I don't consider this a job. It is more like a hobby to these young girls. Most have day jobs and do this off hours for exposure ( tongue in cheek). I am sure they all have in mind meeting and marrying a highly paid NFL player.
It's very much a job -- they're told when and where to be, what and how to perform, and it's a valuable promotional service for the team, a very cash-flow rich business.
Apparently the Bills don't sponsor or support them. Stejon Productions is the current owner. Who knows the arrangement with the football team -- apparently the real money is made away from the gridiron environs:
Give me a break,These girls were not raised under a mushroom, they do this partly for prestige. They know sex sells, Their friends get to see them on tv, and yes there is always the chance to be discovered. If these girls were told everything upfront do you think they would say"never mind" i think not! I do believe They shoud be supported financially by the team,
They might just win. This isn't about 'girls' looking for husbands, fame, or whatever. It is about earning a fair wage. AOL learned that expensive lesson several years ago. http://overtimelaw.com/case.php?case=aol&dir=successes
If I as a contractor, agree to do a job (for what ever pay) I can't say, OH#%* i want more money, i have to suck it up and fullfill the contract. A contract is binding and these contractors went in with their eyes open.It still goes back to"look at me i'm a Buffalo Jill"
If they were "employees" they would be paid at least minimum wage. They are independent contractors and knew the requirements going in. I have to at least partially agree with Tom H. I've no doubt that the prestige of being an NFL cheerleader was a primary motivator.
"If I as a contractor, agree to do a job (for what ever pay) I can't say, OH#%* i want more money, i have to suck it up and fullfill the contract."
That's not necessarily true. This is a big issue being addressed by the Obama administration. Many workers, such as (possibly) the Jills, are being misclassified as independent contractors when, in fact, the behavioral and financial controls of the business are not that of an independent contractor. If one enters into an illegal contract, the contract is still illegal. This is a liability that falls on the business. This isn't a "well, you signed up for it, too bad" situation. I have to believe that there are numerous laws that will play into this along with other important facts that are not supplied to the media yet. On the surface, it seems as though the Jills have a legitimate case. Again, not all data is available on this for me to side either way. I'm certainly interested to see how this plays out and what impact this has on other businesses who use independent contractors.
Matt, What you are bringing up a very good point. If the law decides they were illegally called contractors, then the rules change. I would then have to say "what's right is right" and they may have a case. If the law upholds the contractor theory, and things stay the same, there will still be plenty of girls willing to sit on a few laps to call themselves professional cheerleaders!
Matt, that is why AOL lost. When you look at the money charged to have the cheerleaders at an event, and the amount they actually received then there is a reason to persue this case.
If an business assigns work and will fire you for not showing up or not getting the work done, then you're no longer an independent contractor, you're employee. If you can't assign yourself work (the company need not accept the work) and determine your own way of doing the work and set your own hours, you're an employee.
This article describes assigned work and expectations for conduct and performance that sound like an employer-employee relationship to me, not a a contractor relationship.
If being a cheerleader were truly a free market, then any person who showed up could do any assignment and the employer would pay the highest wages to those who best did the job or just take whoever showed up if they wanted to hold expenses down. But the way football teams do cheerleading is there are tryouts and only the select few are chosen and nobody else can get in, creating a system that limits competition for assignments, thereby denying the select few from the opportunity gain the highest bid for their services and allowing the employer to hold down costs without exposure to a substandard product for the low price their willing to pay.
A free market works only when all parties respect each other. When one party deliberately rigs the system to exploit the weakness of the other party, it's no longer a free market. Rather it's feudal.
All of the supposed reasons mentioned earlier about why young women might want to be Jills is how they are exploited to the determent of their ability to engage in a free market exercise to obtain their highest monetary worth.
Whether by contract or not, the Bills hold some responsibility for the conditions they set in motion.
Law suits, BTW, are part of a free market system. In a free market, law suits are how disputes are settled when two parties can't agree on the fairness or not of their arrangement. The system exists to correct wrongs that the market itself can't correct.
