new thread
Especially for those of you living in the UK, it may be interesting to read this page from the Equal Opportunities Commission, which deals with what it sees as the current legal view on dress codes, including definitions of what is and is not considered reasonable in law. Although specifically designed for school uniform questions, much of what is says is relevant to work situtations.
Is it unlawful for a school to refuse to allow boys but not girls to wear earrings or have long hair?The same considerations would apply as in the issue of girls and trousers, i.e whether, in the light of current conventions on dress, it is less favourable treatment on grounds of sex to deny boys the option of having long hair or wearing earrings. There have been no decided cases about dress codes in school and the outcome of a legal challenge would be uncertain. A recent employment tribunal decided that it was unlawful sex discrimination to refuse a man a job in a pub because he had long hair.
Interesting read, thanks - the whole school issue is still decidely vague, though.
It will be. That's because we are reliant on civil courts to interpret the law. I suspect that future cases will make the old defence of "conventional" dress as being reasonable, obselete due to changing attitudes, evolving dress sense and the Human Rights Act.
But, until there is a test case, it will remain vague.
You wanna try reading the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974...
I believe you are 100% correct Mark. Thank you for your in-put.
Sounds like the so many of the typical "Mumbo-Jumbo" documents in the US. Sure,read the document. It LOOKS as if it says something........but then try and figure-out EXACTLY what it is saying? Perhaps nobody wants to take a sound enough stand.............so the "Vague" prevails? Safest route for them.