U.S. Court Rules Dreadlock Ban During Hiring Process Is Legal

[LilSaihah]

I have a hard time having a problem with this.

[Netherspark]

If your hairstyle doesn't fit in with whatever the job is

Say this line out loud, and pretend it's not madness.

[Kellhound]

Say this line out loud, and pretend it's not madness.

Its not madness, companies do not exist to let you express yourself at work......

[PACOX]

Uh do the dreads stink? Are they getting in the way of her doing her job? Does she not keep them up? It's pretty ridiculous and antiquated and why you'll find the most talented people migrating away from businesses that continue to operate like its 1920. Even the military allows for exceptions.

[Garnier Fructis]

Religion is a choice and 100% under your control.

Clearly, which is why I said 'and religion': a phrasing that suggests that it's separate from the non-choices. I'm rather minimalist; I like to convey meaning using sentence structure when possible.

[Sunseeker]

Here's an interesting tidbit from my facebook feed:

TLDR: Dumb H/R bitch slips up that she wasn't hiring a black applicant because of her dreadlocks, black girl lawyers up, lawyers argue that the dumb H/R bitch violated the Civil Rights Act, and the appeals court shut em down. Here's some specifics for you armchair lawyers in here:



I don't like the precedent it would've set if the courts ruled in the favor of dreadlocks. At the same time, this is why my co-workers will never see my hair grow too far out of fade nor will I ever wear jeans on casual friday because they're all kind of baggy.

Thoughts?

I could see an argument that a requirement for say "straight hair" puts an undue burden on certain races and thus is a violation, such as blacks, arabs, jews, greeks, some gingers and some eastern europeans; but there are plenty of ways to make wavy, curly, or even frizzy hair stylish and respectable.

Hair style and "grooming" policies can honestly range anywhere from reasonable to racist and sexist, I've seen quite a variety of them specifying specific hair styles and cuts for both men and women, makeup levels, etc... Company grooming policies should not be allowed to set unreasonable levels of "grooming" not should they be allowed to be sexist or racist in what is or isn't allowed.

I do agree that dreadlocks are a typically black hairstyle, but I also agree that dreadlocks do not fit most grooming policies. I've seen very nice, clean dreadlocks but they tend to be the exception, not the rule on everyone regardless of race.

[THE Bigzoman]

I could see an argument that a requirement for say "straight hair" puts an undue burden on certain races and thus is a violation, such as blacks, arabs, jews, greeks, some gingers and some eastern europeans; but there are plenty of ways to make wavy, curly, or even frizzy hair stylish and respectable.

Hair style and "grooming" policies can honestly range anywhere from reasonable to racist and sexist, I've seen quite a variety of them specifying specific hair styles and cuts for both men and women, makeup levels, etc... Company grooming policies should not be allowed to set unreasonable levels of "grooming" not should they be allowed to be sexist or racist in what is or isn't allowed.

I do agree that dreadlocks are a typically black hairstyle, but I also agree that dreadlocks do not fit most grooming policies. I've seen very nice, clean dreadlocks but they tend to be the exception, not the rule on everyone regardless of race.

Nobody could ever convince me to get dreadlocks growing up. They couldn't even get me to braid my hair.

APart from being dirty like you said, I know every white person and their mom wants to do this:

https://giphy.com/gifs/hair-KJ1FOlMESVOh2

[anon5123]

Clearly, which is why I said 'and religion': a phrasing that suggests that it's separate from the non-choices. I'm rather minimalist; I like to convey meaning using sentence structure when possible.

Even so, we cannot be giving certain "protections" to religions. Especially when said religions want to take rights away from people for no reason other than "muh religion says so".

[Sunseeker]

Nobody could ever convince me to get dreadlocks growing up. They couldn't even get me to braid my hair.

APart from being dirty like you said, I know every white person and their mom wants to do this:

https://giphy.com/gifs/hair-KJ1FOlMESVOh2

HA. Most of the people I knew with dreads were white people and they were those typical, poorly maintained dreads that looked like they had giant, dirty-blond poops hanging off their head.

[Kapadons]

Need to fire this HR bitch. Not because she wouldn't hire the chick but because she told her that shit. The entire existence of HR is to know policies and how to stop you from getting sued.

She could just as easily thanked the girl for her interview and never called her back. Or give her a run of the mill generic rejection letter "more qualified candidate" etc

[Garnier Fructis]

Even so, we cannot be giving certain "protections" to religions. Especially when said religions want to take rights away from people for no reason other than "muh religion says so".

That pretty much excludes all major religions.

[Deleted]

I don't like the precedent it would've set if the courts ruled in the favor of dreadlocks. At the same time, this is why my co-workers will never see my hair grow too far out of fade nor will I ever wear jeans on casual friday because they're all kind of baggy.

Thoughts?

I'm in favor of everything that affirms the right of property owners to choose who they hire, on whatever grounds they like.

- - - Updated - - -

Are you seriously saying that a person working in HR was wrong to tell an applicant what they could do to improve their chances in the future?

Yes, because that is not their job, as well as introduces possible liability.

[frogger237]

I've never actually seen a black person with dreadlocks in person before every single person I've seen with em is some scuzzy looking white guy and one white chick.

[Garnier Fructis]

You say that as if this was a bad thing.

Yea, I'm not really on board with the whole militant atheist mindset.

[THE Bigzoman]

Yea, I'm not really on board with the whole militant atheist mindset.

That's because you're not a douchebag.

[Super Kami Dende]

I wouldn't hire someone with Dreadlocks. Every person I have ever met or known with Dreadlocks has had horrible personal hygiene and terrible work ethic.

[GennGreymane]

Yeah, sure, why not? Its not unreasonable.

- - - Updated - - -

Need to fire this HR bitch. Not because she wouldn't hire the chick but because she told her that shit. The entire existence of HR is to know policies and how to stop you from getting sued.

She could just as easily thanked the girl for her interview and never called her back. Or give her a run of the mill generic rejection letter "more qualified candidate" etc

I feel like I have been saying this a lot recently

This guy gets it.

[Deletedaccount1]

Just out of principle, I really don't think businesses should have to disclose why they won't hire someone.

To be specific, dreads are not a look you want for some jobs. A job where you have to meet and talk with people in a very professional setting for instance. A company might be at an actual disadvantage for hiring someone who looks like that.

A gym teacher or a cashier is obviously different though. In the end, let the employer hire who they want.

[THE Bigzoman]

Need to fire this HR bitch. Not because she wouldn't hire the chick but because she told her that shit. The entire existence of HR is to know policies and how to stop you from getting sued.

She could just as easily thanked the girl for her interview and never called her back. Or give her a run of the mill generic rejection letter "more qualified candidate" etc

But nooooo,



You just live "in a world where being stupid is asspirational"

[GennGreymane]

But nooooo,



You just live "in a world where being stupid is asspirational"

What if they had dreads, but also a big booty?