new thread
Hi
my friend Javed`s currently following a vocational course. He`s being told to cut his hair.
And here`s the part of the rules and regulations that create problems. Your suggestions to fight these clauses are welcome.
HAIRCUT
1 A male trainee shall keep his hair neatly trimmed to an acceptable length.
His hair must not touch his eyebrows, cover his ears or touch his shirt collar.
2...
3 A female trainee with long hair shall tie up her hair neatly.
If his hair is long enough, pull it back into a ponytail.
I was reading this thread and it occurred to me
the key word to bear in mind is Vocational. Which tells
me the final decision about hair is not with the school but
with employer the person finally ends up working for.
I would take this as meaning the employer is the
one driving this rule, not the school.
Also it's not clear what "vocation" this school is
for: it's very possible it is a vocation that insists
on short hair for men while allowoing women to have long
hair.
So maybe the empoyer is the one who makes the final decision
on this? Maybe it is a professional board that dictates these
policies? Maybe there is a union involved dictating these
policies?
Man, that's just wrong. I can understand why it might be important to keep hair pulled back and out of the way as a safety issue, but it should apply the same to both sexes.
Brett
The rules are the rules and they are written. If the assumption is that he is paying for this course, he could propose to them for him to keep his hair and he will follow the rules that were written for the Female Gender, or he will take his money to another vocational school that does not practice gender discrimination. It is worth a debate, but in the end if the school is still persistent in him cutting his hair, there is not much he can do but follow them or look for another school. Personally I would not want to have any relationship with a school with rules written as such. Rules should be written with equality in mind.
Agreed - So what's Javed going to do?
Agreed.... one could aquire a 'masculine' headband ala david beckham of a few months back to hold hair neatly back. This can also look quite stylish if the right one is chosen an some product applied.
A female trainee with long hair shall tie up her hair neatly.
He should only be told to tie it back...like the female trainee.
First, is this a PRIVATE school? If so, the arguments are tougher.
If it's a PUBLIC school, one might be able to argue the following:
1) 14th Amendment: Equal Protection Clause
2) Civil Rights Act: Article VII Sex Discrimination
3) 14th Amendment: Fundamental Right to Property
Good luck.
Sadly, I don't think 1 or 2 has ever worked. Of course it _is_ sex discrimination, but the precedents don't mesh with reality in any way. I don't think 3 has ever been tried, so that's the one I would go with. That would be saying that forcing him to cut his hair would be a 'taking', which is the legal term for seizing someone's property (in this case hair) against their will. If Roe v Wade can be based on the right to privacy, then this could work too, as it's much less of a stretch.
Of course, I'm only a patent agent, not a real lawyer. I seem to remember that you're a law student(?). It's hard to remember who is what. I beleive Bill is a lawyer, albeit non-practicing. What say you, Bill?
i believe tarikh lives in the UK and i would assume his friend does also. using the United States Constitutional as a basis for arguing isn't going to be of much help.
OK. I was taking the lead from Fitmus, who cited various US constitutional arguments.
Assuming Tarikh is anywhere in Europe, including the UK, then the best legal argument is probably the right to self expression under the European Human Rights Convention. I think that is Article 10, if memory serves. The term 'vocational school' sounds more American than British, though. I don't think there is yet an English precedent under that article, but others reckon it looks promising.
As previously noted, I am a patent agent rather than an actual lawyer, so it's probably not a good idea to rely completely on what I say. I also happen to be British, but live in the US, so I do have some idea of both systems, and have previously researched the precedents on long hair discrimination in both places.
Long hair discrimination is a gray area of the law that is slowly moving in our favor but nevertheless at this time is very much in flux. Rulings vary from one jurisdiction to another. My discussion of it can be seen at these links:
