Johnny DangerFace Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 Just wanted to say thank you for using this phrase correctly, as opposed to the other 99.9% of the population that inadvertently states the exact opposite of what they really meant to say. That is all. I could care less about cheerleaders
MILFHUNTER#518 Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 In other news, the schedule will be released tonight at 8pm on NFLN CH 212 on Direc TV
MattPie Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 How in the world do you all think it is a hobby when they are professionals who earn an income for their service, and people pay to see them (not at the games, but in their appearances where people PAY money to book them, money they don't see). My hobbies, usually cost ME moeny. I don't get paid. Cheerleaders get paid. People don't PAY to see me do my hobby. People PAY to book cheerleaders. someone explain how it is a hobby and the similarities? Playing hockey or paintball earns you money? People pay to book you so they can watch you, and then you don't see that income? You are employed by a contractor to do your hobby? I have friends that do (or have done) low-level motorsports racing. They all like to say, "I'm a professional (car/rally/motorcycle) racer, in my career I've made hundreds of dollars". A very similar (and much better) example are bands that do bar-gigs. People pay covers, buy drinks, and some come to see those people play, but the band gets a very small cut (if any!) of the total revenue for the night. It wasn't that they were told to wash their lady parts, it's that they were told HOW to. They were told many very specific things. They were being told to change their lives for ###### money. I hate to say it, but it's a choice. Continuing on the musician theme, I could be a house musician at a fancy club or bar in my spare time (think piano bar or strings). While I don't think they'd mention how to wash my wedding tackle (unless I was really rank), they'd certainly have requirements on how I dress and my grooming. All for (probably) crappy money. The NFL does make billions and billions of dollars though. How hard would it be to pay each cheerleader $20,000 for 16 weeks? In a perfect world, sure. But it's supply and demand, there are plenty of cheerleaders that will work for the low wages, why pay more?
ubkev Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 The NFL does make billions and billions of dollars though. How hard would it be to pay each cheerleader $20,000 for 16 weeks? Because that would be a waste of money. If all the cheerleaders in the NFL went away tomorrow it would not effect the sale of a single ticket. And there are 36 Jills, at 20 grand a piece that's 720k. I think that's a little more than the NFL would like to invest in an unimportant side show.
darksabre Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 I have friends that do (or have done) low-level motorsports racing. They all like to say, "I'm a professional (car/rally/motorcycle) racer, in my career I've made hundreds of dollars". A very similar (and much better) example are bands that do bar-gigs. People pay covers, buy drinks, and some come to see those people play, but the band gets a very small cut (if any!) of the total revenue for the night. I hate to say it, but it's a choice. Continuing on the musician theme, I could be a house musician at a fancy club or bar in my spare time (think piano bar or strings). While I don't think they'd mention how to wash my wedding tackle (unless I was really rank), they'd certainly have requirements on how I dress and my grooming. All for (probably) crappy money. In a perfect world, sure. But it's supply and demand, there are plenty of cheerleaders that will work for the low wages, why pay more? Bingo.
Johnny DangerFace Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) Yea a musician that is employed that is required to do 30 side gigs and then the musician doesn't receive compensation for the side gigs. That's a more accurate analogy. Edit: it's not a big deal to me, I'm just shocked at the responses. These people aren't being paid minimum wage. All this bs about supply and demand and hobbies is ridiculous. There are federal regulations concerning this. If someone deemed your job a "hobby" and there was someone willing to do it for 1 dollar an hour (supply and demand), it doesn't make it okay. Edited April 23, 2014 by Numark
LastPommerFan Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 independent contractor agreements are not license to violate minimum wage laws. I expect the Bills to settle.
Johnny DangerFace Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 (edited) independent contractor agreements are not license to violate minimum wage laws. I expect the Bills to settle. I could be wrong, but when you are subject to jiggle tests, have a strict rules handbook, have required appearances, have mandatory practices/shifts, have an employer-employee relationship, then you are not an independent contractor but rather an employee? And this means you are by law required to be paid minimum wage. (Even if people thinks it's a hobby, or if they are doing what they are good at, looking pretty and earning others money) http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Small-Businesses-&-Self-Employed/Independent-Contractor-Defined Edit: reading a little bit more, but it seems pretty clear they are being paid as independent contractors and being treated as employees. Fortunately, in labor laws definitions don't include "then don't do it" or "it's a hobby" or "supply and demand, if someone is willing to do it for less then it's okay to pay less" Edited April 23, 2014 by Numark
Weave Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 independent contractor agreements are not license to violate minimum wage laws. I expect the Bills to settle. I could see a co-employment issues cropping up in court as well.
Andrew Amerk Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 What's the point of posting this? The same point of most posts: to spark conversation.
SwampD Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 Since when have musicians been paid properly?
