Jump to content

           



Latest VV Article


Condo Review: Union

Vancouver-based Anthem Properties has made its Victoria development debut with the Union, a two building lowrise condo project between the 500-blocks of Pandora Avenue and Fisgard Street in Old Town’s amenity rich Chinatown district. The Union property, left barren for nearly a decade after the failure of a previous condo development, is a stones throw from the Inner Harbour and literally at the nexus of a rapidly changing and increasingly desirable historic area. [Read more]



Photo

Shark Club


  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan

    Super Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 18,235 posts

Posted 15 September 2010 - 05:16 AM

Even if Shark Club wins, this will cost them lots of money to fight, because although the complainant has her legal costs covered by the Tribunal, the defendants can not recover costs.

http://www.cbc.ca/ca...shark-club.html

I've certainly noticed the Shark Club uniforms have grown increasingly small over the last 3 years or so, just as their marketing has also featured lots of young women in less clothes. It seems to me that Shark hires good-looking ladies, just as Cactus or Earls does, but Shark almost makes the uniform more degrading. Some might argue that they knew what they had to wear when they were hired, similar to a stripper knows what she will not be able to wear when she takes the job (any clothes at all). But I suppose a change in uniform can be a tricky part of this case. If they rule against them for only hiring female servers, well, 95% of nightclubs and sexier lounges are also guilty.

Here's an interesting thing... It's fully legal for females to go topless in this country all the time, that was established in Ontario years ago. But liquor laws, or maybe health laws in BC too will not allow topless female servers in bars or restaurants here. They have them in Quebec. However, there are gay clubs in this town that employ topless male bartenders and servers... (their choice, they are not required to take their shirts off)
TALK about Downtown Victoria on FaceBook: I ❤ Downtown Victoria or TALK about Sidney on FaceBook: I ❤ Sidney

#2 Sparky

Sparky

    Super Duper Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 5,699 posts

Posted 15 September 2010 - 06:22 AM

^ Gord Card was a trained professional at hiring just the right waitress at the "Monkey Tree," no male servers there.

#3 Phil McAvity

Phil McAvity
  • Member
  • 1,238 posts

Posted 17 September 2010 - 08:10 AM

Here's an interesting thing... It's fully legal for females to go topless in this country all the time, that was established in Ontario years ago.


I'm pretty sure that topless law only applies in Ontario. The province doesn't set laws for the rest of the country (although Ottawa obviously does). Not long after that law was enacted an old buddy of mine had a bumper sticker that showed a crude drawing of a topless woman with the caption-"Ontario-Yours to Uncover".

Human rights tribunals are kangaroo courts that shouldn't even exist anyway-just look at how the complainant gets her costs covered but the defendant doesn't-right away that tells me that the tribunal doesn't give a **** about justice. Where does the tribunal get their money from to pay for the litigant's costs anyway? I'll bet you that's where the taxpayer comes in. No one was forcing that woman to work there. If it was so degrading she should have quit.
In chains by Keynes

#4 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 16,141 posts

Posted 17 September 2010 - 08:46 AM

The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal and provincial tribunals are losing credibility in this country very quickly.

Here - HRT impersonates individual on hate crime website to bait owner

Here - The Globe and Mail illustrates that employees file silly complaints that just end up costing small businesses large sums of money

Here - comic ridicules patron at comedy bar and spends years fighting HRT after subject of ridicule files complaint for "suffering injury to dignity"

If you run up a few searches you'll find scores and scores of relatively frivolous cases that 20 years ago wouldn't have been considered justifiable complaints. In short, the HRT seems to have become an unbelievably difficult (and expensive) force to be reckoned with.

Skyscraper Source Media Inc.



#5 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan

    Super Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 18,235 posts

Posted 17 September 2010 - 09:01 AM

Oh, they certainly are a joke. But they are a force to be recknoned with. Just ask Mark Steyn or Ezra Levant.

