Do NFL Cheerleaders deserve minimum wage? (1 Viewer)

[TheCommish]

That's an unchristian post.

In what way? I think I know what you are going to say, but you would be incorrect in your interpretation.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

That's an unchristian post.

In what way? I think I know what you are going to say, but you would be incorrect in your interpretation.

Go ahead and tell me what I was going to say.

 

[TheCommish]

That's an unchristian post.

In what way? I think I know what you are going to say, but you would be incorrect in your interpretation.

Go ahead and tell me what I was going to say.

Good grief. You made the accusation. If you have a point, make it. I'm more interested in the topic than dueling with you.

 

[SWC]

i am surprised at all the brohans who are saying pretty sexist stuff in here i thought that we had a better group than that around these parts i am pretty diseponted in some of the stuff i have read so hey try to clean it up in here bromigos and pay the cheerleaders minimum waget it is ridiculous that in the best country in the world we are debating whether people should get paid a poor mans wage anyhow you would think we could do better take that to the bank brohans

 

[Ruffrodys05]

i am surprised at all the brohans who are saying pretty sexist stuff in here i thought that we had a better group than that around these parts i am pretty diseponted in some of the stuff i have read so hey try to clean it up in here bromigos and pay the cheerleaders minimum waget it is ridiculous that in the best country in the world we are debating whether people should get paid a poor mans wage anyhow you would think we could do better take that to the bank brohans

right on bro, no joke

 

[MoveToSkypager]

That's an unchristian post.

In what way? I think I know what you are going to say, but you would be incorrect in your interpretation.

Go ahead and tell me what I was going to say.

Good grief. You made the accusation. If you have a point, make it. I'm more interested in the topic than dueling with you.

I made my point. Your post was unchristian. We can leave it there if you want.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

i am surprised at all the brohans who are saying pretty sexist stuff in here i thought that we had a better group than that around these parts i am pretty diseponted in some of the stuff i have read so hey try to clean it up in here bromigos and pay the cheerleaders minimum waget it is ridiculous that in the best country in the world we are debating whether people should get paid a poor mans wage anyhow you would think we could do better take that to the bank brohans

mans

???

 

[TheCommish]

i am surprised at all the brohans who are saying pretty sexist stuff in here i thought that we had a better group than that around these parts i am pretty diseponted in some of the stuff i have read so hey try to clean it up in here bromigos and pay the cheerleaders minimum waget it is ridiculous that in the best country in the world we are debating whether people should get paid a poor mans wage anyhow you would think we could do better take that to the bank brohans

Honestly, what do you expect? Look at cheerleaders. You don't see fat, old, ugly women dancing on the sidelines in cheerleading outfits. The entire occupation (if you can call it that) is based on getting hot women in hot outfits. You can SAY their job is to get the fans to cheer for their team, but I say their job is to distract the fans when their team is not doing anything worth cheering for.

 

[Concept Coop]

then they should go do something else, its hard for me to feel sorry for them when theres line around the block of woman tripping other themselves to get the position.

Sadly, potentially, there could soon be a line of people around the block tripping over themselves to get your job for much less that you're being paid, too. If you're not in manual labor--you'll be competing with candidates in other countries, where the US minimum wage is the EQ of a 6 figure income.

 

[Concept Coop]

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.

We're talking about minimum wage. This is a strawman.

 

[SWC]

i am surprised at all the brohans who are saying pretty sexist stuff in here i thought that we had a better group than that around these parts i am pretty diseponted in some of the stuff i have read so hey try to clean it up in here bromigos and pay the cheerleaders minimum waget it is ridiculous that in the best country in the world we are debating whether people should get paid a poor mans wage anyhow you would think we could do better take that to the bank brohans

Honestly, what do you expect? Look at cheerleaders. You don't see fat, old, ugly women dancing on the sidelines in cheerleading outfits. The entire occupation (if you can call it that) is based on getting hot women in hot outfits. You can SAY their job is to get the fans to cheer for their team, but I say their job is to distract the fans when their team is not doing anything worth cheering for.

keep on keepin on with yourself bromigo i do not care what a woman does to make money i still treat them with respect and i know i am no looker and no way am i making the scratch most of the all stars around here are and fankly if i was looking at me i would say that old swcer has about jack squat to offer any one but one thing we all have no matter how much money you have or how awesome you are is respect and me well i choose to treat others with it like they are my brohan from another mothran that is just how my momma raised me so i guess go on and ask what do you expect and all that other mother jazz i think it does not hold water and you know it does not and all the logic and spinzone in the world will not change what you know in your heart so take that to the bank brohans

 

[Concept Coop]

That's an unchristian post.

