Vote yes please.

This is at: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/offbeat/2007/04/do_sex_workers_deserve_workers_1.html


Heavy blogging and digging on an eight-year-old OSHA legend raises interesting questions about workers' compensation.

The story goes like this: Back in 1999 Marci Lyn Deutsch, a Florida phone sex operator, supposedly won a workers' compensation settlement alleging "she was injured after regularly masturbating at work." Her lawyer Steven Slootsky had claimed, according to reports, that she developed carpal tunnel syndrome in both hands because of repetitive self-gratification while speaking on the phone to customers as often as seven times a day. Deutsch had asked her employer CFP Enterprises for "$267 a week, based on her salary of $400, plus $30,000 to cover her medical bills after neurosurgery to relieve the pain in her hands." However, the case was settled for a "minimal" amount because "mediator Joseph Hand, a retired workers' comp judge, told her she'd have a tough time" winning.

While some consider this tale to be another example of America's "I sue, you sue, we all sue" culture, it seems unfair to say that just because someone derives pleasure from her job, it is frivolous to sue for an injury caused by that pleasure. After all isn't masturbatory carpal tunnel for a legal sex worker no different than typing carpal tunnel for a secretary? On the other hand, judges and juries might not be inclined to see it that way. After all, can you imagine a porn star attempting to get cash for a sex-related stress injury? Even in Australia, where prostitution is legal, "sex workers have entitlement to workers compensation for a work-related injury," but "[i]n practice this rarely occurs."

So as ridiculous as these cases may appear on the surface, they raise an important question that I'll throw out to you readers: Should the morality of one's job be called into question when interpreting employment law?



-- Modified on 12/21/2007 1:25:33 PM

Most guys would have glad to lend her a hand.

"Back in 1999 Marci Lyn Deutsch, a Florida phone sex operator, supposedly won a workers' compensation settlement alleging "she was injured after regularly masturbating at work."

I can testify, this cannot happen. Hell, sometimes I switch hands just so it feels like somebody else is doing it!

I see your point, but one could argue, I don't know if it was argued, that she does not have to engage in real masturbation for her job, just verbally simulate it.  This is different for a secretary who HAS to type.  

A porn star might have a better case since he/she has to engage in physical acts, but I can see why they don't pursue it.  Absurdly, many don't consider sex to be "work" even when it is legal, since we can voluntarily engage in it for recreation.  By that argument, sports isn't work either.

Do Sex Workers Deserve Workers Compensation?

Yes. Sex work is difficult, dangerous, and often not pleasurable.

I think the key question must come down to whether or not the masturbation was either required or, at the very least, an unavoidable result of the work that had to be performed.

If so, I could see granting relief. (No pun intended.)

One good reason for decriminalizing sex work is that it would permit sex workers to acquire workers' compensation and thereby ensure that any sex worker who was say, assaulted by a client or had a vibrator blow up on them, be able to receive medical care and wage compensation.

This would be a good one for the legal board by the way.

(still not a lawyer)

LOL
Cmon.do you know how hard it is for a woman to get workmans comp anyhow ? LOL

So now, one of the hazards of my job is walking in stilettos ? Do i go and report it when I twist my ankle  going to see a client ?

HELP IM A HOOKER.. I sprained my ankle going to see a client !

An article called "LABOR ORGANIZING IN THE SKIN TRADE:  Tales of a Peepshow Prole."  -->

livenudegirlsunite.com/story.html

An article in the Chicago Sun-Times. -->

livenudegirlsunite.com/ebert.html

Here's an article from the second article...

"When the strippers at the Lusty Lady, a San Francisco peep emporium, decided to organize themselves into a labor union, there were jolly news stories all over the country. People thought it was hilarious. This may be because in the popular mind strippers do not really work.

Opposing the strike, the management of the Lusty Lady argued that taking off your clothes in a peep show is not real labor so much as an enjoyable part-time job. The women putting in 10-hour shifts didn't see it that way--but their customers did. "What's your job?" one of the clients asks one of the girls. "I'm a stripper," she says. "I mean," he says, "how do you earn a living?"

There is the curious notion that strippers and prostitutes do what they do because they enjoy it. This is a fiction that is good for business. I am sure that some strippers and hookers do sometimes enjoy what they do, but not that they do it over and over, all day long, week after week, for a living. By way of illustration, it is possible to take pleasure in making a ham sandwich (?!?), but you might not want to work behind the counter at Mr. Submarine, especially when the customers always leave with the sandwiches."

