A couple of readers of our blog post yesterday relating to employer dress and grooming policies helpfully added a couple of points about an employer’s legitimate health and safety concerns, which we publish below.

Marc Brenman, a university instructor in Olympia, WA:

“There are also issues of mutable characteristics, and safety. And issues

Way back on July 29, 2011 we wrote that an Oklahoma jury had awarded $20,000 in damages to a devout Muslim job applicant refused hiring by Abercrombie & Fitch when she appeared for an interview wearing a headscarf, or hijab, which she wore for religious reasons.  Abercrombie & Fitch argued that it has what it

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