In what way?

There's a book that can answer this for you. Your religion is based on it. I'd suggest giving it a read.

 

[Beefeaters]

I agree with SWC, that they should be paid based solely upon bangability, starting with the Fatties making minimum wage and then the sky's the limit.

 

[FBG Moderator]

That's an unchristian post.

In what way?

There's a book that can answer this for you. Your religion is based on it. I'd suggest giving it a read.

Let's get back to football related matters. There are threads in the FFA for those who want to talk religion.

 

[Concept Coop]

Let's get back to football related matters. There are threads in the FFA for those who want to talk religion.

 

[Godsbrother]

The NFL should be embarrassed especially since the Commissioner made $44.2 M last year. https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/shutdown-corner/roger-goodell-made-more-44-million-last-wait-211537621--nfl.html

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.

If the owners can afford to pay Goodell that much, they probably can afford to pay cheerleaders minimum wage.

Agreed but not all teams have cheerleaders so this is not really a league issue.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Let's get back to football related matters. There are threads in the FFA for those who want to talk religion.

why? its a fun topic... not like people are being forced in here. Why talk about Darren Sharper or McNabb since their retired and don't play the game anymore? Because its fun and its the off-season. The rookie draft will come around and the front page will be loaded up next week w/ that anyways

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Let's get back to football related matters. There are threads in the FFA for those who want to talk religion.

why? its a fun topic... not like people are being forced in here. Why talk about Darren Sharper or McNabb since their retired and don't play the game anymore? Because its fun and its the off-season. The rookie draft will come around and the front page will be loaded up next week w/ that anyways

Please don't disagree with the FBG Mod. He'll punish you or lock the thread. The shot callers want the thread to not go that direction, so we can at least listen to them.

 

[KellysHeroes]

then they should go do something else, its hard for me to feel sorry for them when theres line around the block of woman tripping other themselves to get the position.

Sadly, potentially, there could soon be a line of people around the block tripping over themselves to get your job for much less that you're being paid, too. If you're not in manual labor--you'll be competing with candidates in other countries, where the US minimum wage is the EQ of a 6 figure income.

Sadly my position doesn't give me the opportunity to meet and party with beautiful single rich woman. .

 

[Concept Coop]

Sadly my position doesn't give me the opportunity to meet and party with beautiful single rich woman. .

That makes two of us.

 

[renesauz]

i am surprised at all the brohans who are saying pretty sexist stuff in here i thought that we had a better group than that around these parts i am pretty diseponted in some of the stuff i have read so hey try to clean it up in here bromigos and pay the cheerleaders minimum waget it is ridiculous that in the best country in the world we are debating whether people should get paid a poor mans wage anyhow you would think we could do better take that to the bank brohans

right on bro, no joke

You understood that? I generally skip his posts after a dozen words or so because it hurts my brain trying to interpret that garbage.

 

[KellysHeroes]

One point I want to make before this thread dies is that I do not view them as strippers or anything derogatory, theres a level of achievement to be a cheerleader for an organization like an NFL team. Clearly anyone doing this has worked hard at it and has passion for it. However, I view it as a performing art and like all performing art professions theres a lot of giving involving before you can take.

Do stage actors get paid for the countless hours they recurse? Do musicains get paid for the countless hours they practice? Do DJs get paid for the hours and equipment they spend on their profession. Do wrestlers (sports entertainers) get paid for the hours they train? In many cases of the professions I mentioned you make very little, nothing or even spend you own money before you can become successful, and thats just the way it is. Each of these professions has stepping stones and to the cheerleader / model performing in front of millions on TV should is seen as a huge step up in the right direction.

 

[CalBear]

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

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.

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.

I don't think complying with federal law on minimum wage is quite analogous to paying $1 million per month for internet service.

