Employer controlling your looks

Well, a private employer can have any kind of policy about their employees appearance specially if the job entels the employee publicaly representing the company. They will of course have to inform you of the details of the policy before hiring you. You don't have to agree, but they don't have to hire you. If you do agree though, they have every right to tell you how to dress or style your hair, according to the image they want to portray. Remember, when people look at the meteorologist, they are not thinking, oh the meteorologist looks bad, or cheap, or tacky. They are thinking channel 7 (just an example) is so tacky. Have you seen the way their meteorologist looks?.

I agree, it shouldn't matter, but unfortunately it does. You would be surprised how many customers complain about the way employess look. I worked as a retail manager for years, so I know. So companies adjust their policies to make customers happy. As long as the customers care, the companies will comply. It is people who determine what companies do.

I am a lawyer by trade and I do practice employment law. Employers are allowed to make reasonable regulations concerning appearance and they are allowed to have different regulations for men and women. This has been repeatedly litigated all over the country in state and federal courts and that has been the bottom line in nearly every decision. The key is whether the employer's demands are reasonable and that is judged by what is within the cultural mainstream. Hence, a regulation that we have at our law firm, that men be clean shaven and keep their hair short, and that women have hair that reaches the bottom of their shoulderblades is going to be upheld as it is well within cultural norms for American men and women. We do provide reasonable expense reimbursements to women for hair products and ornaments. This is the corporate image that we want. We don't want something outlandish that would offend clients. We serve a considerable working class male clientele as we do worker comp law and those clients respond better to women with a feminine appearance.

We could go on and on, but it all comes down to: that is your opinion.

I am neither a liberal nor a conservative (I am an independent and judge each issue on itis merits), but it never ceases to amaze me how denizens of both stripes are equally intolerant of views with which they disagree and equally dependent on their emotions to motivate their arguments.

If it's acceptable for you to feel this way about what others want, then shouldn't it be equally acceptable for others to disregard what you want?

Because what someone wants in this case is a directly intrusion into personal freedoms.

I am neither a liberal nor a conservative (I am an independent and judge each issue on itis merits), but it never ceases to amaze me how denizens of both stripes are equally intolerant of views with which they disagree and equally dependent on their emotions to motivate their arguments.

That doesn't matter. Your views are still annoyingly conservative.

In my previous post, I was merely stating what the law is and what my law firm does in compliance therewith. Laws can and do change, both by way of the legislature and through the Courts. But that doesn't happen spontaneously based on personal attackes. If you don't like the way the law is, elect legislators who feel as you do.  Make arguments to Courts to persuade judges to change the law. That will accomplish more to get you what you want than personal attacks on those persons with whom you disagree.

However, you show no resentment for the law, and seem to subtly accept it.

There is a chasm of difference between items of appearance easily changes such as hair length or facial hair and race or sexual orientation. The latter are immutable. You are born black or white or red or brown or yellow. You are born heterosexual or gay or lesbian or bisexual.

That doesn't matter. It's still a personal freedom. If you're only defending the way someone is born, that's not a personal freedom, as it's already forced on them from birth. I covered this already.

If you could make a black person white, would it be any more acceptable? Why? Because they're born that way? What if we were genetically disposed in ways that would evolve into us liking certain styles of dress, hair colours, etc.? We don't know, but it's very possible.

Discrimination based on immutable characteristics is and will always be wrong.

Bullsh*t. Discrimination is against anyone, or any irrelevant reason whether it's because they have purple hair or because they're gay.

Why, exactly, is discriminating against someone because of their dress or hair colour not discrimination?

Also, my transsexuality is the perfect example. It IS mutable in the sense that I can appear as a more or less normal male despite being born with a female mindset(a parallel to only feeling comfortable in a certain style of dress, hair colour, etc.).

Would it be acceptable to force me into the wrong gender role? And if not, what is the difference?

The employment regulations which I was discussing are related to choices a person makes, not how God made them.

That doesn't matter. They should still be well within their rights to make them. It is not your place, or the place of any seedy businessman to tell them otherwise. As long as they're relatable to by others, there shouldn't be a problem.