Steyn got prosecuted in three separate jurisdictions for the same "crime" - BC, Ontario and the national body, for a McLean's article. That's like robbing a bank in Ontario and you get three trials, all with different possible outcomes, and the possibility of three conviction piled on top of one another.
TALK about Downtown Victoria on FaceBook: I ❤ Downtown Victoria or TALK about Sidney on FaceBook: I ❤ Sidney

#6 dirtydeeds

dirtydeeds
  • Member
  • 201 posts

Posted 17 September 2010 - 09:51 AM

Should the Shark Club be allowed to hire and have uniforms in place to help their buisness? I don't see how a company should not be allowed to market their product the way they want. I think the hired individual knows that the sports bar is geared towards attracting a mostly male clientel and what the uniform is before they are hired . There are a lot of other restaurants and pubs in the Victoria area that cater to a larger demographic that a revealing uniform isn't a major requirement. Had this woman never been in the Shark Club before she accepted the job? No woman should have to endure sexual harrassment at the workplace but just like Strip Bars, Home Depot and McDonalds this woman new the type of uniform req'd before she took the job then got upset after she was req'd to wear it? On another note how can the Bar be responsible for patrons behavior. If it was a problem she could have told management and I am sure the patrons would have been asked to leave. All in all it will be an interesting case to follow!

#7 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan

    Super Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 18,235 posts

Posted 17 September 2010 - 10:56 AM

Should the Shark Club be allowed to hire and have uniforms in place to help their buisness? I don't see how a company should not be allowed to market their product the way they want. I think the hired individual knows that the sports bar is geared towards attracting a mostly male clientel and what the uniform is before they are hired . There are a lot of other restaurants and pubs in the Victoria area that cater to a larger demographic that a revealing uniform isn't a major requirement. Had this woman never been in the Shark Club before she accepted the job? No woman should have to endure sexual harrassment at the workplace but just like Strip Bars, Home Depot and McDonalds this woman new the type of uniform req'd before she took the job then got upset after she was req'd to wear it? On another note how can the Bar be responsible for patrons behavior. If it was a problem she could have told management and I am sure the patrons would have been asked to leave. All in all it will be an interesting case to follow!


I agree with most of this, if not all, but I do note that the Shark uniforms have become smaller, esp. a major move about 3 years ago. Would it be ok if they kept changing the uniform, and making it smaller, would she have to keep agreeing to the new uniform?
TALK about Downtown Victoria on FaceBook: I ❤ Downtown Victoria or TALK about Sidney on FaceBook: I ❤ Sidney

#8 Phil McAvity

Phil McAvity
  • Member
  • 1,238 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 04:02 PM

^She wasn't obligated to work there. I'm sure there are countless other bars/restaurants/pubs she could work at in town that offer more dignified uniforms, if they have a uniform at all.
In chains by Keynes

#9 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan

    Super Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 18,235 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 04:12 PM

^She wasn't obligated to work there. I'm sure there are countless other bars/restaurants/pubs she could work at in town that offer more dignified uniforms, if they have a uniform at all.


What if she worked there, and was allowed to wear as conservative a dress as she wanted, then the next year they instituted a uniform consisting of lingerie? Would you say then that she wasn't obligated to work there, she should take a hike?
TALK about Downtown Victoria on FaceBook: I ❤ Downtown Victoria or TALK about Sidney on FaceBook: I ❤ Sidney

#10 LJ

LJ
  • Member
  • 3,600 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 07:46 PM

What if she worked there, and was allowed to wear as conservative a dress as she wanted, then the next year they instituted a uniform consisting of lingerie? Would you say then that she wasn't obligated to work there, she should take a hike?


That's not the case tho. She knew what work conditions she was getting into when she applied for work there. If she had a problem with the dress code she should have moved on.

In the case you are describing I would say she would be allowed to continue to wear what she wanted to as the new dress code was a substantial change in employment conditions. If they wouldn't let her wear what she wanted then she may have a case.
Life's a journey......so roll down the window and enjoy the breeze.

#11 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan

    Super Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 18,235 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 08:13 PM

That's not the case tho. She knew what work conditions she was getting into when she applied for work there. If she had a problem with the dress code she should have moved on.

