smackdaddies
Footballguy
mmm, no. A contract is an exchange - a promise to do something in exchange for something valuable - often money, but not necessarily. Y
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Do NFL Cheerleaders deserve minimum wage? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Ruffrodys05
- Start date
spider321
Footballguy
It's clear this is just a political argument now.
We conservatives want them to receive what the market dictates.
The progressives/liberals/socialists want them to receive a participation trophy salary because that's what's "fair" and we don't want to hurt their feelings.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Pretty much sums it up.
I don't particularly side with either party, but in this case I think they should get paid what the market dictates, which is pretty much zero pay. Finding cheerleaders for NFL games to work for free would be about as easy as finding someone in a frat house to drink a beer for free.
Not to mention, this isn't a "job". They provide no service, or about the same as some guy on the street corner playing the sax for a few cents here and there. Get rid of them and nobody notices or cares.
I get all the arguments saying "the NFL makes a zillion dollars, they should be embarrassed, blah blah blah". I just don't agree with those arguments in this case.
If they want to, fine. But these cheerleaders should be careful what they wish for. I can see teams just getting rid of them all together, and then 95% of the cheerleaders are gonna be PISSED
spider321
Footballguy
One that thousands upon thousands of people are willing to pay good money to see, in person.
...and one that multiple networks are willing to pay TEXA$ in order to broadcast.
Last edited by a moderator:
FUBAR
Footballguy
How many people pay money to see him perform?How many pay money to see Tara Battiato perform?
CalBear
Footballguy
You really think teams will get rid of cheerleaders because they might have to pay $7.25/hour for their work? Do you understand exactly how ridiculous that is?
If they have 15 cheerleaders, and they work an average of 500 hours a year, paying minimum wage will cost the teams a back-breaking $54K/year. That would be .002% of Jerry Jones' net worth. I'm pretty sure he can handle it.
az_prof
Footballguy
They're are plenty of bad teams where the cheerleaders are far more interesting than what goes on the field.
The people who say that "they provide no service" are ignoring the real fact that teams trot them out there for a reason. If they didn't provide positive images (sex sells...) the teams wouldn't have them at all.
Last edited by a moderator:
FUBAR
Footballguy
fatness
Footballguy
According to some people in this thread, cheerleaders are an important part of the game day experience. Can you point me to where the definition of "service" changes because of the amount of money some people are willing to pay?
How many pay money to see Tara Battiato perform?
FUBAR
Footballguy
I never said they don't provide a service. But the comparison you're making is just silly.According to some people in this thread, cheerleaders are an important part of the game day experience. Can you point me to where the definition of "service" changes because of the amount of money some people are willing to pay?
How many pay money to see Tara Battiato perform?
Perhaps you can explain why?I never said they don't provide a service. But the comparison you're making is just silly.According to some people in this thread, cheerleaders are an important part of the game day experience. Can you point me to where the definition of "service" changes because of the amount of money some people are willing to pay?
How many pay money to see Tara Battiato perform?
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
New record for shortest strike. They aren't players, they aren't refs, they aren't coaches, they aren't even stadium security or concessions folks. Literally, any individual team could cancel cheerleading tomorrow for 2014, and the impact would be utterly minimal. Not to mention the very real possibility of volunteer positions and/or scabs if they even bothered to go that route.
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
I'm NOT the world's most conservative guy BTW, I just don't think the minimum wage was designed for situations like this. It was designed for folks who went out and got the best, most consistent work they could get and had trouble making ends meat. For the most part, I'm OK with that idea. But that isn't what we are talking about here. Every one of them could go tomorrow and work at Hooters and clear a lot more cash with a lot easier schedule. Many of them could also work at other kinds of more traditional jobs. These are NOT the best jobs they can get in terms of salary. These are the best jobs they can get in terms of EXPOSURE, which is why they have chosen them at the expense of higher paying jobs elsewhere.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Seriously? He provides an actual service for his franchise.
The PURPOSE of football is to play football and win games. Peyton Manning's job is directly related to this.
A cheerleaders job is directly related to pretty much nothing more than a poster on the bathroom wall.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
If the only thing that changes is paying them minimum wage, then of course they wont get rid of them.
If they have to start paying them healthcare, pay for their hair, makeup, workout facilities..................................I can see them being scrapped.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
Probably because no one would care if they got rid of them.
If they got rid of the football players, well, then there is no football.
