to work more than 32 hours a week and are no longer allowed to do things like working doubles. Jury is still out on whether what I thought I noticed about a lower valuing of regulars is really a thing...

Ugh that really sucks for the girls in CA and next nearest spots if that is the case Subra! Hopefully they finetune this in a way to make it better for the girls. CA is a large state w/ a shit ton of pretty girls. Hard to imagine there being no clubs that are fair to the girls anymore.

I've been to three clubs since the switch. The exodus is real. My CF, along with a number of popular girls from the club left for Nevada. The girls that remain will voice their displeasure for the switch when asked. Another small Broadway club in SF I visit sometimes had just two girls working the night I went. It was New Year's Eve, but still. Just two?! I wondered if the reason was the classification change, it being New year's Eve, or both? Visited a third Broadway club of about the same size as the one with two girls and they had a much better showing of dancers. Didn't hear any complaints about the classification changes there, but since I'm not a regular there the girls probably didn't open up to me about it. I didn't bother prying for info, just wanted to feel the vibe.

There are less girls working and now clubs will send girls home if it's slow and they are not selling dances and making the club money. Clubs now are looking at saving payroll on these slow nights.

It's negatively affecting the customer experience too, at least right now -- a double whammy for the girls, at least those in already slower markets or clubs

Thank you for the updates everyone.

They got to figure a work around. Strip Clubs have long used Talent Agenices for such. Now make it an Exotic Dancer Service. So the girls are as needed employees of this service. They get sent out on 'assignments' as they are requested from by club.

Club then pays bill from this service.

How the money works can be adjusted so that it is about the same as before.

SJG

Sexiest Ladies of Jazz Vol. 2 - The New Trilogy!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cR5_Jxt1…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8wsK3ni…

I’ve already met 3 dancers from Cali that have moved to the east coast. It seems like everyone is unhappy with the new law.

The vast number of strippers want to have employee protections. Thats why there was a push for this in the first place.It was all organized by strippers.

It doesn't affect them negatively. The pay and everything are the same as if they were waitresses, its a lower minimum wage coz they're "tipped employees" .... Some try to bypass the law by hiring the strippers as "models"

And schedules are the norm in Vegas, certain days and shifts are required to be eligible to work nights and weekends, etc. At least clubs I'm familiar with...

The bs in this thread, like most bs on this site is fueled by right wing sentiments, not reality.

^^^^ There is an issue though of plausible deniability for the club owners. These places only get fun when the owners have that.

SJG

idk much about vegas but those I've talked to say there is no schedule. Now if you are hired for whatever shift then maybe you can only work that shift. But never heard of them having like a certain days of the week + certain times schedule.

Icey, you are mistaken. While most dancers do want employee protections, they dont want this. All the rules, limited days / shifts, paperwork and taxes. It does have them to making less money.
There is no bs or right wing sentiments in the comments. It is reality of what dancers are telling their customers and based on one of the employee contract I have seen. If it wasn't true why are dancers in CA trying to or meet up and organize thru social media to fight this? Why are others just leaving CA?
By the way, it is not the same as waitresses. People are expected to and the majority of customers do tip them. Alot a of strip club patrons don't tip the dancers and just sit there for a free thinking that because they paid a cover, they dont need to tip or are too cheap to tip a dollar.

Some clubs do it, I know a few where you have to work one day shift between Monday and Wednesday so you can work weekend nights, things like that.


The new law isn't impacting money being made. Those who oppose it most are right wingers and strip club owners....and I'm sure some dancers don't want to pay taxes etc. But the fact is, clubs aren't closing, strippers aren't quitting and they're making more, not less money with the guaranteed minimum wage.

The minority trying to fight it doesn't represent the majority that's happy with it.

Well, now they get a standard minimum wage to make up for the cheap asses not tipping, see....

Strippers have been fighting for this law for almost a decade. Don't minimize their efforts because of your right wing agenda.

