A couple of reviews have mentioned lower quality service in the California clubs that treat dancers as employees instead of independent contractors. An article about San Francisco clubs, http://www.sfexaminer.com/new-rules-for-…, says it's really hard on the dancers (though primarily from their statements, not an independent source).
Excellent question. I've been wondering what effect the law change has had in CA. Although, I was under the impression that as of Jan 1 every club statewide in CA had to go to the employee model, that there wasn't a IC option anymore.
I can only assume dancer service would be worse - for one, it seems that it's now harder for them to make $$$ which will affect their mood - also, as an IC she's kinda her own micro-business and one would think in most cases that who owns a business will put extra-effort vs an employee.
The only difference to me so far is that roll call for day time doesn't spill into night time, so if I feel like visiting a SC I don't know until later in the evening whether any dancer I have interest in will be there or not. Reason being that they are no longer allowed to do double shifts or come in late on the day shift and let it creep into the night shift. The roll call also seems to be less reliable, not having some dancers listed who turn out to be there when I decide to visit.
I was talking to a dancer about this a couple of weeks ago. She is originally from San Francisco and occasionally goes back to visit family and friends. When she does she hates working under the new employee law. Can't make enough money.
Many disadvantages. Discourages free-lancing (the girls who leapfrog among, f.e., Mons Venus and 2001 Odyssey in Tampa), discourages helpfulness, increases likelihood of rip-off-scams in general, increases capacity for cooperation between among dancers and bar-staff and security in scamming the customer, increases some degree of "professionalism" among dancers which just essentially (IMO) eliminates the chance of spontaneous interpersonal "click" between dancer and customer.
Some perceived advantages? Makes sure to withhold tax money for the dancers (yeah right) so that the extremely responsible and oh-so-generous club owners will be more likely to provide adequate health-insurance coverage, proper Unemployment Insurance and Worker's Compensation payments to the government (yeah right). Gives a degree of authenticity and officialdom to the situation such that if really deplorable violent crimes happen, at least everyone at the club knows the girl's real name and social security number and a valid phone for her, so she can't simply disappear under the radar merely because they didn't bother to write it down, which does happen sometimes in some locations now. Holds club owners accountable (yeah right) for their cash takings, more so, and for providing an appropriate (yeah right) working atmosphere for the girls.
Generally, I can't see that most of the supposed advantages will actually happen. The thing about discouraging really deplorable violent crimes is, I think, a possible benefit, but that could have been readily handled by means of the girl-network anyway (and usually has been done, so, it's not like it was really a lacking service). I don't blame people in the gummint for thinking they're "helping those poor single mothers out" by reducing the free-lance quotient and increasing the officially-an-employee quotient, but it's the grey-market in the first place, forcing it into the white-market will simply wash out all the black-market benefits without adding any corrollary white-market benefits, IMO.
Generally, the "scene" is dying, I think. The girls are less attractive, the millennials aren't as sexy because they don't like sex as much, the internet has impacted the viability of income for unskilled young hot women in totally other manners such that everyone is a celebrity and every one of the girls is a cam-girl making similar amounts of money without having to touch, without needing to get out of the house even. I think 1996 at Treasure's (north of Toronto, in Richmond Hill, look it up!) is gone forever ... but not yet forgotten.
I can see that any of a number of major demographic shifts might help the "scene" revitalize, but it wouldn't go back to "1996 normal". It would perhaps find a "new normal" somehow, not sure what it would look like. I'd appreciate if anyone could help that happen. We're not in a "normal" right now at all, we're in a "decline."
6 comments
Latest
Many disadvantages. Discourages free-lancing (the girls who leapfrog among, f.e., Mons Venus and 2001 Odyssey in Tampa), discourages helpfulness, increases likelihood of rip-off-scams in general, increases capacity for cooperation between among dancers and bar-staff and security in scamming the customer, increases some degree of "professionalism" among dancers which just essentially (IMO) eliminates the chance of spontaneous interpersonal "click" between dancer and customer.
Some perceived advantages? Makes sure to withhold tax money for the dancers (yeah right) so that the extremely responsible and oh-so-generous club owners will be more likely to provide adequate health-insurance coverage, proper Unemployment Insurance and Worker's Compensation payments to the government (yeah right). Gives a degree of authenticity and officialdom to the situation such that if really deplorable violent crimes happen, at least everyone at the club knows the girl's real name and social security number and a valid phone for her, so she can't simply disappear under the radar merely because they didn't bother to write it down, which does happen sometimes in some locations now. Holds club owners accountable (yeah right) for their cash takings, more so, and for providing an appropriate (yeah right) working atmosphere for the girls.
Generally, I can't see that most of the supposed advantages will actually happen. The thing about discouraging really deplorable violent crimes is, I think, a possible benefit, but that could have been readily handled by means of the girl-network anyway (and usually has been done, so, it's not like it was really a lacking service). I don't blame people in the gummint for thinking they're "helping those poor single mothers out" by reducing the free-lance quotient and increasing the officially-an-employee quotient, but it's the grey-market in the first place, forcing it into the white-market will simply wash out all the black-market benefits without adding any corrollary white-market benefits, IMO.
Generally, the "scene" is dying, I think. The girls are less attractive, the millennials aren't as sexy because they don't like sex as much, the internet has impacted the viability of income for unskilled young hot women in totally other manners such that everyone is a celebrity and every one of the girls is a cam-girl making similar amounts of money without having to touch, without needing to get out of the house even. I think 1996 at Treasure's (north of Toronto, in Richmond Hill, look it up!) is gone forever ... but not yet forgotten.
I can see that any of a number of major demographic shifts might help the "scene" revitalize, but it wouldn't go back to "1996 normal". It would perhaps find a "new normal" somehow, not sure what it would look like. I'd appreciate if anyone could help that happen. We're not in a "normal" right now at all, we're in a "decline."