 

[CalBear]

keep on keepin on with yourself bromigo i do not care what a woman does to make money i still treat them with respect and i know i am no looker and no way am i making the scratch most of the all stars around here are and fankly if i was looking at me i would say that old swcer has about jack squat to offer any one but one thing we all have no matter how much money you have or how awesome you are is respect and me well i choose to treat others with it like they are my brohan from another mothran that is just how my momma raised me so i guess go on and ask what do you expect and all that other mother jazz i think it does not hold water and you know it does not and all the logic and spinzone in the world will not change what you know in your heart so take that to the bank brohans

SWC deserves his own cable show.

 

[Christo]

Perhaps you can explain why?

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.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.

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?

I starting to seriously think this is either fishing or you have no clue what issue you jumped in the middle of.

 

[CalBear]

Perhaps you can explain why?

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.

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.

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?

None of these situations are analogous, for reasons already discussed in this thread.

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.

The question being asked here is, "Do NFL Cheerleaders deserve [at least] minimum wage?" And the answer is yes, and I really have to question the sanity of anyone who thinks otherwise. Eight hours of work at $7.25 is $58. Fifty. Eight. Dollars. That's less than the cost of one ticket to the game. A single 50-yard line ticket could fund the entire cheer squad. A full-time job at that rate would pay less than $12K/year. Damn right they deserve [at least] that much; anyone who's working for a living does.

The question of "does the current compensation structure of NFL cheerleading (in at least this instance) violate minimum wage laws" is a more complex one which requires more facts to evaluate, and that's what the legal process will do. But that's not what was asked.

 

[thriftyrocker]

Do stage actors get paid for the countless hours they recurse? Do musicains get paid for the countless hours they practice? Do DJs get paid for the hours and equipment they spend on their profession. Do wrestlers (sports entertainers) get paid for the hours they train? In many cases of the professions I mentioned you make very little, nothing or even spend you own money before you can become successful, and thats just the way it is. Each of these professions has stepping stones and to the cheerleader / model performing in front of millions on TV should is seen as a huge step up in the right direction.

I didn't realize NFL cheerleaders were just practicing to be actresses or 25 year old models. If so they are doing it all wrong.

I would bet most cheerleaders are doing it (and putting up with the lack of wages) because they love it. It is the pinnacle of their dancing career not a stepping stone. The main difference between them and the wrestler at the national guard armory or the musician at the dive bar is that the company behind the cheerleaders is making enough money to pay them (25 billion with a b).

The dive bar owner is fair enough to pay the opening band if enough people showed. Even if few came to see them, there's enough money and they are not driven by the greed to the point that they ignore that the room was full.

 

[Brewtown]

Who cares!!!!

We are fighting for minimum wage for beautiful, young women.... Money will not be a problem for them....

Who cares!!!!

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Perhaps you can explain why?

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.

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.

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?

None of these situations are analogous, for reasons already discussed in this thread.

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.

The question being asked here is, "Do NFL Cheerleaders deserve [at least] minimum wage?" And the answer is yes, and I really have to question the sanity of anyone who thinks otherwise. Eight hours of work at $7.25 is $58. Fifty. Eight. Dollars. That's less than the cost of one ticket to the game. A single 50-yard line ticket could fund the entire cheer squad. A full-time job at that rate would pay less than $12K/year. Damn right they deserve [at least] that much; anyone who's working for a living does.

The question of "does the current compensation structure of NFL cheerleading (in at least this instance) violate minimum wage laws" is a more complex one which requires more facts to evaluate, and that's what the legal process will do. But that's not what was asked.

Kind of figured there wouldn't be a reasonable response to any of the questions I raised. You can try to boil it down to a simple hot button issue if you'd like to, but the fact is it's a situation that is MUCH more complex than it is being made out to be by you and the woman's legal team through the press. The compensation isn't all direct salary from the team, and even that is much higher than is being represented. "Fifty. Eight. Dollars" is about one 50th of what she earned just from the Raiders last year, so unless you know for a fact that she worked more than 50 full days (for 10 weeks of games), I'm not even sure what your concern is. Again, the $5/hour is a lawyer generated figure. Take it as gospel if you choose, but I prefer to do the math and see the gigantic gap between what you are claiming is an issue, and what she actually received. And NONE of that factors in appearance fee (which are a big deal) OR career exposure (which is a bigger deal). It also doesn't factor in the fact that lots and lots of talented people do free work for things they just enjoy doing or for career advancement or both. It happens in the financial sector, the legal sector, the entertainment industry, the news industry, even in the sports industry. Think none of the coaches or team management personnel took unpaid or underpaid positions before they made it? If so, think again.