I'm not here to minimize anyones efforts and I'm definately not right wing. I have no agenda besides having a good time when I visit strip clubs. Like I said, I think most dancers want the protections but didn't realize all the stuff that comes with being an actual employee. The dancers I know are making less money and they are having to hustle more to try and get more tips. The only ones making more were the ones who werent making any money in the first place and couldnt afford their house fee or payouts. They probably shouldnt have decided to be dancers in the first place.
The best option would have been if a dancer could choose to be an employee or an independent contractor in a club. Employees have all the rules and limits on shifts, but are paid and hourly wage and keep their tips. Independent contractors pay a house fee and keep what they make in dances and tips. Bet more dancers would opt not to be employees or would switch over once they see the what independents are making. But the goverment or "do gooders" would never let that happen, because they need to "protect" the dancers.

>>> "I am still curious if people can comment on if the clubs are dead in CA. Are the girls all going into another line of work or they going to the next nearest places to dance w/o employee status?"

I don't go often enough to know for sure but I went in the afternoon today. I usually go nights. It certainly seemed slow, I think most girls who have to decide on shift are deciding on night shift. Two of the girls I talked to today were describing the same thing going on, that on one hand it's positive as they get benefits and added protections but on the other hand it limits their schedule flexibility and means any girls who can't earn the base probably won't be working long (which was one of my predictions).

>>> "By the way, it is not the same as waitresses. People are expected to and the majority of customers do tip them. Alot a of strip club patrons don't tip the dancers and just sit there for a free thinking that because they paid a cover, they dont need to tip or are too cheap to tip a dollar."

I don't think it matters if it's the same or not. One of the dancers I talked to I could tell she was so-so with the new situation, and was clueless and would probably eventually not be given any shifts as she would cost the club money. Imagine going to McDonald's with staff that just sat in a corner not doing any work. From many of these type of dancer's perspectives so long as they hit 2 or 3 decent VIP dances per week they made what they need and an go home and smoke pot and waste their life away. With the new status, clubs will not tolerate them not making their base to cover payroll and will no longer put these kind of girls on any shifts.

The other girl I talked to was not this type of lazy, she goes in and does her shift to earn whatever she can and goes straight home. To her, even with some new limits in place, her earning would stay about the same but may get even better once the bottom dwellers get filtered out.

One clear thing, though, is that even with employee status it is true that clubs are limiting shifts to 6 hours and 5 days max to keep total weekly hours under 32 to avoid providing benefits. I know some girls at a specific club who, if I added the hours they were at the club before this year would be well over 40 hours, maybe 50 hours. Now these specific girls (which are the minority not the majority) will have to cram what they're used to earning into those fewer hours - which means one of a few things:

- they will either balance hours at another club
- go to a different state (Vegas? as others have mentioned)
- hustle more (not sure if that means squeezing guys for more money or dropping prices to get more customers)
- just deal with the lower weekly income and maybe get a hobby to fill their extra time
- create profiles on SA

I been to a half dozen clubs in LA/OC/IE since the Jan 1stand haven't seen any overt changes in any of those clubs. The same girls are still there and nobody was talking about it. On the surface at least it was business as usual.

That's cos it is business as usual. Everyone I know is ExTATIC to have some kind of base pay to add on to. It means they have at least some kind of guaranteed income

One thing I learned early on on this site is that these tricks are CLUELESS about strip clubs and fucking liars.

The stripperweb girls don't seem too thrilled about the new laws.....

https://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showth…
Towards the end of this thread, someone linked a dancers pay stubs for 3 different nights detailing how much she made in dance money, and how much she actually took home. I'm not sure if the math was correct, but her take home numbers compared to the amount she brought in looked pretty weak.

https://www.stripperweb.com/forum/showth…
A member named kirakonstantin seemed to be pretty knowledgeable about the laws. He/she posts towards the end of the thread.

They're lying. Your check printout has all the info on it. The most they're bitching about is paying taxes. They sound like idiots. MOst dancers look for part time or other work just so they can pay taxes and into ss and everything.So they sound stupid AF.

