What is your definition of "Indy"?

[Phil_W]

UncleBob,

A partner in a big firm? NOT INDEPENDANT

A lawyer working as an employee in a law firm? NOT INDEPENDANT
A lawyer working out of his basement office and answering the phone? YES, INDEPENDANT

My example was used to demonstrate a thought process, not the independent status of the lawyer of different situations. In the same way I could have responded to someone saying “For me a green apple is a real apple”. No, it is your “favorite apple”. A red apple is also an apple. A yellow apple is also an apple.


Since you liked to jump on my lawyer example and distort the idea behind it, let me provide you with another example.


A lawyer working out of his basement office and answering the phone? YES, INDEPENDENT

A lawyer working out of his basement office with a phone service? YES, INDEPENDENT

With a receptionist? With a paralegal?

YES, ALL INDEPENDENT BECAUSE THEY ARE STILL THEIR OWN BOSS.


You might prefer the lawyer that answers the phone right off the bat. But that is another issue just as I tried hard to have yourself and other members acknowledge in my previous posts.


Same thing with an Independent SP.

When you used Gabrielle account to express your opions Phil at the beginning of this thread, I'm sorry, but it just look like an agency that takes care of the interest of their girls but it is worst cause you used some obe else account... (I'm glad you now use you own account)
Now when I see a comment from gabrielle on merb using the account with her name, I will always have doubt about if this is really her writing her own opinions...

The following post was in fact dictated by Gabrielle Garnier and represents HER RESPONSE TO THIS INSULTING THREAD. All I did was to proof read the text and post it on her behalf (just as I do for her ads). The only part that is from me is the last line (to offer a translation). Things are exactly as presented.

Do you see anything in the post below anything that indicate otherwise? So UncleBob, are you also suggesting, like Ezekiel who didn't even respond to my question to him, that the the following is a shill or a lie or anything similar in nature?

I have never posted anything on this board pretending to be someone else. Nor have I done it in emails, text messages or phone calls (this last one would be a tough one anyways!). The ads posted for Gabrielle are drafted by Gabrielle, approved by Gabrielle. Even the titles to her ads are chosen by Gabrielle.

So kindly retract yourself from this false accusation.

Regards, Phil.

Bonjour.

Permettez-moi d'ajouter mon grain de sel dans la présente discussion.

Je me considère comme indépendante à part entière malgré le fait que j'ai décidé, par mon choix personnel, de déléguer certaines tâches à un assistant. D’une part, c’est important à mes yeux que les clients qui désirent prendre un rendez-vous pour me rencontrer puissent recevoir une réponse rapide, professionnelle et courtoise et ce, même quand je ne suis pas disponible (pour des raisons professionnelles ou personnelles).

Un assistant compétant effectue la coordination de mes rendez-vous, me fait part des demandes spéciales, publie ma publicité, etc. Et le choix d’un assistant est justement fait en fonction de son haut degré de compétence, de son excellente connaissance de mon domaine d’activité, de son degré de disponibilité (plus de 15 heures/jour et 7 jours/semaine dans le cas de Phil).

Pas pour un contexte de « boyfriend, pimp or fake-indy » comme cela a été suggéré dans ce thread.


Que ce soit pour le contenu de ma publicité, mes horaires, mes tarifs ou tout autre aspect de mes activités professionnelles, je suis en charge de toutes les décisions qui me concernent.



Pour moi, c’est un choix personnel et professionnel qui, j’en suis consciente, pourrait ne pas correspondre aux attentes de tous, mais c’est mon choix et cela répond à MES exigences.



Je respecte le choix de d’autres Indépendantes d’assumer en tout temps les tâches liées à leurs communications, publicité, etc.

J’apprécierais que l’on puisse respecter tout autant mes propres choix.


Gabrielle Garnier.


[FONT=&amp]P.S. (by Phil) Should you require an English translation, I told Gabrielle I would be glad to oblige (while Gabrielle keeping her Indy status, Lol!). Best regards to all, Phil.[/FONT]

 

[wolfie7]

OMG, how did this most inane of threads get resuscitated again??... 9 pages of this shit?! Point made. Agree to disagree already.