When you decide to work for someone else, rather than have your company, you give up a certain amount of freedom.

You shouldn't have to. How you look, as long as it's not immensely off-putting, is supremely irrelevant. You're already giving up half of your waking hours. Isn't that enough?

You are being paid to work, not to dress like a drone.

I don't give a crap what the law says, or what common practice is. I know. I want it to change.

As long someone else writes your paycheck, you dance to their tune.

I take it you don't believe in workers' unions then?

The law defines the limits of the dance.

Which is why it should change.

What the posters here argue is for an unlimited right of self-expression, whenever and wherever.

There is a big difference between "Whenever and wherever", and where you spend half your life and most of your social interaction time.

f you are self-employed, that is not a problem. You pay the bills and you do what you wish.

Being self employed is not a practical solution for most people and most people don't even wish or have the capability to run a company.

This is a cop out. Not a solution.

conformity to reasonable rules to enable the ongoing success of that business is not too much to ask.

Who the hell are you to say that? No offense, but you probably look like a boring old sod anyway.

Why is it not too much to ask? You're severely limiting someone's freedom of expression and your only backing for doing that is "BUSINESS!". If image based discrimination was somehow limited by legislation(as it is in some areas in some countries of europe, incidentally) it would be the same all around. We NEED to get rid of this culture of style over substance, trusting people in suits, as it is.

And it's still bugging the hell out of me that you seem apathetic or even supportive of sexist hiring policy. That is VERY easy to define in law. No excuses.

Hey DesertDavid, I completely agree with you on the conformity issue. One is often expected to conform to others around them. In the past I had a hard time accepting conformity. I have always been one to step outside of the box and do things my way. That was until recently however, after a lifetime of fighting conformity I've found it a lot easier to accept the status quo on some things and do what is expected instead of rocking the boat so to speak. Yet out there in the real world you will at times encounter employer's who actually should enforce a little stricter dress code policy then what they allow their employee's to get away with. Isn't the reputation of the business at stake by the way they allow themselves to be represented to the public. Prime example is the daycare in which my son had attended in the past there is woman who works there that on any given day it looks as though she has just woken up and rolled out of bed and didn't even bother to change her clothing or comb her hair. I'm sure she bathes on a regular basis but the way she dresses clearly implies otherwise. Here this woman is supposed to be a professional, granted she is taking care of children which at times stressfull but come on holes in a pair of sweatpants that are three times to big for you should be  worn at home if one so chooses to dress in that fashion. On the opposite side of the spectrum dressing a little too provacatively in this environment is also a turn off. One needs to consider the environment in which they work and dress so accordingly.

Rosalie, you really are a "critical" thinker. Criticaly in need of help that is LOL!!

Edited by Sharyg11 - March 14 2007 at 8:25pm

Rosalie may be the most close minded individual I've ever seen on message boards. And that's no hyperbole. To say that your opinion is morally right and that anyone who disagrees is sexist, a bigot, and all the other insults in the thread is the worst part of society.

Any individual who expresses an opinion and doesn't allow for others to have a differing opinion puts us one step closer to living in Orwell's "1984" society. Every issue should be debated. Yes, every one. Even those such as rape, murder, and slavery. Once a society accepts one opinion as a universal truth and stops debating it, the society has failed. On these issues we believe that everyone should have the same opinion, but we still must come up with the counter argument and a strong one. That's the only way to arrive at an opinion.

Most issues aren't like slavery and rape and have a huge gray area. I try to listen to both sides before forming an opinion, but my opinions evolve as I hear more debate. There are few issues that I know I'm right about it. There are many I believe I'm right about. On those issues, I'm pleased that others disagree. Dissent should never be discouraged. It's those people who dissent, no matter how far-fetched their ideas might be, who force us examine those ideas. That's the society I want to live in, not one where one person's opinion is right and all others are bigots and sexists.

All this reminds me of something that I came across on TV.  There is this model that the advertising company uses her hands.  The model can never go in the sun and always wears rubber gloves around the house to protect the look of her hands.  She must be paid very well for her efforts in all this.