Workplace Appearance and Grooming Policies

Workplace Appearance and Grooming Policies Employees are the face of the employer’s business association, framing a public image to clients, customers, and partners. Accordingly, employers require certain appearance and grooming standards for employees, particularly those with critical client or customer contact. A grooming policy should reflect the needs of the employer while not pointlessly limiting employee individual expression. The more casual or professional the culture, the number of employees interact with people outside of the workplace. Moreover, few businesses, especially those employees who operate heavy machinery which is dangerous to livelihood, may require grooming standards to satisfy safety hazards.

Many employers have policies that regulate employee appearance style. These might take the form of attire, policies restricting visible tattoos or piercings or grooming rules. This particular policy has been developed to ensure that all the employees understand the importance of appropriate grooming and hygiene set forth the minimum requirements to which all employees, contract workers, and temporary staff are required to follow.

California and New York are the first two states to connect the dots between racial discrimination and rules that discourage or prohibit certain hairstyles, which experts say should motivate employers to revisit their appearance policies even if they do not ban any specific looks.

Illegal Workplace Discrimination Federal law prohibits employers from discriminating against employees based on race, color, national origin, sex (including pregnancy), religion, disability, genetic information, or age (if the employees are at least 40 years old). State law may prohibit employers from discriminating based on additional traits, such as marital status, sexual orientation, or national origin.

These laws prohibit discrimination in every aspect of employment, from hiring to firing. This includes workplace policies that regulate employee appearance, such as dress codes, grooming codes, and uniform code requirements.

Policies that Discriminate A grooming or dress policy that discriminates against a protected class of employees is illegal.

This is true whether the policy discriminates explicitly or simply has a disparate impact on one group. Here are some examples: ďƒ˜ Shaving: A policy requiring employees to be clean-shaven might discriminate against African Americans, who are more likely to have a skin condition that makes shaving painful. It might also discriminate against employees whose religious beliefs require beards.

 Hair Length: A policy requiring men to have short hair might discriminate against employees whose religious beliefs prohibit cutting hair.  No Tattoos or Piercing: An employee whose tattoos or piercing must be displayed for religious purposes might have a discrimination claim. For instance, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought claims on behalf of an employee who argued that his religious beliefs made it a sin to cover his tattoos or religious inscriptions.  Policies that impose different requirements on men and women. As long as dress or grooming code does not impose heavier requirements on one gender, or require that employees to dress in sexually provocative ways, or as seductive, then it is likely illegal.

However, an employer that requires employees of only one gender to wear uniforms or follow a dress code might be violating the law.  Policies that are difficult for employees with particular disabilities to follow. It is legal for an employer to require all employees, including those with disabilities, to wear a uniform or follow a dress code (for example, that employees wear professional business attire). However, an employee whose disability prevents compliance may require a reasonable accommodation. For instance, if an employee who uses a wheelchair would suffer discomfort from wearing a stiff uniform all day long, the employer may have to allow the employee to wear something similar (for example, clothing of the same color and style) that will not cause the same problems.

This is not to say that employers cannot impose requirements around maintaining a workappropriate appearance. Employers may enforce grooming and appearance policies so long as they do not target any specific hair textures or hairstyles. However, even if a grooming or appearance code does not explicitly target any particular hairstyle, a seemingly neutral policy could give rise to claims. For example, employers who require employees to maintain a “neat and orderly” appearance should explain that the policy does not require employees to straighten, relax, or otherwise manipulate their hair to conform to employer expectations.

Penalties for Non-Compliance Aggrieved workers may file complaints with the commission or lawsuit in State Courts. The commission can impose civil penalties of up to $25,000 on employers that violate the law and is authorized to award a wide array of preparation to employees including hiring, reinstatement, and promotion. There is no cap on compensatory damages that a worker may recover. The commission can also mandate changes in the employer’s internal policies and procedures. In court, workers can seek to recover damages such as back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and costs.

The above information material, content, and images are for informational purpose only and are not intended to provide legal or other types of advice for you.