The whole thing is simply not cut and dry enough to storm the castle with a mob and pitchforks. But it's tough to fight a mob I guess. Much easier to roll with it and shout along with them.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

If its money they want, I've got some.

 

[CalBear]

Kind of figured there wouldn't be a reasonable response to any of the questions I raised. You can try to boil it down to a simple hot button issue if you'd like to, but the fact is it's a situation that is MUCH more complex than it is being made out to be by you and the woman's legal team through the press. The compensation isn't all direct salary from the team, and even that is much higher than is being represented. "Fifty. Eight. Dollars" is about one 50th of what she earned just from the Raiders last year, so unless you know for a fact that she worked more than 50 full days (for 10 weeks of games), I'm not even sure what your concern is. Again, the $5/hour is a lawyer generated figure. Take it as gospel if you choose, but I prefer to do the math and see the gigantic gap between what you are claiming is an issue, and what she actually received. And NONE of that factors in appearance fee (which are a big deal) OR career exposure (which is a bigger deal). It also doesn't factor in the fact that lots and lots of talented people do free work for things they just enjoy doing or for career advancement or both. It happens in the financial sector, the legal sector, the entertainment industry, the news industry, even in the sports industry. Think none of the coaches or team management personnel took unpaid or underpaid positions before they made it? If so, think again.

The whole thing is simply not cut and dry enough to storm the castle with a mob and pitchforks. But it's tough to fight a mob I guess. Much easier to roll with it and shout along with them.

You apparently didn't bother to read what I said. I didn't say I support the legal case. I said I support the cheerleader's right to earn minimum wage. If they're earning more than that (once everything has been considered, including the laws about what counts as work and what counts as compensation), great.

I just have no respect at all for the idea that they don't deserve at least minimum wage, whatever mental gyrations people go through to come to that conclusion.

 

[FUBAR]

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.

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

What service does Peyton Manning perform?

How many people pay money to see him perform?

How many pay money to see Tara Battiato perform?

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?

I never said they don't provide a service. But the comparison you're making is just silly.

Perhaps you can explain why?

First, you won't find any teams that choose to not employ a QB.

Second, you're fishing with a red herring.

 

[FUBAR]

then they should go do something else, its hard for me to feel sorry for them when theres line around the block of woman tripping other themselves to get the position.

Sadly, potentially, there could soon be a line of people around the block tripping over themselves to get your job for much less that you're being paid, too. If you're not in manual labor--you'll be competing with candidates in other countries, where the US minimum wage is the EQ of a 6 figure income.

no.

But the thread topic is divisive to start. What we believe a person "deserves" often has little to do with what they actually make.

Frankly, I don't think athletes "deserve" multi-million dollar contracts to play a game. BUT, they bring in the money to their organization and the free market allows them to take advantage. Cheerleaders just don't bring that kind of money into the business.

Should they make minimum wage or more? Probably.

Do they work hard and can the teams afford it? Sure.

Is it a social injustice if teams pay just as much as they have to in order to fill the squad? No.

 

[FUBAR]

I just have no respect at all for the idea that they don't deserve at least minimum wage, whatever mental gyrations people go through to come to that conclusion.

It's not mental gyrations. For most of us it's the fundamental belief that the free market should allow people to contract as they see fit plus the opinion that teams could fill these positions with volunteers.

 

[Pots]

I just have no respect at all for the idea that they don't deserve at least minimum wage, whatever mental gyrations people go through to come to that conclusion.

It's not mental gyrations. For most of us it's the fundamental belief that the free market should allow people to contract as they see fit plus the opinion that teams could fill these positions with volunteers.

 

[Godsbrother]

keep on keepin on with yourself bromigo i do not care what a woman does to make money i still treat them with respect and i know i am no looker and no way am i making the scratch most of the all stars around here are and fankly if i was looking at me i would say that old swcer has about jack squat to offer any one but one thing we all have no matter how much money you have or how awesome you are is respect and me well i choose to treat others with it like they are my brohan from another mothran that is just how my momma raised me so i guess go on and ask what do you expect and all that other mother jazz i think it does not hold water and you know it does not and all the logic and spinzone in the world will not change what you know in your heart so take that to the bank brohans

SWC deserves his own cable show.

