Sheri’s Ranch Brothel Workers Are Unionizing & My Profile Is Down
- Luna Robbie
- 1 day ago
- 13 min read
“You’re not an employee, so I can’t fire you.”
That is what I was told earlier this week.
And yet, my profile on the Sheri’s Ranch website is no longer visible.
Yesterday morning, a client called the Ranch to book an appointment with me for March — and then emailed to let me know he wasn’t able to schedule.
As of today, Friday February 13th, I have not received written or verbal notice that my business relationship with the ranch has been terminated.
Since I’ve received a number of emails from concerned listeners and clients, I want to share what happened and explain why, as currently written, a group of us cannot sign the new contract.
This is not a grievance post. I love my work at Sheri’s Ranch. I’m just sharing factual information.
And as usual, I remain hopeful.
WHAT THE CONTRACT DOES
I’m going to start by walking through what the contract actually says — using language from the document itself — and why a number of us are not able to sign it as written.
I’m not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. This is my understanding of the contract based on reading it closely and asking questions that, so far, have not been answered.
The first thing to understand is how the contract defines “Services.” Under Section 1.2, “Services” doesn’t just mean legal brothel work. It also includes:
“any content… created in association or collaboration with the Company… or content referencing, referring to, or connecting to the Company… such as… photographs, video, social media content, writings, or other materials.”
That is a very broad definition.
It does not clearly define what “connecting to” the Company means. And it does not clearly limit this to content created on-site, or specifically for the Company.
So if someone creates content independently — for example, a podcast, a social media post, an interview, or educational material — and it references their work, their experience, or even the concept of legal brothel work, it could potentially fall under this definition of “Services.”
That matters because of what happens next.
Under Section 5, the contract states:
“You hereby irrevocably assign… your entire right, title, and interest… in all… Work Product… created… in the course of performing the Services.”
“Work Product” is defined extremely broadly — including photographs, videos, writings, ideas, concepts, methods, and more.
That definition can also extend to how a person presents themselves publicly — including their stage name, persona, and brand — when those are connected to the Services, and the contract does not clearly define where those boundaries stop.
So if something is considered part of “Services,” then ownership of that work is assigned to the Company, according to the contract language.
Not licensed. Not shared. Assigned.
And the contract specifies that this happens:
“for no additional consideration.”
Meaning: no additional compensation.
There is also language about “preexisting materials.”
Section 5.5 states that if any of your existing work is incorporated into something that is considered “Work Product,” the Company receives:
“an irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free… license to… use, publish, reproduce… modify… and otherwise exploit such preexisting materials.”
And importantly, they can:
“assign, transfer, and sublicense such rights to others without your approval.”
So this is not just about new content.
This could potentially reach into work we’ve created before — like the podcast of Sex Stories I’ve been creating for the past eight years, or the thousands of erotic and boudoir photos and video I have taken — if it becomes connected to what the contract defines as “Services.”
There is also a provision that requires disclosure of ideas and creations. The contract states:
“You shall make full and prompt written disclosure… of any inventions… that constitute Work Product.”
And that any intellectual property filings within a certain time period:
“will belong to the Company.”
And then there is a section that many people have questions about, which is the power of attorney clause. The contract states that if the Company cannot obtain your signature, you:
“irrevocably designate and appoint the Company as your agent and attorney-in-fact… with the same legal force and effect as if you had executed them [the documents].”
And it specifies that:
“this power of attorney is coupled with an interest.”
In plain language, that means the Company can act on our behalf to execute documents related to intellectual property connected to “Work Product.”
There are also restrictions on how contractors can speak publicly.
The agreement states that you cannot:
“use the name of… any individual associated with the Company… in any forum… without… prior written approval.”
And includes confidentiality and non-disparagement provisions that extend for years after the contract ends.
Taken together, the concern is not just one clause. It’s how these sections interact.
“Services” is defined broadly.
“Work Product” is defined broadly.
Ownership of that work is assigned to the Company, without additional compensation.
Preexisting work can be licensed.
And the Company is given authority to act on our behalf in securing those rights.
The question that many of us have asked — and have not yet received clear answers to — is where the boundaries are.
What counts as “connecting to” the Company?
What counts as being “in the course of performing the Services”?
How does this apply to independent creative work, personal storytelling, or public appearances?
And what problem is this language intended to solve?
For people whose work includes writing, speaking, teaching, podcasting, or creating content, those boundaries matter. And as written, they are not clearly defined.
When language is this broad, it doesn’t require bad intent for there to be risk; the risk is already built into the structure.
WHY WE CANNOT SIGN
This isn’t about rebellion. It’s about ownership.
In the traditional brothel model, we split income from services. That’s clear. That’s straightforward.
This new contract expands ownership over creative output without changing compensation.
If a business wants to operate more like a studio system — owning media, likeness, and long-term brand output — then that model normally includes employment protections, salary structures, residuals, or revenue sharing.
For many of us, this isn’t just a contract about working at the ranch. It’s a contract that reaches into how we create, how we speak about our work, and how we build our own businesses. And that’s where it becomes difficult to sign.
Many of us are independent creators.
We write, we teach, we stream, we create content, and we build relationships with our audiences — and those things exist outside of any one workplace.
We are not just providing a service. We are building relationships, brands, and bodies of work.
So when a contract defines “Services” broadly — to include anything that “references, refers to, or connects to” the Company — and that Company is a place where many of us live and work for a week or two at a time — it raises real questions.
For many of us, our lived experience is part of our work. Talking about our work is part of our work. Educating, storytelling, and sharing are not side projects. That’s our profession.
And when that same contract says that anything created “in the course of performing the Services” becomes Company-owned “Work Product,” that creates uncertainty about where the boundaries are.
Because those boundaries are not clearly defined.
For example:
If our work and our identity are closely connected — where is the line between them?
If we speak from our own lived experience — including experiences that predate the ranch — how is that separated from “Services” when topics overlap?
If we’ve built a platform based on our voice and our story — at what point does that become something we no longer fully control?
Those are not abstract questions. Those are everyday parts of how many of us work.
There is also the question of preexisting work:
Many of us have spent years building content, brands, and intellectual property that exist independently of the ranch. But the contract allows the Company to obtain a perpetual, royalty-free license to preexisting materials if they are incorporated into something considered “Work Product.” So the line between what we already own and what could be claimed becomes unclear.
There is also the issue of likeness and identity:
The contract includes broad rights around photographs, media, and content. When those rights are not clearly limited, it raises questions about how someone’s image, name, or persona could be used in the future.
That could include traditional media. It could also include emerging formats — such as AI-generated content or virtual environments — where a person’s likeness can be replicated, altered, or placed into new contexts that they did not directly create or approve.
The contract does not clearly define the limits of those uses. When those boundaries are unclear, it becomes difficult to know who ultimately controls how a person is represented.
And while I am fairly public about my identity, many workers choose not to show their face in order to protect their privacy and personal safety. As written, the contract does not appear to distinguish between those different needs or provide clear limitations around how likeness may be used.
And for those whose stage name is also their legal name, it raises questions about how control over a person’s name and identity may be treated under these provisions.
And those boundaries matter.
Another piece that concerns many of us is the power of attorney provision:
This allows the Company, under certain conditions described in the contract, to act on our behalf to execute documents related to intellectual property connected to “Work Product.”
Which means that if something falls under that definition, the Company may be able to sign documents related to it without our direct involvement.
And again — the issue is not one single clause. It’s how these clauses interact:
Broad definitions.Broad ownership.Broad licensing.And authority to act on our behalf.
For many of us, this creates a situation where we are being asked to sign a contract that affects not just our work at the ranch, but our work outside of it.
Our voices.Our stories.Our creative output.
And importantly, there is no clear additional compensation structure tied to those rights.
The traditional model in brothel work is a split based on services provided. This contract introduces ownership and licensing of creative work — without clearly defining how that work would be valued or compensated.
So for many of us, the question becomes very simple:
Are we being asked to give up rights to our independent work, without clear boundaries, and without additional compensation?
And without clear answers to the questions we’ve raised, many of us are not able to say yes to that.
WHAT COULD BE DIFFERENT
I believe that if leadership truly understood this work — not just as a business, but all the different facets the experience can be — different choices might be made.
Because what we do is beyond transactional—it’s relational.
It’s emotional.It’s sensory.It’s deeply human.
The way a client feels when they walk into the bar matters.
The lighting matters.The sound matters.
The atmosphere — including scent and air quality — matters.
The way the space holds them matters.
The quality of the bed matters.
The quality of the food matters.The decor matters.The feeling of a space being cared for matters.
And the same is true for the women working there.
How we are treated affects how we show up. How supported we feel affects the experience we’re able to create. This work requires emotional presence, attention, and care — and those things don’t exist in a vacuum.
When workers are treated primarily as assets to manage, rather than partners in creating an experience, something can be lost. Not just for us. For the clients as well.
Because the most meaningful experiences come from connection. From presence. From people feeling safe, seen, and valued.
And I believe Sheri’s Ranch has the opportunity to be something truly extraordinary.
Not just a place where services are provided. But a place where people come to feel something, to learn, to grow. To connect. To be cared for.
That kind of environment can’t be built through one-sided control. It’s built through collaboration.
The point of all my work is always to co-create a world where taking care of each other is the norm—one ripple of love at a time.
That happens through deep listening and dialogue.
The only shame here is undervaluing this work—because it holds significant, often unrealized potential.
As education.
As healing.
As healthy self-expression.
More than ever, this world needs connection. This moment is an opportunity for those of us who create deep relational experiences to be supported in the work we do.
WHAT HAPPENED IN PRACTICE
And now I want to share, briefly and factually based on my own experience, what implementation has looked like in practice.
I had planned to work my two-week tour and was looking forward to Valentine appointments that had been planned for months.