The other bs in the thread about quotas for selling drinks, dances, VIP whatever, that's nothing new. Having a schedule. You have to hustle management is always on dancers asses about it! That's not just CA. Its more in Las Vegas! I don't have anything against that, its just about everyone making as much $$$ as possible.

-->@JeffTUSCL: "I don't get the requirement of employee status on 100% of dancers working in a club. I can understand the implication of requiring establishments to offer it as an option but forcing every dancer into employee status in order to be able to work in the club seems beyond legal. We have multiple employees at my work who are contracted but work almost 40 hours weekly, and they prefer this for various reasons. Who are we to override their preference? I believe that the clubs are doing the math and realizing that although they don't have to force employee status, if even just some of their dancers want this then they can't manage the club by treating some dancers one way and other dancers another - that will be drama and chaos as most dancers have no education or ability to understand workplace concepts, they just care about making the most money possible for the least effort."

^I think some of your conclusions are not accurate.
--The clubs prefer the dancers as contractors, not as employees. The employee thing was basically forced in California by a mid-2018 Cal Supreme Court decision that interpreted preexisting Calif government regulations known as Wage Orders regarding distinctions between employees and independent contractors (ICs). The clubs waited to make their move until after a late-2018 Calif court of appeal case was released that further interpreted the Supreme Court decision. The choice for the clubs was to make the dancers employees or risk class action lawsuits regarding mischaracterization of employees as ICs. The clubs made legal and economic decisions to minimize risk. The clubs don't want the hassles inherent with employer-employee relationships (payroll taxes, rest breaks, meal breaks, sick leave, prospect of employee benefits such as health insurance, etc.). The clubs and the girls would all prefer the IC relationship where the club cashes out girls at end of night, issues the girls a 1099 at end of year, and there's plenty of cash tips moving around for payout of house fees and tips to bouncers, DJ, house mom, etc. The employee scenario is a nightmare for these previously cash heavy businesses. Yes there's an argument for making clubs comply with labor laws but neither the clubs nor the girls want it. There will be class action lawsuits for wage violations that predated the Supreme Court decision - there already were some and the Supreme Court decision ensures there will be more. Every former stripper is incentivized to file a wage violation lawsuit or join one as a class action member. Current strippers are similarly incentivized, especially if they don't plan to strip long term.
--As for the ICs at your workplace who prefer the IC status, whether those people are properly characterized as ICs depends on the circumstances. There are lots of IC classifications that remained protectable following the court decision (such as software engineers). Under the court decision, strippers are probably not in the protectable classes, and if they were with certainty the clubs would not have made them employees.

-->@IceyLoco: "The vast number of strippers want to have employee protections. Thats why there was a push for this in the first place. It was all organized by strippers."

^This is ricidulous. Under the new employee regime, their income has gone down, even factoring in the employee benefits. The move was not organized by strippers. They hate it. The move was caused by the court decisions that had nothing to do with strip clubs but to which the court interpretations of the Wage Orders applied regardless.

Dancers did pay taxes before, but would self report what they made at the end of the year when filing their taxes. They were taking home all their money in cash each night.
The issue now is any money they make from dances is paid and taxed on their checks. Then the club is also taking a percentage of that depending on the shift, being on schedule, etc.
They still get to take home the cash from tips each night, but have to report their tips to the club. That is also shown their checks as income, so it is also taxed. Bottom line is they have less take home pay. Yes if they do their taxes they will get a big refund, but most dancers aren't used to that and liked working when they needed or wanted to. They are not used to budgeting their money and making it last based on paydays. So most dancers in CA cannot be "ExTATIC" about that. The ones that are making good money are the dancers who are willing to do more ITC stuff for heavy tips when doing VIP or private dances.
The dancers in OR have seen what is going on in CA and have organized. They were able stop a bill that was being discussed by lawmakers about making dancers employees in that state.

The whole push for employee status was organized by dancers and has been an ongoing fight for almost a decade!

