Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Wednesday, June 27, 2012

Stay Classy, Popular Sports Bar Near UCLA

Posted by on Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:28 AM

A former server is suing O’Hara’s in Westwood, alleging that she was forced to wear a minuscule plaid "schoolgirl" skirt with a Velcro fastening. Annnnnd....

She also claims managers placed fans on the floor of the bar that would blow waitresses’ skirts up in the air as they rang up customers at the register...

[The server] also objected to another bar policy that allowed bar patrons to rate female customers on their attractiveness on a scale of 1-through-10 and award the top vote-getters with free shots of liquor.

She alleges that after she complained, her hours were cut and then she was fired. The owners of O'Hara's have "denied the lawsuit’s allegations" via their lawyer.

 

Comments (25) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
TVDinner 1
Ugh. I hope she bankrupts them.
Posted by TVDinner http:// on June 27, 2012 at 7:36 AM
2
If there's one thing I've learned from the Zimmerman case, it's that we need to run those guys out on a rail based on hearsay before the haters have a chance to put together a fair and constitutional trial.
Posted by DisorganizedReligion on June 27, 2012 at 8:00 AM
3
Have you been to CowGirls in Pioneer Square?
Posted by giffy on June 27, 2012 at 8:12 AM
4
yes, this is horrible and sexist. but the escort ads at the back of the stranger are not. showing sex and bodies for money is sexist and horrible. except when i do it. it's like most moralithy things that way. the general rule is "as long as its consenting adults, it's okay, it's their business". until I run into something I don't like. it's the same way with racism, right? for example, if you see folks wearing blackface at the fremont parade, that's horrible and racist, but if you vote for patty murray who makes laws for dc and puerto rico residents as if they were second class citizens ( oh wait! they are!) then THAT issue is just a background thing you think about occassionally. but it's not you being a second class citizen so it doesn't really matter.
Posted by selective outrage is suspect on June 27, 2012 at 8:26 AM
5
@4 Good point on the ads in the Stranger, but you lost me on the rest of it. The Stranger pays its bills by exploitation. Or wait, it's not exploitation because everyone is consenting. Aren't they? For sure?
Posted by David from Chicago on June 27, 2012 at 8:35 AM
Supreme Ruler Of The Universe 6

I just saw that same thing happen when I went to see "Rock of Ages" last night.

Posted by Supreme Ruler Of The Universe http://www.you-read-it-here-first.com on June 27, 2012 at 8:40 AM
Urgutha Forka 7
I'm shocked - SHOCKED! - to find that women are treated as sex objects here!
Posted by Urgutha Forka on June 27, 2012 at 8:52 AM
Westlake, son! 8
Sometimes people are paid money for no other reason than because they're beautiful.

Unfortunately I've never been paid to be beautiful, but I have been paid based solely on my ability to lift heavy objects.

I don't see what the problem is here.
Posted by Westlake, son! on June 27, 2012 at 8:55 AM
9
I've heard worse. Like these places where girls are made to actually take off their clothes for money. I think they call them 'strip clubs' or something? Anyway, to me, that is a lot worse. And so not classy. All those 'strippers' should sue their 'strip clubs.'
Posted by Billy Chav on June 27, 2012 at 9:03 AM
Catalina Vel-DuRay 10
Many centuries ago, when I was in college, I worked at a restaurant where the waitstaff were required to dress in skimpy costumes (short skirts/low bustlines for the ladies, extremely tight sailor/cowboy costumes for the men)

At the top of every hour, you had to get up on the nearest table and perform a dance number to songs like "Boogie Woogie Bugle Boy", and the customers were encouraged to tip.

It was a straight establishment, and popular with bachelorette parties and the sort of housewives who drink in the afternoon. To say there was objectification would be an understatement.

Later, I worked as a coat check boy at The Cuff, where the fewer clothes I wore (within the regulations of the WSLCB of course) the higher my tip would be.

One takes these jobs knowing what the climate is. Unless one is actually assaulted, I don't have much sympathy.
Posted by Catalina Vel-DuRay http://www.danlangdon.com on June 27, 2012 at 9:07 AM
Theodore Gorath 11
You mean completely unskilled workers are not allowed to agree to a job, then change the duties, policies, and uniform of the business to whatever they want?

