Associated Press – January 31, 2006:

Two former Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa cocktail servers have filed a $70 million sex discrimination lawsuit against the casino, saying it humiliated costumed “Borgata Babes” by imposing weight limits, encouraging breast augmentation surgery and emphasizing looks over job performance.

“Borgata Babes” is the moniker given to its cocktail waitresses by the casino, which opened in July 2003 and leaned heavily on sex in its marketing and brand advertising. They wear cleavage-baring bustiers, high heels and tight-fitting bolero-style jackets, and are required to maintain “clean” smiles, hourglass figures and weight proportionate to their height.

Before anyone raises gender discrimination…

A personal appearance policy imposed last year on costumed waitresses and bartenders requires the men to keep V-shaped torsos, broad shoulders and slim waists.



  1. JoJo Dancer says:

    Is this really sexual discrimination?

    Okay on the skin of it, it does appear to be that, but underneath when I think about it, it is no different than what a professional athlete must endure. No less a 5’9″ runway model staying thin to be chosen for the next Sports Illustrated. Even actors themselves are required to maintain a certain shape or image for a part and can violate their contract if they do not maintain the appearance.

    $70 million seems very steep for any lawsuit of this type. Sounds more like a personal gain to me. These people have been hired to play a role like an actor, a model or hey, even a beautiful waitress!

  2. david says:

    We live in a country where personal responsiblity means someone else is responsible for it.

    You don’t see those two former cocktail servers suing a coal mining company for not hiring them. They know they are not fit to do the job.

    Opportunity lurks in every crevice because it works. They’ll get a couple of hundred of thousand dollars when they settle out of court. If they take it to court they better hope I am not on the jury. I’ve served on three civil cases where the plaintiffs were suing for millions. My juries awarded them the exact same amount: zero.

  3. Sounds The Alarm says:

    Hey I could be Borgata dude according to the article.

    ..Hold on that was V like torso, not a U shaped torso.

  4. James Hill says:

    A ho is a ho, especially when trying to get paid.

  5. Michael Reed says:

    LOL if I do not keep my tech skills up, I will lose my job. If they can not keep their slut skills up they deserve to have the same thing occur.

  6. Zuke says:

    “slut skills”!!!! ROTFL!!!!!!!!

    Yep, moneygrabbing ho’s make the news again.

  7. Abram Nichols says:

    Give ’em 50 bucks – the same amount they’ll get working the street corners after they get fired.

  8. garym says:

    I don’t think that even on the face of it that this is a sexual harassment-type case. An employer can set a requirement for a position and enforce that policy, (i.e. Hooters girls). They state these as Bonafide Occupational Qualifications and can hire accordingly.

    Now, if the company is calling these women “fat cows,” or “skinny-assed crack hos,” they might have legal grounds to stand on. But, the article doesn’t mention name calling and making it a hostile environment.

    G

  9. Asperante says:

    This would be exactlly like a stripper suing a strip joint for having to take off her clothes. It is really getting out of hand.

  10. Tallwookie says:

    I dont see the problem here… tig ol bitties and a petite figure is only going to attract employees that fit that profile – besides which this has got to be a breach of contract…

    if they didnt want to be eye candy, then they’re in the wrong damn profession.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5818 access attempts in the last 7 days.