new thread
Good evening and hello fellow long hairs! I have been looking and looking for information on the web about how to get a good job and keep my hair. I have come to the understanding that corporate America is determined to see all self-loving strong LONGHAIRED males to become extinct. Apparently it is due to the fact of customer relations, as if the length of a man's hair has anything to do with whether or not customers will frequent their establishments due to the appearance of a long-haired male behind the desk or counter. And it is really starting to tick me off.
So if you get fired for refusing to conform to dress code policies do not threaten them with "I am going to sue you for sexual discrimination," threaten them instead with "I am going to sue you for violation of my civil rights."
(A circuit court found that students' hair is protected by the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment ("a sphere of personal liberty").
There was a case that was filed under harassment that did win, but most cases are found in favor to the companies due to most claims being outside the scope of Title VII 42 U.S.C. § 2000e, et seq protection. Here is some info on the case that did win (outside of religious practices):
In a recent case, the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld an award of damages to a male Safeway delicatessen worker who was dismissed for not cutting his hair short in accordance with the company’s dress code. He successfully argued that he was treated unfavorably on the grounds of his sex, on the basis that a woman with hair of a similar length would not have been dismissed.
The Tribunal decision was split, with the two lay members finding in favor of the worker. They stressed that rules as to hair length should be viewed differently from rules on clothing, on the basis that a worker can change his or her clothes on returning home straight after work, but that hair cannot instantly grow. The third member of the Tribunal, a Judge, applied a previous case called Schmidt and held that the dress code as a whole should be considered, rather than looking at individual aspects of it, and that on this basis, there had been no discrimination. The judge was outvoted by the two lay members.
Most cases that I have researched do not end up so favorably. Apparently justice is not blind, but sees through eyes that are ignorant of personal liberties.
Anyways, I am glad to have found a discussion board dedicated to the celebration and freedom of hair. Is it not our right to distinguish ourselves from conformity by showing the world that we are free!
I am in the process of doing research on trying to make a law or just get the attention we all need to be free to grow are hair as long as we want to. And still hold onto a good job. (Not a law for the growth of hair mind you, but one that does not let corporations decide what we as individuals are limited to do with our bodies.) Hell I'll write my congressmen if I have to and start to get petitions!
Basically we as long haired men, who in ancient times were acknowledged in status by the length of ones hair, even in ancient Troy, men where allowed to grow their hair long as an acknowledgement of their status as a proven warrior.
I consider myself a follower of Native American religion even though I have not been acknowledged formally by it, but I will when I find a proper teacher willing to show a white man (me) the right way to live. Until then I will continue to live my life as our Grandfather, The Great Spirit, has given to me to understand.
I look forward to chatting with you all. Keep it long!
Xy
hey there. long haired men really should have the right to keep it long. Do native americans legally have a right to keep their hair long? Im not indian, but am often asked if I am, for once maybe that could come in handy
threaten them instead with "I am going to sue you for violation of my civil rights."
The wigs worn by judges in the UK and elsewhere are themselves a symbol of the high status of long hair.
Ah, yes, the descendant of the old periwig. One of the more ridiculous expressions of fashion.... ;-D
Smith v Safeway (1996) was subsequeently overturned at the court of appeal and Schmidt reapplied. This is the "swings and roundabouts" argument that states an employer can impose different codes for men and women providing they are equally restrictive and evenly applied. Safeway were able to satisfy that argument.
There are more relevant cases, however:
Catteral v Glyn Nuttal (1981) where the tribunal ruled that providing the individual's hair did not affect the respondant's business, then it was up to him how long he wore it.
Owen v PGA (2000) This is the women wearing trousers argument that effectively overturned Schmidt. Although the PGA did not satisfy the evenly applied dress code argument, the comparisons used in Schmidt are 25 years out of date and no longer safe.
Pell v Wheatly Hotel (2000) The employer asked Mr Pell at interview whether he would cut his hair to secure the job. When he refused, the interview was terminated. He successfully sued.
European Convention on Human Rights - articles 8, 9 and 10. Now incorporated into UK law, any tribunal or appeal court must take this into account when hearing a case.
What about religion and individual beliefs? Some religion beliefs include growing long hair or long beards. It is not like we all get together in this world to have a meeting and discuss what the policies are with how we dress or how long one's hair should be. No individual or body of individuals can argue successfully an opinion. Opinions are neither right or wrong, they just exist.
This has been tricky - at least as far as UK law is concerned. We have had law preventing racial discrimination for some time. However, that did not protect religious belief. There have been a few oddities - sikhs exempt from the crash helmet law, for example.
However, the Human Rights Act clearly includes religious belief, the right to privacy and the right to freedom of expression.
I'm just waiting for a test case...
Mark,
Thanks for sharing this input, and as always keep us updated with rulings and future cases.
I do think your religious belief system is also a very good place to work from regardless of whether you are acknowledged by particular practitioners of native American religion. My own practice includes an ecclectic set of NA, Buddhist, Taoist and Christian practices. They are mine. They work for me. That's enough. To violate them is to violate my right to religious freedom. Even your acknowledgment of the classical Trojan/Greek (and other) practices of long hair as a sign of the adult man, the wise man, is enough to be a part of your religious practice.
Focus on religious practice rather than religious system or organization.
Robert