She got fired for working as a stripper?

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/11/sarah-tressler-sues-houston-chronicle_n_1509089.html

It's just not right to be mean to a pretty gal like her!

On the bright side, she might be at the club more now. If I were a guy I'd be at her stage :-)

Maybe she got fired cuz of jealousy?

Edited May 14, 2012 by JenniferOfDenver
Better link

[geecue2]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/11/sarah-tressler-sues-houston-chronicle_n_1509089.html

It's just not right to be mean to a pretty gal like her!

On the bright side, she might be at the club more now. If I were a guy I'd be at her stage :-)

Maybe she got fired cuz of jealousy?

Nice pics she is probably better off now.

[Guest sophiarose]

Eh, she chose not to disclose what she did on the side. In most employment contracts ,not disclosing that is grounds for firing. She needs to suck it up and move on. Since it seems to be brought up here a lot recently, I violated my contract by doing something that was "morally wrong" in the terms of my employer. I signed it, agreed to it and violated it in their minds. I am morally defecient according to them. I chose not to play by the rules, I paid the price, and will continue to because I don't feel my life is their business. Do I care? No. They lost a good employee in me, and fuck them. They have come crying back to me, no thanks. I have other options.

[Guest sophiarose]

No, make that I violated it knowing full well what I was doing. Did i measure the risk right? Probably not. Just like she didn't either.

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

This has been brought up here a lot recently? May I ask where? I must have missed it...and now I'm curious.

[A-rod]

There are aspects of many employment contracts that go too far into taking away personal rights or invasion of privacy. Not all of which are actually legally binding (if fought in court).

It's one thing if you are a public figurehead for a company. You are very well compensated and you are part of the image of the company.

But for the average grunt worker, not so much. You should not be restricted from seeking out other income earning opportunities that do not directly conflict with the business of any other employers. Morality clauses should also be void. What if you aren't married and have sex? Many still view that as immoral. What business is it of theirs?

I hear so much crap about Unions from conservative idiots and yet look at how much power business wield over our personal lives?

Sorry...end of rant...

No, make that I violated it knowing full well what I was doing. Did i measure the risk right? Probably not. Just like she didn't either.

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

+1 Well said!

No sympathy here for CEOs, but plenty for gals trying to feed their families and work towards bright futures.

Employment law is not my area, and Colorado cases get me riled. Don't get me started about megacorps and the power they wield! To stay on point, I think that this gal is smart as well as beautiful, and her claim appears to be well-founded. While state statutes may vary, Federal law does take precedent, and I have heard that when dealing with employment law matters, look at the big picture. Federal law trumps state. Just saying ...

[Burt Reynolds]

not sure how this could be gender discrimination... seems the argument is if she did or did not falsify employment history...

personal note: seems in most cases where the 'wronged' party has not real ground to stand on always go for the discrimination 'card'

on the bright side she will not stay unemployed long with any media exposure

[Guest Adrielle Cordeaux]

Who knows who got pissy that a dancer was working for them. I don't know that I'd classify it as gender discrimination but then I don't know but about the specifics to such laws. What I do know is it just goes to show how hard it is for a young lady in the entertainment industry to get (back) into mainstream/legit employment. For all the looking-down-the-nose society does towards girls in the entertainment biz, they should work harder to be positive and accepting when someone decides to "go straight".

Xoxo

Adrielle

[Burt Reynolds]

For all the looking-down-the-nose society does towards girls in the entertainment biz, they should work harder to be positive and accepting when someone decides to "go straight".

i have had a few ex 'entertainment' girls on my staff. Never bothered me personally, always enjoys the stories… at the end of the day they always worked harder than most and actuality appreciated the opportunity

[mrvegas63]

Technically, she had not gone totally straight. Quote in the article from her lawyer about how the girl was only occasionally still stripping. Looks like the girl has deleted most of her blog site, but still plenty of stripping referneces from the beginning of the year on her Twitter feed.

Unfortunately, guessing her contract probably has something akin to a morality clause or verbiage along the lines of "will not do snything that reflects poorly on the newspaper".

[-REDACTED-]

Sounds to me like a stripper driving over the hill (age 30) towards unemployment is trying to find some way to get a settlement from someone with money. That lawsuit will not hold up. That's not gender discrimination. Men can be strippers, too. If she has proof there is a male stripper working as a reporter at the same place with the employers' knowledge, then it's gender discrimination. Otherwise, sounds like a play for a settlement, in hopes the Houston Chronicle won't want the publicity.

She looks pretty damn hot, gotta say.

"Tressler, who has a master's degree in journalism from New York University, said that when she decided to dance to pay for college, she did not think it would keep her from building her career."