MERB is supposed to amuse and inform on SP quality of service, not technicalities and semantics. Now you bring lawyer-speak into this. I can't think of a faster de-boner than a fucking lawyer.

At the time this thread was started, it wasn't even about G Garnier and Jezabelle. Rather, it was stupid poking at a pair of smoking hot SPs from an agency in transition. And yet another poorly guised dig at that booker and pair. Juvenile...

 

[Phil_W]

Thanks wolfie7.

I totally agree and hope this gets put to bed today (getting in bed is soooooo much better!)

My thought was to ignore this, but on a matter of principle, we cannot stand idle in the face of the attacks and insinuations in this thread (veiled and otherwise).

Regards, Phil.

 

[wolfie7]

Fair enough. Principles are important. I can't fault you for that. I'd be a hypocrite otherwise.

(The finality of your previous post though, I'm sure, rubbed some the wrong way. And maybe that got it off to a bad start.) OK, now I'm being guilty of prolonging this thread... I'm done.

 

[ezekiel]

Phil,

First of all at night I sleep and I sleep very well by the way! In case you don't know while you sleep well you can't answer anyone on a forum

Now no i do not suggest that you lie. I only state that the fact that having an agent that was hired by two ladies of the same agency at the same time

that used to work too in the same agency. Is just odd and I think it is just normal that some ppl ask some question about the status of thoses ladies.

Then, like an agency we all know that you are the assistant from jezabell and gabrielle it is obvious that you write for them their ads. You even stated that you answered this thread for

Gabrielle. There is also the fact that for an employee you defend their status with so much energy. I'm wondering why?


Ez

 

[lgna69xxx]

I think Faithful is a good word to describe Phil, not a bad thing and very refreshing in this business.

There is also the fact that for an employee you defend their status with so much energy. I'm wondering why?


Ez

 

[Sol Tee Nutz]

To me it makes sense if an indy hires a booker, indies have a life outside of the industry and can not answer the phone due to work, classes or whatever. Why was it wrong to have Phil work for Gabrielle or Jezebelle? They know and trust him and it sounds like a no brainer to me. If I was with a corporation and went on my own and some assistant I knew wanted to help me I would still be on my own and have an employee. As for answering my mail ( threads )... wrong, unless it is stated that the assistant is replying for the person with his/her permission.
Short answer, you can be an indy with an employee and still be an indy.

 

[Phil_W]

Now no i do not suggest that you lie.

Good to hear that. Thank you.

However, you come back with the same insinuation:

Is just odd and I think it is just normal that some ppl ask some question about the status of thoses ladies.

I answered this several times. What could still be odd in your mind? Is it clear to you now or it is not? If it is, please refrain from unclear suggestions or say what you mean.

Then, like an agency we all know that you are the assistant from jezabell and gabrielle it is obvious that you write for them their ads.

Yes I am their assistant. How does that make us an agency? Agency SP's do not decide on all aspects of how their business is run. Independents do. Again, as I said several times previously, I POST their ads. Jezabelle and Gabrielle design their marketing and advertising. And I execute their will by posting the material they design and approve.

You even stated that you answered this thread for Gabrielle.

Where did you see that?

What I said is the following.

The following post was in fact dictated by Gabrielle Garnier and represents HER RESPONSE TO THIS INSULTING THREAD. All I did was to proof read the text and post it on her behalf (just as I do for her ads). The only part that is from me is the last line (to offer a translation). Things are exactly as presented.

I have never posted anything on this board pretending to be someone else. Nor have I done it in emails, text messages or phone calls (this last one would be a tough one anyways!). The ads posted for Gabrielle are drafted by Gabrielle, approved by Gabrielle. Even the titles to her ads are chosen by Gabrielle.

I would encourage you to read more carefully: It was signed by Gabrielle, not Phil. So it comes from her. End of story.

Any posts, emails, SMS ever written by myself is signed as "Phil", usually with the "Personal Assistant to XYZ". Is it too much to expect you to read until the end of a post to see who wrote it? Apparently so, and that is the reason I created my own handle to avoid any possible "confusion" .

There is also the fact that for an employee you defend their status with so much energy. I'm wondering why?

