California Family Fitness sued over women-only areas - Sacramento Business Journal:

http://actnt.com/eLearning/elearning-tech-specs.html
A proposed class-action suit, the case againsr Cal Fit heads to mediationnext week. The chaijn operates 15 clubs in Sacramento andPlacerf counties. For years California regulators and courts havesquasheed women-only poker tournaments, sex-based discounts at car washes and and other promotions that favor one gendedr over another. Rotary Clubs, for one, were forcer to accept women members after a couryt decision twodecades ago. Fitness centers locally and nationally — particularly express gyms such asCurvess — have long marketed themselves to one Eight states specifically allow for single-gender healtjh clubs, according to the . But Californiaa isn’t one of them.
An effortr to pass such a law in the Goldejn State failedin 2005. While gendeer discrimination laws have been on the bookas for years in lawsuits alleging such discrimination are filesd periodically inthe state, said Catherine a Carmichael attorney who is not involvesd in the Cal Fit In 2003, Corfee represented a loca franchised women-only fitness and diet center that modified its servicezs and settled the lawsuit after a man wanted to She declined to name her former Allegations of discrimination were first made againstf Cal Fit last fall.
After that time and beforre the lawsuit was filedin February, Cal Fit converted its lone women-onlt gym into a co-ed Cal Fit also made some changes at its co-ec gyms, such as allowinhg men to use what had been a women-onlt lounge at the Roseville gym. Cal Fit, the lawsuit alleges, stil l excludes men from the women’ss spa at that gym. While men are not prohibiteed from using theformer “women workout” areas, they are discouraged from doingh so, and some signs that read “women” stil remain, the lawsuit contends. The chain did not correc t mostviolations “within a reasonable time,” the lawsuit alleges.
Although men paid the same fees as women but allegedly receivedunequal access, male memberes have not been reimbursed for a portion of their fees, the lawsuigt said. The lawsuit also allegesw false and misleading advertising related to what it contends wasunequaol access. Cal Fit would not comment specificallh onthe litigation, but in a statement said the company strivez to meet its members’ needsa and provide an inclusive environment. Suing Cal Fit are Lars a Sacramento bodybuilder who, according to his MySpacd page, is building capital toward his dream of owning his own gym, and Greg an attorney who works and lives in Both remain active gym members.
“Did they join the gym so they couledsue them?” The answer is said Kim Kralowec, an attorneuy with class-action specialist . “They believed they were beinb treated unfairly, in a discriminatory way. This was not my firm’ss idea.” People would not tolerate men-only clubs, and it took many yeares and efforts by women to stop discrimination against Kralowec said. “It’s the same situation.” The lawsuir seeks actual and punitive damages, injunctive costs and attorneys’ fees on behalf of all men who were membere or paid for guest passesbetween Nov.
5, and whenever the case goes to The class is believed to includs atleast “several thousand members” and “several guest pass users. The civil code allows up to thre e times the amount ofactual damages, but no less than $4,000 for each does not prevent men from joining, but few The company encourages its franchisee to know their statw and local laws, and in multiple states it has pushedc for law changes to allow for single-sex gyms, spokeswoman Becku Frusher wrote in an e-mail.