I have this gig that happens every two weeks. It is working at a mall entertaining and twisting balloons. After about 2 months I just found out something I am not comfortable with.

First off let me say that I am a family entertainer. That is known to the customer as it is in my selling spiel.

Secondly this gig is subcontracted through a clown.

Well, I was at this gig last Friday and a security person told some teenagers move along. I was in the middle of entertaining a group of people. The security guard did it a second time and I was able to stop her and tell her not to do that. She told me that she was told that anyone under 10 were not supposed to be taking part of the entertainment. I looked at her really oddly. I told her to not do it again please, and I'll take any heat from her boss.

After the gig I find out we were hired (there's four of us there) to bring families into the mall (fair enough...I knew that) because they want to get rid of the teenagers because they don't buy anything.

So I am supposed to only talk to people who are doing business with the mall. How am to make that assumption? Ask them if they are spending money before they see me entertain?

For me this is age discrimination against teens (whom I never had a problems with in the past 2 months since I respect them and treat them as every other guest of the mall).

Also my contract does not state anything about the age restrictions or I wouldn't have signed it.

So I am in a dilemma. I am contracted to do the gigs but I am really uncomfortable with the situation.

You are gonna have to take this up with whoever hired you. Your "boss" is the one who decides what the work rules are, and probably is the person who can get you and the security staff on the same agenda..

I agree that you can't continue quite like this - may it possibly be a problem with a single security staffer, or has it happened with several?

As for "age discrimination," that's really not an issue for you to deal with. The mall management sets the rules, and they could make the whole place "adults only" if they chose. This is not a matter involving anyone's civil rights (which boil down to "equal protection under law") - they aren't chasing away adults based on ethnicity or religion or gender. There are plenty of businesses which do not allow unaccompanied minors at all (look at the sign on the door of your favorite computer-game store). But the mall's current method of dealing with the issue is not even-handed: they allow young people with one policy, forbid them with another - the weight of this disparity confuses you (as well it may) and you need to get someone to decide which of the two ways they want it.

Here is my view. First of all teens DO hang out at malls and don't tend to spend much money vs the number of hours there and the mall wants their customers, the store operators, to be happy and thus attract families who will likely not loiter in front of the arcade but will shop. That isn't discrimination it is business and based on simple facts. If the teens were running around spending cash with the stores that pay the mall for their space no problem. If parents with young children were the ones loitering then they would do things to attract teens and geezers like me. Demographics my man.

Now having said that I think the guard and who ever told them to chase the viewers off was out of line. If the kids are not causing a problem they can and should be allowed to watch because they very well may NOT be loiters but be there with their families that consist of younger kids and parents along with themselves.

Do I think you are over reacting like an over wound PC addicted person? Yes I do. If you don't want the gig then quit. You won't change policy, you won't make them take pause and think "Hmmmm....maybe the loiters who don't spend money ARE good for business". You will just have lost a job. I would tell them not to have the guard disrupt the show again.

Just do the gig, if you are comfortable with it. If not, the world is big enough.

I see your points and will talk to those in charge as the situation did make me feel uncomfortable.

It's weird when 50 percent of the mall stores cater to youth and the mall is trying to get rid of them. Doesn't make business sense to me.

It's not so much PC but just more about my own performing paradigm and what I am comfortable with.

I'll let you know how it goes.

The whole philosophy of "Teens don't spend money" is severely flawed.
I have yet to see groups of teens walking around nekked. They consume as much as, if not more than adults, they just don't do it directly.
Yes they browse for an hour in Hot Topic, hang out in Ambercrombie and Fitch just looking at stuff, split a soda with a friend and then go home.
But what are they wearing when they do it? A $60 Ambercrombie t-shirt? A $40 skirt from Hot Topic? Earrings in ears that were pierced at the piercing pagoda.
Whould they have any of these things if they never went to the mall, came back and begged their parents?
I doubt it.
So...It is a flawed philosophy.
I don't expect it to change, but it is still foolinsh.
Gwyd

