Nikolai Grushevski, a man from Corpus Christi, has filed a lawsuit because Hooters wouldn’t let him work as a waiter, which we guess would be called a Hooters Boy.
“Hooters tries to circumvent the law by referring to its waiters as ‘Hooters Girls.’ Hooters is wrong,” claims the lawsuit, filed yesterday in federal court in Corpus. “Just as Southwest Airlines attempted nearly three decades ago with stewardesses, the waiter’s position addressed herein is being limited to females by an employer ‘…who merely wishes to exploit female sexuality as a marketing tool to attract customers and insure profitability.'”
Exactly. Thankfully, the lawsuit says that Grushevski isn’t trying to stop the restaurant from hiring Hooters Girls. In 1997, Hooters paid seven Chicago men $2 million after they filed a similar lawsuit. As a result of the settlement, the position of kitchen and bartender were deemed “gender neutral.”
Hair Balls couldn’t reach Grushevski or his lawyer, and a Hooters spokeswoman (no spokesman?!) hasn’t responded either. We’ll post an update as soon as we hear back from either.
I believe sporting a nice pair of Hooters should remain a prerequisite for the job.
This has happened before and Hooters won.
Obviously the employment laws need to be changed so this type of suit can’t be brought at all.
Sometimes discriminating is good.
I think they should stipulate that you need to be able to fill out the shirt without any hair showing. And you can’t have any dangly parts hanging out the bottom of the shorts nor bulges. And you have to shave your legs and underarms. And you have to wear lipstick.
And . . .
Apparantly McCullough has an open festering wound. Using a picture of a person who has a brain desease is pretty low. May be it would have been not quite in poor taste if Bob Dole or Bill Clinton would have used.
Then again McCullough should have used a photo of himself…yep, still in poor taste.
Am i the only one that thinks they should not be able to discriminate based on looks/sex for a wait staff job?
Possible ways around this…Hire actresses to play waitresses.
# 6 UnaKRon said, “Am i the only one that thinks they should not be able to discriminate based on looks/sex for a wait staff job?”
Yep. It is pretty much their entire bus model. If you want the Gov to control the internal business decisions then the Gov has to take responsibility for the business.
I don’t want my money wasted like that so Gov needs to stay out of it.
Next up… he sues his local strip club for not hiring him as a dancer.
Well it is discrimination.
#7. Cow-Paddy, Ignorant Shit Talking Sociopath and retired Mall Rent-A-Cop,
Where did you get the idea the Government was involved? This is a private law suit. The only part of the government is the Justice Branch using the courts.
In short, the law states that no one may discriminate based upon several criteria, gender being one of those.
Just as you posted Truman was the most unpopular President, you still don’t know what the eff you are talking about.
# 10 Mr. Fusion said, “Where did you get the idea the Government was involved?
“In short, the law states that no one may discriminate based upon several criteria, gender being one of those. ”
Law, Government.
Think about those two words for a minute. Now, you have the answer to your question.
Until you get the equivalent of a 4th grade education I won’t be answering any more of your elementary questions.
Kind of looks like Ted Kennedy
Good to know that all of our political do-goodery is making a useful impact.
I have often wondered how Hooters gets away with this in today’s legal world.
I think such discrimination laws are unconstitutional, as it is no business of government with whom one chooses to do business. Same for all race/gender/religion/etc. based so called anti-discrimination laws concerning private business. (Government agencies are different…one cannot chose which government to deal with). The laws are bad for the economy, reduce personal freedom, and often are just plain silly.
But, since the laws do in fact exist and are in fact enforced (sometimes to the nth degree), I don’t understand how Hooters (or Chippendale’s for that matter) manage to avoid compliance. I hope this guy wins, just to point out how silly such laws are.
As for Hooters itself..I can only comment that some of the nastiest “drunk guys thrown out onto the sidewalk” I’ve ever encountered were thrown out of Hooters.
If they’re hired as “performers (actresses)” or “models”, Hooters has nothing to worry about…
# 14 Dave W said, “I have often wondered how Hooters gets away with this in today’s legal world. ”
In CA they might do it by stating it’s a B.F.O.Q. (BonaFide Occupational Qualification) Not sure though…
#14, Dave,
Hooter’s uses staff to serve customers. That forces the employer to obey the various Civil Rights laws. Their discretion only allows them to discriminate as to whether or not they are capable of doing the job. Demanding a specific attribute that has nothing to do with the job requirements, such as gender, religion, race, etc, is discriminatory.
Chippendales and your local Strip Club are “Entertainers”, requiring artistic skills the same as other artistic endeavors such as singing, music, fine art, and acting. Anyone hiring an “Artist” may include physical attributes in the hiring process.