MattPie Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 I could be wrong, but when you are subject to jiggle tests, have a strict rules handbook, have required appearances, have mandatory practices/shifts, have an employer-employee relationship, then you are not an independent contractor but rather an employee? And this means you are by law required to be paid minimum wage. (Even if people thinks it's a hobby, or if they are doing what they are good at, looking pretty and earning others money) http://www.irs.gov/B...tractor-Defined Edit: reading a little bit more, but it seems pretty clear they are being paid as independent contractors and being treated as employees. Fortunately, in labor laws definitions don't include "then don't do it" or "it's a hobby" or "supply and demand, if someone is willing to do it for less then it's okay to pay less" The next "handbook" will be called "terms of contract employment". I don't love it because of the chances of abuse, but a company (the Bills) has the right to put terms into the contract a contractor signs. In a more normal job they'd be things like "showing up to work for these hours", a dress (and possibly appearance) code, etc. And it's up to the contractor to decide if the contract terms are acceptable. I don't like it, but it's the way many businesses work these days to avoid the entanglements of actual "employees".
Weave Posted April 23, 2014 Report Posted April 23, 2014 The next "handbook" will be called "terms of contract employment". I don't love it because of the chances of abuse, but a company (the Bills) has the right to put terms into the contract a contractor signs. In a more normal job they'd be things like "showing up to work for these hours", a dress (and possibly appearance) code, etc. And it's up to the contractor to decide if the contract terms are acceptable. I don't like it, but it's the way many businesses work these days to avoid the entanglements of actual "employees". Every "term of contract" dictated by the Bills of the how, when, where of being a Buffalo Jill puts the Bills at risk of liability for a co-employment lawsuit. Basically, the more the Bills dictate the terms of being a Jill, the more likely the Bills will be seen as the true employer of the Jills. Any court case resulting in the Bills being shown as the true employer of the Jills would open the Bills up to a class action suit for back wages and benefits.
WildCard Posted April 24, 2014 Author Report Posted April 24, 2014 (edited) No MNF, no Thanksgiving, and an overall very difficult schedule....as a Buffalo fan I demand McDavid I'll predict 7-9, with a 3-3 divisional record, splitting with the Jets. The other part of that shouldn't be hard to guess Edited April 24, 2014 by WildCard
Ghost of Dwight Drane Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 It seems like the same story every year....get to at least 3-3 to start the season, 4-2 would be great....then a 6 week breather inbetween where they are all winnable...then hope to go into NE at 9-6 with them not needing the win. In reality...2-4, they go into the bye at 3-5, but talking a big talk....go .500 the next 4 and then win at Oakland....6-10.....
darksabre Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 It seems like the same story every year....get to at least 3-3 to start the season, 4-2 would be great....then a 6 week breather inbetween where they are all winnable...then hope to go into NE at 9-6 with them not needing the win. In reality...2-4, they go into the bye at 3-5, but talking a big talk....go .500 the next 4 and then win at Oakland....6-10..... You need to print this out and put it on your wall so you remember you said it. Because it's going to happen.
Weave Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 You need to print this out and put it on your wall so you remember you said it. Because it's going to happen. Oh, he'll remember. And he's probably bookmarked the post already so he can remind us in January. :P
Cereal Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 (edited) No MNF, no Thanksgiving, and an overall very difficult schedule....as a Buffalo fan I demand McDavid I'll predict 7-9, with a 3-3 divisional record, splitting with the Jets. The other part of that shouldn't be hard to guess Yep, finally get Thanksgiving back after I think a three-year drought? Not including last year's Toronto game. But, no Week 16 or 17.... I can usually count on ONE of those two weeks while home for Christmas..... :censored: Edit: I'm talking about the timing of our home games, of course. Edited April 24, 2014 by Cereal
nobody Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 I see an 8-8 season. L, W, L, W/L or L/W, L, W/L or L/W, Bye, W, W, W, W, L, L, W, L
Hoss Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 (edited) I'll get laughed at for this, but I'll say 5-11... Wins: one Miami, one NYJ, Minnesota, Oakland, one against one of Houston, Detroit or Cleveland. Edited April 24, 2014 by Tankalicious
26CornerBlitz Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 (edited) I'll get laughed at for this, but I'll say 5-12... Wins: one Miami, one NYJ, Minnesota, Oakland, one against one of Houston, Detroit or Cleveland. 17 game season? :lol: Edited April 24, 2014 by 26CornerBlitz
WildCard Posted April 24, 2014 Author Report Posted April 24, 2014 I'll get laughed at for this, but I'll say 5-12... Wins: one Miami, one NYJ, Minnesota, Oakland, one against one of Houston, Detroit or Cleveland. Mostly because that's impossible. But I did have 5-11 the first time I went through it, lowered my standards quite a bit though
Hoss Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 17 game season? :lol: 5-11 with a playoff loss. Duh.
26CornerBlitz Posted April 24, 2014 Report Posted April 24, 2014 5-11 with a playoff loss. Duh. A 5-11 Bills team makes the playoffs.... Okay now! :rolleyes:
Recommended Posts