You have indeed zeroed in on the relevant issues. I agree that the comp portion will be a function of how much 'abuse' of the system takes place. As I pointed out once upon a time, while I couldn't remember a single case of a debilitating injury, IC dancers like myself routinely continue to work with broken toes, sprains etc. because a.) we need the income and b.) the club would retaliate in some form or another if we didn't show up. If 'employee' treatment precludes both a.) and b.) from happening, then it will indeed be curious to see how many girls attempt to 'milk' the system.To my surprise, she said that on the job injuries were very rare, and to my recollection she couldn't remember a single completely debilitating injury suffered by anyone. Given her experience in the profession, I beleive this to be an accurate account, and an illuminating one. First, it demonstrates that the need for true workers comp and disability is quite low. Second, it goes to show how the employment related costs of these coverages are somehow extremely inflated (even if at far less than the numbers quoted by Melanie above). Third, it shows that when given no alternative, people either tend to act in a much more responsible way or simple grin and bear it when they fuck up.
In the case of unemployment costs, this will also turn into a potential cesspool of abuse - mostly depending upon how local unemployment offices choose to classify 'other work' that dancers are qualified to perform. Dancers who choose to portray the 'Hollywood Stereotype' during their unemployment interview may indeed be able to collect unemployment for a very long time, as they may be deemed incompatible with 'straight job' alternatives.



Reply With Quote
Probably pay for their cows with CASH too.


Bookmarks