Skip to main content

Updated: Cincinnati Bengals Cheerleader Lawsuit Tentatively Settles


Last week, it was announced that the class action wage and hour lawsuit filed by a Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader (note, the cheerleaders are called "Ben-Gals"...well played) had been settled.  Readers might remember that last March, a class action wage and hour lawsuit was filed against the team.  (From Pom Poms to the Courtroom, Pt. 2 - Cincinnati Bengals Edition).  In that suit, it was alleged that the team paid the cheerleaders less than minimum wage for their work.  In fact, the suit claimed that the cheerleaders worked about 300 hours a year and were paid, "at most, $90 for each home football game."  For those readers are not math majors, that is equivalent to about $2.85 per hour.  

In the documents filed with the Court, the settlement reached provides that the Bengals will pay the Ben-Gal cheerleaders a total of $255,000.00 to settle.  For those covered by this class action suit, those cheerleaders who cheered for the team in the 2011 - 2013 seasons could receive at least $2,500.00 each, per season.  As any good defense attorney would advise their client, the Bengals denied any wrongdoing and simply decided to settle the suit to avoid protracted (and likely expensive) litigation.  The cheerleader who brought the suit, Alexa Brenneman, will receive an extra $5,000.00, since she was the lead plaintiff in this suit.

At this point, the settlement is approval, pending a December 3 hearing.  As well, the Bengals can cancel the settlement if cheerleaders with a combination of six years or more opt out of the settlement.  That means that if two cheerleaders with three years of experience each (who cheered during the covered time frame) choose not to sign off on the agreement, the Bengals could cancel the whole thing.  

This case is not over yet...but we are close to seeing this one wrap up.  Stay tuned.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

NLRB: Discussion Among Employees About Tip Pooling is Protected Concerted Activity

  This Advice Memorandum from the National Labor Relations Board’s Associate General Counsel, Jayme Sophir, addressed whether employees which discussed and complained about tip pooling at work constituted protected concerted activity. In relevant part, an employer in New York operated a chain of steakhouses.  While tip pooling was in place at these steakhouses, some of the employees objected to it on the grounds that it was not transparent and improperly divided tips among the workers.  Employees were told not to complain or talk to each other about the tip pool and were told that doing so would endanger their jobs.  Despite the employer later attempting to provide some clarity as to how the tips were being divided, rancor still existed among some employees.  At one point, the employees were told by a general manager that some employees that had been talking about the tip pool were “cleared out” and the employer would continue to do so. In the Advice Memorandum, it was noted that emplo
Post a Comment
Read more

What I’ve Been Reading This Week

A few years ago, I remember when the “Fight for $15” movement was taking off around the country.  Lo and behold, it appears that a $15/hour minimum wage is not the stopping point, which should be no surprise.  As the below article notes, New York is aggressively moving to ramp up hourly wage rates even higher.  While all the  below articles are worth a read, I called particular attention to that one. As always, below are a couple article that caught my eye this week. Disney World Workers Reject Latest Contract Offer Late last week, it was announced that workers at Disney World had rejected the most recent contract offer from the company, calling on their employer to do better.  As Brooks Barnes at The New York Times writes, the unions that represent about 32,000 workers at Disney World reported their members resoundingly rejected the 5 year contract offer which would have seen workers receive a 10% raise and retroactive increased back pay.  While Disney’s offer would have increased pa
Post a Comment
Read more

Utah Non-Compete Bill Falters in House

Last month, a non-compete bill sponsored by Representative Brian Greene (Republican from Pleasant Grove) & up for vote in the Utah House failed to make it through the Legislature.  The bill sought to ban enforcement of non-competes if they came after a worker was already employed, given no compensation (such as a bonus or promotion) for signing the non-compete, and laid off within six months.  However, by a 22 - 49 vote, the bill was resoundingly defeated after some business groups lobbied to kill the non-compete bill.  One group in particular, The Free Enterprise Utah coalition, argued that the Utah State Legislature should hold off on any changes to non compete laws in the state until a survey about non competes was done among Utah businesses.  Representative Greene had countered this claim and argued that a survey was not needed to show that the current non compete laws in the states allowed many businesses, including some small high tech companies in the state, to per
Post a Comment
Read more