 |
Raven's lawsuit against WWE
|
 |
Author |
Message |
neftali
Ring Technician
Joined: 12 Mar 2006
Posts: 1745
Location: Southern New Hampshire
|
| Posted 27 Aug 2008, 12:04 am |
 |
from http://www.prowrestling.net/artman/publish/WWE/article1002570.shtml
| Quote: |
The lawsuit filed by Raven (a/k/a Scott Levy), Mike Sanders, and Chris Kanyon against WWE regarding independent contractor classification can be read online at CTemploymentlawblog.com. [Thanks to Mike Landau of WrestlingHerald.com.
Powell's POV: It's worth noting that the lawsuit leaves open the possibility for others to join in a class action against WWE. The suit also refers to the WWE classification of wrestlers as independent contracts as "a shame and void." In case you missed it, WWE attorney Jerry McDevitt claimed he would prove the claims are "bogus" in court this week. |
from http://www.ctemploymentlawblog.com/
| Quote: |
As I've cross-posted over at Overlawyered.com today, three wrestlers have sued Connecticut-based World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. (WWE) claiming that they have been improperly classified as "independent contractors" and not employees.
On Friday, WWE removed the lawsuit to federal court from state court claiming that federal questions are implicated in what would otherwise seem to be a "breach of contract" claim. (You can read the removal papers here http://www.ctemploymentlawblog.com/uploads/file/wweremoval.pdf.) What federal questions? Well, federal employment tax questions for one.
But the interesting part of the case is not the removal papers, but the underlying lawsuit itself. (You can download the complaint here http://www.ctemploymentlawblog.com/uploads/file/wwe.pdf) The wrestlers -- who are seeking class-action status -- claim that they were required to sign a "booking contract" that specified the terms of their engagement such as their training regiment, costumes, and -- to the surprise of no one -- the "outcome of each match". They claim that they were akin to "employees" and should have been paid as such. WWE denied the allegations in a 10-Q filing late last month.
While the employees are seeking damages, typically, the penalty for employers is to pay the employment taxes of the employees with some penalties. It's unclear here what else the wrestlers are actually seeking. The case has been assigned to Senior Judge Peter Dorsey.
The proper classification of workers has been a thorny issue for employers, going back to the days of the landmark Microsoft lawsuit from the late '90s. As an employer, you can get a headstart on the issue by going to the IRS website which has lots of commentary and resources on the subject. |
|
Last edited by neftali on 27 Aug 2008, 12:08 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
  |
 |
|
|
|
Author |
Message |
GrayGhost
Color Commentator
Joined: 17 Aug 2004
Posts: 20850
Location: Manchester, Ct.
|
| Posted 27 Aug 2008, 12:07 am |
|
Im curious as to how WWE thinks they can prove that the wrestlers "aren't under their control, and told when to work, etc. what to do", all major components of being classified as an employee. |
11-21UConn NCAA soccer vs Fairfield
11-22 Uconn Hockey vs RIT
11-24 WWE Raw
12-5 PGW
12-6 NEW
12-13 ECCW Sourbridge tbd
1-3-09 GHTBL Awards dinner. Bolton, CT.
1-10 FRW womens doubleheader show (tbd)
1-11/12 JACK IS BACK season seven.
1-16-09 EWA Palmer
1-31 Big Shot Mohegan Sun
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Author |
Message |
wareagle96
Ringrat
Joined: 30 Aug 2008
Posts: 13
|
| Posted 30 Aug 2008, 11:39 pm |
|
I was wondering about that as well. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
  |
Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