Quite simple: because Jezabelle and Gabrielle are annoyed, insulted and frustrated that their independent status is questioned here by some members. Since I totally agree with them and that my character draws me to defend principles to their fullest extent, that's why I do so with that level of "energy".

Also, I must agree on another point raised earlier by Wolfie7. Merb is supposed to showcase the best of what Montreal has to offer in term of the great ladies we are fortunate to have in this city, to provide a community where members can share their experiences with them and to be a fun place to relax online. Opinions and observations on various subjects can also be expressed of course.

But when people do it through innuendo and do not display the bravery of stating clearly who and what they are talking about, I think it has no place on this board. At least that is my opinion. I wonder how many more would agree. And I could make a list of posts made here where it is clearly the case.

Regards, Phil.

 

[Orange_Julep]

Two women become indies. They decide to make their lives easier and hire someone to take care of some time-consuming aspects of the job. Members here jump on the said indies claiming they are not indies, or not "full" indies, or not indies in "their mind", or whatever. No form of explanation will suffice to appease these nay-sayers.

Which part of this behavior is consistent with respecting sex-workers' authority in making their own decisions? When did it become clients' business to start categorizing sex-workers according to some warped understanding of independence ("none" to "full")? How is hiring someone not precisely a demonstration that these ladies are their own bosses? What other reasons might motivate some members to tell these ladies (in their own review thread, and here) that they are not who they say they are?

 

[Phil_W]

Very well said sir. And in a much shorter version than I could ever manage, Lol!

Kudos to you!

Regards, Phil

 

[Phil_W]

Hello Kitty,

Escorts that have Agencies working for them or are working by Themselves are ALL INDEPENDENTS.

Allow me to disagree on your use of the term "ALL INDEPENDENTS" to categorize Sex Workers . SP's are actually "All Self-Employed" (better defined by the french term "Travailleuse Autonome"). They are not paid by salary, have not social benefits, no paid vacation, etc.

When a self-employed person works for a single employer, the employment conditions (i.e. when and where the work is to be performed, how the work is to be completed, etc.) are determined in part or in full by the employer. Transpose that to the SP world = SP working in an agency = Still Self-Employed, but NOT INDEPENDENT.

It is black and white on one point: Independent SP's decide on ALL ASPECTS of how their business is run.

Regards, Phil.

 

[Stroman]

For the love of God, Can someone close the thread?

 

[Orange_Julep]

I’ve now read this thread more thoroughly and have two points.


Number 1:

Yes these girls now have their OWN individual ad threads, they are certainly making decisions and ask for more $$ so we can say their "status" changed indeed.
But for ME, this is not a significant change in this particular case (Booker still involved).

I understand that you have your own opinions about this, UncleBob, and I’m totally fine with that. The thing is, you *are* pushing a definition of indy in a thread on what indies are. So when you say that there is no significant difference (or change in status) between an escort that works for an agency, and an escort who is her own boss and hires a booker, I can’t help but speak up because this opinion not only does not reflect the facts, but is actually detrimental to those sex-workers you don't consider "fully" independent. Some members are now doubting that they're actually paying for the service they thought they were paying for - in many cases, a service they felt was more ethical precisely because of the assumption that the indy is in control of her business.

"Asking for more $$" has no relationship to being an independent escort, though making more money (i.e. pocketing all the earnings), does. The price difference you speak of, where it exists (many indies charge pretty much the same price as agencies), is actually the insignificant difference. The significant difference, as suggested earlier by Amélie, relates to the who is working for who. An independent escort is her booker’s boss; in the case of an agency escort, that booker is either her boss or an employee of her boss. She generally has no real control over which clients the booker selects, what price she is to charge, and what services she is to provide (especially in the case of "GFE" agencies). That’s a world of difference from an indy’s situation. If an indy isn't satisfied with the work of her booker, she can fire him. She has COMPLETE control over how her business is run. The power relationship between an independent escort and her booker is therefore reversed as compared to the agency escort. This is such a HUGE difference that I can’t even begin to understand how an indy with a booker might be seen as the near equivalent of an escort working for an agency.