Every aspect of this relationship will need to be evaluated. There aren't any one or two definitions or rules that define whether an individual is an employee or independent contractor. As Howard mentioned, this is precisely why this is going to the courts. The relationship between the Jills and the agency will be completely disclosed and a decision will be made based on that. Again, we don't know every aspect of the relationship so it's hard to say one way or the other. But, like I said, it seems as thought the Jills have a legitimate case.
On a side note: The argument that these women were looking to "sit on a few laps" or get some "exposure" has absolutely nothing to do with any of this. Those comments have no merit in this case.
If you have volunteers please make sure THEY, not you, pencil in the times they want to use their time. If you use independent contractors then make sure THEY, not you, set their timetable.
Once you start holding mandatory meetings and provide training, etc. Then you are treating that volunteer or contractor as an employee.
She and four others claim other degrading behavior included being forced to wear a bikini and then go into a dunk tank, being auctioned off like prizes, and “the Jills were forced to sit on participants’ laps because there was not enough seats in the golf carts.”......
But hey, its a great way to snag 'em a rich husband!
Debbie, it really doesn't. My comment wasn't in response to the article but to other comments in this thread (your last comment would fall into this category). What you're saying is an entirely different argument.
Not to beat a dead horse, but,, Julie, Lets say there are 50 girls that show up for a jill's audition. If those girls were told exactly what was expected of them, including paying out of your own pocket and having to sit half naked on some old guys lap. In all honesty, how many of those candidates would get up and leave?? honestly,,, not very many, if any
Wow, this surprises me. I
Wow, this surprises me. I would have predicted a big 'NO' vote.
I don't consider this a job.
I don't consider this a job. It is more like a hobby to these young girls. Most have day jobs and do this off hours for exposure ( tongue in cheek). I am sure they all have in mind meeting and marrying a highly paid NFL player.
Thats right Tom....them girls
Thats right Tom....them girls should have to sit on men's laps in golf carts while wearing bikinis, and they should do it for free and LIKE IT. SMGDH
It's very much a job --
It's very much a job -- they're told when and where to be, what and how to perform, and it's a valuable promotional service for the team, a very cash-flow rich business.
I'm surprised they don't even get minimum wage.
Apparently the Bills don't
Apparently the Bills don't sponsor or support them. Stejon Productions is the current owner. Who knows the arrangement with the football team -- apparently the real money is made away from the gridiron environs:
http://www.buffalojills.com/appearances.php
Give me a break,These girls
Give me a break,These girls were not raised under a mushroom, they do this partly for prestige. They know sex sells, Their friends get to see them on tv, and yes there is always the chance to be discovered. If these girls were told everything upfront do you think they would say"never mind" i think not! I do believe They shoud be supported financially by the team,
They might just win. This
They might just win. This isn't about 'girls' looking for husbands, fame, or whatever. It is about earning a fair wage. AOL learned that expensive lesson several years ago. http://overtimelaw.com/case.php?case=aol&dir=successes
If I as a contractor, agree
If I as a contractor, agree to do a job (for what ever pay) I can't say, OH#%* i want more money, i have to suck it up and fullfill the contract. A contract is binding and these contractors went in with their eyes open.It still goes back to"look at me i'm a Buffalo Jill"
Why would adult women even
Why would adult women even want to be cheerleaders .?
Eliminate the minimum wage
Eliminate the minimum wage rouse (law) then you'll truly have an even playing field (pun intended).
If they were "employees" they
If they were "employees" they would be paid at least minimum wage. They are independent contractors and knew the requirements going in. I have to at least partially agree with Tom H. I've no doubt that the prestige of being an NFL cheerleader was a primary motivator.
"If I as a contractor, agree
"If I as a contractor, agree to do a job (for what ever pay) I can't say, OH#%* i want more money, i have to suck it up and fullfill the contract."
That's not necessarily true. This is a big issue being addressed by the Obama administration. Many workers, such as (possibly) the Jills, are being misclassified as independent contractors when, in fact, the behavioral and financial controls of the business are not that of an independent contractor. If one enters into an illegal contract, the contract is still illegal. This is a liability that falls on the business. This isn't a "well, you signed up for it, too bad" situation. I have to believe that there are numerous laws that will play into this along with other important facts that are not supplied to the media yet. On the surface, it seems as though the Jills have a legitimate case. Again, not all data is available on this for me to side either way. I'm certainly interested to see how this plays out and what impact this has on other businesses who use independent contractors.
