new thread
just how legal is it for a business to make it mandatory to cut your hair before starting work?
i went in for an interview at a grocery store, i only applied for stock(seeing how ill be in the back mostly so no one has to see my hair...) and they still insisted i get my hair cut or i cant work there.
thats fucked up
is that even legal
Unfortunately, I'm pretty sure it's legal unless they outright harass you about it.
Have you tried to compromise with them? Maybe tell them you'll tie it back or tuck it in your shirt? If all else fails, perhaps ask if cutting of the hair is also standard for women?
- Brian
i had no idea it was legal for them to outright tell me the sole reason im not getting hired is my hair
thats insane
It is very stupid, but unfortunately you are playing under their rules and if they don;t want you for such a reason then there's not much you can do.
Still, not a good enough reason to get a hair cut!
I don't see how it could be legal...discrimination is discrimination. It would be like someone not hiring me because I'm Pagan...that fact doesn't affect how well I do my job, does it? That's just my opinion, but I could be wrong. I don't know how the law works.
~Jenn
as long as it's in their bylaws and they tell you before you're hired.
It's an unfortunate fact but true.
Most reserve the option of wearing a hair net.
You could possibly have a "sexual harrasment" suit if they do not also tell women they have to cut their hair. The whole "equality" thing that women fought so hard for. LOL
I do some HR consulting for a U.S. business operating in Canada that has a strict dress/hair code, so I know the legal implications for HR decisions. Canada is a prettly liberal place, but I was surprised to learn that it is perfectly legal for an employer to refuse to hire a man for long hair, either sex for visible body piercings; unwillingness to wear a company uniform etc. If after a person is hired, he or she is asked to cut his/her hair, removing piercings etc, it can be disputed, but in advance of hiring, an employer has every right to stipulate what the dress/grooming expectations are.
I think that your only recourse is to write a very dignified letter to the person who interviewed you, and state how impressed you had been with the company, and what an asset you would have been to them. If you were a good candidate, it will undoubtedly bother the interviewer to receive such a letter.
Another option is to consult the ACLU.
On the bright side, companies that are so rigid are usually not very pleasant places to work. Concentrate on finding employment that will enable you to reach your fullest potential.
Michael
Hi,
i'm from the UK. Obviously laws differ from country to country but an interesting case you may want to take a look at is that when Mark Pell took his case against the Wheatley Hotel to court (The employment Tribunal).
- S -
women dont have to cut their hair, hell half of them dont even wear it in a ponytail
but i guess i should mention this is also a place that has been open since the 50's(maybe before) AND is closed on sundays...
As many others already stated, it is legal. It is also LOGICAL!
There are jobs where long hair (man and women) may be dangerous or reduces your productivity. There are jobs where customers expect certain looks.
I won't give examples, so you are required to think about it!
i mean it isnt some big business with millions of dollars on the line counting on me having short hair
christ, its a grocery store , i cant think of anything that could reduce my productivity because of my hair, and even for being back in the stockroom all day, they still want me to cut it.
i mean my minds made up that, the thought never crossed my mind to cut it just for this job, that just pissed me off
As you state, "It is just a grocery store". Look for employment oppurtunities else where. Everyone that responded here gave you some good input. Because your still in search for a job, I'm confident that you will find a more pleasing work environment that will suit your needs. If you are still looking to be hired for this job, then the best course of action is to ask to see their dress code and have the interviewer point out in writing that this is indeed a policy. The only employer I have worked for thus far that has a hair length policy was the Armed Forces and in writing, it clearly states what the maximum length is and that it must be groomed. The interviewer telling you to get a hair-cut is not detail enough. What I mean is, how short should it be cut? What is the maximum length your hair can be at to be tolerable? If none of this information is written in their policy, you may have a valid argument. It could quite possibly be only the opinion of the interviewer telling you this. But I still would look for employment elsewhere. It is not worth it and if you happened to get hired, your experiences there may be an unpleasant one.
I wish you luck.
There are jobs where customers expect certain looks.
Expect certain looks?
IMO;
I think customers can expect an employee's time, courtesy, professionalism and ultimately to do the job they are paid for.
