Discrimination Against Locs Is Legal
As if finding a job in corporate America isn’t difficult enough for Black men and women, a federal court has ruled that natural hair is grounds to be discriminated against. A suit was filed on behalf of Chastity Jones, a Black applicant who applied for a customer service representative position at Catastrophe Management Solutions in 2010. Court documents show that Jones was hired but the company rescinded their offer when she refused to cut her dreadlocks.
The applicant was informed by human resources manager Jeannie Wilson that her hairstyle was in violation of the organization’s grooming policy which states, “All personnel are expected to be dressed and groomed in a manner that projects a professional and businesslike image while adhering to company and industry standards and/or guidelines. . . . [H]airstyle should reflect a business/professional image. No excessive hairstyles or unusual colors are acceptable[.]” EEOC argued that banning dreadlocks in the workplace constitutes racial discrimination because “dreadlocks are a manner of wearing the hair that is physiologically and culturally associated with people of African descent.” The judge in this case obviously disagreed. The fact that natural hair is still under fire, and furthermore is being made grounds for legal discrimination is unacceptable. Hopefully once this case goes to appeal, this ruling is overturned, and that all natural hair is deemed acceptable for office.
Now this is some first class bs. Its things like that make it hard to believe its 2016. I have locs and i LOVE THEM. I would never support a business with these ridiculous policies. Let us BE FREE!