KD in CA Posted April 27, 2014 Posted April 27, 2014 This whole thing is just embarrassing. I don't care who is right or wrong, it is a PR nightmare and the bills need to fix this ASAP. Go line by line through every complaint and address it. Then pay them and make this issue go away. I think they just did. Cheerleaders are history and this story will fall out of the news cycle within another day or two. The settlement will be done quietly several weeks or months from now.
John in Jax Posted April 27, 2014 Posted April 27, 2014 Bills did not underpay, it was the contractor they hired that underpaid and I know it's the internet but don't you think your line about "stupid hags" is a little over the top? The contractor responsible for the Jills is shady to say the very least. What I cannot understand is how an organization like the Bills could permit some of the sordid BS described in the article from occurring. There is something in business called "reputation risk" and if you don't always have an even strain not only on your business, but also the subcontractors that represent you directly or indirectly, your setting yourself up for potential $$$ losses or PR headaches. One of the main points of the lawsuit is that the Buffalo Bills are in fact the "employer", and I tend to agree with that notion. Do you really think that the Buffalo Bills organization just turned over TOTAL control of the Jills to Stejohn (and the company before them), and let them run it any way they wanted to? Get real. I'm pretty confident that the Buffalo Bills had FINAL approval for: the rulebook for the Jills, the costume design for the Jills, when & where Jills could make public appearances, the music the Jills would dance to at the game, how many tickets/parking spaces Jills would get for games, etc. This suit is likely to change how teams do business with their cheerleaders/dancers all across the league, and that's probably a good thing. Now, for those of you saying that you never pay any attention to the Jills.....SERIOUSLY!? With the way the Bills have played over the past 10+ years, I might think that the Jills would be the highlight of a game at RWS.
timtebow15 Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 There will be a lot of rich cheerleaders soon. The DOL is really looking at contractor's vs employees and this is one of the worst abuses you could imagine. Ten or twenty years ago some of these statements might fly such as they knew what they were getting into or they signed a contract but not now. Do you know how much tax revenue this has cost the federal government? As employees they should have been paid hourly at minimum wage and OT if applicable. And you must be paid for charitable work if you are "volunteering" in the same capacity as your job description. I'm not sure if the Bills have successfully shielded themselves from this by hiring a company to supply the entertainment but they have the deep pockets so the lawyers will go after them. Cheerleading squads just got a lot smaller if they continue to exist at all!
Kellyto83TD Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 One of the main points of the lawsuit is that the Buffalo Bills are in fact the "employer", and I tend to agree with that notion. Do you really think that the Buffalo Bills organization just turned over TOTAL control of the Jills to Stejohn (and the company before them), and let them run it any way they wanted to? Get real. I'm pretty confident that the Buffalo Bills had FINAL approval for: the rulebook for the Jills, the costume design for the Jills, when & where Jills could make public appearances, the music the Jills would dance to at the game, how many tickets/parking spaces Jills would get for games, etc. This suit is likely to change how teams do business with their cheerleaders/dancers all across the league, and that's probably a good thing. Now, for those of you saying that you never pay any attention to the Jills.....SERIOUSLY!? With the way the Bills have played over the past 10+ years, I might think that the Jills would be the highlight of a game at RWS. Yep what few teams left that had them will dump them, thank God. There will be a lot of rich cheerleaders soon. The DOL is really looking at contractor's vs employees and this is one of the worst abuses you could imagine. Ten or twenty years ago some of these statements might fly such as they knew what they were getting into or they signed a contract but not now. Do you know how much tax revenue this has cost the federal government? As employees they should have been paid hourly at minimum wage and OT if applicable. And you must be paid for charitable work if you are "volunteering" in the same capacity as your job description. I'm not sure if the Bills have successfully shielded themselves from this by hiring a company to supply the entertainment but they have the deep pockets so the lawyers will go after them. Cheerleading squads just got a lot smaller if they continue to exist at all! They won't be rich at all. They have to validate damages, go to mediation and have a Judge/Arbitrator etc make a decision. If they can't settle it goes before a judge. This lawsuit wont go that far and even if it did, no way in hell can they show legit enough damages to be 'rich'. The idiots will get 5-10k each after attorney's fees is my guess. Oh and its taxed as well. Only if its personal injury is it not taxed anymore. Punitive are taxed as well. So what they really get is the Jills are gone and 15 min of fame. Good job morons.