Girls aren't losing money. You just have to pay taxes now and declare tips and everything like other tipped employees. Its not like you have to list all of your tips lol

It sounds like some of you are just right wingers who think its ok for the clubs to exploit dancers.

Not every club takes a percentage of what you make for dances, just semi private and VIP dances, which has always been the case. House fees and everything have always been paid. Dancers are taking home more cos of the hourly wage. The checks are small enough to where taxes aren't paid if you don't declare all of your tips.

Its a no brainer.

You're just projecting your political beliefs on it

Do you throw fits and act like the sky is falling for working a service job and having your tips taxed? you're fucking morons projecting right wing shit onto everything

^You're a troll and back on ignore now.

^For those of you who have TrapBaby on ignore, that was directed at him

Lol! Declinetostate the funny part about IceyLoco/Trapbaby's tirade is the whole right wing complaint. And how he keeps calling the dancers who are mad about it liars.

It's probably the only reason I haven't put them on ignore yet. Just like SJG, some of the shit they say is straight comedy. I'll probably cave in and ignore them once everyone else has ignored them and they get no longer get any responses.

accusing me of being someone else or ignoring me doesn't change the fact.

so far, yeah some are mad about having to pay taxes and declare their income as tips boo hoo

check printouts include all of the info thats supposed to be on them just like for any other club employee. claiming it isnt is a lie.

Agree with TFP. The only reason I haven't put Icey Trap Loco on ignore is the entertainment value. But that is starting to wear off.

and of course employees have more obligations than independent contractors lol

but the crap in complaints has always been there.

and clubs aren't hurting. business has been down last month cos of the holidays, thats every year everywhere

you're dismissing the whole stripper organized movement that has spent years fighting for this because of your own political views.

and you come up with crap like stripperweb hoes saying they dont want to pay taxes or some bs about how its hurting tricks if dancers have rights rotflmfao

The problem is not how the money works, its the loss of plausible deniability for the club management.

SJG

@TFP So they're saying Cali's change in employee status is right wing, that's a fuck'n riot lol

One thing that'll be interesting about the new employer-employee setup is whether girls will file and win lawsuits for hostile work environment despite all involved (girls, management and customers) knowing and expecting that groping by customers is an anticipated characteristic of the environment. I think we'll soon find out. Hopefully the sky is not falling and it won't lead to no touch clubs in localities that haven't regulated touching.

Like most things in life, there are pros and cons - similar to investing, if one wants security, they often have to sacrifice maximum return - kinda a high-floor low-ceiling thing.

Having a "salary" does sorta "guarantee" the dancer making something - but strip club owners are in this type of seedy biz not only to make $$$, but make big $$$/margins - I would assume going-forward it will only be worth it to most SC owners if they can somehow pass most of these costs to the dancers and squeeze them like many clubs do.

I've often heard dancers state one of the things they like about dancing is the flexibility of the job - also seems many of them are not happy about leaving a paper-trail of their stripping career (for various reasons) - seems this new law would affect dancer flexibility and anonymity, and on the surface it would seem it would affect max $$$ potential.

-->"So they're saying Cali's change in employee status is right wing, that's a fuck'n riot lol."

Ya right, as if the Calif Supreme Court is a bastion of right wing conservatism

And now that there's "more visibility" - I wonder if going forward high-mileage/extras will be affected - we could see the old "killing of the goose that laid the golden-egg" for many people.

^ I can see the "clean-dancers" filing complaints about the high-mileage girls, thinking this will be good for them but likely they may kill off the club

I believe that most other states will follow CA on this. Remember, strippers and an unusual kind of worker. These kinds of cases come from the shit employment industry.

Dynamex Decision
https://www.tuscl.net/app/discussion.php…

For strippers these issues have been the subject of litigation since the 1980's.

It is always the retired strippers who sue. The biggest issue is the employer's contribution to Social Security. Really, young working people on ly want high pay, they do not care about that.

Clubs managers and owners need to be able to say with a straight face that they do not know what the girls are doing, and to be able to waive the signed sheet of rules at LE.