Company policies that include rules on hairstyles (for men or women) have no merit and the law needs to change to abolish this prejudice.
Rubbish!
The employer has every right to expect people to keep their hair covered or tied back to comply with environmental health legislation. The only reason they want it to be cut is to satisfy their prejudices - there is no environmental or health and safety argument here.
As for people expecting certain looks....give me a break, please. People want quality service - how long someone's hair is in the stock room isn't going to be on the top of their minds.
As said elsewhere, seek employment elsewhere.
In the UK - Mark Pell, took the Wheatley Hotel to the tribunal and won over just such a situation.
Sorry, my comment was aimed at the logical part of your statement, not the legality.
You're still wrong. It's always possible to restrain hair in any situation (yes, even in combat), and if men and women have equal rights to have long hair, then no employer is disadvantaged over any other, so they won't lose customers (I don't beleive they would anyway). In any case, the real reason some employers do this is to exercise power over others lives, i.e. megalomania, it really has nothing to do with attracting customers.
The US legal position is that the EEOC has always interpreted the statute such that men have a valid sex discrimination claim on long hair, but no longer advise legal action due to unfavourable court decisions, i.e. they beleive the precedents to be mistaken, but they are still binding. This is a great shame. The only exceptiion seems to be for native Americans. How do I sign up with a tribe? LOL
The position in Europe is 180 degrees different due to the freedom of expression clause, which is an admirable thing.
I do not agree with your below statement. Employers still do this today to uphold an image that portrays their values system. Unfortunately there are still hidden prejudices toward men who choose to wear long hair. I'll give you a good example of this, using my best friend as a comparison. My best friend use to wear his hair long for many years and he always had it tied up in a pony-tail when out in public. He believes that all men wearing their hair long should have it tied up when out in public. He believes that it is "trashy" looking to wear it down after it reaches a certain length. He now wears his hair short and everytime I come over to his house, he literally gets mad at me for wearing it down. I pay no mind to him and even told him that many other people have told me to wear my hair down more often as it looks better. Employers are no different than my friend and perceive the long-hair image as not neat and who knows what other hidden issues they may have with it. The results may look like "control of others lives", but I believe that to be indirect rather than direct.
No, I just wasn't questioning the legality - I don't know enough about US law to comment.
In America:
"If you believe you have been discriminated against by an employer, labor union or employment agency when applying for a job or while on the job because of your [b]race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, or disability, or believe that you have been discriminated against because of opposing a prohibited practice or participating in an equal employment opportunity matter, you may file a charge of discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).[/b]" - www.eeoc.gov
In the UK, recent cases have accepted the general principle that long hair is an acceptable choice for men, and that it is unlawful to compel a male employee to cut his hair. He can, however, be expected to keep it tied up or covered up for health or safety reasons, and to 'look smart' in general terms.
See posts below on this subject and on the comparison between the UK legal situation over long haired men and trousered women in the workplace (ditto in schools), which have many interesting parallels.
The UK has signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees 'Freedom of Expression'. That has been taken to include personal appearance. The law here is, not surprisingly, in a state of flux as a result, but mostly that has been good for anyone who doesn't care to 'conform'.
...John. I understand your anger. I did some research into this about a year ago. Title VII is the applicable statute when it comes to sexual discrimination in the work place. Unfortunately, all the Courts of Appeals in the U.S. have interpreted an employer requiring short hair on men to interfere with a male's employment (I know, it's bull shit). Rather, the courts lump long hair on men into a "dress code" category, thereby allowing employers to openly require a man to have short hair, and not a woman. The United States Supreme Court denied certiori (wouldn't hear) any appeals from the Courts of Appeals. I, however, think that the "law", or should I say "interpretation", by these courts of Title VII is completely outdated. Hopefully it will change someday.
my step-dad works at a computer airline company, and is one of the big dogs. his hair is always long, but they made him cut it for a buisness trip over-seas once. he grumbled, but still agreed to it. when he got there, one of the buisnessmen he was meeting had hair that was much longer than his was. he wasnt very happy about that when he got home. :p
lucky for him, his hair grows fast, and it returns back to normal everytime they make him cut it for trips.
i personally feel that long hair says something about a person, and it isnt laziness to get a haircut.