Is this so that in the contract of employment they can tell you you are not allowed to work for competitors? Maybe even not allowed to attend competing events?
I received an email last night telling me that Taxi Dancers in Ceroc Central will all have to be formal employees of Ceroc Central in future, with associated pay (rather than Admit ones), conditions of employment etc.
All sounds a lot less "fun" at first sight.
However there is a promise of training too which should be a good thing.
Is this happening anywhere else?
Love dance, will travel
Is this so that in the contract of employment they can tell you you are not allowed to work for competitors? Maybe even not allowed to attend competing events?
Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story
No, but recent mutterings around the forum had suggested that this was the way things were going in some parts of the Ceroc world...
I'd suggest it's a good way to lose the goodwill and the services of good people. (Sorry for the over-use of "good" in that sentence. )
Let your mind go and your body will follow. – Steve Martin, LA Story
Well, I think it could be a good idea - it could enable better training, more consistency, higher standards, and maybe even a career development path of sorts.
Like all these things, it depends on why it's being done - to put things on a more professional basis, or to impose more control over employees? Or, possibly, both.
Just going to do my day job now, but out of interest, did it say how much Taxis were going to be paid?
We had a training session when we started as taxi dancers here in Belfast. A couple more have started since then and had 'on the job' training but I'm sure there will be more training in the future. I guess training is an option for the franchisee - whether there is any contract or not.
I prefer taxi-ing as it is, on a 'voluntary' basis. Yes there is the benefit of free entry which is nice, but I taxi 'cos I enjoy it - I like helping beginners discover the fun of dancing. Its not a 'job'.
If they start to be employed, will that then mean employment legislation applies?
I've no idea what parts apply to part time working. Will positions need to be advertised and people apply with forms? Does minimum wage apply? What about absences? Holiday leave? The new age discrimination rules? (I notice you can no longer even ask for education history on forms now as that can reveal a persons age - not relevant to this of course!) Tax?
Wash your mouth out! And certainly don't utter the phrase "benefits in kind".Originally Posted by Lynn
There is a distinction in law between an "employee" and a "worker". The test to determine the difference is "mutality of obligation": on one side, is the person obliged to undertake work that is offered and, on the other side, is there an obligation to offer/provide work. Part-time employees, where a mutual obligation exists, are protected by employment legislation in the same way as full time employees. Workers are, in essence, protected by anti-discrimination legislation and are entitled to holiday pay but that's about it.I've no idea what parts apply to part time working
I would give up coaching if I was obliged to enter into any kind of formal employment relationship. It's just not worth the candle. In my view, any attempt to "regularise" the relationship between an MJ event organiser and those that help out (as opposed to those who receive pay for their services) would be opening a can of worms. Where is the benefit of doing so?
We have set coaches (as we call them) who work alternate weeks. During the intermediate class we take beginners off to other rooms to go through the beginner stuff again and give them some basic skill pointers. Then we make sure we dance with beginners in the freestyle. We can dance with anyone as long as we make an effort to include beginners and make them feel welcome. Its important to be able to dance with some good dancers too, otherwise your own dancing takes a nose dive! ....and you soon get fed up, see the evening as a chore and then lose your enthusiasm for the dance, which is the main thing that helps beginners become jive addicts....... We have an agreement, what we get and what is expected of us.
[QUOTE=ducasi; Maybe even not allowed to attend competing events?[/QUOTE]
If that were the case, I'd be out of there.............
Let's try to take a giant leap forward in terms of Forum discussions!(*)
Be aware that (if this is in fact the case) that the people considering itWhat in the world would induce people to go to these lengths? There must be a pretty good reason.
- are intelligent - if not as intelligent as thee, then nearly so
- are well aware of the potential down-sides
- have access to professional advice concerning the law
- have given the matter some considerable amount of thought.
(*)In other words, lets move away from the typical Forum knee-jerk "something's changing and I'm going to point out how it inevitably means doom and disaster - they must be a complete load of idiots for not asking me first whether I thought it was a good idea and taking my advice."
But, err, if no reason is actually provided, then speculation is clearly invited.
If nothing else, it's poor news management to announce a change, without announcing the accompanying benefits that are expected to accompany it.
DavidY, would you be able to post a copy of the email, or is it confidential? Does it give any explanations?
I know, but if they are wanting to do it all properly and pay taxi dancers then that would surely be taxable income? I'm not saying thats a good thing - just that these are all issues that need to be taken into consideration if you're wanting to properly and legally bring in a contract.
It will certainly be interesting to see how one franchise implements this and whether others follow.
Because no-one ever makes bad decisions in business. And we all know nothing about what its like on the ground at venues.
Hey, why bother discussing anything? Let all just have a sing-a-long instead. Who's starting?
Last edited by Lynn; 17th-November-2006 at 11:46 AM.
What, that no-one is allowed to post anything questioning decisions from Ceroc, because "oh well, the guys at Ceroc are professionals, they must know what they're doing?". It seems like an argument by authority to me.
If there are good reasons for Ceroc doing this (or anything else), then to convince me, they need to explain those reasons. "There are good reasons for this, but we couldn't possibly tell you what they are" doesn't really cut it.
(As you say, in this case, I strongly suspect it has been decided it's required to comply with legislation. Which is a really strong argument in Ceroc's favour, if they'd only explain it...)
I've not objection to speculation; but the "any change is bad and anyone who considers this must clearly be a card short of a full deck" criticism from people who like me know absolutely nothing about the background or implementation of such a thing is a bit tiresome.Strictly, all benefits in kind should be declared on your tax return. Do you, Lynn, put down your free entry to Ceroc venues? Or are you deliberately under-declaring your income, and risking being the subject of lengthy enquiries from a junior spark at HMRC who's keen to make a name for himself?Originally Posted by Lynn
I don't assume that anyone knows what they're doing just because of (or in spite of!) being a professional. But I think debate improves if you recognise that they see the same, obvious, points that you do.
Just because someone's smart, got professional advice, spent time considering something etc doesn't mean they're making a good decision. It just means you can start from one step beyond the "how can they be so stupid as not to realise that a lot of taxi-dancers aren't going to like being employees" (if that is the case) - because they probably do realise it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks