Casino Choice UK News Archive
Appeals court says Harrah’s employees must wear make up
In a split decision the court ruled 7-4 in favour of Harrah’s, saying the company’s dress and grooming codes did not amount to sexual discrimination.
Darlene Jespersen, who had worked as a bartender at Harrah’s in Reno for 21 years, was suing the company for firing her after she refused to wear make-up to work.
But the federal appeals panel in San Francisco ruled that Harrah’s policy was not unfair, as it placed the same burdens on both men and women. For example men were required to cut heir hair while women were not, and men were prohibited from wearing make up, while for women it was a requirement. All in all it amounted to a “personal best” grooming policy, setting equivalent standards for both sexes.
Darlene Jespersen, who had worked as a bartender at Harrah’s in Reno for 21 years, was suing the company for firing her after she refused to wear make-up to work.
But the federal appeals panel in San Francisco ruled that Harrah’s policy was not unfair, as it placed the same burdens on both men and women. For example men were required to cut heir hair while women were not, and men were prohibited from wearing make up, while for women it was a requirement. All in all it amounted to a “personal best” grooming policy, setting equivalent standards for both sexes.
Submitted: 2006/04/18 at 11:58:22
