Security staff.....

[yawanna]

Do any of your clubs have security guards on hand during events?

[BiloxiCouple]

I'm sure everyone has different levels of security.

Some are as simple as owners/managers using their cell phones and good common sense.

Or as elaborate as actually having two-way radios, security surveillance equipment and security guards.

If in doubt ask the club or event in question about what type of security they have.

[EternallySingle]

I believe any club that is set up to allow people to meet for the first time is going to have security. There are too many chances for misunderstandings to occur and, more importantly, too many ways for things to come up missing.

The question should be "Are your security people restricted to only providing security or are they allowed to interact with the guest." I won't go to one of the 3 clubs within 100 miles of my home that allows single men because the security staff, which consists of single men the host said he trusted, spent more time trying to keep the other men away from women and couples than watching for thieves or real trouble makers. One couple, two unmarried people, were kicked out after one of the doormen tried to seperate the two and the boyfriend got upset. Don't even want to know if he still works there. To me, picking him and allowing them to participate while "working" showed poor judgement on the part of the host and hostess in my book.

[fun_pairTX]

Our club has cameras on the exterior and the gated areas. No one is admitted without prior arrangement. No one can go there "spur of the moment" without speaking with the host of hostess first. The staff does't "play" with the guests. It is a very well run establishment.

[BiloxiCouple]

Security people only have the "power" that the owners/managers give them. If you have any problem with a staff member or guest, you need to let the management know and as quick as you can.

As I say all the time you need to check with the club about any specific rules they may have. Especially before you hand your money over!

[remox]

If by "Security" you mean is there someone walking through the facility to insure that the rules are obeyed....the answer is almost always "yes". It may be the hosts, or more of a bouncer type with a shirt that says "staff" or something similar.

If you mean uniformed officers either from local law enforcement or a private agency the answer is almost always "no."

If you mean, does someone look after my car to make sure that noone tries to steal it while I am inside...it depends on the facility.

If you mean, can I lock up my purse or wallet again it depends on the facility.

Do you mean, is someone going to give my personal information such as address, phone or name out...probably not..but each organization handles just how carefully they guard that information (if they even collect it) differently.

I can only answer specifically about my own club.

We have a guest to staff ratio of about 10 guest to 1 staff person. All staff have the responsibility of making sure that the rules are obeyed in the ares in which they are stationed and between 2 and 4 staff members (depending on the size of the event) will not have a fixed station but function as host/maidservice/security at all times.

There is a private parking lot for VIP members but street parking for most. We have in the past hired uniformed officers to patrol the street and lot, but currently do not. We do send our staff to check these areas during the course of the evening.

Lockers are available to our members for $5 and evening, they are free to VIP members.

In regards to your personal information, we have probably the most complicated and detailed membership process of any club of our type. There is a fair amount of personal information that we require from our members and the membership agreement is a legally binding document with provisions and penalties for the protection of the privacy of the club and other members.
Furthermore, the club is a member managed limited liabilty corporation which offers some additional legal protection as to the privacy of the memberships personal information.

[yawanna]

I was surprised to read that yes, many clubs have security personnel. 'Round here, there is one club out of a dozen or so, (not including the house parties aka on premise events) that hires security people for their off premise dances, and we were told by more experienced swingers that a club doing so wasn't a swingers club. Now we think otherwise

[Tom & Bonnie]

Originally posted by remox

In regards to your personal information, we have probably the most complicated and detailed membership process of any club of our type. There is a fair amount of personal information that we require from our members and the membership agreement is a legally binding document with provisions and penalties for the protection of the privacy of the club and other members.
Furthermore, the club is a member managed limited liabilty corporation which offers some additional legal protection as to the privacy of the memberships personal information.

Your membership application is pretty good, I would argue that ours is better but it still gets the legals across. However, you and all other club owners need to memorize the following supreme court decision in order to protect your members privacy from the governments prying eyes...