His comparison of SEX and HAM SANDWICHES makes me want to die LAUGHING... oh my gosh...hmmm...

Cindy

PS. I love strippers.

She was legally employed, so she is entitled to job related injuries. What if she was just sitting there conversing with the customer, and a car comes barreling through the wall and she is injured (happened in real life to a book-keeper)? Why is that any different.

In her situation, it would be reasonable to argue that the masturbation enhanced the conversation that the client was paying for. Now if she was just a secretary and masturbated because there was nothing else to do, that would be a tougher case.

Maybe ADA applies, and the employer should make "reasonable accommodations" for her disability, like providing a Hitachi Magic Wand. lol

They are akin to the abhorent practice of binding the feet of women in ancient China.

I love feet and want to see them treated properly.

If insurance regulations become the avenue towards this end, then so be it.

But based on legality I'd have to say you are gonna have a problem.  If a phone sex worker, stripper, cam girl or escort in a legal brothel files tax returns and is legally employed I would say that they are certainly entitled to any sort of disability plan that is available in their state regardless of what the public view of your job may be.
If however you are involved in an illegal activity and working "under the radar" in the eyes of the state and local revenue agencies I would have to say no, you should not be eligible.

but only those that pay into the system should be entitled to compesation from it. As BG so accurately points out, if you are working UTR so to speak and not paying taxes, why should you be on a equal standing with those who actually pay into(and thus support) the system.

Amen Gambler !

Many girls do not pay their taxes-
Its just a ridiculous thing -

What kind of injuries are going to happen to an escort " on the job " anyhow-

I think they deserve 401k plans, health insurance and worker's comp.

But the trade is illegal, so its a moot point in my opinion. It should be legal though, but oh well.

-m

Porn is legal though. alluding to my earlier point. I still think prostitiution should be legalized, I think you'd find that people in general would be much happier, less suicides, less depression, less violence.

but that's not what this thread is about

-m

so is drug running. point is it's 100 percent legalities. I certainly agree they deserve it, but our countries laws disagree.

-m

I'm not arguing that utr/illegal escorts should have workers comp.. the story was related to a legal job as a phone sex operator.. and I don't know enough about this issue to comment specifically.

As for taxes, it can be more complex than some think. For example, how to file them, what to claim as a career and how far to go in trying to legitimize that career, how much to claim, what deductions to claim, and at the root of all this, whether filing taxes is going to put you in a position of legal or public scrutiny, or protect you from such? As a younger person, I have worked part time since age 15 or 16, and my parents filed my (measly) taxes. Now an adult, I have always paid my taxes and always intend to, but providing income and the legal status of sex work complicate the issue beyond a simple "Everyone should pay their taxes." Well, yeah, in theory, but like I said there are other issues.

In response, escorting has plenty of health costs and risks. Regular health care, such as testing for stds, pregnancy, etc. regularly, the cost of treating such if it were to arise (ie. cost of an abortion, cost of prescription drugs to treat a yeast infection, cost of prevention such as birth control etc.) Even something like repeated use injury, carpal tunnel of the hands for regular masturbation of clients and/or self like the article could happen.. In addition, if a client violently assaults a provider, I do believe she should have some sort of medical and legal recourse- even if just through reducing the stigma of sex work and bettering the health care system and the public access to it. In addition, any other random on the job risks not specifically related to the job- ie. a car accident en route to a work appointment, broken ankle on icy hotel walkway or freshly mopped lobby floor.. just random, but I can think of plenty of things that could happen, and that if escorting was considered a legitimate and legal profession, would likely be considered "on the job," both those things specifically related to the task at hand, and those which are not and could happen to anyone.

XoXo
Marea

Are they working as an employee of an employer that is paying for workman's compensation insurance?  Then yes.

But most are independent contractors or work off the books for cash, and are not eligible for workman's comp.

Many hobbyists and providers prefer decriminalization over legalization, as the latter entails taxation and regulation.  At the same time, it does provide access to important services and protections that decriminalization might not.

I'm also not a lawyer but I thought that decriminalization would mean that the hobby would not subject to legal persecution, not that it would be eligible for legal protections.  

For instance, a provider working for an agency would not be arrested for providing but could also not claim overtime pay, health benefits, paid holidays and vacations, etc.,  She would have to deal with all that as a private citizen, since she would have no legal status as an "employee" or "independent contractor."