In the case you are describing I would say she would be allowed to continue to wear what she wanted to as the new dress code was a substantial change in employment conditions. If they wouldn't let her wear what she wanted then she may have a case.


I can assure you the dress code at Shark became very smaller about three years ago, I was in the industry and saw it. Now, I don't know if she worked across that period, but if she did, then I can almost see her case.
TALK about Downtown Victoria on FaceBook: I ❤ Downtown Victoria or TALK about Sidney on FaceBook: I ❤ Sidney

#12 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 16,141 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 08:46 PM

The establishment that had servers dressed in lingerie (located below The Office on Yates) was shut down several years ago. Was it due to their dress code or a different infraction, or did it simply go out of business? I can't recall the details.

Skyscraper Source Media Inc.



#13 Phil McAvity

Phil McAvity
  • Member
  • 1,238 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 09:03 PM

^That place closed down years ago Mike? I thought it was a lot more recent than that.

What if she worked there, and was allowed to wear as conservative a dress as she wanted, then the next year they instituted a uniform consisting of lingerie? Would you say then that she wasn't obligated to work there, she should take a hike?


Yes, that's exactly what i'm saying. No one is forced to work anywhere. If she finds the dress code infradig to her, she should seek employment elsewhere which is the crux of the issue and exactly the thing i'm sure the Human Wrongs Tribunal will ignore. It's
called taking responsibility for yourself which this woman obviously isn't willing to do.
In chains by Keynes

#14 Mike K.

Mike K.
  • Administrator
  • 16,141 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 09:21 PM

^That place closed down years ago Mike? I thought it was a lot more recent than that.


It closed in '05 or '06, I believe.

Skyscraper Source Media Inc.



#15 VicHockeyFan

VicHockeyFan

    Super Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 18,235 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 09:26 PM

^^ I agree with you 98% Phil.

If I am working for a company in say, telephone sales, and one day they decide that not only will I be required to do telephone sales, but I also must go out on the road and cold-call businesses face to face, and wear a suit and tie one day a week, it's hardly a human rights issue that my job and dress code has changed. I can accept it or leave it.
TALK about Downtown Victoria on FaceBook: I ❤ Downtown Victoria or TALK about Sidney on FaceBook: I ❤ Sidney

#16 Rob Randall

Rob Randall
  • Member
  • 2,528 posts

Posted 19 September 2010 - 11:02 PM

When the Sea Galley opened here in the late 1980s, The cocktail waitresses had to wear short shorts. A few later balked at the rule, and management backed down and waitresses were allowed to wear the same uniforms other servers wore. The dynamics were a bit different with local female managers enforcing a policy dictated from a distant head office.

#17 dirtydeeds

dirtydeeds
  • Member
  • 201 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 09:09 AM

It almost seems like this woman and her lawyer might have been looking for a case to bring to the Human Rights Tribunal. Unfortunately for the Shark Club they fit the right type of case they were looking for. I would be interested to hear other Shark Club waitresses talking about their opinions on the dress code and work enviroment?

#18 Sparky

Sparky

    Super Duper Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 5,699 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 09:34 AM

^ That reminds me, when do you think Hooters will open a restaurant in Victoria?

#19 North Shore

North Shore
  • Member
  • 618 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 12:00 PM

Human rights tribunals are kangaroo courts that shouldn't even exist anyway


Fine where it's your rights that aren't being trampled on...

I'm not privy to the details in this case - but if she knew what the dress code was when she applied, then hard cheddar. If she was already there, and the code was changed then some sort of accommodation is fair, I think.....
Say, what's that mountain goat doing up here in the mist?

#20 Phil McAvity

Phil McAvity
  • Member
  • 1,238 posts

Posted 20 September 2010 - 03:21 PM

Fine where it's your rights that aren't being trampled on...


My rights (and your rights) are already protected by the Criminal Code of Canada. I don't need some pseudo-judicial body like HRT's standing up for my "rights" (which often shouldn't even be considered rights anyway) since they almost always forsake personal responsibility.
In chains by Keynes

You're not quite at the end of this discussion topic!

Use the page links at the lower-left to go to the next page to read additional posts.
 



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users