Man, I gotta sue the Wendy's I worked for years ago for making me sweep the floors and wear that emasculating visor.
Posted by Theodore Gorath on June 27, 2012 at 9:23 AM
12
D in chitown, the point is simple, it's we're all selective in out outrage. the left as much as the right. if you try to articulate a principle to base your outrage on, such as "if between consenting adult's it's okay" then you me or anyone stranger included will quickly find that they still make exceptions to that principle ....to really throw gas on the fire, why woulnd't it be okay for three sisters to marry each other, to get the various rights? the notable examples of selective outrage I see are the hypersentivity to racial comments when our actual american laws make residents of dc and puerto rico second class citizens with all the outraged liberals who're so antiracist not even taking notice of this de jure discrimination embodid in law depriving folks of voting rights. but ohmy god, some restaurant has a fan and is a strip club,k but didn't call itself a strip club, horrors. some dudes wear blackface, horrors. unless, of course, it's the zulu parade in new orleans. oh wait, blacks there also get a pass if they wear native garb, that's traditional. the point is pehaps we should examine our outrage a bit more, to try for greater consistency and reason. yes, I know, it's like taming a wild elephant you're riding, but please, sometimes the cerebellum can control the amygdalia.
Posted by to d in c on June 27, 2012 at 9:46 AM
13
I really don't see much difference between this job and being a stripper... There's nothing wrong with being required to be eye-candy as long as the job description is upfront and honest. If, however, the psuedo-sex work wasn't in the job description, I think there's a problem.
Posted by Jamie in Pittsburgh http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/strawberry.limonade?ref=name on June 27, 2012 at 10:03 AM
DOUG. 14
Why include UCLA in the headline? As a UCLA alum, let me tell you that (proximity aside) Westwood has about as much in common with the campus as Belltown does with UW.
Posted by DOUG. http://www.dougsvotersguide.com on June 27, 2012 at 10:33 AM
evilvolus 15
@13 - Yeah. Being upfront about it is pretty much required.

But avoiding lawsuits like these is exactly why no Vegas hotel hires "servers" or "wait staff" -- all the floor people are hired as "entertainers."
Posted by evilvolus on June 27, 2012 at 10:39 AM
Matt the Engineer 16
@13 has it. The core service waitstaff provides is serving food. It's a small step from allowing this waitress to be fired to firing secretaries for not wearing a bikini to work.
Posted by Matt the Engineer on June 27, 2012 at 10:47 AM
aureolaborealis 17
Sounds like somebody wasn't getting enough free shots.
Posted by aureolaborealis on June 27, 2012 at 11:21 AM
aureolaborealis 18
@15: I think you're right.
I wonder if she didn't take this job with the lawsuit part of the plan. I mean, I'm sympathetic, but do you really take a job at a place like that not knowing what you're getting into?
Posted by aureolaborealis on June 27, 2012 at 11:26 AM
evilvolus 19
@18 - Could happen. I showed up for an interview once having completely forgotten even applying for the job. 6 years later, I'm still here. They rarely look up my skirt, though.
Posted by evilvolus on June 27, 2012 at 11:29 AM
20
It's spelled minuscule.
Posted by bigyaz on June 27, 2012 at 11:34 AM
21
@20: Oh hell, you're right. It was early.
Posted by Bethany Jean Clement on June 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM
22
Well, obviously the bar's owners are on the up and up when they deny all allegations rather than make the claim that she knew what she was signing up for.

@9,

From what I understand, strip clubs have pretty strict rules regarding how customers are allowed to treat strippers. And, anecdotally, I've heard claims from strippers that they get more respect from customers at strip clubs than at normal retail/service establishments, because anyone who steps out of line at a strip club gets his ass booted out the door.
Posted by keshmeshi on June 27, 2012 at 11:56 AM
Teslick 23
According to the LA Weekly, she had been working there since 2007 and this was a recent change to increase profits. If that is the case, I'd would think her suit has merit.
Posted by Teslick on June 27, 2012 at 12:41 PM
Teslick 24
Crap... "I would". Sorry for poor grammar me from.
Posted by Teslick on June 27, 2012 at 12:43 PM
Dougsf 25
@14 - probably because people write news items from behind a computer.

A friend of mine works in a "hip" Hollywood restaurant where the servers dress like something between a Nazi dominatrix and a St. Pauli Girl. I'm not sure what you're supposed to do with that knowledge, but there it is.
Posted by Dougsf on June 27, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

Want great deals and a chance to win tickets to the best shows in Seattle? Join The Stranger Presents email list!


All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy