New York’s Department of Labor is investigating Shen Yun Performing Arts, a globally renowned dance company, over allegations of labor violations involving minors, according to a story by The New York Times. The inquiry follows a report revealing claims of underage performers working grueling schedules for little or no pay, raising questions about compliance with labor laws.
Shen Yun, managed by the Falun Gong religious movement from its secluded Orange County campus, has captivated audiences worldwide with its blend of acrobatics and classical Chinese dance. Behind the scenes, however, former performers and legal experts allege questionable practices, particularly with young dancers and musicians.
Performers, many of whom are children of dedicated Falun Gong followers, reportedly endure intense rehearsal and touring schedules, often working long hours without adequate compensation. While Shen Yun defends these practices as educational opportunities, critics argue they may contravene state laws protecting child performers.
New York law mandates work permits and certifications for performers under 18, stipulates limits on working hours, and requires employers to allocate part of young performers’ earnings into trust accounts. Former Shen Yun members claim the organization often bypassed these requirements.
The company only applied for state certification in September 2024—almost two decades after it began using underage performers. New regulations now require Shen Yun to notify the state before employing minors in any future performances.
Accounts from former performers paint a picture of exhaustive workdays, often spanning from early morning to late at night. On tour, performers reportedly transported heavy equipment, rehearsed extensively, and performed up to two shows daily. Schedules sometimes included consecutive days of travel and performances, with little time for rest.
Some performers, like percussionist Evan Glickman, described the overwhelming reliance on student labor. Glickman, who earned $35,000 annually as a professional, estimated that two-thirds of his orchestra consisted of students. “Without them, the company couldn’t function,” he said.
Critics highlight Shen Yun’s considerable financial success compared to the modest stipends given to performers. The company’s recent tax filings show assets exceeding $265 million, far outpacing other prominent performing arts organizations like the American Ballet Theater, where apprentices earn nearly $1,000 weekly under union agreements.
Former members also allege a culture that discourages discussions about pay, rooted in Falun Gong’s spiritual teachings on detachment from material concerns. Chang Chun-Ko, a former dancer who joined the company at 13, said she earned $500 monthly as a student. As a professional, she received $1,000 for what she estimated were 65-hour work weeks—far more than the 25 hours stated in her employment letter.
Chang explained that questioning wages was often seen as a lack of devotion. “I felt underpaid, but I didn’t dare ask,” she said.
Shen Yun has consistently denied any wrongdoing, insisting its performers are students, not employees. Representatives Ying Chen and Levi Browde argue that young participants gain invaluable cultural and professional experience.
“They’re not employees under federal law,” the statement read. The organization also highlighted that it covers travel and lodging costs, unlike many other dance companies. Still, legal experts caution that such arrangements do not necessarily absolve Shen Yun of compliance with labor laws. “Labeling them as students or volunteers doesn’t exempt the organization from its obligations,” said Manhattan-based employment attorney Michael Minkoff.
Despite the years-long allegations, the Department of Labor had not previously launched an investigation, citing the absence of complaints and reflecting a broader challenge in enforcing child labor laws, as young workers are unlikely to file grievances, especially when their guardians are complicit.
Auditors have previously criticized the department’s reactive approach to such issues, noting systemic gaps in oversight. The current inquiry marks a shift, though officials remain tight-lipped about its scope or findings.