Will this suit succeed? It will depend on the guy’s previous experience as a wait staff, how many inexperienced female wait staff were hired, and the number of openings at the time the application was made.
I suppose I speak for others here…
When I go to Hooters I don’t want wait staff, I want to be served by a cute young babe with an appealing body and nice legs. If she flirts a bit to get a bigger tip, (HAR!) good for her.
If I get served by a dude at Hooters, I’m outta there.
Push up bras, pantyhose under shorts. Jeez. Contrived sexuality. Besides, Hooter’s girls ARE actresses.They act like they give a shit while trying to push calendars and other Hooter’s crap on drooling idiots. Like me.
Dah! First beer of the day. Forgive me.
As ridiculous as this case is, if he does win and Hooters is required to hire him as a waiter, he should be forced to wear the same uniform as everybody else. No special treatment.
Thank god, I can hire an artist who speaks english. They can act like they know what they’re doing just like my employees do now. Brilliant.
either the guy is gay and has a TOTALLY unrealistic view of the world. a guy working for Hooters would never make the kind of money that any Hooters Girl would. in fact, he would actually COST the restaurant money in lost clients.
or
he’s working an angle and knows that, even if he got a job there, he would eventually lose it and would bring another suit against Hooters for another type of gender discrimination (say, intentionally depriving him of patronage equal to that of the girls). If it got to that, it would be easy to prove that it was the customers doing the discriminating (and rightly so), but at that point, lawmakers would have intruded into Hooters business model and ruined the company (and any future companies like it).
y’all ever hear of Bone Daddy’s? out here in Houston, we’re starting to see lots more bikini bars. this lawsuit would end all such businesses.
it would be sad to see Hooters go under if for no other reason than they excel at making hotwings. I won’t eat them anywhere else…
Years ago the same thing happened in many restaurants in the South. As soon as they were forced to allow blacks to eat, many were boycotted by whites. Shit happens.
So many people would stop going to Hooters if they also used men. Too bad for Hooters but they can’t discriminate on sex. They could require clean appearances. But I think forcing men to shave their legs and chest might cross the line into discrimination again.
Fusion–I guess you remembered that our government is composed of three branches all acting as a check and balance against one another? Good.
I remember the first time this type lawsuit came up. It makes a certain sense either way it is decided so the law is an ass either way.
So, philosophically==how “should” we design society? No all female hostitutes on airplanes but all female wait staff is ok? Hard to make sense out of that. As long as Hooters type services are less than .01% of the jobs, I guess that is ok too but I can’t express a rule that makes sense out of that.
And yet, I do think the chorus line at Carneige Hall should remain all female==or all male===gee, or mixed too depending on, on, on, oh nevermind.
Isnt there a Hooters airline too?
Yep, discrimination pure and simple.
If Hooters really wants these lawsuits to go away they should:
– hire the guy,
– give him the crappy shifts,
– require him to wear the uniform,
– pay him the below minimum wage restaurants get away with, and
– watch him quit when he gets no tips.
As it is, he wins when the restaurant has to settle due to discrimination.
Or, have the new hire model be you start as a busser for a few months before progressing to wait staff and hire no experienced hires.
Having said that, Hooters is really pretty disgusting. You couldn’t pay me to eat there.
Hooters is disgusting. An example of soft-porn exploitations resulting from a society that is sexually repressed which is even more disgusting.
Another benefit of the overflow of religious busy bodies foisting their old tired ethics on the majority too timid to tell them to STFU.
#24, bobbo,
You err by deciding that laboring is the equivalent or same as being an artist. Serving food does not require special artistic skill. Dancing does.
So, philosophically==how “should” we design society?
By shooting arrogant assholes that wave questions about “How do we design society”. You don’t design societies unless you are writing a Science Fiction story. Real societies evolve. None of them work if you use a “one size fits all”.
That does not mean you can’t have standards or rules. The rules in our society insist you can’t discriminate except under narrow rules.Those rules are to protect the minorities from abuse. That is why in the Constitution the rules may only be changed with great difficulty.
While no one forces you to eat at Hooters, or not eat there, in our society to eat there is an option. Your choice. If they are going to partake inside society then they must follow the rules (laws) of society. As a private club they could hire only women, but not as a public restaurant.
This clown is just trying to blackmail Hooters into a big cash pay-off to go away.
#28 –Fusion==I report, you decide. I would think with your supple wit you could understand that court rulings/governmental actions are a type of design on a culture.
http://fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/Hooters-of-America-Inc-Company-History.html