SJG

Just a little extra info -- all anecdotal, but at least I've spoken to actual strippers about this LOL -- I was in Vegas this weekend, and as usual, ran into a lot of strippers from CA. NOthing unusual about that, lots of CA girls strip in Vegas to make more $$$. At one point, like the 4th or 5th CA girl I ran into, I mentioned "so many CA girls here", she shot right back with, "I danced in LA until recently, but a whole bunch of us came out to Vegas because of the changes." Again, just anecdotal, but at least in this early phase -- where they are factually making less $ from their dances and tips than they used to -- the strippers are overwhelmingly not happy with the change in status. We'll see where it leads.

-->@Papi: "Having a "salary" does sorta "guarantee" the dancer making something"
^Really not trying to split hairs with ya here Papi, but the girls are paid hourly (minimum) wage plus commissions over a certain dollar amount they generate daily after the club has taken its cut to pay the hourly wage, and they are not salaried employees. Despite them not being salaried (in which case the clubs would be exempt from having to pay them overtime and provide rest and meal breaks), there actually is an argument to be made they could be salaried as "artistic profession" employees but they won't be because all salaried employees in Calif must be paid on a full time basis and the full time minimum salary for 2019 is $49,920.

-->@Papi: "but strip club owners are in this type of seedy biz not only to make $$$, but make big $$$/margins - I would assume going-forward it will only be worth it to most SC owners if they can somehow pass most of these costs to the dancers and squeeze them like many clubs do.
^Yes, and the squeeze in the new employer-employee setup is that the wages paid to them as employees (including benefits) appears to be less than what they took in as independent contractors, even when factoring in their payment of self employment tax (the self employed portion of FICA that employers pay on employee's behalf).

Don't forget that employees actually have less rights than those with IC status, and are limited in the law suits they can file, the clubs now get the protections afforded under the WC statutes as well as Dept. of Labor, and the DOL in generally much more favorable to employers than employees. Especially with regard to termination for cause, That will be where the abuse starts.

I would assume this would affect the dancers that like to hide out in the dressing-room, and the ones that like to bury their noses in their phones and ignore the custies

There are already complaints in some clubs about hoes ruining it for those who don't hoe, affecting their earnings. But thats been the case before as well, its just getting more attention from management now.

A good percentage of dancers in LV have always been weekend girls from LA.

I don't know about the clubs taking a cut, they don't. That's the fees paid to the club and the tipouts and everything. Its nothing new, its just organized differently in paperwork.

There is already a class action lawsuit for retro-active wages.

The dancers complaining about it don't want to pay taxes or don't actually understand it. Its not affecting anyone negatively. It gives dancers protections and guarantees a small minimum. Prior to this there was no guaranteed minimum and you could lose money on a shift, and you had no protections.

^ Absolutely, now as employees they can be ordered to get on the floor .

you're acting like treating dancers like any other worker is opening the poor strip clubs up to being abused and that clubs will have higher costs oh no! less profits for them! thats a right wing position.

Yes, schedules will get more strict, like a higher minimum number of days you have to work. Nothing wrong with that.

Per the SW thread TFP posted above:

"... Deja Vu is making us pay ourselves our own minimum wage and income taxes out of our dance sales and if you don't make enough in dances to cover it, eventually you'll be terminated because THEY don't want to pay your legally owed wages. You will also be told to go home if you don't cover your minimum wage in the first 3 hours, which we all know is fucked up because some days you could make most or all of your wages in the last hour or two of your shift if it's slow ..."