Matt, What you are bringing
Matt, What you are bringing up a very good point. If the law decides they were illegally called contractors, then the rules change. I would then have to say "what's right is right" and they may have a case. If the law upholds the contractor theory, and things stay the same, there will still be plenty of girls willing to sit on a few laps to call themselves professional cheerleaders!
Matt, that is why AOL lost.
Matt, that is why AOL lost. When you look at the money charged to have the cheerleaders at an event, and the amount they actually received then there is a reason to persue this case.
“It still goes back to ‘look
“It still goes back to ‘look at me i'm a Buffalo Jill’”
You sound downright bitter. Maybe you should sue for a cheerleading spot and a few laps to sit on yourself.
If an business assigns work
If an business assigns work and will fire you for not showing up or not getting the work done, then you're no longer an independent contractor, you're employee. If you can't assign yourself work (the company need not accept the work) and determine your own way of doing the work and set your own hours, you're an employee.
This article describes assigned work and expectations for conduct and performance that sound like an employer-employee relationship to me, not a a contractor relationship.
If being a cheerleader were truly a free market, then any person who showed up could do any assignment and the employer would pay the highest wages to those who best did the job or just take whoever showed up if they wanted to hold expenses down. But the way football teams do cheerleading is there are tryouts and only the select few are chosen and nobody else can get in, creating a system that limits competition for assignments, thereby denying the select few from the opportunity gain the highest bid for their services and allowing the employer to hold down costs without exposure to a substandard product for the low price their willing to pay.
A free market works only when all parties respect each other. When one party deliberately rigs the system to exploit the weakness of the other party, it's no longer a free market. Rather it's feudal.
All of the supposed reasons mentioned earlier about why young women might want to be Jills is how they are exploited to the determent of their ability to engage in a free market exercise to obtain their highest monetary worth.
Whether by contract or not, the Bills hold some responsibility for the conditions they set in motion.
Law suits, BTW, are part of a free market system. In a free market, law suits are how disputes are settled when two parties can't agree on the fairness or not of their arrangement. The system exists to correct wrongs that the market itself can't correct.
Every aspect of this
Every aspect of this relationship will need to be evaluated. There aren't any one or two definitions or rules that define whether an individual is an employee or independent contractor. As Howard mentioned, this is precisely why this is going to the courts. The relationship between the Jills and the agency will be completely disclosed and a decision will be made based on that. Again, we don't know every aspect of the relationship so it's hard to say one way or the other. But, like I said, it seems as thought the Jills have a legitimate case.
On a side note: The argument that these women were looking to "sit on a few laps" or get some "exposure" has absolutely nothing to do with any of this. Those comments have no merit in this case.
If you have volunteers please
If you have volunteers please make sure THEY, not you, pencil in the times they want to use their time. If you use independent contractors then make sure THEY, not you, set their timetable.
Once you start holding mandatory meetings and provide training, etc. Then you are treating that volunteer or contractor as an employee.
Actually Matt it does have a
Actually Matt it does have a merit in this case, although admittedly not in direct relation to Howard's question.
http://wivb.com/2014/04/22/former-jills-file-lawsuit-against-bills-mana…
She and four others claim other degrading behavior included being forced to wear a bikini and then go into a dunk tank, being auctioned off like prizes, and “the Jills were forced to sit on participants’ laps because there was not enough seats in the golf carts.”......
But hey, its a great way to snag 'em a rich husband!
Debbie, it really doesn't.
Debbie, it really doesn't. My comment wasn't in response to the article but to other comments in this thread (your last comment would fall into this category). What you're saying is an entirely different argument.
The Jills should be paid and
The Jills should be paid and paid well....why?.....because they are a hell of a lot more entertaining than the Bills !!! Just sayin'.......
Not to beat a dead horse,
Not to beat a dead horse, but,, Julie, Lets say there are 50 girls that show up for a jill's audition. If those girls were told exactly what was expected of them, including paying out of your own pocket and having to sit half naked on some old guys lap. In all honesty, how many of those candidates would get up and leave?? honestly,,, not very many, if any