Male employee can be fired for wearing an earring, court
rules
byLindy Korn, Esq.
A male warehouse employee who was fired for wearing
an earring could not sue for sex discrimination, even though an unwritten
policy allowed female workers to wear similar jewelry, a State Supreme
Court has held.
The employee was fired after he refused to remove an ear stud
during work hours. His
supervisor had warned him previously that he would be terminated if
he did not conform to the company’s grooming policy, which prohibited
males, but not females, from wearing earrings.
The employee argued that the policy constituted “disparate
treatment” on the basis of sex in violation of federal and state
law. But the court found that grooming policies
that reflect customary modes of grooming have insignificant impact on
employment opportunities and do not constitute sex discrimination.
The court found that wearing an ear stud is not an immutable
characteristic. The employee can remove an ear stud or
cover it with a bandage. He
does not contend wearing an ear stud involves a fundamental right. Nor does he contend that the unwritten
personal grooming code perpetuated a sexist or chauvinistic attitude
in employment that significantly affects his employment opportunities.
Therefore, the court found that the personal grooming code prohibiting
males but not females from wearing earrings or studs was not unlawful
discrimination.
Sex discrimination provisions under federal law were enacted
to stop sexist or chauvinistic attitudes in the workplace that significantly
affect a person’s abilities to work and have an effect on employment
opportunities.
Federal and state laws were not meant to prohibit employers from
instituting personal grooming codes, which don’t have an effect
on employment rights.
Please submit any
comments you may have about the above case. |
