ST. LOUIS (First Alert 4/Gray News) – A former teacher at a high school in St. Louis who resigned after her OnlyFans page was reported to district officials has been fired after just days on a new job. Brianna Coppage was a teacher for five years, spending two at St. Clair High School. She was ... Read more
  • NounsAndWords@lemmy.world
    1672·
    3 months ago

    A million dollars from OnlyFans and now she gets an employment law claim against the new employer.

    This may truly be the only way to get ahead as a teacher in the US…

  • ThrowawayOnLemmy@lemmy.world
    971·
    3 months ago

    I love how the employer admitted to not checking her references or googling her beforehand.

    Can’t really blame her when they didn’t do their due diligence.

    • Spraynard Kruger@lemmy.world
      111·
      3 months ago

      Yeah, the ones who hired a teacher without doing any sort of a background check are the ones who really should be fired. Imagine if they hired someone who was actually dangerous to their students.

    • DrSteveBrule@mander.xyz
      1·
      3 months ago

      When I was in high school, my 11th grade biology teacher was let go after 1 week because he didn’t have a teaching license

  • legios@aussie.zoneEnglish
    87·
    3 months ago

    I’m a senior manager at a pretty big company.

    That’s something she does on the side, and if anyone in the workplace gave her shit, I would tell them to leave it the fuck alone unless they wanted me to bring HR in to the convo.

    Can people please not be cunts? (I’m an Aussie…)

    Edit: People need to disconnect things. Say there’s leaked nudes (or even just public nudes) of a work colleague. Let’s take it to they used to do porn. Yep, that’s something they did. That has zero impact on their role now or who they are in their role. They don’t deserve shame, or ridicule.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      81·
      3 months ago

      You know this chick:

      Those expressions were her reaction to taste testing some kombucha on a video or stream. Those screenshots were grabbed by the internet and used in a similar format to the Drake meme, “Nah that’s bad” "actually I like that

      She worked at a bank. They fired her for it.

        • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          23·
          3 months ago

          It’s potentially worse, and stupider, than that.

          The bank didn’t fire her specifically because she posted the video where she made a couple faces after trying kombucha. They fired her because her face started to get used for the meme. Completely out of her control, because people started posting “thing I don’t like, thing I like” memes with this format, often times with various political messages. Basically someone else used her face in a “this brings joy, this does not bring joy” meme and she got canned because of the bank’s “image.” As if it was actually her saying these things.

          • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
            131·
            3 months ago

            I mean, I hope she got a hell of a lawsuit out of that, because damn. Also its a bank so you know they have at least some money.

            • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
              51·
              3 months ago

              At Will employment. “In a meme” is not a protected class, and a reasonable bank employee could see her meme-attachment having a detrimental effect on business (you don’t have to be in your reasons for firing someone as long as those reasons aren’t protected or being used to hide that you’re firing them for a protected reason). I’d guess she’d have no case in almost any state in the US with their lack of employee protections.

              • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
                5·
                3 months ago

                And to be clear - she probably got unemployment. “At-Will” isn’t a magic spell.

                Terminating an employee without cause requires them to pay unemployment.

                • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
                  1·
                  3 months ago

                  She was terminated “for cause”. To get unemployment, she’s likely to have to fight for it. She’s likely to win, but it’s not a free thing.

              • Gabu@lemmy.world
                3·
                3 months ago

                Gross. Here in Brazil the employers would be bending over backwards to beg her not to sue them for all they’re worth.

                • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
                  4·
                  3 months ago

                  Here in Sweden this wouldn’t be a problem whatsoever, and she’d have worker rights. Well, the conservatives driven by American cock sucking ideals are dismantling all that, but so far, she’d be ok.

                  ed: i get political when I’m drunk, sorry

      • Leviathan@lemmy.world
        61·
        3 months ago

        “We need to protect our innocent company from these scumbag workers at all cost!”

        I assume, they don’t exist to protect workers’ rights.

      • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
        4·
        3 months ago

        HR where I work is excessively paranoid about terminations. They will want a paper trail of performance failures or argue to death that “then they’ll be able to argue they were really fired for a protected reason. Get me a paper trail of performance failures”.

