new thread
I currently work serving tables for a large resturant chain. I have around shoulder length hair that I have been tying back for work into a loose ponytail. However yesterday I found out that our company has just introduced a new dress code and as part of this they have decreed that anyone who has longer than collar length hair has to wear it covered using a company standard accessory that they will supply as part of a new uniform. This is a large clip, which is used to gather the hair, with a big red bow on it and a hair net to gather the loose hair from the ponyt tail up into. I am OBVIOUSLY apprehensive about this since it will not look cool, but I need the job to pay my bills. I wonder if anyone has any suggestions that I can offer my boss as a compromise - I have no idea whther they will agree but it is worth a go. They plan to introduce these new uniforms as from late next week when they have supplied them to all the chains.
I know where You're comming from.Sometimes you've got to go along with company bulls--t to pay the bills.Anyway here's an idea about what you can do. Try to pull your hair back in a ponytail and tuck it under your shirt.Then that way nobody can say anything about it being over your collar.Also,if you are so inclined,start looking around for another job that will be more long haired friendly.You might find the new job will pay more money.Whatever you decide to do,I support you and wish you luck
Hawkman
I don't know, but is this legal? Can a company impose a dress code, after the fact, that so clearly discriminates against men with long hair (within the bounds of reasonablenss in that you have obviosuly tied your hair back to conform, but now they want you to wear a bow that is obviously intended to put you off keeping your long hair, or force you out of the company). Can anyone comment
Yup, especially if his employment contract states that he agrees that the restaurant chain he works for reserves the right to alter the contract. One thing you have to remember about men with long hair and women who wear skirts/heels: Hair isn't nearly as "sexist" an issue as women's clothing is, mainly due to the fact that hair is a natural part of one's body that can change over time. Hence, there's little to no room for any kind of suit against a company that requires men wear short hair.
At present, the credit office I work for has a fairly liberal dress code (casual business, and no mention of hair length either on men or women), so I have the freedom of wearing my hair however long I want, providing I keep it neat and clean. Sadly, most other jobs aren't like this. I got lucky when I landed the job I have now. Hell, there's a guy in our collections department who wears a nose ring, and a co-worker of mine (female) has chin-length hair all the way around, and it's black with purple highlights.
The point is that dress codes generally aren't something that can be easily challenged by allegations of sexual prejudice. If a company has a business-style dress code, they have every right to require women wear skirts/dress shoes and men wear dress shirts/slacks and short hair, and it's completely legal. If the office I work for were to suddenly decide men had to have short hair, I'd have to make a decision as to whether I wanted to keep my job and cut my hair (or, possibly, hide it behind my shirt), or quit. Considering how valueable my job is to the well-being of me and my wife's financial stability, if hiding my hair wouldn't "cut it" for the company, the hair would be gone by the next week (under strong, but silent protest, mind you).
As time changes, and societal views change to support men with long hair, perhaps, hopefully, more businesses will be more accepting of men with long hair. Until then, it'll remain a constant hurdle to get over in our continued struggle to stay employed. Alas, this is one contest where short-haired men have the advantage, and the better chance of landing the same position the long-haired man with better qualifications wants, but can't get because the employer doesn't want to have to deal with telling the long-haired man he's right for the job, but he has to cut his hair. The shorter your hair, the further into the door you are during that crucial first impression.
Sucks, though, don't it. :)
Given a recent ruling in NY state allowing women to go topless anywhere a man can otherwise it would be gender-discrimination, however, is encouraging. Cases can be retried. Just because a certain court somewhere ruled against men with long hair doesn't mean it will always be ruled against.
Indeed.
This is true, to an extent. Quite honestly, though, I don't think businesses are going to have much trouble with continuing to get courts to rule in their favor; especially if they can continue to be allowed to require women wear skirts/dress shoes.
If you look back to the long-hair cases of the early '70s where public shool boards were being sued by the parents of male students who had long hair and were expelled for it, a large factor in the argument was that, unlike a manner of clothing that can be easily donned/doffed before/after school, it is not possible to have long hair outside of school and short hair inside. So, while they school may decide how it wants students to look/behave during school hours and on school ground, their no-long-hair ban reached beyond into the students' non-academic lives and the courts ruled that this was overstepping their authority.