I remember when I was a banker we used to critique vehicle sales people at the dealerships on there sales skills whenever the opportunity arised.
On one occasion a fairly experienced sales person was having a lenghty conversation with a couple and showing them a few cars. When they walked out I told him they were not going to buy a car and he asked me how I knew. I said because the guy said right in the beginning of the conversation that he wanted to buy his wife a car for his birthday and not only did you not ask when her birthday is you also never spoke to her to find out what she liked. Yes the guy is spending the money but I can gaurantee you that the woman is doing the choosing.
The same thing applies above.
I am very sure that the security personnel are just "following orders" but very often the people on "ground" level have no idea how to implement management decisions or make judgement calls which is why they are not part of management.

Age discrimination IS a civil rights issue, and may give rise to 14th Amendment equal protection claims. It is judged under a different standard than race or gender (which, in fact, are also judged under different standards from each other -- gender discrimination is easier to justify than racial discrimination), but it still under the same umbrella. Even racial discrimination MAY be justified under the 14th Amendment but it's a really tough sell. In contrast, age discrimination is scrutinized less strictly, and is thus much more likely not to be found unconstitutional.

KIDS? What about the Mall Walkers? You know, the swarm of seniors who need to do a hundred laps and day. Yet they buy nothing and will knock you over if you are in their way! Let's face it, sure kids/teens can be annoying but at least they don't run you over.

I can tell you from experience having carts in the mall and airports. It's the mall management. It’s corporate Logic, plain and simply.

Bottom line. It sucks working in those environments, not easy at best.

Good luck, if it were me and I Had to work there, I would suck it up and just keep my mouth closed. Let the management work it all out, you just stand there and do your thing - don't get involved! Management changes things daily and when you work in a mall, you are subjected to their slightest whims, no matter how extreme or insane. I've seen them walk over to someone’s cart, unplug the power and roll the cart to another part of the mall. With no prior warning! You have to learn to put a glaze over your eyes and get into a zone. Zone everything out except for the task at hand.

Hang in there.

My take is, the entertainer should do the entertainer's job, and he should let the security guard do the security guard's job. If you don't like owner's policies, as evinced by the security guard's actions and comments, then give a week's notice and quit the gig.

Bill,

I certainly see your point. However, you as a subcontractor have no argument with the mall or its security force. You can share your concern with the person that hired you, but as in most situations, you have been hired to perform; so just work the gig. If it becomes too uncomfortable, then you have a decision to make.

And if the people are asked to leave my response would simply be, "I'm sorry, it's mall policy". The mall will hear about it, trust me. The kids will go home, complain to their parents and the parents will be on the phone, talking to mall management. As for my children, I taught them that they had NO rights, just privileges. Rights were achieved by demonstrating responsibility. They learned that rights were achieved through hard work and not entitlements.

As for our local mall, I would love them to implement a similar policy. I would also love them to terminate the contracts of those stores that cater to the gang or delinquent mentality. Management's answer however, has been to do neither and place a police station in the mall. I don't shop there anymore. I travel to another city, they do it right.

I will finish the job (it end at the end of June) as I am contracted to do so. Having talked to someone in charge they understand (hear) my concerns and ask that I gear the stuff for the under 10 patrons but because of it not being stated in the contract that I can still do as I do. However, any future engagements might be in question due to my philosophies.

I also found out that the other performers asked for the security guards to shoo the teens away since they were getting harrassed. This is odd since I haven't had problems because as I said in my first post, I treat them with respect and non-prejudice. The other clowns were not doing anything for the older set thus creating conflict.

Justin, you make a good point about mall walkers. The only problem is that age discrimination is somehow easier to be a legal issue with those over 65 and many cases have been fought and won in those instances.

I did find this link of interest
http://www.cbc.ca/streetcents/archives/g......_01.html
http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/dca-dea/ncd-j......air.html

Steven, I like the idea of putting the responsibility on the mall by saying it's mall policy. That was really my biggest issue as I have a certain image/paradigm to uphold and I felt that I was being made to look bad. Your response is both professional and makes the point of who is at fault.