        Not saying our HR is worker-friendly. They’re just VERY lawsuit-averse.

        Flip-side, I worked at a company that fired anyone for any reason and just kept cash aside for wrongful termination suits. And they had a HUGE HR team, whose job it was to keep the employers happy.

  • DudeImMacGyver@sh.itjust.works
    742·
    3 months ago

    Maybe we should pay our teachers so they don’t have to do more work when they’re done with work so they can do stuff like not starve to death or have a roof over their head?

    • Vast_Emptiness@programming.devEnglish
      131·
      3 months ago

      I am not from US but is the same thing too. Teachers are paid so bad that doing videochat is actually good than just steal or something else.

    • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
      7·
      3 months ago

      We should. We should also stop punishing sex workers. Victorian morality needs to die already, this ain’t Plymouth Rock.

  • PP_GIRL_@lemmy.world
    721·
    3 months ago

    After her OnlyFans became public, Coppage told KMOV that she made $1 million on the platform. Her yearly teaching salary was $42,000, she said at the time.

      • wise_pancake@lemmy.ca
        82·
        3 months ago

        Enjoy sitting at the shite end of the Pareto income distribution.

        OF is a marketing gig, if you don’t have a way to push your content and leverage network effects, you’re not going to make any money.

        The revenue from an only fans is the customer count × avg customer lifetime × avg subscription price, customer count is a function of your exposure to potential customers, and lifetime is a function of your content frequency and originality (I assume if you upload the same content types the fan base gets bored).

        So, if you want a successful OF, you need to first focus on exposure, but the algos on most social media reward the haves, so your first issue is getting into people’s feeds. The best way to do this is targeting niches, areas with lower volume or high demand for content.

        Then you need to keep your audience by engaging with them but pushing new concepts, which will present it’s own challenges. There’s very much a quick copy culture on these networks that you’ll probably have to emulate to keep on the front of the engagement curve, and expect anything you do that success to be quickly replicated ad infinitum until it doesn’t anymore. I think this is a losing battle over time.

        You can also offer whale services like “girlfriend experiences” to try and lock in big spenders, but first you need them on a hook.

        It’s not just snap some pics and you’re good.

          • wise_pancake@lemmy.ca
            18·
            3 months ago

            Now you know the unit economics of OnlyFans, and it’s an exercise to the reader to try them out.

          • Zahille7@lemmy.world
            81·
            3 months ago

            It’s also just common sense.

            It’s like trying to become a successful twitch streamer or YouTuber - it’s a very saturated market. Think about how many articles we’ve all seen about someone or another getting flak just for having an OF at all, now multiply that by at least 1,000 and you have a rough starting estimate of how many people even have one, let alone how many are “successful.”

        • jballs@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          8·
          3 months ago

          The best way to do this is targeting niches, areas with lower volume or high demand for content.

          It’s Lemmy’s time to shine! If my time here has taught me anything, it’s that there’s a surprisingly high demand for Star Trek and Linux. Time to paint a penguin on my dick and live long and prostitute my ass.

        • cm0002@lemmy.world
          5·
          3 months ago

          Yea I kno, I’ve looked into it before and it can be summed up as “it’s a job with fun sexy bits, but lots of job bits still” LMAO

        • TangoUndertow@lemmy.world
          11·
          3 months ago

          Considering teachers practically work 100% of the time, it seems it would be difficult to genuinely perform the duties required while still maintaining a flourishing side gig like OF.

          My wife is a teacher. I see how much they have to work at home. She probably wasn’t a great teacher in the first place.

          I feel her point about the pay. Considering the hours worked, teaching is barely approaching minimum wage.

          • Buffalobuffalo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            2·
            3 months ago

            “140 subscribers and we do a grading in doggystyle stream! Who wants a sticker?” Throw in a couple A+ emotes, and you’ve got cross-career synergy. Depending on her grade level it might not be as demanding outside of work.

      • alekwithak@lemmy.world
        31·
        3 months ago

        You’ll need a school full of students and probably some news sites to run an article about you in order to make those kinds of profits.