Please tell me you werent serious
This thread has established that your first sentence is wrong.ghostguy123 said:
I don't see how your second sentence is relevant. There are lots of people who wouldn't care if there was no football.
I am serious. How are a football player and a cheerleader different? Neither are necessary. Both are just entertainment. The fact that their efforts are valued differently by different people doesn't change that.
Last edited by a moderator:
KellysHeroes
Footballguy
wow, well when the game is advertised the players are on the billboards and commericals... not the cheerleaders.
This is a site of mostly men and not one person has come on and said the girls are needed to go watch the games. Their nice to look at but in general their not even in the thought process when u buy a ticket.
mr roboto
Footballguy
What everyone is trying to say is that they don't really add value to the game day experience. Of course they perform a service just as Peyton does. But their value is far lower. And if an external force required their compensation to increase, teams would have to decide if their value to the company is worth the additional expense.
The only interesting questions are 1. Should they be held to the same laws as normal employees? and 2. Would their absence impact financial performance of the team?
The only interesting questions are 1. Should they be held to the same laws as normal employees? and 2. Would their absence impact financial performance of the team?
mr roboto
Footballguy
Actually, not really. Just chiming in on the last few posts re:tying compensation to services performed.
The issue wasn't tying compensation to services performed. You really haven't read the thread, have you?
ghostguy123
Footballguy
I wonder if they would even be there in the first place if they were going to be treated and paid like normal workers.
ghostguy123
Footballguy
The bum on the corner plays his sax and trumpet all the time. He is just entertainment. He provides a service. Why doesnt he get paid minimum wage? He isn't necessary.
Some strippers PAY to work at the clubs they dance at. Why? The provide entertainment and a service, yet are not paid. Why? They aren't necessary, they are just entertainment.
Some waiters and waitresses make like 2 bucks an hour. Why? The provide a service.
People do unpaid internships. They do a lot of work for nothing. No pay. Why?
No clue at all why you compare them to the football players. Are you saying they should get paid just because the football players get paid? Are they coworkers? If that's the case, see the list I provided above. Outside of the bum, all the others work with people who get legit paychecks. Why don't they?
KellysHeroes
Footballguy
ghostguy123
Footballguy
I guarantee you the fans will be paying a higher % of their salaries than the owners will. Nothin like a 25 cent hike in ticket sales to pay the cheerleaders.
Or maybe they will figure out a way to allow the fans to tip them and pay them a servers wage.
Pots
Footballguy
Why? If they don't like what they're getting out of what they're doing they can do something else with their time. Cheerleading is more of a hobby than a profession. You get to go onto the field and perform in front of thousands of people representing a real NFL team. Some girls like that, some don't, but there are more than enough willing to do it for very little (or free) to satisfy the team's needs. And those that do, are often given other oppertunities in the modeling/acting avenues because they are a cheerleader. If they need the money from cheerleading itself, maybe they should do more lucrative/productive things with their time? It's like arguing that contestants on America's Got Talent should be paid minimum wage because the show gets a lot of money from them.
Milkman
Footballguy
Yeah we wouldn't want the owners to lose any of their profit margin. Lol this kind of situation is so ridiculous that it's going to take care of itself in time. The majority of the American population is already fed up with it.
Milkman
Footballguy
You know i could understand the owners side of this a little better if it was a zero sum game but it's not. It's not if the cheerleaders win the owners lose. The owners can pay the cheerleaders better and still be incredibly wealthy. Which to me at least seems like a lot healthier business relationship.
KellysHeroes
Footballguy
good artticle http://deadspin.com/nfl-cheerleading-is-a-scam-a-former-ravens-cheerleader-1509840273
not saying they don't work hard but if the conditions are that bad then find something else to do with your time, these aren't illegal immigrants who have no other way to provide for themselves.
If they all want change then they should all strike in the middle of the season when it would be hard for the team to get replacements.
not saying they don't work hard but if the conditions are that bad then find something else to do with your time, these aren't illegal immigrants who have no other way to provide for themselves.
If they all want change then they should all strike in the middle of the season when it would be hard for the team to get replacements.
KellysHeroes
Footballguy
Godsbrother
Footballguy
I am pretty sure that cheerleaders have contracts with individual teams and not with the NFL. I don't think Goodell has anything to do with it.
daveR
Footballguy
How many of the posters in this thread make minimum wage? How many of you refuse to work for minimum wage? It's an absurd amount of money.
