Hair rules at work
Printed From: HairBoutique.com
Category: Hair Talk
Forum Name: Hair Politics
Forum Description: The politics of Hair is a slippery slope...
URL: https://talk.hairboutique.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=8608
Printed Date: June 19 2024 at 2:15pm
Topic: Hair rules at work
Posted By: Unregistered Guest
Subject: Hair rules at work
Date Posted: April 17 2000 at 4:50pm
Here is something for all you hair politicians to ponder.
A couple of weeks ago a man walked into my salon (I
am a hairdresser). He had very long hair right down his
back. He told me that in a couple of weeks time he was
going to have to have his hair cut for a new job (in a
bank). One of the people at the interview told him he
would have to have it cut as it was part of their dress
code (they have to be very smart, customers expect it
etc). He asked me how much I charged etc and then
went away.
On Friday he came in for the hair cut. It was obvious he
didn't want it cut and he hated every minute of it
(particuarly the clippers) and I hated giving him the
haircut as I could see it destressed him (however, I
must say I think he looks better with it short!).
What do you all think of this situation? Do you think his
employers were right to make him cut his hair? Was
he right to give in to them and have it cut?
|
Replies:
Posted By: wolfgang
Date Posted: April 18 2000 at 7:11am
This situation is well known to me. It never was a question of rights. The first hair cut request came to me at the age of 18, military rules (from hairlength about 40cm). After that I could grow it out during university studies and had to cut it short to get a job in a research institute. There was no freedom in choice, the only possible alternative would have been to look for another job. In this case the haircut was the only possible way, but I remember also that some of my aquaintances had hidden their long hair with wigs. Today the things have changed a little bit, recently I got a new job without getting a hair cut, although the members of the staff all have very short hairs (computer development area, my hairlength now is about 18 cm). To get a job in a bank without a haircut I can not imagine (my location is Germany/Munich).
wolfgang
-------------
|
Posted By: Ally
Date Posted: April 18 2000 at 9:11am
It depends where the guy was working, doesn't it? For example, when civilian teachers get jobs at military academies, they have to cut their hair, take out their nose rings, etc., because they are role models for the cadets.
I'm happy that lax dress codes are becoming a trend. Many tech companies would lose some of their best people if they made them shave their beards, cut their long hair, or wear anything other than the same t-shirt day after day.
But I also feel it's within a company's rights to dictate how its employees look on the job. Your client didn't have to accept the job.
Ally
-------------
|
Posted By: bobbedguy
Date Posted: April 19 2000 at 9:15am
I think that making this guy cut his hair was wrong. In my opinion that is like invading a persons privacy. If a person wants wear their hair a certain way and feel that they look good with their hair that way then who is an employer to say he must cut it off. Did they hire him because of his qualifications and that he would perform the job well or for his looks. They made this guy cut his hair against his will in order to get a job that he may have badly needed. That is akin to forcing someone to pull out all their teeth and get dentures because a couple of their teeth are crooked. I am a guy and have my hair bobbed just below my ears with bangs and I am in a professional position in an office. Many people would not accept that hairstyle on a guy but my coworkers and bosses do not mind or say anything. Don't take away a persons freedom to choose how they want to look and their freedom to express themselves.
-------------
|
Posted By: Ally
Date Posted: April 19 2000 at 9:32am
bobbedguy--
Sorry, but whether we agree with it or not, this employer was within its rights to demand that he cut his hair. The employer is looking to maintain a particular image and thereby ensure that the company appeals to the right market and is profitable.
Here's a similar example: If you owned a children's toy store, would you want an employee who was covered with scary tattoos and pierced all over his face? I wouldn't. Would you want a female employee wearing tiny skirts and revealing blouses and stiletto heels?
You can try to say that these scenarios are different, but fundamentally they are not. Besides, there are plenty of places that will hire long-haired men and not bat an eyelash. This wasn't one of them. If this particular man finds that rule intolerable, chances are he won't care for the entire workplace environment.
Ally
-------------
|
Posted By: DaveDecker
Date Posted: April 20 2000 at 10:14am
It's my understanding -- and perhaps I'm mistaken -- that employers generally reserve the right to dictate appearances in terms of clothing and hair *styles* ... but if hair length guidelines differ based on gender then a (presumably) male candidate could claim discrimination on the basis of gender, not entirely unlike other methods of discrimination that used to be used all too often against women. Regardless, a potential employer considering two otherwise equally-qualified candidates may well choose the one whose appearance is preferred by the hiring authority, and the slighted party has little chance of receiving a sympathetic ear in the courts.
Ally, you said, "The employer is looking to maintain a particular image and thereby ensure that the company appeals to the right market and is profitable." I understand that companies want their employees to project a particular physical appearance which lends to their image, but the consistency between that image and appeals to the "right" (i.e. target) market and the projected image is based on the extent to which people want to see themselves as matching that image. To presume that this is the only method of appeal is to take an extremely narrow view of the potential of marketing, for effective marketing appeals to a diverse populace. And in that narrow approach to marketing how in the world can this hypothetical company ensure maximum profitability? The company that respects diversity in its customers AND its employees has the best chance to ensure maximum profitability. Many major corporations are beginning to understand the power of recognizing and accepting diversity, and those who insist on enforcing rigid codes of conformity run the risk of failing to reach maximum profitability and incurring the wrath of shareholders demanding to know why this rigid company is failing to keep up with its competitors.
-------------
|
Posted By: bobbedguy
Date Posted: April 20 2000 at 10:39am
I agree with DaveDecker on the part about hair lengths in the work place having a double standard. Millions of professional (and non professional for that matter) women have very short haircuts but they are not told that they MUST grow their hair out long. So then why MUST a guy get his hair cut short? It seems to me that women have the absolute freedom to wear what they want and have their hair any length or style that they want while men MUST conform to all of these certain images to be acceptable. Sounds fishy to me and definitely wrong.
-------------
|
|