As if stripping was not stressful enough already - I can see dancers now smoking 2-cigs at once from all the added pressure

And one would think this would impact the slow shifts (e.g. dayshifts) even more - but time will tell how it all shakes out

Per SW:

"... Lol I'm so sick of California. Nothing good comes out of living here. Feels fucked dealing with the BS rules here. One club I work at will fine you if you don't sell 5 sodas. I had to pay them 10 bucks last night because the waitress only sold 4 sodas for me and she would interrupt a dance to ask a customer for a soda for me. One Deja Vu used to do the same here with a 4 drink policy..... Excuse me, I'm not a waitress nor have I ever asked a customer for a drink. The fuck am I supposed to do with 5 large sodas in 5-6 hours? Waitress had the audacity to bring one of them over to me that I left behind. It's beginning to be too much here in Cali. I was also told to tip the dj 20 bucks after he was pissed I gave him 3 bucks last time and he called the manager on the phone annoyed at the tip saying he would let it slide. He probably makes more money than any dancer with all the tips he makes off of girls. Cheaper to not have him there and use the system Deja VU NH uses. Excuse my angry rant lol ..."


LOL

Remember, ulm clubs exist because the management can deny knowledge of what the girls do. Employee status makes that harder.

Another way is just to make the women customers, they pay an admission fee, and they get no money from the house, nor do they give money to the house.

In my opinion, that will really draw wild girls

:) :) :)

SJG

Per SW:

"... My club doesn't have a drink sales quota for dancers but you do get a bonus for having the guys buy you a $10 non-alcoholic beverage ..."

That shit sucks - when custies get suckered into buying drinks (non alcoholic at that) in order to make the club, and dancers, $$$ - but hey the dancers still like us right?

^^^^^^^^^ Front Room Makeout Session, TJ Style!

SJG

Per SW:

"... Clubs are already working on imposing the new rules to get ready for the new year changes. Today, manager gave warnings to me and many other girls that we HAD TO sell a dance or else he would send us home early. It was a slow and when it did start to fill up most of the guys were cheap. Ridiculous.

Time to consider a different state to live at ..."

I agree with Subra, it's good to hear from some actual strippers. It would be nice if some of dancers on this site who work in CA (or have left due to the changes) gave us their views. Not some troll.
There maybe a few that like the new arrangement, but I think most do not.

Is the legal change having any effect beyond DV?

SJG

Honestly half of what I'm hearing is Deja Vu sucks and is trying to pass it all onto the dancers instead of paying their share of the burden.

If every Vu closed tomorrow would anyone care? I don't understand why anyone works or goes there as a patron.

San Francisco, little to no other choice. That's the issue.

SJG

Ya, someone had done a quick analysis for the higher end clubs in my city -- the girls, at least here, are getting a smaller cut of the money the earn now, and paying taxes on top of it. At least in this city, there's no reason to hypothesize that it's good for the girls' income; their income has, factually, gone down per shift. In addition, they are no longer allowed to work more than 32 hours a week, or do doubles, so even their potential for income has gone down. And they are subject to workplace rules they weren't before, scheduling is more rigid, etc. The girls are near-unanimous in being unhappy over the change -- at least the ones I've spoken to, who are admittedly just a drop in the bucket, and only in my city (and one girl in Vegas)

How about my idea, the ultra dive, make the women customers. So they pay an entrance fee, as the men do. The house gets booth and back room fees. Wouldn't that result in a UHM anything goes club?

SJG

^^^^ The whole point is plausible deniability. That is how this all works.

SJG

Looks like strippers in CA are trying to organize and fight back against the new employee status law.
Check out
STRIPPERCHOICE.COM

Saw a posting on twitter that they plan to rally at the capital to protest on Jan 18th.

Geuss dancers are not so ExTATIC about the changes.

Of course this rally must be something instigated and lead by someone with a right wing agenda

LOL, yes, "the strippers all love this law and only right wingers think it's bad" ... except that no one who has actually spoken to a stripper can find one who supports it

It's probably those damn Russians that are behind this causing trouble again

http://stripperchoice.com/

The real issue would seem to be the Social Security Contributions. And it always has been the retired strippers versus the active strippers and the owners.

But just because we do not like a law, that does not make any of us exempt from it.

But again remember, this court ruling did not come about because of strip club issues, it came from the shit job arena.

Anyone seeing compliance with this ruling anywhere except DV?