To me, the concept that these women aren't even compensated to that ridiculous extent is repugnant. It's disgusting. If I had a hand in the process, I'd turn it around just to save face, if nothing else.
NFL owners, are you out there???
To me, the concept that these women aren't even compensated to that ridiculous extent is repugnant. It's disgusting. If I had a hand in the process, I'd turn it around just to save face, if nothing else.
NFL owners, are you out there???
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
I made references to law firm interns first, but it's not like strippers are the LAST thing I think of when considering a group of attractive, scantily clad women gyrating in front of a predominantly male audience as a career.
I get the point you are trying to make, but let's not pretend that a comparison like that isn't SOMEWHAT natural. Quick, name five professional careers that are closer to stripping than cheerleading...
Auto mechanic, geologist, pilot, kindergarten teacher, database administrator, damn, I'm drawing a blank.
Wait, adult magazine model! Nevermind, there is an extremely high percentage of adult magazine models among NFL cheerleaders.MoveToSkypager
Footballguy
Lots of people in this thread don't know what team they are on. I don't blame people for being hoodwinked for a time, but at some point you need to do some reading.
thriftyrocker
Footballguy
You could say the same thing about any auxiliary NFL job. Why pay the groundskeeper when he can put "official groundskeeper for <team>" on his business card and get more business? Why pay the security guard when it is providing him an opportunity to meet a player and become their personal security? Why pay the GM when there's an internet full of people who would do the same job for tips?
CalBear
Footballguy
None of these situations are analogous, for reasons already discussed in this thread.
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
So you've said, but I haven't seen much to support it.
But I see some of them as much better analogs than the typical fast-food scenario the minimum wage was intended for. As I've said before, but no one seemed to want to respond to, these ladies have generally opted for these positions over other more immediately lucrative positions. I don't see too many fast-food workers choosing to make less money at burger shack because it might enhance their future career in a related field. Did you know that the woman suing the Raiders left a cheering position making $12/hour to work for the Raiders? Afterwards, she seemingly wonders why she was paid so much more, but why did she CHOOSE to go with the Raiders after reading and signing the contract? Because it was a more high-profile gig of course and offered better long-term advantages than the basketball gig did.
It turns out the job was not really suited for her. I get that. She has a kid, and all of the required extra-curriculars made that hard. But did you know most of the other cheerleaders are unhappy with the suit? Only 2 of the eligible members have signed on. Some prominent former cheerleaders are concerned about just what I alluded to earlier. This could revert the positions back to strictly volunteer or eliminate some of the teams altogether.
Did you also know that three teams still have volunteer squads? The Packers apparently use a college squad from time to time as well. Maybe they do it because:
1) It is fun for them
2) They use the exposure to launch careers in modelling, acting, fitness instruction, dancing, etc.
Also, this "below minimum wage" thing is a "calculated" figure provided by the cheerleader's lawyer. Lawyer's figures are always 100% appropriate right? She was paid per 8 hour game day for 10 games. Even with rehearsals and appearances etc, this is NOT a 40 hour gig. The Raiders actually paid the her nearly 3,000 - which is a little more than 80 hours X $5/hour which would have been $400 bucks. So there must have been SOME pay for the other required activities, or we are talking over $35/hour.
But there are also paid appearances which I'm sure weren't added to the picture. They can make up to $400 per appearance. Can a fast-food worker do that? How does that figure in to the minimum wage? "Love the way you make that burger Johnny, can you show up to our corporate picnic to sign some autographs? We'll pay you handsomely!".
So yes, the cheerleading profession is MUCH closer to other performing professions, "tip" enhanced compensation professions, or internships than it is to machine-shop work, fast-food work, retail work etc.
Do I think that all is 100% well in NFL cheer-leader world? No, I do not. Some of the stories seem outrageous and I'm sure there is a lot of truth to some of them. But let's not take that and do the typical "slam the greedy big business" mantra without at least looking at the facts.
Donnybrook
Footballguy
If the owners can afford to pay Goodell that much, they probably can afford to pay cheerleaders minimum wage.
Donnybrook
Footballguy
TheCommish
Footballguy
Your last sentence is just stupid. Just because someone can "handle" paying more money doesn't mean they should. Bill Gates can "handle" paying $1 million per month for his internet service. Should he?
According to you, he should. This whole "paying your fair share" for weathly people needs to stop. It's entirely based in jealously, but portrayed as an equality push.
MoveToSkypager
Footballguy
Similar threads