So, while a business may continue to require women to dress a certain way, I don't think they have any business dictating how one must look outside of work, and, hopefully, so will a judge.
(Try your case in NY state.)
- Paul
Paul,
This would seem to suggest in Dans case that the company could not force him to cut his hair, but they could make him wear the bow-clip. Am I right in assumimng this is what you mean?
Paul
Paul,
This would seem to suggest in Dans case that the company could not force him to cut his hair, but they could make him wear the bow-clip. Am I right in assumimng this is what you mean?
Paul
While I hadn't thought of that, yes that would be a consequence because the bow clip is removable after the work day. Given the choice, I'd keep my hair long.
- Paul
It absoulutely IS legal. A company can decide at any point in time what image it requires from its employees--the employee can decide at any point in time if s/he still wants to work there with the company's regulations. I know this for a fact because I've "been there; done that." I no longer have long hair. The organization for which I work imposed a new "appearance code" which specified that a man's hair cannot go over the ear, collar or fall into the eyes. The next day one of my colleagues with a beautiful blond ponytail came to work with a flattop! The following week three more ponytails fell. I consulted an attorney (of course our organizations had also--before such a policy was introduced) and discovered that the company has the right to demand this of employees. Have you ever seen a guy working for Disney with long hair?
And I think Nyghtfall is wrong. Long hair on guys has been around for over 30 years, and society still does not "accept" it. It's tolerated in many circles, but still draws attention and in many settings is not accepted at all. I had long hair for over ten years and finally had to give it up to be successful in my job. I've just accepted it. I still admire looking at a guy's long hair and fantasize about it for myself.
In most cases, courts have upheld an employer's right to establish a dress code, and can have differing standards for males and female based on societal "norms." Attempts to change the dress code in midstream are usually held up as well. The law and the courts can be notoriously pro-employer, and few battles such as this have been won. It sucks, but that's the way it is.
It's clear that the new policy is an attempt to shame long-haired male employees into either getting a haircut or looking silly. Personally, I think he should go ahead and say, "fine -- I'll wear the bow clip." Sure, he will feel a little weird, but it will defeat the intent of what the employer is trying to do (they probably assume that no man in his right mind would wear a hair bow to work) and frustrate them no end. Then, as customers comment or ask about it, he can tell them that it is part of the establishment's dress code, and that he has no choice in the matter. Hopefully, enough patrons will comment to the manager on how absolutely absurd the policy is, and they will relent.
In other words, don't give up without a fight, but use a kind of "passive resistance" -- let them see how ridiculous their policy is for themselves. (Hey, don't complain -- at least they're not making you shave your legs and wear a skirt!!)
Or, worse, they'll comment on how un-professional looking his hair is with the bow clip in it, and the company will decide to enforce a stricter dress code which will require him to cut his hair.
Hey I know how you feel since I have been there and done that while working the tables after college. Our company imposed a dress code to standardise the appearance of all the waitresses and eliminate any individualism. As a result we had to wear something similar to what you have described, but no bow - just a longish loose piece of cloth which came down over the back of the head. It looked daft and all the girls hated it, but we had no come back. Talk to the girls who work with you I bet they are not too happy about this either.
As for a compromise, I don't think you will get very far - sorry. The only thing perhaps you could argue is that perhaps the hair clip/bow does not go with the male uniform - at least they haven't suggested that you wear a dress/skirt as well - have they :-). Perhaps you could work in another part of the resturant where you do not have to wear this uniform. A final thought is perhaps you could trim your hair back to just above collar length but wear it in a bob style.
Otherwise just see how it goes. As I say both you and the girls will probably be united in thinking its silly, but soon it just becomes the norm and you will get used to it. The only thing is that as a guy you may get more funny looks or comments from customers than the girls will. I hope you have a thick skin.
Let us know how you get on.
I'm a bit late getting to this, but... Personally, although I love long hair, I don't relish the thought of finding it in my food and wouldn't mind a bit if all food service workers wore nets. (I did when I worked in a restaurant.) The bow sounds fairly degrading for EITHER gender, IMO, and might well be used to "shame" you into cutting your hair. Would they be willing to allow you to wear the "net" part without the bow?
I'm interested in knowing how this turned out.