In general, employers have the right to dictate on-the-job standards for clothing and grooming as a condition of employment. Codes governing employees’ appearance may be illegal, however, if they result in a pattern of discrimination against a particular group of employees or potential employees. This type of violation has most often been mounted in companies with different codes for male and female employees.
1. Dress Codes
Many companies have policies about uniforms to keep their employees looking uniform—a legal goal. There is nothing inherently illegal, for example, about a company requiring all employees to wear navy blue slacks during working hours.
Many employers provide workers with some or all of the clothing that they are required to wear on the job. A few companies even rent suits for their employees to assure that they will be similarly dressed.
Although generally legal, such systems can violate your rights if the cost of the clothing is deducted from your pay in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). For example, it is illegal under the FLSA for an employer to deduct the cost of work-related clothing from your pay so that your wages dip below the minimum wage standard, or so that the employer profits on the clothing.
A few states have attempted to address the concerns of employees who fear their uniform costs will cut into their earnings and have passed laws that prohibit employers from charging employees for required uniforms. But these laws are very narrow—and often do not apply to workers who need the economic boost the most, such as restaurant employees. Other laws erase the patina of generosity by imposing complicated schemes for when an employer may charge employees for cleaning a uniform. If you have questions about the legality of uniform charges, contact your state department of labor.
And, sometimes, the legal lines on dress restrictions become blurry. Courts have held, for example, that an employer cannot require female employees to wear uniforms if it allows male employees to wear street clothes on the job. And some differences that seem to be gender-based—such as barring men from wearing earrings but allowing them for women—have been allowed to stand. The courts reason that the differences in dress codes are not discriminatory if they do not put an unfair burden on one gender or the other.
2. Grooming Codes
Most workplace grooming codes simply require that employees be clean and presentable on the job—a reasonable request. And such codes are rarely challenged.
However, several lawsuits challenging workplace grooming codes have been waged by black men with Pseudofollicullitis Barbae, a race-specific skin disorder making it painful to shave. Several individuals have successfully challenged companies that refuse to hire men with beards or that fire men who do not comply with no-beard rules.
Example
Nelson, a black man, was advised by his physician not to shave his facial hair too closely because that would cause his whiskers to become ingrown and infected. Although Nelson took with him to a job interview a note from his doctor attesting to this problem, he was turned down for employment because the company where he had applied had a no-beard policy.
Nelson filed a complaint against the company under his state’s antidiscrimination laws on the basis of racial discrimination. Medical experts testified in his case that the condition which prevented Nelson from shaving usually affected only black men.
The court ruled in Nelson’s favor, saying that the company’s failure to lift its ban on beards despite Nelson’s well-documented medical problem resulted in illegal workplace discrimination against black men.
0 comments:
Post a Comment