N.A.A.C.P. vs. Alabama- 1958

Justice HARLAN: We review from the point of its validity under the Federal stitution a judgment of civil contempt ered against the National Association for Advancement of Colored People, in the ts of Alabama. The question presented is whether Alabama, consistently with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, can compel petitioner to reveal to the State's Attorney General the names and addresses of all its Alabama members and agents, without regard to their positions or functions in the Association. The judgment of contempt was based upon petitioner's refusal to comply fully with a court order requiring in part the production of membership lists. Petitioner's claim is that the order, in the circumstances shown by this record violated rights assured to petitioner and its members under the Constitution.... Petitioner produced substantially all the data called for . . . except its membership lists, as to which it contended that Alabama could not constitutionally compel disclosure. . . The Association both urges that it is constitutionally entitled to resist official inquiry into its membership lists, and that it may assert, on behalf of its members, a right personal to them to be protected from compelled disclosure by the State of their affiliation with the Association as revealed by the membership lists. We think that petitioner argues more appropriately the rights of its members, and that its nexus with them is sufficient to permit that it act as their representative before this Court. In so concluding) we reject respondent's argument that the Association lacks standing to assert here constitutional rights pertaining to the members, who are not of course parties to the litigation.... If petitioner's rank-and-file members are constitutionally entitled to withhold their connection with the Association despite the production order, it is manifest that this right is properly assertable by the Association. To require that it be claimed by the members themselves would result in nullification of the right at the very moment of its assertion.... We thus reach petitioner's claim that the production order in the state litigation trespasses upon fundamental freedoms protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Petitioner argues that in view of the facts and circumstances shown in the record, the effect of compelled disclosure of the membership lists will be to abridge the rights of its rank-and-file members to engage in lawful association in support of their common beliefs. It contends that governmental action which, although not directly suppressing association, nevertheless carries this consequence, can be justified only upon some overriding valid interest of the State. Effective advocacy of both public and private points of view, particularly controversial ones, is undeniably enhanced by group association, as this Court has more than once recognized by remarking upon the close nexus between the freedoms of speech and assembly. It is beyond debate that freedom to engage in association for the advancement of beliefs and ideas is an inseparable aspect of the "liberty" assured by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which embraces freedom of speech. [Cites cases] Of course, it is immaterial whether the beliefs sought to be advanced by association pertain to political, economic, religious or cultural matters, and state action which may have the effect of curtailing the freedom to associate is subject to the closest scrutiny The fact that Alabama, so far as is relevant to the validity of the contempt judgment presently under review, has taken no direct action to restrict the right of petitioner's members to associate freely, does not end inquiry into the effect of the production order. In the domain of these indispensable liberties, whether of speech, press, or association, the decisions of this Court recognize that abridgment of such rights, even though unintended, may inevitably follow from varied forms of governmental action. . .. It is hardly a novel perception that compelled disclosure of affiliation with groups engaged in advocacy may constitute as effective a restraint on freedom of association as the forms of governmental action in the cases above were thought likely to produce upon the particular constitutional rights there involved. This Court has recognized the vital relationship between freedom to associate and privacy in one's associations. When referring to the varied forms of governmental action which might interfere with freedom of assembly, it said in American Communications Ass'n v. Douds, 339 U. S. 402, "A requirement that adherents of particular religious faiths or political parties wear identifying arm-bands, for example, is obviously of this nature." Compelled disclosure of membership in an organization engaged in advocacy of particular beliefs is of the same order. Inviolability of privacy in group association may in many circumstances be indispensable to preservation of freedom of association, particularly where a group espouses dissident beliefs. We think that the production order, in the respects here drawn in question, must be regarded as entailing the likelihood of a substantial restraint upon the exercise by petitioner's members of their right to freedom of association. Petitioner has made an uncontroverted showing that on past occasions revelation of the identity of its rank and-61 members has exposed these members to economic reprisal, loss of employment, threat of physical coercion, and other manifestations of public hostility.... It is not sufficient to answer, as the State does here, that whatever repressive effect compulsory disclosure of names of petitioner's members may have upon participation by Alabama citizens in petitioner's activities follows not from state action but from private community pressures. The crucial factor is the interplay of governmental and private action, for it is only after the initial exertion of state power represented by the production order that private action takes hold....

[remox]

Thanks for the info.

I'm glad to see another ILA affiliated Club paying attention to the legalities.