timtebow15 Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 The guy sitting next to her....I assume that's her lawyer....is making some very unusual/psychotic faces during the interview. WTH is wrong with him? LOL I agree - talk about uncomfortable situations! He should be fired for being creepy! Yep what few teams left that had them will dump them, thank God. They won't be rich at all. They have to validate damages, go to mediation and have a Judge/Arbitrator etc make a decision. If they can't settle it goes before a judge. This lawsuit wont go that far and even if it did, no way in hell can they show legit enough damages to be 'rich'. The idiots will get 5-10k each after attorney's fees is my guess. Oh and its taxed as well. Only if its personal injury is it not taxed anymore. Punitive are taxed as well. So what they really get is the Jills are gone and 15 min of fame. Good job morons. Well, rich is a matter of opinion. They won't get millions out of it but they will get back pay for up to six years and they may get personal damages for some of the other aspects of the suit. It's actually not their fault and I'm not referring to the tests and standards and such but they were taken advantage of as independent contractors. Even a simple thing as not being covered by worker's comp comes into play. If they got hurt performing they were out of luck. Whether or not anyone likes cheerleading or not they should have been paid for their time like any other employee.
Flutie Flakes Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 (edited) One of the main points of the lawsuit is that the Buffalo Bills are in fact the "employer", and I tend to agree with that notion. Do you really think that the Buffalo Bills organization just turned over TOTAL control of the Jills to Stejohn (and the company before them), and let them run it any way they wanted to? Get real. The Buffalo Bills IN FACT were not the employer as of 1986. The cheerleaders were employed by a sub-contractor for the Bills, Stejon Productions Corp and prior to that, Citadel Communications Co. All parties including the Bills are named in the suit because they contracted Stejon and appeared to have failed to provide the proper due diligence in overseeing the Jills operation (they also have deeper pockets). The Bills lack of direct management and proper due diligence is what I found so hard to believe and was the point I was trying to make in my prior post that you must have missed. Bills were included because of the added publicity garnered by naming an NFL team and the fact that this team is currently in the process of being sold and there can be no outstanding legal entanglements when ownership is transferred. A judge would more than likely dismiss the case against the Bills, but I doubt they would want to take a stand on this in court based on the negative attention and the fact that this would hold up the sale of the team. They will work out a monetary resolution and move on. Edited April 28, 2014 by Flutie Flakes
TheLynchTrain Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 One of the main points of the lawsuit is that the Buffalo Bills are in fact the "employer", and I tend to agree with that notion. Do you really think that the Buffalo Bills organization just turned over TOTAL control of the Jills to Stejohn (and the company before them), and let them run it any way they wanted to? Get real. I'm pretty confident that the Buffalo Bills had FINAL approval for: the rulebook for the Jills, the costume design for the Jills, when & where Jills could make public appearances, the music the Jills would dance to at the game, how many tickets/parking spaces Jills would get for games, etc. This suit is likely to change how teams do business with their cheerleaders/dancers all across the league, and that's probably a good thing. Now, for those of you saying that you never pay any attention to the Jills.....SERIOUSLY!? With the way the Bills have played over the past 10+ years, I might think that the Jills would be the highlight of a game at RWS. Exactly, I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand - there were plenty of people that made quite a bit of money off of them. All the Bills/contractor pass through needed to do was pay minimum wage and this wouldn't be an issue.
Trader Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Too much has been spent on this topic but I took a quick look at the handbook. Do we really have a problem with this? Some women don't have the kind of parents that teach these fundamental things. Most of it is how to behave in public and some basic feminine health stuff. The crux of the problem is the wage issue and they have a valid point the rest is just fluff. If I were coaching a young lady who was in Sales or Public Relations I would recommend this to her. It's a little too specific but it's pretty good advice.
TheLynchTrain Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Too much has been spent on this topic but I took a quick look at the handbook. Do we really have a problem with this? Some women don't have the kind of parents that teach these fundamental things. Most of it is how to behave in public and some basic feminine health stuff. The crux of the problem is the wage issue and they have a valid point the rest is just fluff. If I were coaching a young lady who was in Sales or Public Relations I would recommend this to her. It's a little too specific but it's pretty good advice. Wait, so you would tell your female employee this? "12. When menstruating, use a product that right for your menstrual flow. A tampon too big can irritate and develop fungus. A product left in too long can cause bacteria or fungus build up. Products can be changed at least every 4 hours. Except when sleeping, they can be left in for the night." Let me know how that goes.