Never read his posts anymore. The no punctuation thing has run it's course.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Kind of figured there wouldn't be a reasonable response to any of the questions I raised. You can try to boil it down to a simple hot button issue if you'd like to, but the fact is it's a situation that is MUCH more complex than it is being made out to be by you and the woman's legal team through the press. The compensation isn't all direct salary from the team, and even that is much higher than is being represented. "Fifty. Eight. Dollars" is about one 50th of what she earned just from the Raiders last year, so unless you know for a fact that she worked more than 50 full days (for 10 weeks of games), I'm not even sure what your concern is. Again, the $5/hour is a lawyer generated figure. Take it as gospel if you choose, but I prefer to do the math and see the gigantic gap between what you are claiming is an issue, and what she actually received. And NONE of that factors in appearance fee (which are a big deal) OR career exposure (which is a bigger deal). It also doesn't factor in the fact that lots and lots of talented people do free work for things they just enjoy doing or for career advancement or both. It happens in the financial sector, the legal sector, the entertainment industry, the news industry, even in the sports industry. Think none of the coaches or team management personnel took unpaid or underpaid positions before they made it? If so, think again.

The whole thing is simply not cut and dry enough to storm the castle with a mob and pitchforks. But it's tough to fight a mob I guess. Much easier to roll with it and shout along with them.

You apparently didn't bother to read what I said. I didn't say I support the legal case. I said I support the cheerleader's right to earn minimum wage. If they're earning more than that (once everything has been considered, including the laws about what counts as work and what counts as compensation), great.

I just have no respect at all for the idea that they don't deserve at least minimum wage, whatever mental gyrations people go through to come to that conclusion.

I read your response, I just think you were and are oversimplifying things. You seem totally hung up on this arbitrary dollar-per-hour thing, when in fact the law and common sense dictate that there are thousand different scenarios where other kinds of compensation are reasonable in addition to or in lieu of an hourly wage. Things like career exposure/networking opportunities, personal appearance fees, free season tickets, etc.

More than half of the country is exempt from the minimum wage for various reasons, most of which involve compensation other than hourly wage. But you cavalierly dismiss those things as "mental gyrations" and claim to have no respect for people who have a different opinion than you, just because some lawyer throws out some semi-arbitrary hourly figure designed specifically to incite the outrage we are now dealing with and which totally ignores all the other compensation the cheerleaders receive.

My personal opinion is that if you want to fight for someone's minimum wage, fight for wait staff, or farmworkers, or any one of a hundred exempted groups that don't CHOOSE to be in low paying positions for the perks/career boost and/or the "fun", but are in them because they need to pay the bills. The 24 year old, mostly college educated hotties hoping to be the next Teri Hatcher or Stacey Keibler will be OK. The 45 year old single mom working at the local restaurant is the one you need to look out for.

 

[Milkman]

Kind of figured there wouldn't be a reasonable response to any of the questions I raised. You can try to boil it down to a simple hot button issue if you'd like to, but the fact is it's a situation that is MUCH more complex than it is being made out to be by you and the woman's legal team through the press. The compensation isn't all direct salary from the team, and even that is much higher than is being represented. "Fifty. Eight. Dollars" is about one 50th of what she earned just from the Raiders last year, so unless you know for a fact that she worked more than 50 full days (for 10 weeks of games), I'm not even sure what your concern is. Again, the $5/hour is a lawyer generated figure. Take it as gospel if you choose, but I prefer to do the math and see the gigantic gap between what you are claiming is an issue, and what she actually received. And NONE of that factors in appearance fee (which are a big deal) OR career exposure (which is a bigger deal). It also doesn't factor in the fact that lots and lots of talented people do free work for things they just enjoy doing or for career advancement or both. It happens in the financial sector, the legal sector, the entertainment industry, the news industry, even in the sports industry. Think none of the coaches or team management personnel took unpaid or underpaid positions before they made it? If so, think again.

The whole thing is simply not cut and dry enough to storm the castle with a mob and pitchforks. But it's tough to fight a mob I guess. Much easier to roll with it and shout along with them.

You apparently didn't bother to read what I said. I didn't say I support the legal case. I said I support the cheerleader's right to earn minimum wage. If they're earning more than that (once everything has been considered, including the laws about what counts as work and what counts as compensation), great.