  • stoly@lemmy.world
    693·
    3 months ago

    They claim that I violated their social media policy, but will not respond to me with how I violated it.

    This second part is what is going to get her a nice piece of damages. What was the policy? Was it spelled out when she started? Is Only Fans actually social media?

    The answers are: There’s a vague one that certainly doesn’t cover the use of OF; she wasn’t given it; and no, she’s an actress.

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      113·
      3 months ago

      Only if she can prove the firing was related to being a member of a protected class. Unless it was not at will employment but I’m not aware of any private sector jobs like that anymore.

      Edit: people keep telling me I’m wrong so that may be true.

      • Firebirdie713@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        28·
        3 months ago

        No, they gave a reason and that reason isn’t covered under their policy, so she should still be covered.

        If they let her go without a reason, then she would have to prove discrimination. But if they say “You violated our social media policy” and refuse to show how, and she can prove that nothing she did was on violation of the policy as written, then that is a clear case of unlawful termination.

      • GekkoState@lemmings.world
        8·
        3 months ago

        Lots of teachers are part of a union. There’s no mention of it in the article that I see, but union workers tend to be a little bit more protected than at will workers.

        • stoly@lemmy.world
          3·
          3 months ago

          In this case, she seems to have moved into healthcare in some way or another and may no longer have union support.

      • stoly@lemmy.world
        1·
        3 months ago

        As said below, they gave a reason. It has to be consistent with the actual policy and that policy has to be applied fairly and universally. If someone is making it up as they go, then they did it wrong.

    • lorkano@lemmy.world
      520·
      3 months ago

      I mean, you can do all the things on only fans you do on Instagram so I would say it’s definitely at best social media, at worst porn platform

  • 100_kg_90_de_belin @feddit.it
    59·
    3 months ago

    If someone were willing to pay for pics of my ballsack and I made a lot more selling those pics than I make teaching in high school I would still miss my less-paying job

      • tooclose104@lemmy.ca
        4·
        3 months ago

        If it’s that pictures of my ball sack will earn me more than my current job, I’ll need to go back in time and tell me how sooner!

        • roguetrick@lemmy.world
          41·
          3 months ago

          Well what sort of talents does your ball sack have? I bet you’d make some money on Lemmy if you could document your ballsack installing arch on a computer it built.

        • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
          1·
          3 months ago

          It will make you money in "addition* to your current job.

          Unless they find out and shame you for your filthy immorality, because the economy will not stand for unnatural acts like sex or the human body. Well, apart from advertising its products, at least.

      • Ann Archy@lemmy.world
        1·
        3 months ago

        Wait, gay onlyfans pays bucks?

        Do they pay extra for non-gays doing gay stuff? I’d do gay non-gay stuff for money. It’s just dicks, oh no, so what if it gets stuck up my ass. I tried that as a kid, it’s not impossible!

  • etchinghillside@reddthat.com
    371·
    3 months ago

    …”They claim that I violated their social media policy, but will not respond to me with how I violated it.”

    KMOV reached out to Compass Health, but the company has not yet responded.

  • TangoUndertow@lemmy.world
    4614·
    3 months ago

    It feels like she knew she would get fired from this new job, leverage it nationwide articles and get even more subscribers to her OF page. She even references the teaching gig in her bio, and the new job in her latest posts.

    • bassomitron@lemmy.worldEnglish
      786·
      3 months ago

      Maybe. It doesn’t matter. Jobs shouldn’t be able to fire you because you get naked on the Internet, which requires you to pay to even see in the first place.

      Edit:

      @meep_launcher@lemm.ee made a great point about teacher/student dynamics and I can agree with that in most circumstances (e.g. the students are underage). I still think it’s ridiculous for her second, non-teaching job to fire her.

      • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
        445·
        3 months ago

        I’m a teacher and they specifically have guidelines on what you’re behavior online should be. Keeping your socials clean. Making sure my interactions with students are kept professional.

        The fact is that kids these days are nosey and great researchers. Having an only fans as an educator has a huge risk of students discovering it, and will ultimately change the relationship between student and teacher from a student/ teacher relationship to a viewer/ pornstar one.