Mr. WEO Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 One of the main points of the lawsuit is that the Buffalo Bills are in fact the "employer", and I tend to agree with that notion. Do you really think that the Buffalo Bills organization just turned over TOTAL control of the Jills to Stejohn (and the company before them), and let them run it any way they wanted to? Get real. I'm pretty confident that the Buffalo Bills had FINAL approval for: the rulebook for the Jills, the costume design for the Jills, when & where Jills could make public appearances, the music the Jills would dance to at the game, how many tickets/parking spaces Jills would get for games, etc. This suit is likely to change how teams do business with their cheerleaders/dancers all across the league, and that's probably a good thing. Now, for those of you saying that you never pay any attention to the Jills.....SERIOUSLY!? With the way the Bills have played over the past 10+ years, I might think that the Jills would be the highlight of a game at RWS. You hire a contractor to renovate your house. You tell him exactly what you want everything to look like, the floors, the tile, the landscaping the appliances, etc. You tell him that you want the job done in a very specific time frame--which means that he agrees that he and his workers will do no other jobs until yours is finished. You tell them you want no music played while on the job site and you tell him all workers must leave their shirts on at all times and can't wear shorts. You tell him when his workers may arrive each day at the job site and when they have to be out. 6 years later, your contractor's laborers sue him for illegally low pay and they name you as a co-defendent in the suit. I'm "pretty confident" you would tell them to go F themselves.
What a Tuel Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Is the handbook actually a set of rules? Or is it just tips for them? It reads like a set of tips to avoid problems.
John in Jax Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 You hire a contractor to renovate your house. You tell him exactly what you want everything to look like, the floors, the tile, the landscaping the appliances, etc. You tell him that you want the job done in a very specific time frame--which means that he agrees that he and his workers will do no other jobs until yours is finished. You tell them you want no music played while on the job site and you tell him all workers must leave their shirts on at all times and can't wear shorts. You tell him when his workers may arrive each day at the job site and when they have to be out. 6 years later, your contractor's laborers sue him for illegally low pay and they name you as a co-defendent in the suit. I'm "pretty confident" you would tell them to go F themselves. Apples and Oranges. The Jills worked EXCLUSIVELY for the Buffalo Bills. The home contractor, and his employees, can go work for anyone. The Jills could NOT even go do modeling/acting work (Out of their Jills uniform) without written approval from Stejon AND the Buffalo Bills, so their economic viability was definitely affected. The Jills, by their presence at special events & appearances AT OTHER LOCATIONS than RWS, brought in additional revenue to Stejon, and presumably, to the Buffalo Bills. Of course, when the contractor is not at your home, but off on other projects, you don't get anything. And for your scenario above, I'd bet that you'd have a real hard time finding a contractor to work under such restrictions (no music, no shorts, and "work exclusively on my home 'til it's finished.").
TC in St. Louis Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Glad to get rid of them. I go to football games to watch football, not those airheads.
Rob's House Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Wait, so you would tell your female employee this? "12. When menstruating, use a product that right for your menstrual flow. A tampon too big can irritate and develop fungus. A product left in too long can cause bacteria or fungus build up. Products can be changed at least every 4 hours. Except when sleeping, they can be left in for the night." Let me know how that goes. Are you 12? A woman's menstrual cycle may be icky to you, but to adults it's just a part of life. What is it about this that so offends you?
RuntheDamnBall Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Are you 12? A woman's menstrual cycle may be icky to you, but to adults it's just a part of life. What is it about this that so offends you? It's just a part of life but it's also none of an employer's business?
Rob's House Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 It's just a part of life but it's also none of an employer's business? Again, what's offensive about it? It's not a mandate. They're not doing tampon inspections. It's nothing more than a guideline on proper hygiene maintenance that could just as easily be printed on the side of a box of tampons. So what are you complaining about?
RuntheDamnBall Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 Again, what's offensive about it? It's not a mandate. They're not doing tampon inspections. It's nothing more than a guideline on proper hygiene maintenance that could just as easily be printed on the side of a box of tampons. So what are you complaining about? I don't know. You think no dudes would think it a tad ridiculous if they were told at work how to keep their johnsons clean? It's just proper hygiene maintenance.
Rob's House Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 I don't know. You think no dudes would think it a tad ridiculous if they were told at work how to keep their johnsons clean? It's just proper hygiene maintenance. No, not really.
RuntheDamnBall Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 No, not really. Can I challenge someone here to make some posters and put them up in the men's room at their workplace? Preferably a supervisor? We've got to make something good out of this... do it for (social) science.
PromoTheRobot Posted April 28, 2014 Posted April 28, 2014 One thing for sure the Bills are getting lots of press over this lawsuit. Even John Oliver made fun of it on his new show "Last Week Tonight."
Recommended Posts