Employers need to pay close attention to their dress codes and
how they are enforced if they want to avoid complaints and
discrimination claims from disgruntled employees.
The warning from employment lawyers at Browne Jacobson follows
the recent case of a male trainee police officer who was threatened
with disciplinary action by the Metropolitan Police if he failed to
cut his shoulder length hair.
Mr Dansie cut his hair, albeit reluctantly, to avoid being
removed from the training programme. However, he later filed a case
claiming that he had been unlawfully discriminated against on the
grounds of his sex because a female officer would have been allowed
to keep hair of that length.
The Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) agreed with the original
Employment Tribunal ruling that an employer's dress code must be
considered as a whole when deciding if it is discriminatory, and
not simply analysed on a single issue basis.
Whilst the EAT dismissed Mr Dansie's claim, employment law
specialists believe the case highlights the pitfalls many employers
could face over their dress code policies.
According to a recent IRS survey one in four employers (25%) has
disciplined at least one employee for flouting their dress code in
the past two years. Despite the majority of employers making sure
their dress codes complied with current regulation one in ten of
the 94 organisations surveyed by IRS had been accused by an
employee of discriminatory practices.
James Tait, employment lawyer at Browne Jacobson, said: "We
get a number of enquiries from employers every year over their
dress code policies so it is certainly keeping many awake at
night.
"Case law reminds us that discrimination claims relating to
dress and appearance are a real risk unless the impact of a policy
and the way it is enforced is looked at properly.
"The recent spate of cases over the wearing of religious attire
has also highlighted the challenges many employers face.
"The Dansie case reminds employers of the importance in having a
clear dress code policy that is enforced equally for both men and
women. The law, however, recognises that men and women are
different. It's about being fair when looking at the policy as a
whole, and looking at what standards are acceptable, or even
necessary, in the industry that the individual works in. Applying
the policy consistently is key.
"Those who have not looked at the overall impact of their
policies could be at risk of discrimination claims from
employees.
"It is also important to remember that if dress code rules are
relaxed for any reason, employers should state what is acceptable
attire taking care to ensure equal provisions for men and women.
They should also make it clear that failure to adhere to the code
could lead to disciplinary action.
"It might appear harmless to some people, but cases such as
those involving the wearing of religious attire can also have wide
reaching implications for a business, affect employee morale, and
ultimately lead to complaints of discrimination.
"We are advising businesses to consider their existing policies
if in any doubt to see whether any restrictions or standards which
are imposed are proportionate and, if not, to revise them
accordingly."