join our network! affiliate login  
Custom Search
GET OUR FREE EMAIL NEWSLETTERS!
Daily and Weekly Editions • Articles • Alerts • Expert Advice • Learn More

Total Articles: 4

Dear Littler: Can We Still Maintain Hairstyle and Personal Grooming Policies?

I am an HR manager for a boutique beauty supply shop based in Atlanta, Georgia. We are planning to expand into new storefronts in both San Diego, California and Brooklyn, New York. We have a standard grooming policy because our company promotes personal care products and it is important to us that client-facing employees are clean and well-groomed. Our handbook restricts employees on the sales floor from wearing facial piercings, visible tattoos, long beards and dreadlocks. However, we’ve heard that new laws prohibit “hairstyle discrimination” and restrict dress codes. Can we still maintain our look?

Grooming Policies in the Workplace: 11th Circuit Upholds Employer’s Dreadlock Ban

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled that an employer’s policy banning dreadlocks did not constitute racial discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In doing so, the court rejected the argument that hairstyle can be a determinant of racial identity for purposes of Title VII. The court reasoned that Title VII protection extends to immutable characteristics but not cultural practices and that hairstyles are not immutable characteristics.

Employer Wins Dreadlocks Deadlock

A federal appeals court recently ruled that a woman rejected from a job because she refused to cut her dreadlocks could not proceed with a race discrimination claim against the employer. The decision highlights the distinction between individual expression and inherently racial characteristics in the context of race discrimination claims under Title VII.

Federal Court Rejects EEOC Concept of Race, Upholds Employer’s Dreadlock Ban

An employer’s ban on dreadlocks and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s willingness to file a lawsuit to vindicate an employee’s rights has opened a legal debate on the meaning of “race” under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
    SORT ARTICLES
  • No Subtopics.
tempobet tipobet giriş