If you’re thinking of making a career out of serving cocktails in casinos, think twice. Think hard.
That’s because the court has ruled that an Atlantic casino can dictate how much weight a cocktail server can lose or gain.
Well, the ruling isn’t general—it was for an issue that arose in Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa and their cocktail servers called “Borgata Babes.”
That’s because the court has ruled that an Atlantic casino can dictate how much weight a cocktail server can lose or gain.
Well, the ruling isn’t general—it was for an issue that arose in Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa and their cocktail servers called “Borgata Babes.”
The Babes which include both men and women were hired to serve cocktail drinks to its patrons. Upon hiring, they were told their job description would be part model, part beverage server and part charming and lovely host/hostess.
And in order to be lovely, they are required to gain or lose no more than 7 percent of their body weight. If the workers eat even as much as a cookie, they were subject to disciplinary action.
Some of the workers even claimed they were publicly asked if they were just faking pregnancies to cover their weight gain while their co-workers snort at them like they are pigs.
This, they said, created a culture of humiliation and a hostile working environment for them.
They were also subject to periodic weigh-ins most especially when they just returned from their leave of absence.
The waitresses’ appearance—stockings and high heels, corsets—were also scrutinized more closely than their male counterparts, which they claimed, is a clear violation of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination.
“Plaintiffs cannot shed the label babe; they embraced it when they went to work for the Borgata.”
The servers—22 of them—sued the casino (Know more about the case at: http://widenerlawreview.org/files/2015/02/9-Frey-1.pdf). But court didn’t agree with them.
Court rulings stated there was no gender-based discrimination because the rule has been applied to both male and female workers. It also cited that the servers were informed the casino’s standards prior to being hired. The fact that they took the job means they agreed to it.
The Borgata Casino has been sued over its weight policy back in 2013 and the lower court judge said the same thing: “Plaintiffs cannot shed the label babe; they embraced it when they went to work for the Borgata.”
VP and legal counsel for Borgata, Joe Corbo, said the court’s ruling is a significant victory for the casino.
"We have long held that Borgata’s personal appearance policy is fair and reasonable. We are pleased that the three appellate court judges agreed with prior rulings that our policy is lawful and non-discriminatory to women.
As the Court noted in its ruling, Borgata’s policy was fully and openly disclosed to all costumed beverage servers, male and female, and all of the litigants voluntarily accepted this policy before they began working for us."
Deborah Mains, attorney for the servers, said the ruling was disappointing and frustrating. She said:
“Sexual objectification has been institutionalized and is being allowed to stand."
She added: "It’s difficult to separate the harassment claims that the court is recognizing from the overall theory that the working environment is hostile because of the personal appearance standards.”
"We’re disappointed that the court didn’t recognize that the evidence of sexualisation of the workplace existed. For us, that was one of the crucial issues of the case. The workplace was sexualized for the women and only for the women, and therefore in our mind the policy was discriminatory, but the court disagreed."
It has not been decided yet if the plaintiffs would be appealing their case further.
"We have long held that Borgata’s personal appearance policy is fair and reasonable. We are pleased that the three appellate court judges agreed with prior rulings that our policy is lawful and non-discriminatory to women.
As the Court noted in its ruling, Borgata’s policy was fully and openly disclosed to all costumed beverage servers, male and female, and all of the litigants voluntarily accepted this policy before they began working for us."
Deborah Mains, attorney for the servers, said the ruling was disappointing and frustrating. She said:
“Sexual objectification has been institutionalized and is being allowed to stand."
She added: "It’s difficult to separate the harassment claims that the court is recognizing from the overall theory that the working environment is hostile because of the personal appearance standards.”
"We’re disappointed that the court didn’t recognize that the evidence of sexualisation of the workplace existed. For us, that was one of the crucial issues of the case. The workplace was sexualized for the women and only for the women, and therefore in our mind the policy was discriminatory, but the court disagreed."
It has not been decided yet if the plaintiffs would be appealing their case further.