snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > Non-UL Chat > Amusement Bark

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 25 April 2014, 09:15 PM
Hero_Mike's Avatar
Hero_Mike Hero_Mike is offline
 
 
Join Date: 06 April 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ & Hamilton, ON
Posts: 7,265
Default

Musicians and public performers of all sorts perform a great deal of work "off the clock" as preparation for their paid performance. Consider a symphony musician - do they get paid for each hour or two (or more) that they practice each day, or do they get paid for the performance and rehearsal only? I presume it is the latter and that they get paid well for that performance, factoring into it the unpaid hours of practice and training. I imagine that the same would be true for dancers or other performers who have to keep training to maintain their physical fitness for their current role and the next one. It's not that unique.

FWIW, if you look at the profiles of cheerleaders you will find that many of them have one or more other jobs - the cheerleading (regardless of how much it pays) doesn't take up a whole work week, and that many work in jobs (other dance/performance, physical fitness training) which complements this work. It'd be very hard, I think, to have a non-related full-time job, where the person would still have to practice and do the required physical training outside of that 40-hour workweek.

That's not to say that there shouldn't be some payment for this - even a flat "appearance fee" would be appropriate - but then the lines blur about employment, health care, benefits, and so on. While NFL cheerleaders do not typically perform a lot of high-risk acrobatics (if any), there is the possibility of getting injured on the job. Unruly fans in some cities throw things at their own teams, and there's no reason why that wouldn't include the cheerleaders.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 25 April 2014, 09:17 PM
Errata's Avatar
Errata Errata is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 13,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey Blue View Post
As to whether or not they are necessary.. I guess it can be debated but bottom line you could have football without cheerleaders, you cannot have football without football players.
Nothing about football is even remotely necessary.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 25 April 2014, 09:19 PM
Beachlife!'s Avatar
Beachlife! Beachlife! is offline
 
Join Date: 22 June 2001
Location: Lansing, MI
Posts: 28,282
Default

Americorp is another interesting example. It is considered volunteer work, but places a lot of job-like restrictions on volunteers while paying far less than minimum wage.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 25 April 2014, 09:26 PM
Mickey Blue's Avatar
Mickey Blue Mickey Blue is offline
 
Join Date: 01 February 2004
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,571
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
Nothing about football is even remotely necessary.
Really? Ok let me try again; if you are going to have a sport, you have to have players to play that sport. There are lots of other factors that go into sports as entertainment but one of the necessary ones are players.

Yes, sports aren't necessary, I get it, but we are not talking about necessary to the greater good, or to humanity as a whole, or to culture or survival (and I assume you can figure that out). We are talking about necessary.. To sports.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 25 April 2014, 10:55 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
Nothing about football is even remotely necessary.
That is a completely irrelevant statement.

Football, and related sports are businesses. Most businesses are not "remotely necessary". They exist because people are willing to give them money for their product. Your cell phone, cable TV, car, comfy chair, novel and bananas are all not "remotely necessary".

If the cheerleaders actually increase the revenue for the team then they should strike and force a reasonable wage. If their affect on the income of the organization is minimal then they already have about the best arrangement that they are likely to get.

Since it appears that currently they are darn near not paid at all, and if they are being mistreated, then why do they keep cheerleading? It is not like say a miner working in unsafe conditions for low wages who can't quit because a crappy job is better than starving. Bottom line it looks to me like even with the minimal wage, and even with a fair amount of stupidity from management, most of these women think they are being "paid" enough.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 25 April 2014, 10:57 PM
Errata's Avatar
Errata Errata is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 13,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mickey Blue View Post
We are talking about necessary.. To sports.
And that's always going to be the weak link. You can't get around how unnecessary the whole thing is.

I could agree that you can play unnecessary games of moving balls around without having unnecessary dancers shaking pom poms. Some teams have done precisely that. But most have the dancers and choose to pay them sub minimum wage for their time. That's not cool. Either pay them or don't have them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmy101_again View Post
Football, and related sports are businesses. Most businesses are not "remotely necessary". They exist because people are willing to give them money for their product. Your cell phone, cable TV, car, comfy chair, novel and bananas are all not "remotely necessary".
Most of the things you mentioned are at least remotely necessary. Are you going to argue that throwing balls is as essential to life as telecommunications, transportation, or fruit?

Football players have a very, very silly job. Much sillier than cell phones. For which they get paid a lot of money. You can argue that entertainment fills a valuable role, sure, you're just better off leaving "necessary" out of the discussion altogether when you're talking about something so whimsical. It's not like you're comparing the necessity level of cheerleaders to doctors, teachers, or plumbers. You're comparing them to guys who run back and forth to amuse you, and the dancers aren't very much less necessary than that.

Last edited by Errata; 25 April 2014 at 11:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 25 April 2014, 11:00 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
Either pay them or don't have them.
Why do you want to inhibit the cheerleaders ability to do what they want?
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 25 April 2014, 11:04 PM
Errata's Avatar
Errata Errata is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 13,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmy101_again View Post
Why do you want to inhibit the cheerleaders ability to do what they want?
Why do you want fast food workers to not have the choice of whether they want to work for $3 an hour. Do you like unemployment?
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 25 April 2014, 11:15 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
Why do you want fast food workers to not have the choice of whether they want to work for $3 an hour. Do you like unemployment?
That's a great analogy! Except for one thing, the fast food worker makes $7+ and may well be using that job to support themselves. The cheerleaders are basically unpaid. To say that you can't quit your non-paying job for financial reasons is, well, kind of stupid.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 25 April 2014, 11:23 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
And that's always going to be the weak link. You can't get around how unnecessary the whole thing is.