I just have no respect at all for the idea that they don't deserve at least minimum wage, whatever mental gyrations people go through to come to that conclusion.

I read your response, I just think you were and are oversimplifying things. You seem totally hung up on this arbitrary dollar-per-hour thing, when in fact the law and common sense dictate that there are thousand different scenarios where other kinds of compensation are reasonable in addition to or in lieu of an hourly wage. Things like career exposure/networking opportunities, personal appearance fees, free season tickets, etc.

More than half of the country is exempt from the minimum wage for various reasons, most of which involve compensation other than hourly wage. But you cavalierly dismiss those things as "mental gyrations" and claim to have no respect for people who have a different opinion than you, just because some lawyer throws out some semi-arbitrary hourly figure designed specifically to incite the outrage we are now dealing with and which totally ignores all the other compensation the cheerleaders receive.

My personal opinion is that if you want to fight for someone's minimum wage, fight for wait staff, or farmworkers, or any one of a hundred exempted groups that don't CHOOSE to be in low paying positions for the perks/career boost and/or the "fun", but are in them because they need to pay the bills. The 24 year old, mostly college educated hotties hoping to be the next Teri Hatcher or Stacey Keibler will be OK. The 45 year old single mom working at the local restaurant is the one you need to look out for.

Hmmm so if a business lets their employees eat there at a discount they should be able to pay them less? I mean we are already well on are way to being paid in cheeseburgers no need to rush it.

lol Hey I just thought of something. Where I work they do let me use the restroom. I mean I am using water to flush the toilet and wash my hands. Not to mention soap. The business I work for should be able to deduct that from my pay. amiright?

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Kind of figured there wouldn't be a reasonable response to any of the questions I raised. You can try to boil it down to a simple hot button issue if you'd like to, but the fact is it's a situation that is MUCH more complex than it is being made out to be by you and the woman's legal team through the press. The compensation isn't all direct salary from the team, and even that is much higher than is being represented. "Fifty. Eight. Dollars" is about one 50th of what she earned just from the Raiders last year, so unless you know for a fact that she worked more than 50 full days (for 10 weeks of games), I'm not even sure what your concern is. Again, the $5/hour is a lawyer generated figure. Take it as gospel if you choose, but I prefer to do the math and see the gigantic gap between what you are claiming is an issue, and what she actually received. And NONE of that factors in appearance fee (which are a big deal) OR career exposure (which is a bigger deal). It also doesn't factor in the fact that lots and lots of talented people do free work for things they just enjoy doing or for career advancement or both. It happens in the financial sector, the legal sector, the entertainment industry, the news industry, even in the sports industry. Think none of the coaches or team management personnel took unpaid or underpaid positions before they made it? If so, think again.

The whole thing is simply not cut and dry enough to storm the castle with a mob and pitchforks. But it's tough to fight a mob I guess. Much easier to roll with it and shout along with them.

You apparently didn't bother to read what I said. I didn't say I support the legal case. I said I support the cheerleader's right to earn minimum wage. If they're earning more than that (once everything has been considered, including the laws about what counts as work and what counts as compensation), great.

I just have no respect at all for the idea that they don't deserve at least minimum wage, whatever mental gyrations people go through to come to that conclusion.

I read your response, I just think you were and are oversimplifying things. You seem totally hung up on this arbitrary dollar-per-hour thing, when in fact the law and common sense dictate that there are thousand different scenarios where other kinds of compensation are reasonable in addition to or in lieu of an hourly wage. Things like career exposure/networking opportunities, personal appearance fees, free season tickets, etc.

More than half of the country is exempt from the minimum wage for various reasons, most of which involve compensation other than hourly wage. But you cavalierly dismiss those things as "mental gyrations" and claim to have no respect for people who have a different opinion than you, just because some lawyer throws out some semi-arbitrary hourly figure designed specifically to incite the outrage we are now dealing with and which totally ignores all the other compensation the cheerleaders receive.

My personal opinion is that if you want to fight for someone's minimum wage, fight for wait staff, or farmworkers, or any one of a hundred exempted groups that don't CHOOSE to be in low paying positions for the perks/career boost and/or the "fun", but are in them because they need to pay the bills. The 24 year old, mostly college educated hotties hoping to be the next Teri Hatcher or Stacey Keibler will be OK. The 45 year old single mom working at the local restaurant is the one you need to look out for.