Number 2:

SP's are actually "All Self-Employed" (better defined by the french term "Travailleuse Autonome"). They are not paid by salary, have not social benefits, no paid vacation, etc.

I will very strongly disagree with this point. This is Revenu Québec’s definition of "self-employed person":

You are considered a self-employed person if you are free to choose the means of carrying out a contract and no relationship of subordination exists between you and your client. (Source)

I do not believe this to be the case of escorts who work in agencies. But since self-employed status can be a tricky thing to evaluate, here are the six criteria Revenu Québec uses:

1) Subordination to the employer. A client (in this case, an agency) does not set your work schedule or decide where or how you will do your work. He cannot determines the conditions of your hiring and firing or define your tasks and work methods. He cannot take disciplinary action against you, nor can he prevent you from offering your services to more than one client. Considering that agencies often do set escorts' schedules (or penalize escorts who don't respect the schedule they provided); that they determine the working conditions; that they define what services they are to offer (e.g. GFE); that they can fire them; and that they do not generally allow escorts to have clients outside the agency, the non-subordinate relationship criteria is not met.

2) Financial liability. Do escorts cover agencies' operating costs? Do they assume financial risk by working for the agency? If a loss is incurred (say, a dissatisfied client wants a refund) does that effect the escort's salary (say, when the agency owner decides to offer the dissatisfied client a free hour with another escort)? If the answer is no to these questions, you are probably not self-employed.

3) Ownership of tools. Do the escort own the lines on which their clients call? Do they own the agency’s website? Do they own the car that drives them from location to location? The apartment they work in? The agencies’ membership on Merb? Do all these tools not allow escorts to perform their job? If they are not the owner of the tools that allow them to do their jobs, they are probably not self-employed.

4) Degree to which the work is integral to the activities of the work provider. Self-employed persons do not normally provide services that are integral to their client’s business. Do escorts sell a service that is among the agency's main activities? Do agency escorts primarily earn their income by working for one agency? Yes and yes? Probably not self-employed.

5) The work ends when specific results are achieved. Are escorts hired by agencies to achieve a specific result? Are they free to determine the means to achieve that result (not provide GFE, only provide one SOG, say)? Are their services made available to the agency for a long period of time? Probably not self-employed.

6) Agreements on working conditions. Ok, not being on any actual payroll, agency escorts probably don’t make CSST payments, aren’t eligible for the agency's client’s group insurance plan and don't have access to severance pay. So maybe they really are self-employed.

All this information is paraphrased from this Revenu Québec document.

 

[Orange_Julep]

For the love of God, Can someone close the thread?

Sorry

[This message is no longer too short to be posted.]

 

[UncleBob]

SAM why closing this thread?

The opinions given here are IMHO respectful and are on a subject that cannot affect negatively any escort business.

Phil's indies are still the same great legends.

Why would you to stop people to express on a innofensive subject?

 

[UncleBob]

Phil, or Gab, who ever, where do you see secretiveness and any conspiracies in here?

 

[Stroman]

SAM why closing this thread?

The opinions given here are IMHO respectful and are on a subject that cannot affect negatively any escort business.


Why would you to stop people to express on a innofensive subject?

Alright, let the thread live!

It is indeed inoffensive. Sorry if I intruded.

For me, it's just that the topic reached its saturity.

But hey, if you think otherwise, then alright let's keep it alive.

My apologies if I offended anyone.

 

[neverbored]

Wow 4 pages on this?

 

[Stroman]

Wow 4 pages on this?

Yeah! I know!

 

[UncleBob]

Orange, you did not quote everything from what I said but I fully agree that there is indeed a big change for a SP that goes indy with a booker as descibed by Phil, but this change is more visible from the girl side. From a client point of view, booking an indy with a booker from an agency or a booker employed by the girl, I don't see a diff.
But I fully agree and always been, these girls are independants.

For me and this only for me, my opinion, stop thinking I talk in the behalf of all the johns lol, is that there are SHADES of independancy (Not only a question of preference ...)

That's all.

Many here do not agree with my opinions, I respect that.


I will repeat:

I fully agree to the following:
- SP in the Independant Section are working on their OWN.
- Bookers are employees of these Indies.


But for me and only ME, there are shades in the status.