Tattoos, body piercings, dreadlocks – can an employer prohibit such bodily adornments?  Can an employer require a “look policy?”


We just read about a woman in Edmonton, Canada who has 22 visible body piercings and claims that employer dress codes discriminate against her, and that “one prospective employer threw out her résumé in front

A couple more reader comments about our post about dreadlocks and mutable characteristics.  Put another way:  can forbidding dreadlocks in the workplace when it is not worn as a matter of religious belief still run afoul of Title VII as race related?

12974744_sShana Goodman, an HR administrator in the Atlanta Area:

“I think

Our post about dreadlocks and mutable characteristics drew further comments worth publishing:

Tasha Robinson, an HR manager in the Atlanta area:

“This is an interesting case. I just read about the recently released grooming guidelines within one of the armed forces and how there is a petition because the new guidelines prohibit certain

Last September the EEOC sued an Alabama catastrophic insurance claims company under Title VII for allegedly refusing to hire a black woman who wore dreadlocks in contravention of the company’s grooming policy.

Dreadlocks Violated The Company Policy

The applicant had blond hair dreaded in “neat curls,” or “curllocks,” but the policy required employees to have

In our post of March 7th we said that “employment decisions based upon tattoos, certain headwear or other garb, and grooming habits may, in fact, run afoul of Title VII’s prohibiition against religious discrimination. How, you ask? Certain religions may require their adherents to conform to certain appearances, either clothing, body decoration or certain