Reporter fired for working as an 'Angry Stripper' sues newspaper for gender discrimination

Daily Mail

Further proof that you can get a Masters degree without actually being very intelligent. She didn't think stripping her clothes off for money in venues that often have ties with prostitution and drugs would "keep her from building her career" as a respected journalist and representative of the Houston Chronicle?

She goes and interviews people in their name. Why wouldn't they fire her?

"A rival newspaper, tipped off by an online blog titled "Diary of an Angry Stripper" she wrote anonymously, published a story about her background in March."

Reporter, fired for stripping, charges gender discrimination

CNN

I think it sounds like she wanted to get caught, but hoped for different results.

"The 30-year-old said she would sometimes perform on stage for a few hours just to get a workout since she did not have a gym membership."

Reporter fired for working as an 'Angry Stripper' sues newspaper for gender discrimination

Daily Mail

Ah, yes, another winning decision from the Master.

"Most exotic dancers are female, and therefore to terminate an employee because they had previously been an exotic dancer would have an adverse impact on women, since it is a female-dominated occupation," Allred said.

Reporter, fired for stripping, charges gender discrimination

CNN

Now that's ridiculous. I thought we were trying to break down gender barriers. It seems like Gloria Allred is trying to build new ones.

Does this mean, since almost every profession is male-dominated, that any man who gets fired for having been in a previous profession of any kind (except exotic dancing and a few other jobs) can sue for gender discrimination because it would have an adverse impact on men?

Oh, wait. We don't want that. We want equality, just not so much equality that men benefit. They've benefited enough! Equality should punish those evil men.

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

Employee v independent contractor status may or may be relevant here, Re: alleged "falsification of history." Counsel is aware of this, I'm sure, but why weren't her adjunct faculty and blogger positions raised as relevant to her termination? I rest my case :-)

Hell hath no fury like women jealous of beautiful women! I stand by my initial statement that this may have been the real motivation behind her wrongful termination. Looking forward to hearing further details as they are released.

I hope she

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

Good news for gals who have worked in the Adult Entertainment industry! According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission:

"The law forbids discrimination when it comes to any aspect of employment.

An employment policy or practice that applies to everyone, regardless of sex, can be illegal if it has a negative impact on the employment of people of a certain sex and is not job-related or necessary to the operation of the business.

Sex discrimination can involve treating someone less favorably because of his or her connection with an organization or group that is generally associated with people of a certain sex."

The Adult Entertainment industry is generally associated with female workers. This cannot be disputed by pointing out exceptions, because they are exactly that--exceptions.

The website is full of interesting information, and includes stuff like sexual harassment, and discrimination relating to criminal records, credit, and background checks. Ladies, here you go:

http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sex.cfm

[FatDog]

keep tilting at the windmills don quixote......cause no one gives a rats ass if some stripper got canned.

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

Got anything objective to support your statements? And what's up with bagging on people with Masters degrees? NYU is a top university, not an academic walk in the park.

Her claim is valid. http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sex.cfm

She was wrongfully terminated. What's wrong with engaging in legal activities as an independent contractor? How is "stripping" different from "blogging?" Apparently the newspaper had no issue with that, although there they might actually have stood a chance of terminating her under a noncompetition agreement or something.

The entire point I'm trying to make is that gals who work in the Adult Entertainment Industry should not have to suffer from discrimination. Many of the gals here have a past or present affiliation with the Adult Entertainment Industry. If you think that the gals here should accept discrimination and wrongful termination as a direct result of having been affiliated with the Adult Entertainment Industry, you may discover that not everyone buys that pile of horse manure.

It's wrong that people have been discriminated against. Why not empower them? Is it that difficult to say nice things instead of mean ones? I thought everyone was against discrimination, unless they're secretly in favor of it.

[-REDACTED-]

Got anything objective to support your statements?

Most of my post was fairly subjective, as I was more or less editorializing based on my opinions.

And what's up with bagging on people with Masters degrees?

I’m not “bagging on people with Masters degrees”. I was saying (and I still say) that having a Master’s degree doesn’t indicate wide-ranging intelligence. Master’s programs test specialized knowledge, not diversity or breadth outside of that specialization. I’m not saying those who have Master’s aren’t in possession of the knowledge of their field, but that it is not necessary to be all that intelligent (overall) in order to gain a Master’s (or even a PhD) in one specialized field, depending on what that field is.

NYU is a top university, not an academic walk in the park.

That depends more on the individual degree program than the school, especially at the post-graduate level. There are easier and harder fields to gain a Master’s degree in. Journalism programs in particular, and especially those in this country, are massively deficient, as evidenced by the pathetically decrepit state of American journalism.

