Kimberlee Ouwroulis has filed an interesting lawsuit in Canada alleging age discrimination. Owroulis is a stripper and claims that she was fired at 44 due to her age. The question is whether age is a Bona Fide Occupational Qualification for a stripper.
We appear to be collecting a growing number of stripper tort and civil lawsuits. I have heard of forum non conveniens, but this would be form non conveniens.
On its face, age should presumably not be a BFOQ but appearance would be. A more difficult question has arisen with regard to anchors where female anchors have sued over being fired for younger women while television stations argue that appearance is a big part of the job. Click here and here. There has also been discrimination lawsuit filed with the EEOC over Hooters hiring woman on the basis of their looks, here.
Ouwroulis has filed her complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. She alleges that the club “told me that the club is going in a new direction with younger girls. That’s age discrimination to me.” Perhaps. Perhaps not. If a “different direction” is a polite way of saying “better looking,” it would seem a valid employment decision for a stripper as opposed to other jobs like a librarian or a taxidermist.
The defendant in the case is John Sit, owner of the New Locomotion Strip Club. Ouwroulis argues the Old Locomotion was just fine with customers.
For a recent interview with Ouwroulis, click here.
Ouwroulis worked at Locomotion for most of those four years and is now employed at a Pickering-area strip club. The fact that she is still employed as a stripper would presumably help her case in seeking damages of $100,000. (She earned $8000 a month at the club or $96,000 a year).
For the full story, click here.