Discrimination: Is your company dress code legal?

As triple-digit summer temperatures settle over Kern County, workplace talk often turns to dress codes and their practicality in a changing climate. Is it time to discard the old dress code, or review it to ensure it’s legal and defensible? 

Employers can set standards for appropriate workplace dress. But those standards must not discriminate against employees on the basis of sex, gender identity, religion, race or physical disabilities. 

A bill that received overwhelming support in the California Legislature demonstrates how carefully employers must tread as they move to regulate workers’ appearances. 

Sen. Holly J. Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, is the author of SB 188, commonly called the CROWN Act (Create a Respectful and Open Workplace for Natural Hair.) The bill proposes to make California one of the first states to outlaw workplace racial discrimination based on hairstyles such as braids and dreadlocks. 

The bill comes in the wake of a high-profile incident last year in which a 16-year-old New Jersey high school varsity wrestler was told by a referee that he would have to cut his dreadlocks or forfeit his match. The teen complied, but his story went viral, bringing hairstyle discrimination into the national conversation. 

Many incidents in California and across the nation have seen students banned from classrooms or events because of the length or style of their hair. Mitchell’s bill notes the historical double standard enforced in the workplace in terms of how Black employees are expected to wear their hair, compared to their white colleagues. Non-white workers have been forced to conform to a Euro-centric aesthetic that requires women with natural hair to straighten it and men to keep their hair cut short. 

Grooming standards aren’t the only hazard for employers wanting to project a company image through the way their workers present themselves. Employers may be discriminating, consciously or unconsciously, through dress code requirements. 

Dress codes should be reasonable, defensible and equitably applied. Is a strict dress code appropriate for a workplace, or would more flexibility boost worker morale, creativity and willingness to collaborate? That depends on the workplace and the workers. But it is a question worth asking. 

Just this spring financial giant Goldman Sachs, long known for its formally dressed employees, made headlines when it announced that suits and ties were no longer required. The company’s announcement embraced a widespread change that is occurring in the nation’s workplaces. 

But it’s not just changing trends that are causing employers to reconsider their dress codes. Laws are changing as well. Every aspect of workplace dress code must be examined as to how it affects workers and whether it discriminates. 

Safety is a “defensible and reasonable” standard. For example, some workplaces legitimately ban wearing jewelry or require closed-toe shoes as a safety measure. 

It is also legal for businesses to have rules regarding clothing, hair, tattoos, makeup and piercing, as long as they do not discriminate based on gender, age, race or religious 
beliefs. For example, it may violate religious beliefs to require men to cut their hair and beards, and women to wear makeup. Banning head coverings worn by men and women may also discriminate against some workers based on their religion.  

Dress codes must also accommodate workers’ disabilities. Employees with temporary or permanent disabilities must be allowed to dress in a way that does not hinder them. Some examples include:  

• An employee who uses a wheelchair may require slip-on shoes, rather than laced. 
•  
• An employee with diabetes may need to wear loose-fitting pants to access an insulin pump. 
•  
• An employee with a skin condition may need to wear soft clothing that does not irritate. 
•  

A dress code cannot discriminate based on race, color, national origin, gender, pregnancy, religion, disability or age. Requirements that differ between these protected groups must not place an undue burden on one over another. Employers should ensure that their dress codes comply with state and federal law, as well as allow room for workers to express themselves.