          • meep_launcher@lemm.ee
            133·
            3 months ago

            This thread seems to fall into the “people who have no idea about the realities of teaching being confidently incorrect”.

            As someone somewhere said; if you want to lose faith in comment sections, go to a discussion on a topic that you are an expert on.

            • TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
              3·
              3 months ago

              Thanks for adding some sanity and nuance to this conversation. I agree with the general sentiment here that stuff that a person does on the side of their career should not affect their employment for most careers, but when it is a teacher, especially one that works with minors, it’s a bit of a different dynamic.

              That being said, we should absolutely pay teachers enough so that they don’t have to get side gigs to survive. It is disgusting how little teachers are paid for the amount of work they do, and their importance to society as a whole.

        • summerof69@lemm.ee
          84·
          3 months ago

          to a viewer/ pornstar one

          And depending on their age, they might even have sex. People want one easy solution to all problems, but being a teacher and a regular office worker is not the same, hence the standards are different too.

        • Gabu@lemmy.world
          2·
          3 months ago

          Here’s a wild idea that seems to never catch on in 'murica - have the parents actually educate their children about how socially unacceptable that’d be.

      • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
        3213·
        3 months ago

        Eh I disagree with some jobs. Teachers are supposed to be role models to students and keep certain things private.

        The problem is we aren’t paying teachers adequately for that. It reminds me of essential workers during the pandemic. If we need these people so badly, or we’re asking them to be role models and be private about certain things, then we should be paying them much, much more.

        • almar_quigley@lemmy.world
          161·
          3 months ago

          Even if teachers are supposed to be role models for students which I think is debatable it certainly is not applied outside the classroom. They will never be paid enough in any world to warrant them crafting their entire being as if they are some K-pop idols.

          • Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
            71·
            3 months ago

            I’d take it a step further and say that nude modeling doesn’t make a bad role model. People don’t generally get into a line of work unless they want to or are pressured into it (directly or indirectly). Someone who doesn’t want anyone to see their body won’t start a nude OF just because their favorite teacher did it. They’ll start one because they want to sell nudes or because they want to pay bills and have exhausted other options.

            That last bit is more evil than any kind of voluntary sex work. People sell their bodies for worse things than sex work. Like mining, the farming work that depends on illegal immigrants (or legal ones whose bosses assume they won’t raise a stink if labour laws aren’t followed), or a bunch of factory or construction work that exposes people to fumes and dust they probably shouldn’t be inhaling. Shit that leaves them broken, or with cancer or some other disease that shortens their life. If someone can sell pictures of their bodies to avoid that kind of work, IMO that’s a good role model.

        • VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          51·
          3 months ago

          Is it, in your eyes, morally wrong to sell naked photos of yourself?

          The porn industry has many, many problems, and OnlyFans has just recently been targeted by an investigative piece by Reuters journalists for doing little about people using their platform to sell non-consensual nude pictures, or even videos of rape, but as long as you yourself are doing it of your own free will, I don’t see the problem, even if you are a teacher.

          • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
            2·
            3 months ago

            I want you to know that I don’t have an answer for this and that you’ve made me think about this from a different angle, which I very much appreciate. It’s a very good point.

            • juicy@lemmy.today
              11·
              3 months ago

              Thank you for saying so! I have to admit that my comment is almost adressed to myself as much as to you. I was raised with all the sexual hang ups of conservative Christianity. The idea of my daughter growing up and choosing to do sex work certainly makes me uncomfortable. But I also would like my daughter to be unashamed of her sexuality when she grows up, and I wouldn’t want her to be judged no matter how she chooses to express herself. I also believe sex work can be an incredibly compassionate form of labor, providing human connection to people starved of affection.

              On the other hand, I do have some reservations about sex work, particularly when it comes to outright prostitution. Can someone have sex with so many people and still maintain the ability to have a full, healthy relationship with a partner? What are the consequences for social stability of making it so easy for men to cheat on their partners?

              • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
                2·
                3 months ago

                I think I’m in the exact same position as you. Generally speaking I tend to be personally conservative about sex and relationships – not really into hook up culture, thinking sex should be with someone you deeply love, etc.