I could agree that you can play unnecessary games of moving balls around without having unnecessary dancers shaking pom poms. Some teams have done precisely that. But most have the dancers and choose to pay them sub minimum wage for their time. That's not cool. Either pay them or don't have them.



Most of the things you mentioned are at least remotely necessary. Are you going to argue that throwing balls is as essential to life as telecommunications, transportation, or fruit?

Football players have a very, very silly job. Much sillier than cell phones. For which they get paid a lot of money. You can argue that entertainment fills a valuable role, sure, you're just better off leaving "necessary" out of the discussion altogether when you're talking about something so whimsical. It's not like you're comparing the necessity level of cheerleaders to doctors, teachers, or plumbers. You're comparing them to guys who run back and forth to amuse you, and the dancers aren't very much less necessary than that.
The key is that football makes a big pile of money. Whether that actually reflects "need" or not is irrelevant. If football is irrelevant than cheerleaders, and their pay scale, are also irrelevant. But if the cheerleaders go away millions will still watch football, which pretty much defines just how "necessary" it is.
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 25 April 2014, 11:34 PM
Errata's Avatar
Errata Errata is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 13,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmy101_again View Post
That's a great analogy! Except for one thing, the fast food worker makes $7+ and may well be using that job to support themselves.
Very sharp-witted observations, there. They are paid either the legal minimum, or very close to it. Your argument about taking away choice is precisely the same as one used by those arguing to abolish the minimum wage. Which, if done, would leave some fast food workers in the position of either choosing either to work for significantly less than they do now or to make nothing at all. See, eliminating the minimum wage is all about empowering low income workers to have more choice. Except it's not really a choice, because those people need money to live.

But I suppose cheerleaders live on fairy dust and don't have such mundane concerns. Surprisingly enough, some of them do need money. Cheerleaders don't make no wages, they make low wages. More than minimum wage if you only look at game day, but less than minimum wage if you count the weeks of mandatory practice required to be able to perform for pay. They are facing extremely stringent requirements from their employers in their "off time" that they aren't being paid for, which is equivalent to making fast food workers work overtime and only paying for half their hours.

As you also helpfully pointed out, their employers are making a big pile of money, and exploiting their services for peanuts. Their employers are making money off of them and their likenesses. They should have at least the same rights as any other employee.

Last edited by Errata; 25 April 2014 at 11:41 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 26 April 2014, 10:17 AM
kitap's Avatar
kitap kitap is offline
 
Join Date: 20 January 2001
Location: Tucson, AZ
Posts: 9,610
Whalephant

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
Nothing about football is even remotely necessary.
Well no. But that doesn't mean people don't like to watch and/or play it and that it's worthless to all humanity and should be abolished. I could say stockbrokers aren't remotely necessary either but hey. Lots of people think otherwise.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 26 April 2014, 06:21 PM
jimmy101_again jimmy101_again is offline
 
Join Date: 29 December 2005
Location: Greenwood, IN
Posts: 6,793
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Errata View Post
But I suppose cheerleaders live on fairy dust and don't have such mundane concerns. Surprisingly enough, some of them do need money. Cheerleaders don't make no wages, they make low wages. More than minimum wage if you only look at game day, but less than minimum wage if you count the weeks of mandatory practice required to be able to perform for pay. They are facing extremely stringent requirements from their employers in their "off time" that they aren't being paid for, which is equivalent to making fast food workers work overtime and only paying for half their hours.
Looking at the numbers quoted they appear to make no net wages. Figuring in haircuts, manicures, time in the gym to maintain weight, travel costs etc. and they are loosing money on their cheerleading "job". So they must be living on "fairy dust", or probably more likely other income. Sorry, but no matter how you cut it they are not being forced to have the job to make ends meet. Indeed, if they quit their cheerleading job it would be easier to make ends meet.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 26 April 2014, 06:32 PM
Chloe's Avatar
Chloe Chloe is offline
 
Join Date: 13 September 2004
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 39,316
Default

You should point it out to them, as I bet they haven't realized that. Math is hard.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 26 April 2014, 06:33 PM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 11,992
Default

So that makes how they're treated okay?
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 26 April 2014, 08:37 PM
Sylvanz's Avatar
Sylvanz Sylvanz is offline
 
Join Date: 23 June 2001
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,934
Default

Yes, because they don't have to have the job. If you don't like it toots there's a million like ya' out there who'd love to be in your shoes. Oh, and don't get me started on what happens if one of them did a nude photo shoot or anything like that. It's the same thing with pageant queens etc. We're gonna' judge you on your looks, have you parade around half naked for our organization, but don't you dare think of going fully naked for your own benefit. The whole thing is so exploitative if makes me ill.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Eating Disorder Orthorexia on the Rise A Turtle Named Mack The Doctor Is In 5 22 January 2016 03:52 PM
Chocolate Toothpaste and the Rise of WTF Flavors snopes The Bad Gastronomer 23 03 March 2014 08:19 AM
Texas judge rules for cheerleaders in Bible banner suit snopes Moot Court 19 14 May 2013 11:07 PM
NFL cheerleaders "Kick Breast Cancer" campaign Jenn Fauxtography 1 13 November 2010 01:04 AM
Holiday suicide rise a myth snopes Medical 1 29 December 2006 06:53 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.