Dress codes and the risk of discrimination
Many leisure and hospitality businesses maintain dress codes, uniform policies and grooming policies for their employees. These policies can be PR successes or nightmares depending on what is included in them. For example, last year, Virgin were featured in the press because of changes to their policy on uniform, allowing staff to choose which uniform to wear ‘no matter their gender’.
This time it is The Ritz London which has hit the headlines in the last couple of weeks due to rules which came to light from their Employee Grooming Policy. A prospective employee of The Ritz had been invited to the final interview for a job vacancy, at which point he was sent the Employee Grooming Policy where he read that staff could not have ‘unusual hairstyles such as spiky or Afro style’. The Ritz has stated that the policy was out of date and offered an ‘unreserved apology for this error’.
The Equality Act 2010 exists to prohibit discrimination and harassment on the grounds of any one of nine protected characteristics. Race is included as one of those protected characteristics and having hair in a certain style can be intrinsically linked to race.
Importantly, in October last year the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) published new guidance regarding the prevention of hair discrimination in schools. However, the EHRC did not extend the scope of this guidance to workplaces. The EHRC cited the legal case of Ruby Williams (Ruby Williams vs Urswick School), a mixed-race pupil who was repeatedly sent home from school because of its policy that banned afro hair of excessive volume.
As to whether the policy at The Ritz was directly or indirectly discriminatory, the prospective employee who received the policy has said that ‘the word afro itself is obviously indicative of Africans’. Although this is not a case which has gone before the courts, the EHRC said school policies which ban certain hairstyles without making exceptions on racial grounds are likely to be indirectly discriminatory.
Indirect discrimination is where the employer has a policy which puts people of a protected group at a particular disadvantage compared to others which isn’t objectively justified. For example, if an employer bans braids, it could be much more likely that it negatively impacts a black employee because of the potential cultural or practical importance of having their hair a certain way. There have been a number of court cases which have dealt with employment policies on issues including wearing religious clothing, religious jewellery or requiring women to wear high heels.
Instances such as The Ritz policy remind us that, in the context of a grooming or dress code policy, employers need to be careful with the wording of their policies to ensure that they are not directly or indirectly discriminating against an employee who has a particular protected characteristic. It also shows that as well as an employment law issue, it could be a significant PR issue for many businesses.
It is likely that we will see these policies being challenged more and more as diversity, equality and inclusion remains at the forefront of employees’ and employers’ minds. If this case encourages you to review your dress code and other policies, please get in touch with our employment team who will be pleased to help on 0118 977 4045 or email@example.com.
This reflects the law and market position at the date of publication and is written as a general guide. It does not contain definitive legal advice, which should be sought in relation to a specific matter.
t: 0118 989 8151
Trainee Solicitor, Corporate & Commercial
Latest News & Insights
Preparing for Family Friendly Workplaces
Several long-awaited pieces of legislation aimed at creating a more family friendly workplace...
Can farfetched allegations still constitute sexual harassment at work?
Sexual harassment is where someone engages in unwanted conduct of a sexual nature and the conduct...
Government announces intention for employment law reform
Last week, the government released its policy paper on ‘Smarter Regulation to Grow the Economy’...
All in a Day’s Work: Employment Podcast Series
Our Employment team bring you a monthly podcast covering all aspects of Employment law for businesses and individuals. You can browse our podcasts below…
All in a Day’s Work: Menopause at work
We will discuss how employers can help support employees experiencing the symptoms of the menopause within the workplace.
All in a Day’s Work: References and Regulatory References
This month’s episode covers references, with a focus on regulatory references in the Financial Services sector.
All in a Day’s Work: Skilled Worker Visas
Usof Shah and Samuel Gray will be discussing eligibility requirements for the visa and the process once a business has been granted a sponsor licence.
Top Legal Insights
Material Breach of Contract
What is a ‘material’ breach of contract by a party to a commercial contract? This is a critical issue regularly considered by the courts. What constitutes a material breach and what are the remedies?
Commercial Lease: The Financial impact on Landlord and Tenant
Coronavirus (COVID-19) and the restrictions now in place to control its spread, are having a significant effect on many business sectors.
Divorce and Family Law
Divorce in Lockdown: Can I get some discreet legal advice?
We have spoken to clients who are unfortunately experiencing some family issues, and would like to obtain expert legal advice, yet don’t know how...
Land & Property Dispute
Restrictive Covenants – The Price of Modification
Having identified that your land is burdened by a restrictive covenant and for the purposes of this article the covenant in question will be that only one residential building can be erected on the land. What do you do next?
Award winning legal advice
Herrington Carmichael offers legal advice to UK and International businesses as well as individuals and families. Rated as a ‘Leading Firm 2023’ by the legal directory Legal 500 and listed in The Times ‘Best Law Firms 2023’. Herrington Carmichael has offices in London, Farnborough, Reading, and Ascot.
Brennan House, Farnborough Aerospace Centre Business Park, Farnborough, GU14 6XR
Reading (Appointment only)
The Abbey, Abbey Gardens, Abbey Street, Reading RG1 3BA
Ascot (Appointment only)
102, Berkshire House, 39-51 High Street, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7HY
London (Appointment only)
60 St Martins Lane, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4JS
Commercial Property Lawyers
Dispute Resolution Lawyers
Divorce & Family Lawyers
Immigration Law Services
Private Wealth & Inheritance Lawyers
Startups & New Business Lawyers
Please be aware that we have no plans to change our bank details. If you receive any indication that any of our bank details have changed please contact us before sending us any funds. We take no responsibility for monies you transfer into the wrong bank account.
© 2023 Herrington Carmichael LLP. Registered in England and Wales company number OC322293.
Herrington Carmichael LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority with registration number 446245.