Dancer’s complaint could have impact

Dancing in a Las Vegas show, the glamorous life, huh?

Never has a profession involving so relatively few people – and a part-time job for many of them – been so interesting to the outside world.

We’ve seen the backstage melodrama in movies such as “Showgirls.”

In that infamous stinker, a show producer advises one auditioning dancer, in NC-17 terms, to come back when she’s had enough sex to burn “some of that baby fat off.”

But in a courtroom last week, the creators of “Vegas! The Show” chose their language carefully.

“Not the best performer we had,” choreographer Tiger Martina said of Anne Carter, a dancer who filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board after her contract was not renewed.

When Martina said, “Her legs are completely wide open,” he was talking about show photographs of dance formations being scrutinized with the intensity of the Zapruder film.

The multiday hearing mirrored a courtroom trial in its testimony and cross-examination in front of a traveling administrative law judge, Eleanor Laws.

I’ve seen dancers in need of this attention. Last year, I wrote of cast members who went unpaid when magician Steve Wyrick’s show folded. They were independent contractors working alongside union stagehands, with no recourse other than a lawsuit.

This one? It will be a much closer call when Laws decides, but one with ramifications for the majority of performers on the Strip not represented by the Actor’s Equity union as well as the producers who hire them.

“Vegas!” producer David Saxe called the hearing a “witch hunt,” an “abuse of power” that has cost him $70,000 in legal fees, wasting time and taxpayer money. Carter wasn’t even terminated, he argues. He simply opted not to renew a contract, which he thought was the reason contracts exist in the first place.

Carter wasn’t in a union, so the NLRB complaint hinges upon whether she was dropped from the show for engaging in “concerted activities” with other dancers. According to her complaint, her departure stemmed from “requesting pay for rehearsal time, days off, holiday pay” and other issues involving breaks and staffing levels.

Though much of the hearing centered on the quality of Carter’s dancing , Martina also testified she was “demanding” and “combative in her approach,” with a knack for getting the other dancers “really upset.”

We’ll see what the judge decides. But as a retroactive lesson to Wyrick’s dancers? Start some “concerted activity” before the first check bounces.

Contact reporter Mike Weatherford at mweatherford@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0288.