On my four-hour drive to the ranch, I began experiencing flu-like symptoms.
When I arrived, I was told that since I was there for my tour, it was assumed I would be signing the new contract.
I was aware that other ladies had been allowed to work under the previous contract while questions about the new one were being addressed, and I had submitted via email a number of questions related to the contract and had not received a response.
I asked for the opportunity to work under the previous contract.
I was informed that, because I had requested a copy of the contract ahead of time via email, that counted as my review period.
When I pointed out that none of my questions had been answered, and that I understood that to mean we were still in a period of discussion. I was told the questions were valid, but the contract was “done.”
I was told again that my email request counted as my review period and that I would need to sign the contract if I wanted to work.
I continued to ask for the opportunity to work under the previous contract, as I understood that option had been available to others, and was told, “you need to take your stuff and go if you don’t want to sign.”
I asked for a physical copy of the contract to review again.
Initially I was told I would need to review and sign the 47 pages before room selection at 10 AM, which was less than 15 minutes after I received the physical copy. I asked for more time and was told that turning it in by 5 PM would suffice.
I was considering redlining it and signing. I was also feeling increasingly nauseous, foggy-headed and feverish and stepped outside with the paperwork for some fresh air.
I had only written my name on the first line when a staff member told me I was needed in the office again.
I was then told by another staff member that they had been “informed” that I was planning to write “UD” on the contract and that they would not accept a contract marked “under duress.” I was told I was welcome to leave and that my storage bins would be placed in the parlor so I could take my belongings.
I was feeling quite feverish and super nauseous at this point and did not feel prepared to make a permanent decision. I asked if I could keep my future tour dates on the calendar and not sign that day so I was not making a rushed decision.
I was told I could return for my future tours if I signed the contract at that time.
Given how I was feeling physically, I chose to leave and take time to recover.
Later that evening, I noticed my profile was no longer available on the website.
Yesterday morning, a client reached out to say he wanted to make an appointment with me in March, could not find my profile, called the ranch, and was unable to schedule with me.
As of this recording, I have not received any notification that I am not permitted to return, or that my relationship with the ranch has ended.
I am sad.
I love my work at Sheri’s Ranch. In four and a half years, I have never missed a tour — this would have been my 37th.
And: I am holding out hope for a collaborative resolution.
UNIONIZING + PUBLIC RECORD
What I’m going to share next is already part of the public record, and links to all articles referenced are below.
A petition has been filed with the National Labor Relations Board to determine whether courtesans at Sheri’s Ranch should be classified as employees for the purposes of collective bargaining.
As of now, that case is open, and the process is ongoing.
According to reporting from The Nevada Independent and the Associated Press, a majority of workers have signed authorization cards indicating support for union representation.
The union involved is the Communications Workers of America, Local 9413, which represents workers across media, communications, and related industries.
This process is not about shutting anything down.
It’s about determining classification — whether brothel workers at Sheri’s Ranch are legally considered independent contractors or employees — and whether we have the right to collectively negotiate working conditions, contracts, and protections.
In public reporting, a representative of Sheri’s Ranch has stated that the business respects the right of workers to express our views on workplace structure, and that its focus is on providing a safe, lawful, and professionally managed environment.
At the same time, many of us have raised questions about how the current model operates in practice — including structured schedules, location requirements, and pricing expectations — and whether those conditions align with independent contractor status.
I will note here: some aspects of how pricing works in practice are more nuanced than what has been reflected in public reporting.
They’re questions that are now part of a formal legal process.
This isn’t about conflict.It’s about clarity—and having a structured way to ask questions, understand our rights, and participate in decisions that directly affect our work.
If we are determined to be employees, and if a union is formally recognized, that process could create a legal framework for collective bargaining — where terms, conditions, and agreements can be negotiated more transparently.
If you want to learn more about that effort, you can visit:unitedbrothelworkers.org/join
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT
My work at Sheri’s Ranch has allowed me to fund Sex Stories and keep it free for all listeners, and has given me real stability doing work I love and believe in for the past five years.
Sex Stories is in its eighth year — and I will always do my best to find ways to keep it going.
If that income stream changes, I will still be here.
And if you’ve ever found value in this show, there are a few ways you can support:
You can support directly via Cash App: $lunarsecrets
You can join me on OnlyFans.com/lunarobbie
You can connect with me on SextPanther.com/lunarsecrets
You can join our community at patreon.com/lunarobbie (and if you’re on Apple, join through a browser instead of the IOS Patreon app to avoid additional fees).
If you want to stay connected and receive updates directly from me, you can join my Lunar Newsletter at lunarobbie.com (refresh this page for the pop-up).
This isn’t panic. It’s transparency.
I hope to return to the ranch.I hope we reach resolution. I believe we can.
But I cannot sign something that transfers ownership of my voice and likeness without clear boundaries 🤪
And so, for now —
My profile is down.
But I’m still here.
Encouraging you to share Sex Stories.