In any case, my aim isn't to provide commentary on the status of her Master's degree program, or the school she went to. I am judging her intelligence based on her actions and her prepared statements, and deducing that her Master's program must not have required vast intelligence to attain entry. It is my opinion based on the publicly available information thus far.

Her claim is valid. http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/sex.cfm

Her claim is not valid. It doesn’t fit any of the conditions set forth on the link provided. It isn’t sex discrimination; it’s profession discrimination, which is legal.

What if a dog walking company doesn’t hire people who use Hoveround scooters? Is that disability discrimination? How about if Hooters doesn’t want to hire 60 year old men as waiters, or even if the strip club she worked at didn't want to hire 60 year old men as strippers? Is it sex and age discrimination? What if a hospital refuses to allow people to wear religious head coverings inside surgical clean rooms? Is it religious discrimination?

None of these would be valid discrimination claims, and neither will hers. It isn’t sex discrimination. It’s a newspaper that doesn’t want to associate publicly with strippers. That isn’t illegal.

She was wrongfully terminated.

That’s what they’ll determine, though I have read of no evidence released publicly which would establish that to be the case.

What's wrong with engaging in legal activities as an independent contractor?

Nothing at all. There’s certainly never a moral difference of any kind between activities, so long as they’re legal.

So, if I run a No-Kill Animal Shelter and I find out my employee is working on the side for a company that tests toxic chemicals on laboratory cats and rabbits, then I shouldn’t be able to fire them because that is legal.

Or, if I find out that my Daycare Center employee is working on the side as a pornographer, I should be fine with it because it’s legal, and they are just a contractor for the porn company! No liabilities there whatsoever.

Perhaps my Hazardous Materials Trucking employee is moonlighting as a Wine Tasting Tour Guide on the weekends. Why be worried? They’re just professions.

My point, if it isn’t clear, is that discriminating based on prior and current professions is SUBJECTIVE. Employers are not, and should not be, automatons. They are individuals who will judge things based on their individual morals and logic, and based on company and insurance guidelines. If the Houston Chronicle doesn’t want to associate with those who work at strip clubs, that is their choice, not the Court’s.

How is "stripping" different from "blogging?"

Is this a serious question? We are talking about a Texas newspaper, right? In largely conservative Houston?

How is stripping off your clothes for cash tips in venues often tied with prostitution and drugs, different from typing opinions on an internet blog, likely for no compensation?

I can’t think of a way. They’re exactly the same.

Apparently the newspaper had no issue with that, although there they might actually have stood a chance of terminating her under a noncompetition agreement or something.

They don’t need any reason to fire her. Texas is an At-Will Employment state, meaning that employers can fire you without giving any reason. There is also no Implied Contract Exception like there is in Colorado.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2001/01/art1full.pdf

The Houston Chronicle certainly didn’t cite her sex as their reason for firing her, so it will take some convincing witness testimony to convince a jury that sex was the reason.

The entire point I'm trying to make is that gals who work in the Adult Entertainment Industry should not have to suffer from discrimination. Many of the gals here have a past or present affiliation with the Adult Entertainment Industry. If you think that the gals here should accept discrimination and wrongful termination as a direct result of having been affiliated with the Adult Entertainment Industry, you may discover that not everyone buys that pile of horse manure.

It's wrong that people have been discriminated against. Why not empower them? Is it that difficult to say nice things instead of mean ones? I thought everyone was against discrimination, unless they're secretly in favor of it.

What are we counting as discrimination here? Before this conversation goes further, let’s establish a definition.

Is it discrimination to refuse to hire a felon?

Is it discrimination to blacklist a bad client?

Is it discrimination to favor a P411 or DateCheck client on the simple basis of their member status?

All of these are rational usages of our ability to discriminate and make choices.

discriminate - to make or constitute a distinction in or between; differentiate

Discrimination laws are based primarily on unchangeable or very difficult to change aspects of life. For the most part, it is not possible to change our sex, our race, our age, our level of ability, and our national origin. It is very difficult, and beyond most of our will, to change our religion or our pregnancy status. These are the things that are protected, because they are unchangeable.

Your profession is your choice. No one forces you to become what you become, at least not legally. If you become a journalist, and then a stripper, that is based on your decisions, not unchangeable aspects of your history over which you had little or no control. That is not protected, nor should it be protected, by discrimination laws.

[Guest JenniferOfDenver]

;310855']

Two words: GRE scores.

This is interesting. May or may not be relevant to the stripper case, but quite useful in other matters. Thank you!

Of course they didn't cite her sex as their reason for firing her. That would be illegal.

Convincing witness testimony to convince a jury is usually necessary. Juries don't get convinced without it.

[FatDog]

maybe she should hire gloria allred.