Hmmm so if a business lets their employees eat there at a discount they should be able to pay them less? I mean we are already well on are way to being paid in cheeseburgers no need to rush it.

lol Hey I just thought of something. Where I work they do let me use the restroom. I mean I am using water to flush the toilet and wash my hands. Not to mention soap. The business I work for should be able to deduct that from my pay. amiright?

And if a Mercedes salesman is pulling in 500k/year in commissions, his employer has to make sure he's paying him 8 bucks an hour right? We can do this all day. The fact is, the law already says things other than an hourly wage matter, and it should. Otherwise, you need to outlaw college sports (some would say this isn't a bad idea, but I digress), all unpaid internships etc. right now.

Oh, and if you can't see the difference between providing soap for full time employee and a thousand dollars worth of NFL season tickets to a part-time seasonal employee, I'm not sure I can help you.

 

[Milkman]

I was provided training at an old job that helped me get a more lucrative job later on. Holy Schneikes probably thinks i should have worked there for free.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

I was provided training at an old job that helped me get a more lucrative job later on. Holy Schneider probably thinks i should have worked there for free.

Are you a beautiful woman? If so, yes.

 

[Milkman]

This thread is amazing.

 

[Concept Coop]

The 45 year old single mom working at the local restaurant is the one you need to look out for.

Why pick and choose? Let's look out for people.

 

[Concept Coop]

Sadly, potentially, there could soon be a line of people around the block tripping over themselves to get your job for much less that you're being paid, too. If you're not in manual labor--you'll be competing with candidates in other countries, where the US minimum wage is the EQ of a 6 figure income.

no.

I'm an analyst/programmer. My freelance market value has already been affected by this, at least.

Call Microsoft about your broken XBox and see who picks up. If Microsoft alone--one company!--replaced their out of country employee base with American workers--it would affect the pay of the entire customer service industry. If Apple did the same--same thing.

If companies didn't benefit from outsourcing, they wouldn't do it. The fact that they are costs American jobs, and even affects the market value of those of us lucky enough to have them.

 

[Concept Coop]

Cheerleaders just don't bring that kind of money into the business.

The math is in the OP. They bring millions.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I was provided training at an old job that helped me get a more lucrative job later on. Holy Schneikes probably thinks i should have worked there for free.

I don't think it was a requirement, but I think it was a legal and reasonable possibility depending on how much the employer got out of your work there and how much training you got. There is a big difference between some basic OJT and something more akin to true internship. No one is REQUIRED to take an unpaid internship, but it can often be beneficial to both parties.

Steven Spielberg was an unpaid intern.

Steve Jobs was an unpaid intern.

You guys can make all the ridiculous cases you want, talk about soap and simple training and try to make my position out to be some extremist position, but that's not the reality. NFL cheerleaders are not fast-food workers. Their situations aren't remotely like the run of the mill factory worker. They are part-time seasonal specialists in a specialized field with specialized compensation. They generally have better options from a strictly salary standpoint and opt against them. The minimum wage was simply never designed to be applied to situations like those and they aren't applied to many other similar situations we have been over a thousand times now.

 

[Concept Coop]

For most of us it's the fundamental belief that the free market should allow people to contract as they see fit ...

Being against a minimum wage is one thing. But not the conversation.

 

[Concept Coop]

They generally have better options from a strictly salary standpoint and opt against them.

Study please.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Cheerleaders just don't bring that kind of money into the business.

The math is in the OP. They bring millions.

If that were true in a vacuum, why wouldn't all the teams have them? Did the Steelers just decide they don't need that extra couple of million? That statement reeks of the same lawyer-math that generated the $5/hour figure. Besides, the first movie Spielberg worked on probably brought in millions too.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

They generally have better options from a strictly salary standpoint and opt against them.

Study please.

Study what? The plaintiff in the suit left a $12/hour cheering job to join the Raiderettes. Ask yourself why she did that. The only two possibilities that come to mind are that she was hoping for better exposure, or she thought it would be more fun. Either way, she had at least one better option from a strictly hourly wage standpoint. Without hiring an investigator in the career options for every other cheerleader out there, I can guess MOST if not all of them could make a better wage elsewhere.