I feel that the club owners can find better ways to stay out of trouble, than just making the dancers employees.

SJG

the negative talk about it has a definite political slant to it.

the vast majority aren't bitching

Just my experience as a customer: 100% bitch about it if you ask them about it, 0% wanted this, nearly all hate it for reasons that are specific and reasonable -- the club is taking a bigger share of their revenue, for no visible benefit. That's just a slice of customer/stripper conversation in one city, but again, I actually did talk to strippers about it, I'm not a persona

I should add, and it is a fact many girls are so unhappy that they've moved on to other clubs -- even the manager confirmed that. I'll leave it up to the reading audience as to whether it's just right wingers who don't like it, or whether it's more likely strippers would be unhappy with lower revenue per shift, fewer allowable shifts, few benefits but more rules.

Strippers will bitch about anything to customers. Sob stories are a way of getting more money out of them "oh no I'm losing money the new rules are making it impossible"

Its like anyone else bitching about having to pay taxes. Also, many are too dumb to understand paycheck deductions and shit. The only money they're "losing" is taxes. The rest is just their fees and shit being listed out like on any paycheck.

If this is so bad, why are there class action suits in Arizona and soon to be Nevada, by strippers, to get employee status as well.

Kinda makes sense the clubs may now take an even bigger chunk given they may be taking on greater liability

Ya... every time there's some big change, the girls get fucked. The clubs are always going to adapt to ensure their revenue stream; and change is an opportunity

The law protects dancers from the unfair fines and fees that used to get racked up to take as much as possible from them

It also protects them from retaining relatively more of the money they earn, working more than 32 hours, working doubles, picking their own shifts, etc.

Yeah - strip-clubs were far from perfect w.r.t. how they treated dancers - but I'm not sure the current-medicine is better than the disease

Dancers never pick their own shifts per se. Its not like you walk in and can just work any shift you want. It comes down to meeting the requirements, seniority, how well management likes you etc

PapiChulo, its not perfect, lots of bugs to work out but its a start.

Its also a way to start breaking the stigma of stripping on an institutional level.....when its seen as gainful employment and treated as such.

Business as usual at the local (non DejaVu ) club. Sounds like they have a work around for now and aren't using it as cover for a cash grab by management.

Also remember its expanding to Arizona and possibly Nevada soon. Has to be something there for strippers to want it.

No idea about AZ or NV, I'm not going to dream up explanations about things I know nothing about. I just know -- being a real actual person, who has spoken to actual strippers and a club manager -- what I'm reporting here: that it is a fact that the new financial structure means the girls are taking home less out of their earnings (especially tough on dayshift), that it is a fact that there's been a mini-exodus from the local clubs, that it is a fact that the girls are being very limited in hours.

They're lying about taking home less. They're not going to tell a customer they're making more or the same.

Management doesn't like it coz they have to treat the girls better and with more transparency.

There financial structure -- e.g., first $150 goes to the club, 70/30 (club 70) split of the next $200 (I think it is, need to go back on check), etc. It's elementary arithmetic to see the club is taking a bigger cut versus the previous. It's a fact that hours are being restricted.

Again, that's just my local area. I believe other actual SC customers -- e.g., JamesSD -- that there hasn't been this impact where he is. I don't have an axe to grind, and in a management vs the girls fight, I'm 100% of the side of the girls. But also not giving any credence to a persona controlled by someone who doesn't go to strip clubs or talk to strippers, who has dreamt up a position for political reasons, and for whom no amount of first-hand discussion will change. I hope it works out for the girls, it's just not doing that locally. I'm very interested in hearing other first hand reports

If that's true then its one club..... But the structure sounds like what a girl would normally pay... House fee, tip outs, etc. Then the club gets a percentage of VIP, and she gets a bonus or a fine based on if she has to hustle drinks.... That's nothing new.

I know much more about strip clubs than your trick ass.

On the contrary, you do not know a fraction of what I know. But like most blowhards, you love TALKING about how much you know LOL

you just sound like a trick.