                That said, as a single, nearly 30 year old dude, I do watch porn, and it’s usually by independent content creators, not studios. I find the idea of maligning those women for what they do to be utterly reprehensible, and peak hypocrisy. If I were in their shoes, there’s a decent chance I’d also post nudes and try to monetize it.

                Yet, at the same time, I don’t like subscribing to only fans, because it just feels wrong, like on a core level personally. On some level, I’m wary of getting overly invested in someone and having a weird parasocial thing. I’m glad that I’ve given them money in the short term though.

                Human sexuality is really weird, and the way society plays into it makes it nigh incomprehensible sometimes how we feel and act about it.

                • juicy@lemmy.today
                  22·
                  3 months ago

                  Human sexuality is really weird, and the way society plays into it makes it nigh incomprehensible sometimes how we feel and act about it.

                  I couldn’t agree more

      • Imalostmerchant@lemmy.world
        96·
        3 months ago

        Gonna get roasted for this, but why?

        I think it’s pretty reasonable for an employer to fire someone for posting racist things on the Internet. I think we can all agree on that. Actions outside of work can have an effect on work and so I think it’s reasonable to make employment decisions based on how the employer acts outside of work. I would argue racism is morally wrong and sex work is not, but I don’t think it’s possible to define employment laws in a way that fits a universal moral code.

        I love the protected classes we have for employment now: age, gender, color, religion, etc. I think these protections are valuable to employees everyone, and I think they make sense because they don’t affect your ability to do the job. I having “does sex work on the side” on this list makes much less sense.

        I think many, maybe even most, jobs wouldn’t be affected by an employee having an onlyfans, and so in my opinion someone shouldn’t get fired for it most of the time. But I think there’s a clear line between the protected classes and people who post on onlyfans.

        • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
          2·
          3 months ago

          Simple answer. Most of us (and most of the world) thinks At-Will employment is barbaric.

          It is entirely reasonable to require some substantive effect to warrent termination, even if that substantive effect is not directly the teacher’s fault. Her having an onlyfans account, not grounds for firing. Her onlyfans account passed around by students? Grounds for termination.

          There’s a (not so new) trend in the US for companies to crack down on side gigs. Yes, sex work is a politically charged side-gig, but we shouldn’t ever be supporting a company’s right to fire people having side-gigs without a very good reason. So long as your side-gig never encroaches into your day job in any real (not hypothetical) way, there really isn’t a good reason.

          • Imalostmerchant@lemmy.world
            2·
            3 months ago

            I appreciate you taking the time to respond so thoughtfully.

            I hear what you’re saying about not firing someone until an actual effect on the business is felt. I think that makes sense in this situation but there’s certainly situations where you could find something out about an employee and should be able to fire them before it’s affecting the business. Maybe my accountant committed tax fraud when they filed their taxes. That’s totally in their personal life and if no one finds out about it, then it doesn’t affect the bussiness. I still think it would be totally reasonable to fire that person.

            I’ve worked my whole career in salary positions where side gigs are against my contract/need special approval so I think I’m just used to that way of thinking.

            • juicy@lemmy.today
              11·
              3 months ago

              It makes me all warm and fuzzy to see people have respectful disagreements!

    • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
      506·
      3 months ago

      Her job doesn’t get to decide what she does in her off time. Of course on the streets of the real world they definitely try and succeed. I’m saying that they should not.

      God i just want the world to change for the better. This is dumb

  • anon_8675309@lemmy.world
    4·
    3 months ago

    Her teacher salary was $42k. She made a million off OF. If she puts that into index fund she can replace her teacher salary at 4% WR.

  • Mr_Dr_Oink@lemmy.world
    67·
    3 months ago

    Oh! Thats awful! What sites did she post her nudes to? Like which specific ones?

    Edit: this is a joke. Im devastated that i need to say this. How is it no obvious? Please do not send me links to her porn.

    Is there a reason to downvote me other than thinking im being serious? This is a serious subject, she should not be fired for having a hobby. I 100% believe that.

    I was just making a joke.

    1. I know how to google, if i wanted to i could probably find YOUR nudes (even if they dont exist)

    2. Its a reference to a tv show. Im personifying the joke performed by the character Mac.