The Law of Work
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
  • Home
  • About
  • Professor David Doorey
  • Osgoode Hall LLM
  • Books
  • Guest Contributors
  • Useful Links
    • Archive
The Law of Work
Law of Work Archive

Can your Employer Fire You For Shaving Your Hair Off?

by David Doorey January 28, 2011
written by David Doorey January 28, 2011

Carrying on with my post earlier this week noting that we don’t prohibit discrimination in employment on the basis of physical appearance in Canada, there’s a story in the papers today about a Winnipeg restaurant server who was dismissed for shaving off her hair. She claimed she had done so in support of a family member who was dying of cancer.  Her boss told her she looked unacceptable and fired her.  She filed a human rights complaint, alleging discrimination.  We saw a very similar case a couple of years ago, when an Owen Sound waitress was dismissed after she cut off her hair in support of a fund raising effort for cancer.
Do these workers have a human rights case?
Read the list of prohibited grounds in Section 9 of the Manitoba Human Rights Code.  Do any of these grounds apply here?
Her application was dismissed on the basis that the Code does not cover physical appearance, such as hair style.  If she had cancer, and that was why she was bald, that would be a different matter.  Also, if the employer fired her because they believed she had cancer, even if she did not, that would be illegal, since it is unlawful under the Code to punish an employee for their “presumed” inclusion in a prohibited ground. (see Section 9(1)).  Here, since she presumably told the employer she was shaving her hair in support of someone else who has cancer, she could not claim that the employer believed she had cancer.
Unionized Workers Have Far More Freedom to Express Themselves Than Nonunion Employees
All of this might seem strange.  After all, why should employers be able to fire someone just because they don’t like their hair style, or piercings, or how they do their makeup?  In the non-union setting, the government has said employers should have that right (since they did not include physical appearance in human rights codes), and common law judges have always allowed employers to dismiss employees for any reason, or no reason at all.  The only question is whether the employer has to give notice.
The situation is very different in the unionized setting.  Unionized employers are required to prove that there is an actual business reason for physical appearance rules.  For example, see this arbitration award from Walfoods Limited, in which a union challenged an employer’s rule banning jewelry at work.  In a non-union workplace, if the employer doesn’t want employees to wear jewelry, it can ban all jewelry.   Not so in a unionized environment.  The arbitrator here states the rule about employer’s rights to issue rules about dress and appearance in unionized environment as follows:

There is no dispute that the Company has the authority under the collective agreement to issue personal appearance standards and that it has done so in good faith. The question is whether the new standards are reasonable. Reasonableness is to be judged on whether the standards are operationally necessary for a legitimate business purpose. I consider also whether the purpose can be achieved by a standard which impinges less on the employees’ rights of free expression

In other words, the employer must put forward evidence that the dress code or appearance rule is related to a legitimate business concern.  If the Winnipeg waitress worked at a unionized restaurant, the employer would have to have convinced an arbitrator that customers would be turned off by a bald server (or one wearing a scarf or whig, as this person did).

Do you think a restaurant would be able to prove that customers would not come if there was a bald server?  Do you think nonunion employers should also have to show some business reason to justify its dress and appearance rules?

6 comments
0
FacebookTwitterLinkedinEmail
David Doorey

Professor Doorey is an Associate Professor of Work Law and Industrial Relations at York University. He is Academic Director of Osgoode Hall Law School’s executive LLM Program in Labour and Employment Law and a Senior Research Associate at Harvard Law School’s Labor and Worklife Program. Professor Doorey is a graduate of Osgoode Hall Law School (LL.B., Ph.D), London School of Economics (LLM Labour Law), and the University of Toronto (B.A., M.I.R.).

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

previous post
Skinny Women Earn More, Skinny Men Earn Less. Should the Law Care?
next post
The Real Reason Mayor Ford Will Be Giving City Employees a Nice Raise?

You may also like

This Blog Entry is About the Lunacy of...

July 21, 2019

A Cross Country Update on the Card-Check versus...

October 3, 2018

The Folly of Not Voting to Strike in...

September 16, 2018

Unifor Posts Photos of Replacement Workers as Gander...

September 10, 2018

A Wrongful Dismissal Case and the Absence of...

August 29, 2018

China Said to Quickly Withdraw Approval for New...

August 27, 2018

The Latest Hot E-Commerce Idea in China: The...

August 27, 2018

The Trump Administration Just Did Something Unambiguously Good...

August 27, 2018

Unstable Situations Require Police In Riot Gear Face...

August 27, 2018

Trump’s War on the Justice System Threatens to...

August 27, 2018

Follow Us On Social Media

Twitter

Latest Tweets

TheLawofWork Follow

@ ·
now

Reply on Twitter Retweet on Twitter Like on Twitter Twitter
Load More

Categories

  • Alberta
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Australia
  • British Columbia
  • Charter of Rights and Freedoms
  • Childcare
  • Class Action
  • Climate and Just Transition
  • Collective Bargaining
  • Common Law of Employment
  • Comparative Work Law
  • competition law
  • construction
  • COVID-19
  • Diversity
  • Employee Classification
  • Employment Insurance
  • Employment Regulation
  • Europe
  • Financial Industry
  • Fissured Work
  • Freedom of Association
  • frustration of contract
  • Gig Work
  • Health and Safety
  • Health Care
  • Human Rights
  • Immigration
  • Interest Arbitration
  • International Law
  • Labour Arbitration
  • Labour Economics
  • Law of Work Archive
  • Legal Profession
  • Manitoba
  • Migrant Workers
  • Minimum Wage
  • New Zealand
  • Newfoundland
  • Nova Scotia
  • OLRB
  • Ontario
  • Pension Bankruptcy
  • Privacy
  • Public Sector
  • Quebec
  • Real Life Pleadings
  • Saskatchewan
  • Scholarship
  • Sports Labour
  • Strikes and Lockouts
  • Student Post
  • Supreme Court of Canada
  • technology
  • Transnational Law
  • Uncategorized
  • Unions and Collective Bargaining
  • United States
  • Videos
  • Women and Work
  • Wrongful Dismissal
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Guest Contributors
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive
Menu
  • Legal Scholarship
  • Useful Links
  • Archive

2020. Canadian Law of Work Forum. All Rights Reserved.