And you sound like a troll persona being an animated, badly and in a cringeworthy manner, by a truly terrible, miserable person. So we both have things to improve on

calling me a troll coz i have different experiences from you and am not a trick doesn't change you being a clueless trick

funny how you leave your vip shithole to troll here

Calling me a trick because you learned the word "trick" when you watched Pimps Up Hoes Down doesn't change you from being a clueless troll

What happened to the Icey comments, did the account get deleted?

Interesting. I can see the IceyLoco posts in other threads, but they're gone from this thread.

I ignored him -- still kicking myself for being an idiot and letting him bait me into trolling my own thread. I didn't realize that would erase his comments for everyone. Do you want me to un-ignore him?

Dear God no.

I was conflicted over the fact that he wouldn't see my Pimps Up Hoes Down zinger, but there it is.

This functionality of the Ignore tool reminds me of the ending to "Avengers: Infinity War".

@Subraman
The main reason the front room sucks is because every afternoon after the lunch rush at the IN and Out Burger joint that jackoff comes on here and posts on every single thread, a dozen times, it was bad enough with SJG posting gibberish, at least he mostly confined it to threads, mined to show everyone just how ignorant they are

Remind me, at the end of Avengers: Infinity War, do a bunch of guys who are socially isolated and in their low-rent apartments alone, trolling the internet, disappear? Because that's a pretty righteous ending

25: well, at least now if you want to create a thread here that actually has more signal than noise, you know you can insta-remove anyone

^^^ Alternate ending on Blu-ray.

@Subraman
My post some how got truncated.
I said between SJG, Crap Baby, and Phat head, it is impossible between the three of them to have an intelligent, conversation, none has ever set foot in any strip club, yet they seem determined to show off their combined ignorance, I never in all of my time here, even when alucard was posting saw such stupid dreck, I am going to recommend to founder the next time it comes up that he close the front room, those three have diminished it's value, truth be told if I was a newcomer I wouldn't even waste two seconds posting here as soon as I saw that shit.
If TUSCL was an actual strip club the bouncers would have gotten rid of these three in a heartbeat.

Its nice to see that when Trap went quiet, Icey was there to pick up the mantel an run with "only a few dancer and right wingers don't like the new law". Of course the dancers are all lying and ignore the actual payout slips posted online by dancers. Ignore that dancers are organizing to fight this. When others post about actual conversations with dancers and a mini exodus, then start calling people names. There is no arguing with a troll. Just put them on ignore.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that new feature about blocking someone on one's thread - kinda a nuclear option I would only use sparingly if at all

501: I hate to say the name of lord maldevort, but dougster used to do the same thing: stake out some odd position that he was, for some reason, incredibly invested in, and then ignore any factual arguments against while dismissing them for increasingly delusion reasons and theories. It reminds me a bit of this pattern, as does the pattern of writing lots of threads about people you don't like

^The takeaway from that is, great minds speak of Ideas , average minds speak about things, but small minds speak about people I've been saying right along dougster never left he's been morphing into a few persona's, he's always needed allies even if they were him.

What kinda minds speak about strip club's?

What kinda minds speak about strip club's?

^ Ideas bro

^ PL minds

Aye motherfucker : )

Ah, I got to the party too late. I mean I'm sure Subra already slam dunked that chump even before he went Thanos on him. But I still wanted to see the silly shit Icey was saying. Judging by Subra's responses it was more of the same: tricks, right wing activists, and more shit. Basically the same shit that Trapbaby says. Because they're the same damn person.

Well that was fun, but to get back on topic: I was reading some of the reviews today, and there's reports of the same thing: lots of new girls on shifts due to so many girls leaving, etc. Note that these are all DejaVu clubs, and due to DejaVu's monopoly here, it could be they are more heavy-handed than elsewhere in CA, where only some of you are seeing similar things. Please keep checking in as you get a feel for things.

I, too, had heard the dancers are organization against the re-classification, or at least for choice; interesting to see if that leads anywhere